6 January 2023

A Political Health Warning - Why Palestine Solidarity Activists Should Have Nothing to do with Peter Gregson

Whilst there are very few anti-Semites who support the Palestinians – Gregson is the exception that proves the rule

Many people involved in Palestine solidarity activism in Britain are likely to have come across Peter Gregson. He has often been unfairly treated, such as when the GMB union expelled him in March 2019 for ‘anti-Semitism’. His expulsion was effected by the rabidly racist and misogynist Gary Smith, then Regional Secretary of Scottish GMB and now General Secretary of the union.

I even testified at the kangaroo court that the GMB had assembled and wrote a document in his defence. However if one week is a long time in politics 3 years and 9 months is an eternity. Peter’s politics, which were always flaky, have now become anti-Semitic.

Nick Kollerstrom - Holocaust 'sceptic'

Peter has to his credit expulsion from a number of organisations. I initiated the first from Labour Against the Witchhunt when he put up a petition on his website linking to an article by Holocaust denier Nick Kollerstrom who had written a ‘literature review’ on ‘The Auschwitz “Gas Chamber” Illusion’.

Peter decided to publish on his blog my entire correspondence with him over this. The Jewish Chronicle then published it verbatim. It is probably the only article that ‘liar’ Lee Harpin has written that didn’t contain the obligatory quota of mistakes!

PSC and I believe Jewish Voices for Labour have also expelled him and Jewish Network for Palestine has rebuffed his attempts to join.

Peter is notorious for setting up his own ‘campaign’ groups such as LAZIR (Labour Against Zionist Islamophobic Racism) and now the Campaign Against Bogus Anti-Semitism (which he tells me has 60 members!).

In April 2022 Gregson emailed me asking me to comment on a document he’d written Why Zionists Are Not Jews.There are many arguments in the anti-Zionist armoury but this is not one of them.

My response was as diplomatic as I could manage:

Obviously many Zionists are Jewish according to the halachic definition of being born to a Jewish woman.  Being Jewish is not just a matter of belief.  Of course Jewish identity has changed throughout the ages and Zionism is one such identity.  Anti-Zionism is another but to go down this road is extremely dangerous and completely besides the point.  The fact is that the religious establishment and most rabbis do believe in Zionism.

Indeed this whole debate over whether someone is Jewish or not reminds me of the Nazis trying to define being Jewish.  The Law of Return then adopted the Nazi definition almost wholesale.

Totally misplaced and your campaign will go the way of your previous campaign I suspect

Peter has taken to heart the ideas of Neturei Karta that ‘true’ Jews do not support Zionism but NK are not Marxists. They are well meaning but politically naïve. Orthodox Jewry, which historically was anti-Zionist, has changed its position though even now the United Torah Judaism party in Netanyahu’s coalition is officially non-Zionist.

The majority of Haredi Jews in Israel are Zionists and indeed are among the most anti-Palestinian elements in Israeli society.

Gregson’s political degeneration began with his article Do Jews in the UK have significant leverage on Israel? on the anti-Semitic Redress Online site which has itself published articles by holocaust deniers.

The article is historically illiterate. It asserts ‘Right from the outset, rich Jewish bankers such as Lord Rothschild backed Zionism. It is unlikely we would have Israel now were it not for his influence.’The first Rothschild that Theodor Herzl, the founder of Political Zionism encountered, was Edmond Rothschild, who opposed Zionism.

Contrary to the assertion of Wikipedia Lord Walter Rothschilds was not a ‘Zionist activist’ but an obsessive Zoologist. He was considered the leader of British Jewry by virtue of his aristocratic rank, which was why the Balfour Declaration was addressed to him (also contrary to Wikipedia he wasn’t President of the Board in 1917 but 1925-6). In 1919 Walter Rothschild stood for Vice President of the Board against both Anthony de Rothschild and the Zionist candidate, Samuel Duiches. who obtained just 21 compared to Walter’s 123, which is a good indication of the strength of the Zionists amongst the Jewish bourgeoisie then. In 1918 the anti-Zionist Leopold de Rothschild was unanimously elected President of the United Synagogue.

In 1917 the anti-Zionist League of British Jewswas formed at a meeting in New Court, headquarters of the Rothschilds’ business interests. Its first AGM in March 2018 was attended by over 400 members. Lionel Rothschild, a Conservative MP was elected President. Gregson’s attachment to the Rothschild’s legend is in itself telling. Gregon’s article asserts that

Around 75 per cent of the UK’s 300,000 Jews support Israel (if they didn’t, we wouldn’t have the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism).

The idea that the IHRA only exists because of Jewish support is indicative of Gregson’s drift to the anti-Semitic right. Jews were convenient political pawns of the political establishment. The reason for the IHRA is to outlaw as far as possible opposition to British foreign policy in the Middle East by calling it ‘anti-Semitic’. For example Lord Eric Pickles is a White non-Jewish racist and the British delegate to the IHRA.

What Gregson is doing is suggesting that Jewish Power is responsible for British support for Zionism rather than seeing support for Israel as a consequence of imperialist politics. Jews are convenient political pawns or as Barnaby Raine described them,

‘favourite pets: heroic colonists in the Middle East… Jews are conscripted as the alibi of white society…. We are the useful props for a moral panic.’

But Gregson doesn’t do subtle. He goes on:

Jews have significant leverage. And the majority of them throw their wealth and personal resources into ensuring Israel maintains its immunity from criticism.

But it was the wealthy and influential Jews in politics and the media who foisted the IHRA definition upon us, the tool now widely used to silence pro-Palestine campaigners and used by the Labour Party to expunge activists. If Jews had not been behind demanding the new definition and claiming it was essential for their safety, we would not have it.’

That this analysis is complete nonsense hardly needs stating. The British bourgeoisie adopted the IHRA definition, as did open anti-Semites like Trump and Viktor Orban in Hungary.

Gregson assumes that Jews act as one homogenous mass. You can accuse British Jewry of many things, not least stupidity, but to suggest that they acted in concert to foist the IHRA on gullible Gentiles is simply untrue. Gregson’s defence, for what it is worth is that:

To say Jews in the UK have great leverage is not anti-Semitic, it is just a statement of fact. Like saying an Eton education gets you into Parliament. Or Muslims don’t like alcohol and fear speaking out about Islamophobia. Or Scots are “good with money”, i.e. not profligate. Or Germany has an enormous collective guilt over the holocaust, while Austria, its partner in crime, has not. Or London has many rich Russian oligarchs…

It should not take a genius to see why Gregson is comparing apples to oranges. To suggest that Jews, as a collective group, have ‘great leverage’ makes assumptions about Jewish political power whereas saying Muslims don’t drink alcohol (untrue, many do) is a generalisation.

Gregson goes on to say, on the basis that Jews are eight times over-represented in the UK Parliament that

they are powerful, in proportion to their share of the population (300,000 out of 66 million), comprising 0.4 per cent of us.

The fact that the Zionists encourage such conspiracy theories by claiming to speak on behalf of all Jews, doesn’t make what Gregson says any the less anti-Semitic. Gregson’s assertion that

It is because of these wealthy Zionist Jews, steered from the British Board of Deputies of British Jews and the like, that nobody in this country, including our media, dare point out the blindingly obvious: that we have utterly lost our freedom of speech on Israel because everybody is frightened of what Zionist Jews will do to them.

One wonders why, if Jews are only 0.4% where they get all this power.

Sir Edwin Montagu

Historically the British Jewish bourgeoisie was determinedly anti-Zionist until 1940. The only member of Lloyd George’s War Cabinet to vote against the Balfour Declaration was its only Jewish member, Sir Edwin Montagu, who accused his fellows of ‘anti-Semitism’.

It was the adoption of Zionism by the non-Jewish bourgeoisie that eventually led the Jewish bourgeoisie to realise that it was ‘patriotic’ to support Zionism.  In other words Gregson gets cause and effect the wrong way round.

However it is his latest article Against Zionist invaders: Why race matters in Palestine on Redress (where else) that should put him beyond the pale for Palestine solidarity activists.

I leave to one side his mistaken position, derived from Neturei Karta that up until 1940 most Jews refused to move to Israel on religious grounds.’What should be condemned is Gregson’s assertion that

These were the people that Hitler gassed. With Zionist support. Proof? Over the period 1942-44, Rabbi Weissmandl of Hungary made a deal with Adolf Eichmann… (my emphasis)

I won’t quote the rest of this rubbish. Weissmandel didn’t make an agreement with Eichmann, nor was he from Hungary! Having read Zionism During the Holocaust Gregson has failed to understand any of it.  There is absolutely no proof that the Zionist leaders, supported the extermination of European Jewry. It is simply not true.

There are many criticisms that can be made of the Zionists during the war and I make them, at length. Their obstruction of rescue attempts not involving Palestine, their playing down of the holocaust because people would be distracted into giving money for the refugees rather than their own fundraising, but to say that the Zionists supported the gassing of Jews is both false and anti-Semitic.

Ironically the main criticism of the Zionists for what I and Lenni Brenner before me write, is that what we are saying amounts to saying that the Jews murdered themselves. Once again Gregson has acted to reinforce the Zionist narrative rather than the other way around. Instead of reading my book and reflecting Gregson has cherry picked a few quotations and put his own crazy interpretation upon them. For those interested in the debate on this issue on my blog go here.

Gregson is apparently organising a tour of Britain in April/May involving both Rabbi Yisroel Dovid Weiss of Neturei Karta and Dr Azzam Tamimi. I shall write to the former but if anyone has any contact with Dr Tamimi he would be well advised to pull out.

Tony Greenstein

15 comments:

  1. Great post Tony. Have you every read a book called 'The Zionist Masquerade' by James Renton ? If so, what are your thoughts on it ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi, I haven't read the book I'm afraid so unfortunately I can't offer any comments.

      Delete
    2. It covers a similar topic re the British political elites antisemitism during the time of Balfour. Might worth doing a review.

      Delete
  2. Re: Nick Kollerstrom's claims that the gas chambers were merely for purposes of hygiene, I'd like to know how he manages to explain away what took place at Treblinka, Sobibor and Chelmno, etc? Does he think the Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto who arrived at Treblinka fell down a rabbit hole and entered Wonderland?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Totally agree Steve. When I've found myself on conspiracy sites where people are denying the holocaust I've found that I am removed when I dispute their allegations. They really don't stand up.

      Did Eichmann, of his own free accord, when interviewed by the Dutch Nazi journalist Wilhelm Sassen in 1955, 5 years before Israel captured him, deny he had murdered millions? No he boasted of having killed 5 million and said he'd jump into his grave laughing. As it happens he overestimated his own prowess. It was more like 3 million.

      Did Rudolph Hoess or any leading Nazi deny what had happened? No instead they fixate on whether there tiny apertures to put in the Zyklon B into gas chambers when it is unlikely that the planes that photographed them were capable of such minute detail or rely on false estimates of the number of Jews in Europe before the war.

      Theirs is an unsustainable case and one wonders why Kollerstrom and others behave as they do. Kollerstrom seems to have had a particular disturbed background with suicides in his family, so I've been informed today by someone who knew his family, but that is no excuse.

      However I put the blame on those who exploited the Jewish Holocaust for the purposes of establishing a racist state, i.e. the Zionists, for the growth of holocaust denial. Nothing better serves the purposes of the Zionists that holocaust denial.

      Delete
  3. Tony, you misrepresent me and even contradict yourself. It feels as if you have never heard of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, the Community Security Trust, the Jewish Labour Movement, Hope not Hate (a misnomer!), Labour Against Antisemitism, the Board of Deputies of British Jews, the Jewish Leadership Council, the three Jewish newspapers, UK Lawyers for Israel, Friends of Israel, Britain Israel Communications & Research Centre (BICOM) – and of course the Israeli Government. These are the agencies that are run by Zionists who are also, interestingly Jews- and they are the people who brought down Corbyn because of his support for Palestine. But according to your twisted logic, it was the capitalists who destroyed him because he was a leftie and the Zionist Jews were just their pawns. You are oblivious to anything but Marxist analysis.
    And I never said the Zionists supported the gassing of Jews. I said they supported Hitler's rise to power by stopping any boycott of Nazi Germany - and by being leading lights in the Judenrat, and by saying that Jewish blood must be spilt if they were to get their hands on Palestine. This is all in your book... Do pay attention to what I actually say, Tony- before you go off on a rant. You are becoming quite infatuated in attacking me

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is no misrepresentation. This was what you wrote:

      'These were the people that Hitler gassed. With Zionist support.' You clearly aren't referring to anything but the gassing. I'm sorry but they are your words.

      Yes the above organisations are largely Jewish though BICOM includes We Believe in Israel which is run by a Luke Akehurst who is not Jewish.

      But who supported them and willing used what they said indeed began the campaign? The Daily Mail, Guardian, BBC etc. etc. It was the ruling class, the Establishment that put its weight behind the 'antisemitism' campaign and so when you focus on Jews you are looking down the telescope the wrong way.

      Delete
    2. Have you even heard of the Big Tent for Israel event? In 2011 Jeremy Newmark implored, in “Big Tent for Israel” event, for Jews and anybody supporting Israel (ie Zionists) to join trade unions and their local political party to mobilise. Then, as soon as Corbyn was elected leader in 2015, Newmark rebadged a virtually redundant Paole Zion, an affiliate body to the Labour Party from the Party’s early years, into the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM) and set about recruiting Jews and others who supported Israel. This group was then able to command the debate from virtually inside the Party.

      Many JLM members secured posts in Labour HQ and in the trade unions. Zionist activists then set about convincing major bodies that Jews were at risk and that the only way they could be protected was by adopting the IHRA definition of antisemitism. From 2015 to 2018, they largely succeeded. This was achieved through cultivating a hysteria in the media that Jews felt vulnerable without it; Rhea Wolfson in the Scotsman July 2018, for example. Wolfson served on Labour’s NEC and she and Jon Lansman were key in getting Labour to adopt the IHRA definition.
      And it is the IHRA definition that has been used to eviscerate the left, for those that say Israel is racist are now Jew-haters- ie no better than Hitler.
      Who cooked up the IHRA? Who forced all the big political parties to adopt it? Almost all of the major trade unions? 40% of local authorities? The Police? And progressively the Universities too?
      This wasn't the Establishment, Tony. These are people who support Israel. And most of them say they are Jewish. They proudly do it to protect their racist colony.
      Unfortunately you think that these Zionists are being used by the wicked wealthy- as an excuse for the capitalists to get a foothold on the Middle East. That Jews have nothing to do with it. However, if it wasn't for the fact that 70% of people who say they are Jews support Israel, there would be no problem. This is what bogus antisemitism is all about.
      And the pit to which we are all being consigned is not being helped by naive, blinkered bullying arrogant pedants like you.

      Delete
    3. I have reluctantly allowed Peter a second bite of the cherry but it is his last bite.

      I agree with the first 3 paras. I don't agree from 'Who forced all the big political parties to adopt it?' Actually Corbyn (always a fool) and May adopted the definition voluntarily at the end of 20116 (Corbyn only the utterly useless 38 words at first).

      Peter tells us this wasn't the Establishment. It was the 0.4% of the population that Jews represent. Total and utter rubbish and t his is why your politics are antisemitic Peter.

      How were 1/4 million people able to force all parties bar UKIP to sign up to the IHRA? How did it force the Judicial College to adopt it? How did it force the Daily Mail, which in the 30s campaigned to stop Jewish refugees from Hitler entering Britain?

      Have you not noticed the eagerness of the Tories to force universities to adopt the IHRA? Gavin Williamson's threat to their funding. Was his arm twisted? The Establishment, none Jews like Eric Pickles were happy to adopt it just like Trump did in America because it portrays opposition to British support of Israel as antisemitic. So yes British Jews, gullible fools that most are, were willing stool pigeons for the British Establishment.

      But you are so fucking obsessed with 'Jews' that you cannot see the processes at play. I have never said that Jews have nothing to do with Israel. Obviously many have but there is a growing disillusionment amongst Jews with Israel for reasons that you will never figure out.

      Zionism was the adopted policy of the British Establishment b4 British Jews accepted it. Christian Zionism predated Jewish Zionism. And the reason people ostracise Peter Gregson because he is so tin eared that he cannot understand the power politics at play.

      Jews have often been used as middlemen e.g. in Algeria by France, just as Indians were used by the British in Kenya, Natal and other colonies. You are so obtuse and ignorant that you are determined to attack the favourite pets of the British Establishment. That is why you are a reactionary and a racist.

      Anyway you have had your say.

      Delete
  4. Tony, it is high time, but really HIGH TIME, that you guys provide hard, FACTUAL evidence for the gas chambers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have admitted this comment, because it shows the stupidity and disingenuousness of your average holocaust denier. Such is their honesty they can't even admit to their name!

      Nor is it intended to open a debate about the Holocaust or any aspect of it, including the gas chambers.

      As a fairly obvious point to make, there are of course no witnesses to the gas chambers (I'm wrong there are 1 or 2 including a Jewish doctor in Auschwitz was spared at the last minute by Mengele) because those who witnessed also died inside it.

      But there is testimony aplenty from those who were able to watch its operation from a distance such as Rudolf Vrba who counted in some 1.75 million people who had arrived by train at Auschwitz/Birkenau yet mysteriously none of them survived whilst the crematoria did a roaring business (literally).

      How this dishonest fool asks for hard factual evidence. Well there is plenty.

      There are thousands who will testify to the all pervasive sickly smell of human flesh burning, night and day with flames roaring 30 meters high. But of course all eye witness evidence is, a priori ruled out by Nazi apologists.

      In just the same way the Zionists rule out oral and eye witness evidence of the Nakba. The mentality of holocaust deniers and Zionists is very similar.

      The first thing to say is that no leading Nazis every denied what happened.

      The second thing is that there is very strong evidence, from the doctors/nurses and ancillaries to the murder by gas if 70,000+ disabled and mentally handicapped people in gas trucks in Germany between 1939-41. This is indisputable. It led in August 1941 to its denunciation by Bishop Galen of Muenster. There was never any Nazi denial and it is accepted by genuine historians such as Henry Friedlander in The Origins of Nazi Genocide that this was the precursor of the gassing programme in Auschwitz and elsewhere.

      At this time the murder was by carbon monoxide not cyanide.

      But the anonymous idiot forgets that the person in charge of the co-ordination of the Holocaust, Adolf Eichmann ADMITTED to his role, quite proudly.

      Delete
  5. (continued)

    In his interview with Dutch Nazi journalist William Sassen, freely given in 1954 and reprinted in Life magazine on November 28 this is what Eichmann said:

    'Where I was implicated in the physical annihilation of the Jews I admit my participation freely and without pressure. After all, I was the one who transported the Jews to the camps. If I had not deported them they would not have been delivered to the butcher.' (this is printed in full in Lenni Brenner's 51 Documents - Nazi Collaboration With the Nazis)

    Only the most malevolent and dishonest holocaust denier would challenge this.

    Eichmann continues:
    'After the onetime German Fuhrer gave the order for the physical annihilation of the Jews, our duties shifted. We supervised Gestapo seizures of German Jews and the trains that took them to their final destination.'

    He goes on to say that:
    'In the years that followed I often said to Jews with whom I had dealings that, had I been a Jew, I would have been a fanatical Zionist. I could not imagine being anything else. In fact I would have been the most ardent Zionist imaginable.'

    Eichmann continues with a section on the '(Gas) Chambers at Maideneck and then another section 'The gas chambers at Auschwitz'. Here is what he said:

    'I never had anything directly to do with the gas chambers which evolved from early measures like those at Litzmnnstadt'. (Lodz) Presumably Eichmann refers to the fact that at the first extermination camp, Chelmno, they did not have gas chambers but gas trucks which had been used to murder disabled people first. He continued:

    'But I did visit Auschwitz repeatedly. It had an unpleasant smell. Even today I do not know how the gassing was carried out. I never watched the entire process. Even a man like Hoess, the commandant at Auschwitz, described the matter to me in a rather rose--coloured way.... It was Hoess who told me that Reichsfuhrer Himmler, taking a personal look at the entire liquidatintg action, had declared that this was a bloody fight which our coming generations would need to fight no more.'

    I suspect that neither this nor any other evidence would satisfy our budding neo-Nazi. After all the purpose of holocaust deniers is to deny what they would like to repeat again.

    The tragedy is that these people, with their Camp Auschwitz tee shirts stood side by side with Zionists and their Swastika Flag of David at the insurrection at Capital Hill a couple of years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Tony, you haven't published my open letter to you from the ODP website.
    Will you then publish this?
    https://www.consistent-democrats.org/uncategorized/hands-off-peter-gregson-for-workers-democracy-and-free-debate-not-bundist-heresy-hunts/
    The author has read your book more closely than I and has come up with more damnning evidence of how Zionists worked with the Nazis. I think this would count as "support" to anybody who read your book.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes I am happy to publish a link to Ian Donovan's undisciplined ramble of a political attack.

      I will only respond to a couple of the points it makes. He says that one of the reasons for my blog is that 'It appears that one important reason for this is Peter’s initiation of One Democratic Palestine... An objective which Tony correctly supports'.

      Until Peter informed me of the fact, I did not know that the Campaign Against Bogus Antisemitism had changed its name to ODP. In fact it had nothing whatsoever to do with my decision to write the blog.

      I am not going to go over old territory, but I requested Peter to take down an item which linked, albeit indirectly, to an article by holocaust denier Nick Kollerstrom who was a member of the 'Keep Talking Group' with Peter. My decision to put up the link was so that people could judge the tenor of the article itself. If Ian Donovan does not appreciate the difference so be it.

      Yes I have not accused Donovan, Atzmon or Gregson of personal antipathy to Jews as Jews but their POLITICS are certainly anti-Semitic. The fact that anti-Semitism is not a form of racism, i.e. state racism, in Britain today is immaterial.

      Donovan then goes on to quote Peter's statement:
      'These were the people that Hitler gassed. With Zionist support. Proof? Over the period 1942-44, Rabbi Weissmandl of Hungary made a deal with Adolf Eichmann…”

      But Peter was not accusing this (non-Zionist) Rabbi of being involved in the extermination. I know and I did not make this accusation.

      What I did accuse him of was saying that the Zionists actively supported the gassing of Jews. This is simply untrue. I know of no statement by the Zionists to this effect.

      I have repeatedly pointed out how the Zionists were indifferent to the fate of Jews in Europe. This is well documented. That they misled, misinformed, obstructed rescue etc. But to date, before Peter put his great clod hoppers into the debate no one but no one has said that the Nazi extermination of Jews was carried out 'With Zionist support.' i.e. the Zionists supported the extermination of Jews.

      This is a falsehood which plays right into the hands of Zionists who find it difficult enough to defend their abject collaboration. Unfortunately Donovan is muddled throughout on this and other questions.

      I won't respond to the accusations of being a 'semi Bundist' etc. I will leave it to others to judge.

      Delete
  7. Israhell is an apartheid state

    ReplyDelete

Please submit your comments below