Showing posts with label Yair Golan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Yair Golan. Show all posts

3 December 2020

Why it’s anti-racist NOT anti-Semitic to compare Israel to pre-holocaust Nazi Germany

Why Today’s Israel Reminds Me of Nazi Germany – Uri Avnery


As people will be aware, the Zionist movement is in the forefront of the attack on free speech in this country and elsewhere. It provides the Right in the Labour Party with the ideal  moral justification for an attack on free speech – ‘anti-Semitism’.  So much so that plenty of Jewish people are now being suspended and expelled! Zionism is the cutting edge of the attack on democratic rights in the West.

The latest Jewish member to be suspended is Professor Moshe Machover.  Moshe was expelled peremptorily three years ago on the false charge that he was a member of the Communist Party of Great Britain.  So fierce was the backlash to that particular expulsion that the witchhunters were forced to backtrack and reinstate Moshe.

As I told Moshe when I heard the news, he has since been living on borrowed time. The Zionists have been eager to see the back of him and his Open Letter in Weekly Worker daring Starmer and the Zionists to do their worse, after he had appeared on a platform with Chris Williamson and myself, was probably a red rag to a bull (or a snake).

I however can’t be expelled (unless they readmit me in order that they can repeat the exercise!). So I can say virtually anything about Herr Sturmer and his anti-Semitic friend, David Evans.

Uri Avnery considered himself a Zionist to his dying days but unlike 99% of Zionists when he talked about peace with the Palestinians he meant it. Uri fought in Israel’s War of Independence (or Nakba) and was severely wounded.  He was also a former member of the Irgun terror group, which is why it was all the more remarkable that he courted arrest several times to meet the PLO, which then was the representative of the Palestinians including memorably Yasser Arafat in a  Beirut under siege.

There are indeed many comparisons between the Nazi state before 1939 and the Israeli state and many survivors of the holocaust, including those who were survivors of the concentration camps, such as Ze’ev Sternhell and Hajo Meyer saw those comparisons.

The key comparison is that for the Nazis the Jews were not part of the national collective, hence why in 1935 the Nuremberg Laws removed Jewish citizenship.  Henceforth they became subjects.

In Israel citizenship was begrudgingly given in the early 1950’s to the Palestinians but it was a degraded form of citizenship.  For the first 18 years of the state they lived under military rule.  Since then they have lived, not even as second class citizens but as tolerated guests, the majority of their lands stolen from them and hemmed into the 2% that they are allowed by Jewish settlements.

The Jewish Nation State Law passed in 2018 makes what was always implicit explicit. In its original, explicitly racist form it legalised the formation of Jewish only settlements, hundreds of which already exist.

Making Israel’s racism explicit caused an uproar among liberal Zionists because in Israel Zionism has perfected the art of not making its racist intentions explicit, bar the Israeli Law of Return. Instead para state organisations, such as the Jewish National Fund and Jewish Agency undertake the dirty work of discrimination. Regulations, policies and practices do the rest.

The broken window of a Jewish shop in Kristallnacht

For example there has been a longstanding policy of Judaising the Galilee, Jerusalem and Negev. This is no different to the Nazi policy of ‘deJewification’. Except that no laws were necessary. The Koenig Memorandum and the Prawer Plan ensured that policies would enact what the Knesset desired but did not legislate for.

Indeed it would be possible to say that being a settler colonial state, which Germany of course was not, has meant that racism in Israel is far higher than in Nazi Germany.  It may surprise people but even in the Nazi Party itself, the majority of members were not vehement anti-Semites. It was among the hard core of ‘old fighters’, those who had seen action in the Freikorps, the counter-revolutionary squads employed by the Social Democrats against the German Revolution, that genocidal anti-Semitism flourished.

There is a large section of Zionism which would not blanche at the extermination of the Palestinians.  Religious Zionists in particular have often expressed genocidal sentiments as have their rabbis such as Dov Lior, who is the settlers’ Chief Rabbi.  Dov Lior famously said that a Jewish fingernail was worth more than a thousand non-Jewish lives. Rabbi Yaacov Perrin, giving the funeral oration for Baruch Goldstein, who had murdered 29 unarmed worshippers in the Ibrahimi mosque in Hebron and wounded another hundred, increased this to a million lives.

Nonetheless it is not extermination but expulsion/transfer which is what the Palestinians face in the medium to long-term. Comparisons between Nazi Germany post 1939 and Israel are far-fetched to say the least.  With the onset of war Nazi Germany turned from expulsion to extermination. It first began with the wholesale murder of the disabled, in particular the Jewish disabled, from 1939-1941 until Catholic Bishop Galen spoke out against it (although a wild ‘euthenasia’ persisted in the concentration camps).

However even the most absurd comparisons, such as describing the Palestinian experience as a ‘holocaust’ are not anti-Semitic. Hyperbole is not racism. It is a measure of the fact that the Palestinian struggle is an anti-racist one that the Nazis are seen as the ultimate evil.

However the Zionists are in no position to deprecate comparisons between Zionism and Nazism given their appalling record before and during the holocaust.  Ben Gurion made clear his attitude to the endangered Jews in Germany being sent to Britain in a speech to the Israeli Labor Party’s central Committee on 9th December 1938, just a month after Kristalnacht.

The reaction of the world to this state sponsored pogrom was one of revulsion. The British Government acceded to the request of the Board of Deputies (which had not yet been captured by the Zionists) to admit ten thousand children. The Zionists were outraged and the reaction of David Ben Gurion, the Chairman of the Jewish Agency (which was the Zionists’ government-in-waiting) and later first Prime Minister of Israel was telling.

‘If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England, and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Yisrael, then I would opt for the second alternative. For we must weigh not only the life of these children, but also the history of the People of Israel.’[i]

This was the attitude of the Zionists throughout the war as they consciously sought to block all avenues of escape for Jewish refugees unless the destination was Palestine.  Their warped thinking being that if Jewish Palestine could not provide a solution to the refugee question, then what was the point of this ‘national museum’ as Ben Gurion also called it.

It was called ‘cruel Zionism’. Although Zionism was to be immensely cruel to the Palestinians we should never forget that it was cruel to the Jews first.

Read and enjoy!

Tony Greenstein

Israeli activist and author Uri Avnery draws on his personal experience of Hitler’s Germany on the eve of the Nazi party’s victory, and during the early years of Nazism, to show that similar processes of creeping Nazism are underway in Israel today

Why Today’s Israel Reminds Me of Nazi Germany – Uri Avnery

 “Please don’t write about Ya’ir Golan!” a friend begged me, “Anything a leftist like you writes will only harm him!”

So, I abstained for some weeks. But I can’t keep quiet any longer.

General Ya’ir Golan, the deputy chief of staff of the Israeli army, made a speech on Holocaust Memorial Day. Wearing his uniform, he read a prepared, well-considered text that triggered an uproar which has not yet died down.

Dozens of articles have been published in its wake, some condemning him, some lauding him. It seems that nobody could stay indifferent.

Uri Avnery protesting in Jerusalem

Traces of Nazism

The main sentence was this:

If there is something that frightens me about the memories of the Holocaust, it is the knowledge of the awful processes which happened in Europe in general, and in Germany in particular, 70, 80, 90 years ago, and finding traces of them here in our midst, today, in 2016.

All hell broke loose. What! Traces of Nazism in Israel? A resemblance between what the Nazis did to us with what we are doing to the Palestinians?

Ninety years ago was 1926, one of the last years of the German republic. Eighty years ago was 1936, three years after the Nazis came to power. Seventy years ago was 1946, on the morrow of Hitler’s suicide and the end of the Nazi Reich.

I feel compelled to write about the general’s speech after all, because I was there.

As a child I was an eyewitness to the last years of the Weimar Republic (so called because its constitution was shaped in Weimar, the town of Goethe and Schiller). As a politically alert boy I witnessed the Nazi Machtergreifung (“taking power”) and the first half a year of Nazi rule.

I know what Golan was speaking about. Though we belong to two different generations, we share the same background. Both our families come from small towns in Western Germany. His father and I must have had a lot in common.

There is a strict moral commandment in Israel: nothing can be compared to the holocaust. The holocaust is unique. It happened to us, the Jews, because we are unique. (Religious Jews would add: “Because God has chosen us.”)

I have broken this commandment. Just before Golan was born, I published (in Hebrew) a book called The Swastika, in which I recounted my childhood memories and tried to draw conclusions from them. It was on the eve of the Eichmann trial, and I was shocked by the lack of knowledge about the Nazi era among young Israelis then.

My book did not deal with the holocaust, which took place when I was already living in Palestine, but with a question which troubled me throughout the years, and even today: how could it happen that Germany, perhaps the most cultured nation on earth at the time, the homeland of Goethe, Beethoven and Kant, could democratically elect a raving psychopath like Adolf Hitler as its leader?

The last chapter of the book was entitled “It Can Happen Here!” The title was drawn from a book by the American novelist Sinclair Lewis, called ironically “It Can’t Happen Here”, in which he described a Nazi take-over of the United States.

In this chapter I discussed the possibility of a Jewish Nazi-like party coming to power in Israel. My conclusion was that a Nazi party can come to power in any country on earth, if the conditions are right. Yes, in Israel, too.

The book was largely ignored by the Israeli public, which at the time was overwhelmed by the storm of emotions evoked by the terrible disclosures of the Eichmann trial.

The truthful general

Now comes General Golan, an esteemed professional soldier, and says the same thing.

And not as an improvised remark, but on an official occasion, wearing his general’s uniform, reading from a prepared, well-thought-out text.

The storm broke out, and has not passed yet.

Israelis have a self-protective habit: when confronted with inconvenient truths, they evade its essence and deal with a secondary, unimportant aspect. Of all the dozens and dozens of reactions in the written press, on TV and on political platforms, almost none confronted the general’s painful contention.

… Golan has sacrificed his further advancement in order to utter his warning and giving it the widest possible resonance.

No, the furious debate that broke out concerns the questions: Is a senior army officer allowed to voice an opinion about matters that concern the civilian establishment? And do so in army uniform? On an official occasion?

Should an army officer keep quiet about his political convictions? Or voice them only in closed sessions – “in relevant forums”, as a furious Binyamin Netanyahu phrased it?

General Golan enjoys a very high degree of respect in the army. As deputy chief of staff he was until now almost certainly a candidate for chief of staff, when the incumbent leaves the office after the customary four years.

The fulfilment of this dream shared by every General Staff officer is now very remote. In practice, Golan has sacrificed his further advancement in order to utter his warning and giving it the widest possible resonance.

One can only respect such courage. I have never met General Golan, I believe, and I don’t know his political views. But I admire his act.

(Somehow I recall an article published by the British magazine Punch before World War I, when a group of junior army officers issued a statement opposing the government’s policy in Ireland. The magazine said that while it disapproves of the opinion expressed by the mutinous officers, it took pride in the fact that such youthful officers were ready to sacrifice their careers for their convictions.)

The Nazi march to power started in 1929, when a terrible worldwide economic crisis hit Germany. A tiny, ridiculous far-right party suddenly became a political force to be reckoned with. From there it took them four years to become the largest party in the country and to take over power (though it still needed a coalition).

Israeli settlers shout slogans as they march in the streets.

Add caption

I was there when it happened, a boy in a family in which politics became the main topic at the dinner table. I saw how the republic broke down, gradually, slowly, step by step. I saw our family friends hoisting the swastika flag. I saw my high-school teacher raising his arm when entering the class and saying “Heil Hitler” for the first time (and then reassuring me in private that nothing had changed.)

I was the only Jew in the entire high school. When the hundreds of boys – all taller than me – raised their arms to sing the Nazi anthem, and I did not, they threatened to break my bones if it happened again. A few days later we left Germany for good.

Corrosive victories

General Golan was accused of comparing Israel to Nazi Germany. Nothing of the sort. A careful reading of his text shows that he compared developments in Israel to the events that led to the disintegration of the Weimar Republic. And that is a valid comparison.

Things happening in Israel, especially since the last election, bear a frightening similarity to those events. True, the process is quite different. German fascism arose from the humiliation of surrender in World War I, the occupation of the Ruhr by France and Belgium from 1923 to 1925, the terrible economic crisis of 1929, the misery of millions of unemployed. Israel is victorious in its frequent military actions, we live comfortable lives. The dangers threatening us are of a quite different nature. They stem from our victories, not from our defeats.

Indeed, the differences between Israel today and Germany then are far greater than the similarities. But those similarities do exist, and the general was right to point them out.

Racism and discrimination

The discrimination against the Palestinians in practically all spheres of life can be compared to the treatment of the Jews in the first phase of Nazi Germany. (The oppression of the Palestinians in the occupied territories resembles more the treatment of the Czechs in the “protectorate” after the Munich betrayal.)

The political riffraff peopling the present Netanyahu government could easily have found their place in the first Nazi government.

The rain of racist bills in the Knesset, those already adopted and those in the works, strongly resembles the laws adopted by the Reichstag in the early days of the Nazi regime. Some rabbis call for a boycott of Arab shops. Like then. The call “Death to the Arabs” (Judah verrecke?) is regularly heard at soccer matches. A member of parliament has called for the separation between Jewish and Arab newborns in hospital. A chief rabbi has declared that goyim (non-Jews) were created by God to serve the Jews. Our ministers of education and culture are busy subduing the schools, theatre and arts to the extreme rightist line, something known in German as Gleichschaltung. The Supreme Court, the pride of Israel, is being relentlessly attacked by the minister of justice. The Gaza Strip is a huge ghetto.

Of course, no one in their right mind would even remotely compare Netanyahu to the Fuehrer, but there are political parties here which do emit a strong fascist smell. The political riffraff peopling the present Netanyahu government could easily have found their place in the first Nazi government.

One of the main slogans of our present government is to replace the “old elite”, considered too liberal, with a new one. One of the main Nazi slogans was to replace das System.

By the way, when the Nazis came to power, almost all senior officers of the German army were staunch anti-Nazis. They were even considering a putsch against Hitler . Their political leader was summarily executed a year later, when Hitler liquidated his opponents in his own party. We are told that General Golan is now protected by a personal bodyguard, something that has never happened to a general in the annals of Israel.

The general did not mention the occupation and the settlements, which are under army rule. But he did mention the episode which occurred shortly before he gave this speech, and which is still shaking Israel now: in occupied Hebron, under army rule, a soldier saw a seriously wounded Palestinian lying helplessly on the ground, approached him and killed him with a shot to the head. The victim had tried to attack some soldiers with a knife, but did not constitute a threat to anyone any more. This was a clear contravention of army standing orders, and the soldier has been hauled before a court martial.

A cry went up around the country: the soldier is a hero! He should be decorated! Netanyahu called his father to assure him of his support. Avigdor Lieberman entered the crowded courtroom in order to express his solidarity with the soldier. A few days later Netanyahu appointed Lieberman as minister of defence, the second most important office in Israel.

Before that, General Golan received robust support both from the minister of defense, Moshe Ya’alon, and the chief of staff, Gadi Eisenkot. Probably this was the immediate reason for the kicking out of Ya’alon and the appointment of Lieberman in his place. It resembled a putsch.

It seems that Golan is not only a courageous officer, but a prophet, too. The inclusion of Lieberman’s party in the government coalition confirms Golan’s blackest fears. This is another fatal blow to the Israeli democracy.

Am I condemned to witness the same process for the second time in my life?



[i]         Yoav Gelber, ‘Zionist policy and the Fate of European Jewry, Yad Vashem Studies, Vol. XIII, p. 199 Labour Party Archives, Bet Berl Tsofit., 22/38,   see also Segev, p.28.  Teveth, p.855, Piterberg, p.99. 

 

 

Yair Golan, Uri Avnery, Nazi,

12 December 2018

The Cowardice and Self-Abasement of Angela Rayner who apologised for having offended Israel’s racist supporters


Why do accusations of ‘anti-Semitism’ cause Labour MPs’ Spines to Turn to Water?


Before reading in last week’s Zionist press about Angela Rayner’s attack on me, I had barely heard of the woman. She is not exactly a household name. Nor is she known for her wit and charm.  In an interview just over a year ago she demonstrated her mettle:
“I see myself as soft left. I’m very pragmatic. I’m interested in how we can change lives for the better; how we can we put socialism into practice. Every time we expend energy on fighting each other, we’re letting down the people that need us the most.”
Jewish only Afula - the racism that Angela Rayner didn't mention
Which is a restatement of Blair’s aphorism that “what matters is what works”. Pragmatism is the excuse for a thousand excuses as to why socialism should be postponed. Blair’s adage was the basis for private sector vultures to cherry pick the NHS. PFI also worked for some people. New Labour sycophants such as UNISON’s Dave Prentis were all in favour of mortgaging our future when PFI first appeared. After all it worked and enabled hospitals and schools to be built, albeit at the cost of the future.
This is the kind of pragmatism which the Angela Rayners of New Labour specialised in.  In a further display of the political bankruptcy of this New Labour leftover (she supported Andy Burnham in the first leadership election) Rayner observed that ‘Ideology never put food on my table'. Employing this logic we should forget about socialism altogether and follow the non-ideological route of the United States’s Democrats, the second party of capitalism.
This is the pathetic specimen that is currently Shadow Education Secretary. And Rayner is not alone. There is Emily Thornberry, another Labour luvvie who is equally spineless and waiting for Corbyn to fall or be pushed. These creatures hate ‘ideology’ because ideas about the society we live in might suggest we have a systemic problem in capitalism, based as it is on profit and exploitation rather than human need, that poverty and unemployment is integral to a free market economy.
Angela  Rayner is a prime example of the Fabian spirit which has imbued countless Labour managers of capitalism. In the same Guardian interview this pragmatist assured her interviewer that she wouldn’t get rid of grammar schools because that would mean destroying good schools’. Presumably employing the same logic Rayner would keep Eton and Harrow and no doubt she would also keep private medicine since that also works.
In other words Angela Rayner is a typical example of Labour’s wretched right-wingers who ends up defending the interests of the multi-nationals and imposing austerity in the ‘national interest’.
This is by way of introduction to the invitation extended to Rayner by the Board of Deputies to address its annual gathering at the House of Lords. It was a controversial invitation and the Jewish Chronicle’s Editor, Stephen Pollard called it, in his normally measured hyperbole, an‘idiotic, craven and deeply counter-productive decision”.
However BOD President Ms Van der Zyl undoubtedly realises that with the virtual collapse of May’s ramshackle administration and the prospect of a Labour government under Jeremy Corbyn, it might be a good idea to talk to the future government rather than boycott it. Ms Rayner was therefore in a strong position and she could have told the Board, to put it politely, to fuck off if they gave her any grief. If members of the Shadow Cabinet don’t have the bottle to tell the small minded small businessmen of the Board where to get off then they will be putty in the hands of the currency speculators.
The Zionists discovered that in her radical phase, after having visited Auschwitz, Rayner had quoted from Norman Finkelstein’s seminal book, Holocaust Industry which describes how the Zionist movement has exploited the Holocaust both financially and politically. Rayner tweeted that “As Norman G Finklestein writes in his seminal book The Holocaust Industry it is important to fight for and preserve the integrity of the historical record.”
The problem with asking people like Angela Rayner to have the courage of their convictions is that they never had any convictions
What you might ask is wrong with that? However you should never underestimate the yellow streak running through Labour MPs. Instead of defending her quote from a book praised by Noam Chomsky and the most eminent of all Holocaust historians, Raul Hilberg, Rayner expressed regret and apologised for quoting from the controversial book, The Holocaust Industry, by anti-Zionist Norman Finkelstein.’
The Jewish News observes that Finkelstein ‘claims in the book that the US Jewish establishment exploits the memory of the Holocaust for political and financial gain.’ 
This is about as controversial as saying that the sun sets in the west or that gravity calls things to fall. The Zionist movement, of which the American Jewish establishment is an integral part, has shamelessly exploited the Holocaust for the benefit of Israel. Why even the fraudulent ‘definition’ of anti-Semitism that the Zionist movement is trying to impose on us is called the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition.  It would be honest at least to call it the Israel government sponsored definition of anti-Semitism. The Holocaust has been exploited mercilessly by the Zionist movement.  Finkelstein’s book documents just a few of these examples. The Holocaust has become an ideological construct, separate from the memory of the Holocaust itself, replete with its own museums and cultural artifacts, the purpose of which is to defend the practices of Zionism and the Israeli state.
What makes this even more shameful is that the actual Holocaust survivors themselves live in poverty, denied all but the most basic sustenance in a  militarized economy run by a handful of oligarchs. See Tens of thousands of Israeli Holocaust survivors are living in abject poverty
Finkelstein gives as an example (p.30) of how little the Zionist movement is concerned about the Holocaust the example of Ronald Reagan’s visit to Germany’s Bitburg military cemetery in 1985. During the course of this visit Reagan declared that German soldiers, including members of the Waffen SS, ‘were victims of the Nazis just as surely as the victims of the concentration camps.’ The Waffen SS were responsible for running the camps.
What was the reaction of the same Zionist lobby groups who ritually accuse all and sundry of anti-Semitism? They defended Reagan who was a good friend of Israel. In 1988 Reagan was given the ‘Humanitarian of the Year’ award by the Simon Wiesenthall Centre and in 1994 the ‘Torch of Liberty’ award by the Anti-Defamation League. When one remembers that Reagan sponsored death squads in El Salvador and the Nicaraguan Contras you realize how deep the Zionist sickness is.
Yet the cowardly Rayner, backed down. Instead of defending her right to quote from Holocaust Industry and telling the Board where to get off she decided to imitate the victims of China’s Red Guard. She could have been quoting from the Report to the March 1949 Seventh Central Committee meeting of the Communist Party of China on the Marxist-Leninist weapon of criticism and self-criticism.’ which explained that ‘We can get rid of a bad style and keep the good.’ Rayner’s self-abnegation knew no limits:
 “I regret the choice of quote I used to illustrate it, and now that I know more about the context I would not make that reference again. I apologise for what was a genuine misunderstanding, in what was always intended to be a message of solidarity with the Jewish community. This underscores the importance of engagement with the Jewish community to improve understanding about this issue.”
Humiliation piled on humiliation. It’s as if these ciphers don’t believe in anyting. If Rayner had been guilty of ‘anti-Semitism’ the Board of Deputies would be the last body to apologise to.  Throughout its miserable 258 years existence this organisation, set up to pay homage to George III on his accession to the throne, has utterly failed to defend the Jewish community against anti-Semitism. The only time it fought against discrimination was in the mid-19th century when it fought for the Emancipation of the Jewish bourgeoisie, in particular its rights to stand for Parliament. After having been elected three times Lionel de Rothschild finally took his seat in 1858 after the passage of the Jewish Relief Act.
The Board completely failed to defend the rights of Jewish refugees from Czarist Russia at the end of the 19th century. On 18th January 1894 500-600 Jewish workers in the East End of London occupied the Grand Synagogue seeking an audience with Chief Rabbi Herman Adler who had described the Russian immigrants as criminals... mentally and physically afflicted. They had to be thrown out by truncheon wielding police. When the Tories, under Zionist hero and Prime Minister Arthur Balfour introduced the Aliens Act 1905 to keep the Jewish refugees out, the Board failed to oppose it. As the editor of the Jewish Chronicle, L Greenberg, noted: ‘The Board asked for the driest of dry bread, it was given the hardest of hard stone.’ [Jewish Chronicle 24.4.1908
The Board of Deputies message to Jews when faced with real antisemitism in October 1936 was to 'keep away from the route of the Blackshirt march' - nothing has changed since
On 2nd October 1936 the BOD advice to Jewish workers and anti-fascists was to ‘Keep Away’ when Moseley’s British Union of Fascists tried to march through the East End. The Board was comprehensively ignored and today the anti-fascist movement commemorates the Battle of Cable Street in 1936 when Moseley’s fascist thugs were stopped in their tracks by the Jewish and non-Jewish working class.
In the 1970’s the neo-Nazi National Front was being talked about as the third party of British politics.  At the West Bromwich by-election in 1973 the NF’s Martin Webster gained 17% of the vote saving his deposit. In the Stechford by-election in 1977 the NF beat the Liberals into 4th place, gaining 8.2%. It was as a result of this that the Anti Nazi League was formed in late 1977. 
What was the reaction of the Board? It was to ignore the NF and attack the ANL because it had been formed by anti-Zionists. Then as now its concern was Israel not Jews. This drove Searchlight Anti-Fascist Magazine, which was edited by Maurice Ludmer before the baleful influence of its current editor, Gerry Gable to issue a strongly worded editorial [Issue 41, November 1978]:
"In the face of mounting attacks against the Jewish community both ideologically and physically, we have the amazing sight of the Jewish Board of Deputies launching an attack on the Anti Nazi League with all the fervour of Kamikaze pilots... It was as though they were watching a time capsule rerun of the 1930's, in the form of a flickering old movie, with a grim determination to repeat every mistake of that era. "
Solicitor and member of the Board of  Deputies Robert Festenstein appears in promotion video with Tommy Robinson
The Board is stuffed with bigots such as Roslyn Pine for whom Muslims are ‘the vilest of animals” and Arabs are simple ‘evil’ or Robert Festenstein, Deputy for Prestwich Hebrew Congregation who starred in a Tommy Robinson video.
The Board of Deputies, which doesn’t represent the secular majority of Jews in Britain or Ultra Orthodox Jews is a reactionary Zionist body. Its past President Jonathan Arkush accused Jeremy Corbyn of havingunquestionably anti-Semitic views’. The same Arkush, writing on behalf of the Board, welcomed the election of the unquestionably anti-Semitic Donald Trump.
When Israeli snipers began murdering unarmed Palestinian demonstrators in Gaza the Board of Deputies rushed to support them in the name of all Jews
The Board has given unquestioning and unstinting support for every act of mass murder and repression by the Israeli state. It has organised demonstrations in support of Israel’s murderous attacks on Gaza and most recently given its support to Israeli snipers firing on unarmed demonstrators in Gaza. In a statement issued by both Jonathan Arkush and Marie van der Zyl the Board stated that
No state could allow its borders to be breached by those who openly wish harm to its civilians.  Israel is defending its people from repeated violent attempts at mass invasion.’
There are no borders between Israel and Gaza. There is a security fence and the demonstrators were shot hundreds of yards from the fence in a scene reminiscent of the Nazi killing fields in Russia.
No doubt Angela Rayner deprecated, like all Labour’s apologists for Zionism, Israel’s mass murder of Palestinians but she fails entirely to connect the murder of Palestinians with the use of ‘anti-Semitism’ as a weapon against Israel’s critics.
Israel is a state that is officially an apartheid state with the passing of the Jewish Nation State Law.  As the late Uri Avnery wrote, in his last ever article, Who the hell are we’
So what is new about the new law which at a first glance looks like a copy of the declaration? It contains two important omissions: the declaration spoke of a “Jewish and Democratic” state, and promised full equality between all its citizens, without regard to religion, ethnicity or sex.
All this has disappeared. No democracy. No equality. A state of the Jews, for the Jews, by the Jews.
Avnery was one of those rare creatures, a Zionist who sincerely wanted to make peace. He wasn’t a man of the Left, on the contrary he came from a Revisionist Zionist background, having fought in the Irgun. But it is plain as a pikestaff that the Israel that the Board defends is racist to the core.
Angela Rayner, instead of taking the Board to task for implicating all British Jews in the atrocities of the Israeli state, which inevitably helps fuel anti-Semitism, decided to attack me instead.  In Angela Rayner: Those likening Hitler to Zionism not welcome in Labour Party Board President Marie van der Zyl was quoted as saying that 'Labour must kick out the racists from the party, no Ifs, no Buts, and it must do so without further delay'. As it happens I agree with her. The first step should be the disaffiliation of the Jewish Labour Movement and the expulsion of its Chair, war criminal Ivor Caplin and its Campaigns Officer Adam Langleben. All those who defend Israeli Apartheid should be shown the door. Instead Rayner she was
glad that the likes of [Jewish anti-Zionist] Tony Greenstein have been expelled and I want to make it clear that those who distort history by likening Hitler to Zionism are no longer welcome.”
Angela Rayner seems to have contracted the IHRA disease, verbal incontinence. Nowhere have I compared Hitler to Zionism for one simple reason.  Hitler was (in theory anyway) a human being. Zionism is a political movement.  Of course if Rayner used ‘Hitler’ as a metonym for Nazism she is right.  There are many comparisons between Zionism and Nazism and Israelis including Israeli historians are prime amongst those who make the comparisons. However comparing two things is not the same as saying they are identical.  Such logic completely escapes this Labour front bench opportunist.

The late Professor Amos Funkenstein, former Head of the Faculty of History at Tel Aviv University, when referring to the controversy over the refusal of soldiers to serve in the Occupied Territories, compared them to soldiers in the German army who refused to serve in concentration or extermination camps. [HOLOCAUST ANALOGIES - Repaying the Mortgage Return 2 March 1990]  To those who asked how it was possible to compare the actions of Nazi soldiers with Israelis, Funkenstein replied

As a historian I know that every comparison is limited. On the other hand, without comparisons, no historiography is possible. Understanding a historical event is a kind of translation into the language of our time. If we would leave every phenomenon in its peculiarity, we could not make this translation. Every translation is an interpretation and every interpretation is also a comparison.
Israelis including Holocaust researcher Professor Daniel Blatman and fellow Hebrew University Professor Ofer Cassif are presumably also racists, according to Idiot Rayner, for comparing Israel today to Nazi Germany. [Hebrew U Professor: Israel Today Similar To Nazi Germany]. Even Israel’s Deputy Chief of Staff, Yair Golan, made just such a comparison. IDF General In Bombshell Speech: Israel Today Shows Signs Of 1930s Germany. Rayner typies the bankrupt anti-intellectualism of Labour politicians who run scared of the Zionist smear of anti-Semitism. Nearly all of them lack the political courage to call Zionism’s racists out for what they are.
Afula has just elected a city mayor who has vowed to keep protect the City’s ‘Jewish character’ starting off with banning Arabs from the city’s park. Would it be anti-Semitic to make a comparison with Nazi Germany which, from 1935-6 onwards also banned Jews from parks?

Or how about the quaint Israeli custom on Jerusalem’s Flag March of Israelis marching to the chant of ‘Death to the Arabs’? Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, who accused Corbyn of anti-Semitism and being the new Enoch Powell, encouraged Jews to attend this march. There was a time in 1930’s Germany and Poland when ‘Death to the Jews’ was quite popular. Perhaps this comparison is also anti-Semitic?
Or maybe the Israeli custom of having Jewish only towns and communities brings to mind the custom in Nazi Germany of having Aryan only communities. The existing ability of communities of 400 Jewish families to reject Arabs and other undesirables, under the Reception Committees Law is being expanded to 700 families.
The fact is that there are many comparisons which can be made between a ‘Jewish’ state based on ethnic cleansing and racial-nationalism and Nazi Germany. In just the same way as people compared Apartheid in South Africa to Nazi Germany.  That doesn’t mean that Nazi Germany and Israel are the same, especially after the Holocaust began however it does mean that they have certain features in common.  Today Israel even has its own Jewish Nazi groups based around people like the popular rapper, The Shadow.
Unfortunately people like Angela Rayner are too cowardly to understand that it is precisely because Israel uses the Holocaust as its touchstone that it is a moral imperative to point out that ethnic cleansing and all Israel’s other barbarities are no different in principle to Germany under fascism. That is one reason why today the Israeli state is best friends with anti-Semitic regimes such as those in Hungary and Poland.
The sheer abject cowardice of Angela Rayner is epitomized by the fact that Marie van der Zyl
was also scathing of Jeremy Corbyn, who, she said, “must apologise for the hurt he has personally caused, whether by calling antisemitic terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah his ‘friends’, defending an antisemitic mural, laying wreaths by the graves of terrorists, or allowing so many racists and their apologists to remain as Labour members.’
Jeremy Corbyn has nothing to apologise for when it comes to fighting racism and if Rayner had a spine then she would have walked out because one thing is for certain – there are next to no votes to be obtained by appeasing Britain’s Zionists.
We even had Tory Lord Eric Pickles complaining that “those who wanted to amend the IHRA definition wanted to be free to compare Israel to the Nazis. That is bigotry.” This is the same Pickles who defended the Tory Party’s links in the European Parliament with anti-Semitic parties such as Poland’s Law and Justice Party.
What Angela Rayner proves is the power of Zionism’s political terrorism in silencing criticism of Zionism. The fact is that Israel today is fundamentally an apartheid state, both in the Occupied Territories, where it is most obvious, but also in Israel itself where Arabs have the status of resident aliens. Those who seek to prevent comparisons with Nazi Germany are in effect giving a green light for Israel to continue down the road of visceral racism and segregation.
Tony Greenstein