I Have Been Expelled from the Green Party Because Excluding Jews is the Best Way to Combat a Non-Existent Anti-Semitism

Racist Zionists like Elise Benjamin, Who Accused Mothin Ali of Anti-Semitism & Called Noam Chomsky a Race Traitor are Left Untouched

Greens 4 Palestine Webinar 1 July 2026 - 'Reinstate Our Members - Anti‑Zionism is not Anti-Semitism

On 29 June I received an email informing me that I had been expelled from the Green Party ‘after proper consideration’ by a ‘consensus decision’ of the Green Party Council [GPC].

Attached to the email was a Form which begged more questions than it answered. I had been suspended, after an anonymous complaint, on 16 April and given till 13 May to respond.

Clearly the GPC couldn’t wait till 13 May because on 7 May they expelled me! Yet the description of it being a consensus vote by Rositta Priestley of the Complaints Department, who for some reason reminds recipients of her emails that ‘#MyNameIs: Rose-EATer’ was a little wide of the mark. The vote had been 7-6, in other words a majority of one.

Longman’s Dictionary defined consensus as ‘an opinion that everyone in a group agrees with or accepts.’ A vote of 7-6 doesn’t seem to accord with that. Collins Dictionary definition was much the same ‘A consensus is general agreement among a group of people’ and the synonyms include ‘unanimity’ or ‘common consent’.

What was curious was although the decision was made on 7 May it wasn’t until 29 June, over 7 weeks later that I was informed of the decision. Why the delay? I can only assume that the decision was referred elsewhere. Perhaps the Chair of the GPC, Laura Eccott, consulted her Israeli Embassy handlers for their approval? It is a mystery.

Did you know that you can’t have a civil or secular marriage in Israel? https://t.co/3UNM8q0ehl

— Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) June 29, 2026

However it was the reasons for my expulsion that demonstrate that disciplinary processes in the Green Party are not fit for purpose. Behind the nice, cuddly image of the Green Party lies a deeply authoritarian and undemocratic set up.

The reason I was suspended on 16 April was for

Documented history of antisemitism, including court decisions and recent terrorism charges.

No documentation has ever been produced so it is clear that this was a fictitious reason. The ‘terrorism charges’ relates to an allegation that has yet to be tested, viz. that I invited support for a proscribed organisation. The usual legal rule of innocent until proven guilty seems to have been discarded by a Green Party that is nominally committed to natural justice. Internally however it seems no such rules apply

The reasons give for my expulsion bear no relationship to the reasons for my suspension. This is indeed Zionist justice.

The first reason given was ‘Multiple breaches of 4.8 suspension’ with no indication of what these might have been.

But its the following reasons that are bizarre. They states that

Despite the repeated instances of antisemitism that led to TG's suspension, post suspension TG has displayed no contrition or regret, but rather sought to solidify his lack of any regret for his previous action by way of seeking to publicly portray those involved in the original decision in a negative light through online posts and blogs.’

It refers to ‘the repeated instances of antisemitism that led to TG's suspension’. If this is true why was there no reference in my original suspension to these ‘repeated instances’? It is as if the Chair, Laura Eccott, who proposed the expulsion, had simply made up the first thing that entered the vacuum between her ears.

Unsurprisingly I didn’t express any contrition or regret since there was nothing to regret or be contrite about. The final paragraph, that I

not only failed to show any regret or remorse, but has sought to portray GPEW negatively for seeking to distance itself from his activities and opinions, to include making false allegations concerning party members.

repeats the previous paragraph, apart from saying that I had made ‘false allegations’, none of they gave. I have also been informed that there is no right of appeal. So basically the GPC can make up whatever it wants and there is no come back.

Green Party Deputy Leader Mothin Ali Is a Particular Target for Britain's Racist Press & the Zionists

This is what the Green Party describes as its internal democratic structures. If this is how they treat their members then what would they do if they get into office? Would their attitude to democracy in government be the same as their practice inside their party?

When the Labour Party expelled me they took care not to accuse me of anti-Semitism for legal reasons. Instead they concentrated on allegations that I had ‘abused’ people like Louise Ellman MP, a Zionist MP, for calling her the MP for Tel Aviv South. Laura Eccott, as a common and garden Zionist, displayed no such reticence.

Instead she alleged that I had been guilty of ‘repeated instances of antisemitism’. As to what these repeated instances were she doesn’t tell us. However these are allegations of fact not opinion. In libel law there are two defences under the Defamation Act 2013 – s.2 which is the truth and s.3 which is honest opinion. Because this is not an opinion she cannot rely on section 3. She must prove that her allegations are true.

The UN Report on Israel's Extermination of Palestinian Children Is a Product of Zionism

I have already written to Harriet Lamb, the CEO of the Green Party saying that I will bring proceedings for defamation unless these allegations and the expulsion are withdrawn.

However the wider question revolves around the suspension of at least 30 Council candidates, most of whom are Muslims. In fact the only White person that I know who has been suspended is Mark Adderley who has been elected for a Croydon ward.

The impression that is inevitably gained is that the Green Party wants the votes of Muslims but if they express an opinion that falls foul of the Telegraph or Mail then they will be suspended. Of the six Muslims due to speak at our webinar, five of them decided not to appear because of the threat of being suspended or expelled.

Nonetheless although the original 9 speakers were whittled down to 3, our webinar was excellent. Heather Mendick, who was expelled from the Labour Party, stood as an independent socialist candidate in Hackney. She described the pressure that was put on her by the Green Party, which had originally entered into an alliance with the Hackney Independent Socialists, as a result of ‘anti-Semitism’ allegations that were made. In the end they backed off but it caused a lot of mistrust.

The Green Party is going to have to do what the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn didn’t do which is to stand up to the mass media and not back off when allegations are made. Anti-Semitism is a very simple concept –hostility to or prejudice against Jews as Jews. Hostility to Israel is anti-racist not anti-Semitic. It is difficult to think of anything that can be said of Israel today that is anti-Semitic. Israel is not a person. It is like saying criticism of Nazi Germany was anti-German.

The next speaker was Feda Shaheen, who had been a candidate in Bournemouth. Feda is a fiery speaker and a Palestinian who did not mince her words for the behaviour of the Green Party and fellow candidates. When I asked speakers if they still wished to continue Feda had been adamant that no Green Zionist was going to deplatform her.

This is the Zionism that Caroline Lucas Ignores

This is disingenuous @carolinelucas and you know it. In the original interview you said

"There is a vast difference between criticising the Israeli government and using terms about which Jewish Greens and others have raised concerns, she stresses. “Zionism can be interpreted… https://t.co/xS3HzmwVES

— Tony Greenstein tonygreenstein.com (@TonyGreenstein) July 1, 2026

The last speaker was me and I laid into the Green Party Establishment who are behind this witchhunt. I criticised in particular Caroline Lucas, the former MP for Brighton Pavilion who in an interview with Politics Home said of the Zionism is Racism motion that is due to be debated at the Autumn Party Conference that:

There is a vast difference between criticising the Israeli government and using terms about which Jewish Greens and others have raised concerns, she stresses. “Zionism can be interpreted in so many different ways, and there was a concern that some people thought the motion was talking more about individual Jewish people rather than the Israeli government.”

It is up to the party to decide what to discuss, Lucas adds, but she hopes the debate is held in a less “toxic” way next time.

Lucas has always been a supporter of the Israeli state and Zionism. She is simply wrong when she says the motion talks about individual Jews. It doesn’t mention Jews at all and simply says that ‘definitions of anti-Jewish discrimination should not equate Jewish identity with Zionist ideology.’

It is her Zionist friends who insist that Zionism is about Jews. When she says that debates should be held in a less toxic way what she’s really saying is that our criticisms of a genocidal, ethnic cleansing state and Zionist ideology are toxic.

Nothing is toxic enough to describe the genocide in Gaza. Nor is it true that Zionism means different things to different people. Zionism is what it does to Palestinians and how they experience it not what is in the heads of those who confuse their Jewish identity with Zionist ideology.

People think that all Nazis and members of the Nazi party were virulent anti-Semites. This is not true. Many Nazis weren’t interested in what was called the Jewish Question. They supported the Nazis because they wanted an end to unemployment or because of Versailles or wanted to see a new revitalised Germany. Would the fact that they thought Nazism meant these things mean that we should judge Nazi ideology by what was in the heads of individual Germans or by what those who experienced Nazi oppression saw it as?

Zionism believes in a Jewish state which, in the words of the ‘moderate’ Israeli opposition leader, Yair Lapid means ‘maximum Jews on maximum land with maximum security and with minimum Palestinians.’

I explain Israel's weird marriage laws here. They are at the core of Israel's system of apartheid: https://t.co/ECcEXiBcmA pic.twitter.com/9UAeLEoEqx

— Jonathan Cook (@Jonathan_K_Cook) June 30, 2026

Zionism always sought a racially pure state which inevitably meant ethnic cleansing and Jewish Supremacy. Everything in Israel is segregated as Jonathan Cook so eloquently points out in his article Israel is an apartheid state – and its weird marriage laws show us how.

There is a fight on to see whether the Green Party is going to backtrack from the criticisms Zack Polanski has made about Genocide in Gaza and the racism which causes this. My expulsion and the suspension of others are an indication of the determination of Zionist Greens to do the bidding of the Israeli state.

Elise Benjamin’s Racist Rant is Acceptable to the Green Party Council

Meanwhile prominent Zionist Greens like Elise Benjamin are not suspended despite making openly racist comments, accusing the Deputy Leader Mothin Ali of being anti-Semitic and Noam Chomsky of being a race ‘traitor’ for his criticisms of Israel.

Tony Greenstein