antisemitic discourse in britain in 2007 - cst discourse report 2007_web.pdf · antisemitic...

Antisemitic Discourse in Britain in 2007

This graphic appeared on the internet guestbook of the British neo-Nazi groupCombat 18 in February 2007. It combines a wide range of antisemiti c chargesto allege that Jews control the world.

Executive summary

Introduction

Antisemitism: background

Antisemitism: anti-Israel activity and anti-Zionism• Continuities between antisemitism and anti-Zionism• Antisemitic impacts of anti-Zionism

Antisemitic discourse: misconceptions and smears

All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Antisemitism

Poll of antisemitic attitudes: Jewish power and disloyalty

The Iraq war and contemporary antisemitic discourse• Background: wars and Jewish scapegoats• “Zionist neoconservatives”• “The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy”• “Taming Leviathan…the American-Jewish lobby”• “Fantastically successful…the Jewish lobby”

UK political lobbying controversies and antisemitism• Background: Jews, money and Jewish financial power• “…middle name is Abraham”• “Hidden hand of Zion”• “The wrath of Moses” and “The shadowy role of Labour Friends of

Israel”• “Israel’s deep seated penetration of our political system”

Anti-Israel boycotts and antisemitism• Background: Jewish identity and history of boycotts• Boycotts today • University and College Union: Israel boycott and antisemitism denial• Other anti-Israel boycotts• “Would you not boycott Dr Mengele?” British Medical Journal• Anti-Israel boycotts and antisemitic isolation of “Zionists”

Abuse of Holocaust Memorial Day: “Perdition”

The internet: antisemitism in mainstream media• The Guardian, Comment is Free• BBC website

CST Antisemitic Discourse Report 2007 / 3

Contents06

09

10

12

14

15

16

18

23

27

34

35

4 / CST Antisemitic Discourse Report 2007

Antisemitism from radical Islamist sources• Background• Media exposés of radical Islamist antisemitism

Terrorism and antisemitism• Background: recent history of antisemitic terrorist attacks• Antisemitism in British jihadist terrorism• UK support for Hizbollah and Hamas

Case studies• Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi: “Fatawa on Palestine”• British People’s Party: “Declaration of Independence From Zionism”

ISBN: 0-9548471-1-3

The text and illustrations may only be reproduced with prior permissionof the Community Security Trust.

Published by the Community Security Trust. Registered Charity Number 1042391

Copyright © 2008 The Community Security Trust

39

40

45

This cartoon was used many times by British Nazigroups, with this particular version dating from 1962.It vividly illustrates the enduring antisemitic chargethat Jewish financiers control politicians. The allegationresurfaced again in Britain during 2007 in controversiesabout Labour Party funding.

In the cartoon, the Jewish financier is dominatingLabour, Conservative and Liberal politicians with a whipin the shape of a sterling sign. The Jew’s other handholds an open sack of coins and his belt buckle is a Starof David. The politicians cower, beg like a dog and lickthe Jew’s shoes.

• The Government’s Response to the All Party Parliamentary Inquiry intoAntisemitism was the single mostimportant action against UKantisemitism for many years.This was a crucial acknowledgementof the fears of the Jewish communityand the concerns of many otherobservers and commentators. TheInquiry and subsequent Responseprovide a unique working frameworkfor identifying and challengingantisemitism.

• Explicit antisemitism is subject tosimilar social and legal prohibitionsas are other forms of racism andprejudice. Explicit antisemiticdiscourse, whereby Jews are openlytargeted on the basis of their religionor ethnicity (rather than attacked forsupposedly backing Zionism orIsrael), is extremely rare in Britishsociety, media and politics.

• A poll of antisemitic attitudes showedthe mass potential for antisemiticconspiracy theories within mainstreamopinion. Half of UK respondents said it is “probably true” that “Jews are moreloyal to Israel than their own country”;one third agreed that “American Jewscontrol US Middle Eastern policy”;and one-fifth associated Jews withglobal business and finance.

• Extremists from across the politicalspectrum are converging upona shared definition of “Zionism”that relies upon antisemitic themes,imagery and language, in whichthe word “Jew” is now replaced by“Zionist”. This is demonising languagethat depicts Zionism as a great hiddenconspiracy, centred in Israel and theUSA against the rest of humanity:

controlling politicians, media and finance, and provoking wars and global foment.

• Rhetoric against “Zionist” or “pro-Israel” lobbies facilitates antisemitismby casting suspicion against allmainstream Jewish personalitiesand organisations.

• Antisemitic discourse was repeatedlyrevealed in the trials of British jihadistterrorists and sympathisers.

• The nature and scale of theinternet is facilitating, normalising andglobalising antisemitic discourse onthe websites of mainstream mediaoutlets that would not otherwisetolerate antisemitism.This is a particular problem in theblogging sections of daily newspapers’websites and the bookselling sectionsof leading retail outlets. Offensivematerial may be removed if membersof the public can persuade hostwebsites to act, but leadingcompanies are effectively absolvingthemselves of proactive responsibilityfor what appears on their own sites.

• Many supposed anti-racists, includingmainstream journalists and politicians,scorn and misrepresent mainstreamJewish community concerns aboutantisemitism. This contrasts with theirsympathy for similar fears from otherminority groups. Anti-Israelcampaigners deride mainstreamJewish community concerns about the antisemitic content and impact of their anti-Israel rhetoric andfrequently excuse or deny theantisemitism of Hizbollah, Hamas and their UK supporters.


Executive Summary

The evil Jew is represented here as a dragon-like serpent that is poised to rape and kill a trapped anddefenceless woman, representingcivilisation.

Pre-World War II British Nazi cartoon.

The evil Jewish serpent is encirclingand controlling the world.

Cover, UK edition of “The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion”, c.1970s.

A Star of David dominates the world.

Cover, contemporary Malaysian publication sold in UK,includes “The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion”.

This CST Antisemitic Discourse Reportanalyses antisemitism within writtenand verbal communication, discussionand rhetoric about Jews and Jewish-related issues in 2007.

This report studies antisemitic discoursewithin the mainstream public sphere. It does not survey discourse withinmarginal or clandestine racist,extremist and radical circles, whereantisemitism is the norm. Where suchmaterial is quoted within this report, it is for comparison with moremainstream sources.

The 2006 Report of the All-PartyParliamentary Inquiry into Antisemitism1

noted the importance of antisemiticdiscourse and the complexity of definingwhat is (and is not) antisemitism. This study is intended to aid publicunderstanding of these complex issues,in order that antisemitic discourse and antisemitic incident levels may be reduced.

Antisemitic discourse is distinct fromactual antisemitic incidents, which arecriminal race hate attacks against Jewsor Jewish organisations and locations.These racist attacks are analysed in theCST Antisemitic Incidents Report 2007.2


Introduction

1 “Report of the All-PartyParliamentary Inquiryinto Antisemitism”.Published September2006, London: TheStationery Office. The report may beviewed on the website of the ParliamentaryCommittee AgainstAntisemitism:www.thepcaa.org

2 CST’s annual AntisemiticIncidents Report is acomprehensive analysis of the scale and nature of antisemitic race hateattacks.The report may beviewed at CST’swebsite:www.thecst.org.uk

Antisemitism is an important warning of division and extremism within societyas a whole. It is a subject that shouldbe of concern not only to Jews, but toall of society.

The near destruction of European Jewryin the Holocaust rendered openantisemitism taboo in public life, butit has led many to wrongly categoriseantisemitism as an exclusively far rightphenomenon that is essentially frozenin time.

Antisemitism predates Christianity and is referred to as “the LongestHatred”. In essence, antisemitism ishostility, phobia or bias against Judaismor Jews as individuals or as a group. Its persistence is not doubted, yetprecise definitions of antisemitism are an issue of heated debate.3

Antisemitism repeatedly adapts to contemporary circumstances and historically has taken many forms, including religious, nationalist,economic and racial-biological. Jews have been blamed for manyphenomena, including the death of Jesus; the Black Death; the adventof liberalism, democracy, communism,capitalism; and for inciting numerousrevolutions and wars.

A dominant antisemitic theme is the allegation that Jews are powerfuland cunning manipulators, set againstthe rest of society for their evil andtimeless purpose. The notion of Jewishpower - codified within the notoriousforgery, “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”4 - distinguishes antisemitismfrom other types of racism, which oftendepict their targets as ignorant andprimitive.

Today, antisemitic race hate attackshave approximately doubled since the late 1990s. This phenomenon hasoccurred in most Jewish communitiesthroughout the world, and there is a distinct global pattern wherebyoverseas events (primarily, but notexclusively, involving Israel) triggersudden escalations in local antisemiticincident levels. The situation is madefar worse by ongoing attempts at masscasualty terrorist attacks by globaljihadist elements against their localJewish communities.


Antisemitism: Background

3 The term antisemitismwas coined by WilhelmMarr (a self describedantisemite) in 1879.He regarded the termas preferable to anti-Jew or anti-Judaism.

4 Modern publications of The Protocols of theLearned Elders of Zionmainly derive from theRussian hoax versionof 1903. The Protocolsclaim to reveal a Jewishplot to conquer theworld by control ofgovernments, media,wars, finance, revolutionand other means.Today, it is widelydistributed andendorsed throughoutmuch of the Muslimand Arab world.

Antisemitic caricature of American “Uncle Sam”. British far right stickeropposing 1991 Gulf War. Note antisemitic facialfeatures and Stars of David on top hat and lapel pocket.

By the next Gulf War in 2003,it had become relativelycommonplace for mainstreamcommentators to insinuate orallege that American andBritish foreign policy wasdictated by Jewish or “pro-Israeli” lobbyists.

The cowardly Jew with global power urgesa British soldier to defend him by killingPalestinian Arabs. (The Jew’s Star of Davidhat has been knocked to the ground).

Cartoon from July 1936 edition of “TheFascist”. The Jew’s assurance, “there won’tbe any sanctions here”, refers to allegedJewish control of the League of Nationsensuring that Britain will not face economicsanctions for its actions, unlike fascist Italywhich was then facing sanctions followingits recent conquest of Abyssinia (Ethiopia).

The relationship between antisemitism,anti-Israel activity and anti-Zionism iscentral to contemporary British antisemitism,and to the concerns of British Jews.

The bastardisation of the word “Zionist”is crucial to this process. Anti-Israelactivists, open antisemites andextremists of diverse political shades are converging upon a mutual definitionof Zionism that is rooted in traditionalantisemitic conspiracy motifs, and owesnothing to Jewish definitions of the term.To many self-described “anti-Zionists”,the word “Zionist” now resonates as apolitical, financial, military and mediaconspiracy that is centred in Washingtonand Tel Aviv, and which opposesauthentic local interests.

The All Party Parliamentary Inquiry intoAntisemitism noted, “One of the mostdifficult and contentious issues aboutwhich we have received evidence is the dividing line between antisemitismand criticism of Israel or Zionism.”5

Criticism of Israel or Zionism is notantisemitic per se. However, it risksbecoming so when traditional antisemiticthemes are employed or echoed. Thiscommonly occurs when the word“Zionist” or “Israeli” is substituted where“Jew” would have previously appeared.The Parliamentary Inquiry found that“discourse has developed that is in effectantisemitic because it views Zionismitself as a global force of unlimitedpower and malevolence throughouthistory. This definition of Zionism bearsno relation to the understanding thatmost Jews have of the concept; that is,a movement of Jewish nationalliberation, born in the late nineteenthcentury with a geographical focus limitedto Israel. Having re-defined Zionism

in this way, traditional antisemiticnotions of Jewish conspiratorial power,manipulation and subversion are thentransferred from Jews (a racial and religious group) on to Zionism (a political movement). This is at thecore of the ‘New Antisemitism’ on whichso much has been written.”6

Continuities betweenantisemitism and anti-ZionismThere are numerous continuitiesbetween historical antisemitic themes and modern anti-Zionism.These include:

• Alleging that Jewish holy books preachJewish supremacy and that this is the basis for alleged Zionist racism.

• The belief that Jews are only loyal to other Jews. This is integral to theantisemitic image of leading Jews as secret, all powerful conspirators whocontrol media, economy, government,and other social institutions for theirmutual benefit and to the detriment of non-Jews. These attitudes influencedperceptions of the role of Jewishindividuals in financial and politicalWestminster controversies during 2007.

• The idea that Jews are “the Other”.The old notion of Jews being outsidenormal, civilised society is now echoedby the claim that Israel does notbelong in the family of world nations.

• Dehumanising antisemitic languagecomparing Jews to rats, cancer, plagueand bacteria is now repeated in somedepictions of Israel and Zionists. This type of language reduces its targetto a pest or disease, encouraging thenotion that ‘cleansing’ or ‘extermination’must occur.


Antisemitism: Anti-Israel Activity and Anti-Zionism

5 “Report of the All-Party ParliamentaryInquiry intoAntisemitism”.Published September2006, London: TheStationery Office. The report may beviewed on the websiteof the ParliamentaryCommittee AgainstAntisemitism:www.thepcaa.orgFinding 76

6 Ibid. Finding 83

• Scapegoating Jews for local and globalproblems, and demanding theirdestruction or conversion as a vital stepin the building of a new, better world.These historical demands are echoed in contemporary depictions of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as central totheological and political struggles for the future of the world.

• The image of Jews as alien corruptorsof traditional, authentic society andestablished moral values. This survivesin contemporary portrayals of pro-Israellobbyists as illegitimate hijackers of thetrue will and nature of British politicsand people. It is increasingly routine in mainstream UK media depictions of American pro-Israel lobbyists.

Antisemitic impacts of anti-ZionismAnti-Israel and anti-Zionist discourse,especially from the liberal left, charitiesand trade unions may not in any waybe inspired by antisemitism. Nevertheless,widespread anti-Israel and anti-Zionistdiscourse may still have manyantisemitic impacts. These include:

• British Jews and British Jewishorganisations are randomly subjected to antisemitic race hate attacks includingterrorism - over events that are blamedupon Israel and/or Zionists.

• Depicting a Jewish state as an intrinsicallyracist or imperialist enterprise serves to demonise and isolate all Jews whobelieve they have the right to statehood.

• The fostering of a reflexive hatred,fear, suspicion or bias against Jews perse, which leads to Jews and Jewishorganisations being prejudicially treateddue to their support, real or not, forIsrael or Zionism.

• The use of “Zionist” as a pejorativedescription of any organised Jewish (or Jewish related) activity, such as the“Zionist Jewish Chronicle”, or the “ZionistCST”. These bodies are then maltreatedfor being allegedly Zionist, rather thandecently engaged with.

• Contemporary antisemitism is judgedby its supposed utility to Zionism and is reacted to on that basis. There is widespread contempt formainstream Jewish and “pro-Zionist”concerns about antisemitism. In particular, antisemitism fromanything other than overt far rightsources is ignored, excused or denied.This legitimises the spread and impactof non-far right antisemitism, and deepens the cycle of mistrust and division between the mainstreamJewish community and its detractors.Similarly, Holocaust commemoration is often judged by its supposed utility toZionism and is reacted to on that basis.

• Employing anti-Israel rhetoric oractions specifically because they haveunique resonance for Jews per se. (For example, comparing Israel to NaziGermany, or advocating an academicboycott of Israel on the basis thateducation is a particularly Jewish trait).

• Enacting anti-Israel activities,especially boycotts, that inevitablyimpact against local Jews far morethan any other sector of society.


British Jewish leaders andrepresentative bodies, including CST,the Board of Deputies of British Jewsand the Chief Rabbi, have repeatedlyand sincerely stated that it is entirelycorrect that Israel should be subjectto criticism, just as any nation stateis. Indeed, Israel is subject toextensive media and political scrutinyand criticism, especially compared to other overseas countries and the reactions that they evoke.

Nevertheless, some mainstreammedia commentators and politicalactivists regularly accuse Jewishrepresentative bodies of manipulatingantisemitism as a smear with whichto target any criticism of Israel.This false accusation effectively labelsBritish Jewish representative bodiesas liars and concealed front groupsfor Israel. Additionally, British Jewishrepresentatives are often treated withderision and contempt whenever theydo actually raise concerns aboutantisemitism.

The false accusation is often accompaniedby the claim that politicians andjournalists are too fearful for theircareers and personal safety, to speakout against Israel and the alleged Jewishcover-ups on its behalf. This charge ispartly reliant upon the antisemitic notionof an all pervasive and all powerful pro-Israeli conspiracy.

The openly antisemitic variants of these charges may be foundin thousands of extremist websites.One typical example is “ZionistWatch”, which states, “…the corpulentbank accounts and overindulgedpower of extremist Jews havecombined to create an intellectual

and internet climate of censorship,harassment, and intimidation for anybrave souls who dare to expose theiragenda of endless war, bloodshed,degeneracy and anti-Gentilist hatred…”7


Antisemitic Discourse: Misconceptions and Smears

This image appeared on the website “ZionistWatch”.

The image’s digitalencoding was entitled“jew_death_stalkers.jpg”

7 http://zionistwatch.wordpress.com

The All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry intoAntisemitism8 was commissioned by JohnMann MP, Chairman of the All-PartyParliamentary Group against Antisemitism.It was chaired by Dr Denis MacShane MPand comprised 13 MPs from across thepolitical spectrum. The inquiry was heldat Parliament but did not have officialstatus.

The terms of reference for the inquirywere:

1. To consider evidence on the nature of contemporary antisemitism

2. To evaluate current efforts to confront it

3. To consider further measures that might usefully be introduced

The inquiry called for written papersin November 2005, and heard oralevidence sessions during February and March 2006. Its report was issuedin September 2006.

The Government’s command response9

was issued on 29 March 2007. This elevated the inquiry to officialstatus and was overwhelmingly positive.

The introduction stated: “The Government shares the Jewishcommunity’s concerns over recentmanifestations of antisemitism. We are specifically concerned aboutsignificant indications that, unlike otherforms of racism, antisemitism is beingaccepted within parts of society insteadof being condemned. We are alsoaware that current rhetoric againstIsraeland Zionism (from the far-right,the far-left and Islamist extremistsalike) employs antisemitic motifs thatare consistent with ancient forms ofhatred towards Jews.”


All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Antisemitism

8 “Report of the All-PartyParliamentary Inquiryinto Antisemitism”.Published September2006, London: TheStationery Office. The report may beviewed on the website ofthe ParliamentaryCommittee AgainstAntisemitism:www.thepcaa.org

9 “Report of the All-PartyParliamentary Inquiryinto Antisemitism:GovernmentResponse…by Commandof Her Majesty 29thMarch 2007”. London:The Stationery Office.The response may beviewed atwww.thepcaa.org/responses.html

In May-June 2007, the US-based AntiDefamation League conducted a poll10

into antisemitic attitudes in Britain, Austria,Belgium, Hungary, the Netherlands andSwitzerland. Each country polled 500people .

The results revealed the endurance of traditional antisemitic chargesin Britain and elsewhere in Europe, and showed that antisemitic attitudeshave significantly intensified since theprevious survey in 2005. Britain was less antisemitic than the other countriessurveyed. Results included:

• 50% of UK respondents believe it is“probably true” that, “Jews are moreloyal to Israel than their own country”.In 2005, 39% believed it to be so. Injust two years, this shows a 28% risein those questioning the basic loyaltyof British Jews.

• 22% of UK respondents believe it is“probably true” that, “Jews have toomuch power in the business world”.In 2005, 14% believed it to be so.This shows an increase of over 50%in people associating Jews withmoney and capitalism.

• 21% of UK respondents believe it is“probably true” that, “Jews have toomuch power in international financialmarkets”. In 2005, 16% believed it tobe so. This shows a near 33% increasein people associating Jews withinternational finance.

• 28% of UK respondents believe it is“probably true” that, “Jews still talktoo much about what happened tothem in the Holocaust”. This was a3% decrease from 2005, when 31%believed it to be so.

• 17% of UK respondents answered“probably true” to three or more of the above questions. Those whocommissioned the poll denoted thisas an acceptance of “antisemiticstereotypes”.

• 22% of UK respondents “stronglyagree” or “somewhat agree” that,“Jews are responsible for the death of Christ”. 20% said so in 2005.

The poll also examined the linkbetween attitudes to Israel, Jews,antisemitism, and international affairs.Results included the following:

• 26% of UK respondents say theiropinion of Jews is influenced byIsrael’s actions, 56% of whom saytheir attitude to Jews is “worse” as aresult. These responses are identicalto those in 2005. Approximately onein eight people therefore admit tohaving more negative attitudes toJews as a result of Israel’s actions.

• 34% of UK respondents believe thatantisemitic violence in Britain is theresult of anti-Israel sentiment. 27%believe antisemitic violence is theresult of anti-Jewish feelings. Theseresults are largely static compared to2005, when 33% believed it to be anti-Israel, and 24% to be anti-Jewish.

• 34% of UK respondents agree or somewhat agree that, “AmericanJews control US Middle Eastern policy”.The notion of Jewish power andconspiracy is a staple of historicalantisemitism. This shows that one-thirdof the public believe the world’sleading superpower is essentially doingthe Jews’ bidding in the Middle East.


Poll of Antisemitic Attitudes: Jewish Power and Disloyalty

10 “Anti DefamationLeague. AttitudesTowards Jews and the Middle East in SixEuropean CountriesJuly 2007”. Prepared by: FirstInternationalResources, LLC. The poll may beviewed on thewebsite of the ADL:www.adl.org

The Jew sits atop a bag of money outside the Stock Exchange. A crown and a top hat lie in the road, which is covered with goldcoins. The Jew is clutching a book with a Star of David on the cover.

Cartoon from Julius Streicher’s 1938 publication for children, “Der Gitfpilz” (The Toadstool). The caption translates as, “The G-d of the Jews is money. To earn money, he commits the greatest of crimes. He will not rest until he can sit on a hugemoney sack, until he becomes the King of Money”.

Background: wars and Jewish scapegoatsHistorically, antisemitism has repeatedlyalleged that leading Jews manipulatenon-Jewish dupes to go to war on theirbehalf. Targets of this charge haveincluded: the Rothschild bankers duringthe Napoleonic Wars; supposed Jewishspeculators during the Boer War;Trotsky and others during the RussianRevolution; and supposed Jewishfinanciers and politicians during theFirst and Second World Wars.

Today, only the most extreme andmarginal groups would openly makeallegations of Jewish money power, non-Jewish dupes, Jewish media control andvengeful Jews. Nevertheless, it is quiteroutine to make the same charges –minus the word Jew – and level themagainst the American pro-Israeli lobby.Increasingly, these allegations are alsoheard against senior British politicians whoshow support for Israel, including PrimeMinisters Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

“Zionist neoconservatives”Responsibility for the Iraq War is oftenblamed upon American “neoconservatives”who are routinely cast as warmongering,profit-seeking and alien to normal politicalcultures and authentic national interests.These are traditional antisemitic motifs;frequent mainstream characterisations ofneoconservatives as “Zionist”, or “pro-Israeli”,have facilitated a discourse that often mimicsearlier antisemitic conspiracy charges.

The urgency of this discourse isaccelerated by the allegation that“neoconservatives” are now engineering awar with Iran that threatens a Third WorldWar, and that the unsustainable protectionof a malignant and irredeemablyillegitimate Israel is the key to all of this.

Neoconservatives did support interventionin Iraq, and they do generally sympathisewith Israel. Nevertheless, denoting themas “Zionist” - rather than any otherpolitical label - revives antisemiticthemes of concealed power and goals.

This also fuels the increasing belief in certain European and British circlesthat American support for Israel canonly be explained by some deep seatedhijacking of American politicians andmedia by Zionist influences. This belief is now repeated in the UK in allegationsthat Jewish Zionist funding of theLabour Party has influenced the Middle East policies of successive Prime Ministers.


The Iraq War and ContemporaryAntisemitic Discourse

Zionist domination of USAContemporary internet graphicshowing the Statue of Libertycarrying a Star of David torchand the Jewish legal text, the Talmud. Blood from theword Zionism has dripped ontothe Talmud.

The inset picture shows the9/11 terrorist attacks, implyingthat this is also part of theZionist plot.

“The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy”The widespread reaction to the UKpublication of the American book, “The Israel Lobby and US ForeignPolicy”11, showed the urgentimportance that mainstream Britishmedia attach to claims about supposedpro-Israeli power at the heart of politics.

Anthony Julius summarisedcontroversies arising from the book in a Jewish Chronicle article, “How theJewish conspiracy myth still flourishes”12.He began by quoting from the 1887work, “Antisemites’ Catechism”, by the German Jew hater Thomas Frey:

“All Jews of all nations and alllanguages work for the Jewishdomination of the world”

Julius continued: “Today’s antisemitestend to rewrite it as follows: ‘AmericanJews control America, and throughAmerica work for Israel’s domination of the Middle East and Jewishdomination of the world.’ Ideas aboutillegitimate and conspiratorial Jewishinfluence over national governmentshave thus been floating around forsome time. Though they are integral to the worldview of the modernantisemite, they also have a currencyamong the merely ignorant anduninformed...if told suitable lies bypersuasive or ostensibly authoritativeindividuals.”

He also noted that the book’s publicity“blurb” by Penguin Books - “How apowerful American interest group hascreated havoc in the Middle East,damaged Israel itself and nowthreatens an even more perilous future”- illustrated how the book could

contribute to antisemitic discourse.Julius commented of the publicity: “This formulation, in its alarmism, and its intimations of sinister andunaccountable power, is an indicationof the particular problem that the bookis likely to cause. It points the finger at Jews.”

The book was extensively reviewed by UK media, with most writers takingcare to distinguish between AmericanJews and “the Israel Lobby”, regardlessof whether or not they agreed with thebook. Richard Ingrams, however, wrotein his Independent column about“(mostly Jewish) neocons” lobbying onbehalf of Israel. He further claimed thatfear of being branded as antisemitesprevented this being publicised.

Ingrams wrote that the book’s authors,Mearsheimer and Walt:

“demonstrate that the Americaninvasion in 2003 not only had thesupport of Israel but also that theoverriding aim of these (mostly Jewish)neocons who were urging Bush toinvade was to assist Israel by gettingrid of its menacing neighbour SaddamHussein...

Thanks to the power of the Israel lobbyin the US, Bush, like all modernAmerican presidents, was and still is under constant pressure to giveunconditional support to Israel…

The more important question is why the issues raised in the Israel lobby areseldom if ever mentioned in relation tothe disastrous invasion of Iraq and thesubsequent descent of that country intochaos and anarchy. The only possibleexplanation is that most politicians and


11 “The Israel Lobby andUS Foreign Policy” byJohn J Mearsheimerand Stephen M Walt.US publication, 27 August 2007. US publisher: Farrar,Straus and Giroux. UKpublication, September2007. UK publisher:Penguin UK

12 Anthony Julius, “Howthe Jewish conspiracymyth still flourishes”.7 September 2007Jewish Chronicle

journalists are by now so frightened of being branded anti-Semites by thefriends of Israel that they choose not to see the elephant in the room.”13

“Taming Leviathan…the American-Jewish lobby” The ease with which the terms Jewishand pro-Israeli can be intermingled wasdemonstrated by an article in the “Lexington” column in the 17 March 2007 edition of the highlyrespected “Economist” magazine.14

The article, headlined “TamingLeviathan”, carried the sub-heading“These are both the best of times and the worst of times for theAmerican-Jewish lobby”, therebyimplying that the Leviathan needingtamed was the American-Jewish lobby.This was reinforced by the cartoon that appeared between the headlines andthe actual article, showing men in suitsusing small rowing boats to try andcapture a giant sea dragon, bearing a Star of David that was coloured bysome US style stars and stripes. (Thisis the emblem of the AIPAC pro-Israellobby group, something that may notbe known by many Economist readers).

The cartoon was most likely inspired by the imagery of Moby Dick; thearticle included the sentence, “TheLeviathan may be mightier than ever,but there are more and more CaptainAhabs trying to get their harpoonsin”. There is a historical tradition of Jews being portrayed as dragons,with one such British imagecommonly showing a drawing of StGeorge slaying a dragon that hasgrotesque Jewish features. This isnot to suggest that the Economistcartoonist was in any way influenced

by such antisemitic imagery, but it does demonstrate the potentialresonance that modern depictionsmay inadvertently carry.

The article began with an explanationof the “Leviathan” and the American-Jewish lobby: “This week saw yetanother reminder of the awesomepower of “the lobby”. The AmericanIsrael Public Affairs Committee(AIPAC) brought more than 6,000activists to Washington for its annualpolicy conference. And they proceededto live up to their critics’ darkest fears.”

The article then described a counter-protest against the AIPAC conferenceby, “Orthodox Jews in beards, side-curls and heavy black coats – holdingup signs saying “Stop AIPAC”, “Torahforbids Jews dictating foreign policy”,and “Judaism rejects the state of Israel”.15

After noting the Jewish counter-protest,the article then returned to theconnection between Jews, AIPAC and American backing for Israel:

“The lobbyists had every reason to feelproud of their work. Congress has moreJewish members than ever before: 30 in the House and a remarkable 13in the Senate. (There are now moreJews in Congress than Episcopalians.)Both parties are competing with eachother to be the “soundest” on Israel.About two-thirds of Americans holda favourable view of the place”.

Having blurred the distinction between Jews and the pro-Israel lobby, and having earlier declared that AIPAC’s effectiveness was proved by the presence of so many Jews inCongress, the article then once again


13 “Richard Ingrams’Week”.8 September 2007 The Independent

14 Lexington, “TamingLeviathan”. 17 March 2007 The Economist

15 This is a reference toNeturei Karta, a Jewishsect that opposes theexistence of Israel ontheological groundsand routinely partnersIsrael’s enemies. (Forexample, attending thenotorious Holocaustdenial conference inTeheran in December2006).

acknowledged the diverse politicalperspectives of American Jews:

“The growing activism of liberal Jewishgroups underlines a worrying fact forAIPAC: most Jews are fairly left wing.Fully 77% of them think that the Iraqwar was a mistake compared with 52%of all Americans. Eighty seven per centof Jews voted for the democrats in 2006,and all but four of the Jews in Congressare democrats.”

“Fantastically successful…the Jewishlobby”In August 2007, leading scientist RichardDawkins toured the USA encouragingAmerican atheists to assert themselvespolitically. When interviewed about this inthe Guardian,16 Dawkins cited “the Jewishlobby” as having been “fantasticallysuccessful” in influencing Americanforeign policy “as far as many people cansee”, and he urged atheists to learn fromthis example.

The remarks were reported without anycritical comment from the Guardian,demonstrating how mainstream suchnotions have become in recent years.

Dawkins stated, “When you think abouthow fantastically successful the Jewishlobby has been, though, in fact they areless numerous I am told – religious Jewsanyway – than atheists and [yet they]more or less monopolise Americanforeign policy as far as many people cansee. So if atheists could achieve a smallfraction of that influence, the worldwould be a better place.”

Opinion was divided as to whether or notDawkins had meant to say “the proIsrael lobby” rather than “the Jewishlobby”, but in the context of discussing

the influence of religion over public life,the quote appears deliberate. Someobservers also claimed that this could notbe a case of antisemitism as Dawkinshad specified “the Jewish lobby” ratherthan Jews per se, and that a leadingintellectual such as Dawkins simply couldnot be antisemitic.

Noted columnist Daniel Finkelsteincommented17:

“So Dawkins, a liberal hero, believes, er, that Jews control world power. And, judging from the Guardian it is nowa part of mainstream debate to say so.Perhaps you think I am over-reacting tosay so, but I am a little bit frightened”.


16 Ewen MacAskill,“Atheists arise: Dawkinsspreads the A-wordamong America’sunbelievers”. 1 October 2007 The Guardian

17 Daniel Finkelstein,“Dawkins on the powerof the Jews”. 5 October 2007 The Times

The evil Jew dominates the world, his graspingfingers causing death. Cover, French edition of“The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”, entitled “LePeril Juif” (The Jewish Danger).

Background: Jews, money andJewish financial powerThe association of Jews with money has been one of the most fundamental and persistent charges of antisemitismthroughout the ages. In 2007, thisassociation was revealed within bothextremist and mainstream discourseregarding two separate Labour Partyfinancial controversies involving LordLevy and David Abrahams. Both casesalso evoked the concomitant theme of Jewish financial power manipulatingstate policy for its alien, selfish ends.

“…middle name is Abraham”Writing about the Lord Levy coverage,the editor of the Jewish Chronicle, DavidRowan, noted in the Independent18 that“the unashamedly anti-Semitic and conspiratorial rhetoric surroundinghim has long been self-evident”. Rowan quoted both Tam Dalyell MP’snotorious “cabal of Jewish advisors”19

comment regarding Britain’s role in theIraq War, and David Tredinnick MP’sclaim that Labour Party funding hadbeen raised on the “tacit understandingthat Labour would never again, whileBlair was leader, be anti-Israel”20.

Rowan then quoted from a letter theJewish Chronicle had received whichnoted newspaper profiles had toldreaders:

“That Levy’s middle name is Abraham,the fact that his parents were devoutJews, that he first met the PrimeMinister at a party thrown by the Israelembassy, when we hear nothing aboutRuth Turner’s or Jonathan Powell’smiddle names or of their religiousaffiliations”. Rowan concluded,“Is it hard to figure why?”.

A Guardian article similarly quoted anunnamed source as saying: “Journalistsdon’t refer to ‘Christian businessman’ or‘Protestant businessman’. They only evertalk about Jewish people in that way.”21

The Jewish Chronicle reported thatAndrew Dismore MP put a PrimeMinister’s Question to Gordon Brown,asking the Prime Minister to markChanukah by acknowledging thecontribution made by the BritishJewish community. The article continued:

“But as he [Dismore] began hisquestion, he said “Some Tories shouted‘Lord Levy’ and ‘David Abrahams’ whenI said the word Jewish. There were a few of them heckling. It didn’t get out of hand, it was brief and theSpeaker didn’t have to intervene…this just feeds the problems we havein relations, in the way that this wholething has been turned into an antisemiticattack. Its neither here nor there thatthey [Lord Levy and Mr Abrahams] are Jewish, its irrelevant.” The Prime Minister rose above it.”22

“Hidden hand of Zion”The front page of the 29 November2007 edition of the Daily Telegraphbore the headline “Hunt for ‘mysterybenefactor’ in illegal donationsscandal”, and carried a largephotograph featuring David Abrahamsshaking hands with former Israeliambassador, Zvi Heifetz. The articlestated, “Fears are growing within the[Labour] party that…[Mr Abrahams]may himself have been a conduit foranother mystery benefactor…Last yearhe [Mr Abrahams] was pictured shakinghands with the then Israeli ambassador,Zvi Heifetz, who was questioned then


UK Political Lobbying Controversies and Antisemitism

18 David Rowan, “Onceagain, a Jewish financieris cast as the villain ofthe piece”. 10 March 2007The Independent

19 May 2003, numerousmedia reports

20 House of CommonsHansard Debates. 25 July 2006, column 819

21 Hugh Muir and MichaelWhite, “Friends rush toLevy’s defence as cashfor honoursinvestigation leavespeer increasinglyexposed”. 10 March 2007 The Guardian

22 Leon Symons, “DavidAbrahams gave insecret ‘to quellconspiracy fears’”. 7 December 2007 Jewish Chronicle

cleared over money launderingallegations. Mr Heifetz was recentlyappointed as an adviser to Mr Blair in his role as Middle East envoy”.23

Under the ironic headline, “Right-wingnewspaper identifies hidden hand ofZion shock”, the New Statesman’spolitical editor, Martin Bright, criticisedthe Telegraph article as, “surely themost bizarre report on Labour’s hiddendonations”. Bright sarcastically noted:“The ‘mystery benefactor’ turns out tobe our old friend, global Zion.”24

“The wrath of Moses” and “The shadowy role of LabourFriends of Israel”It is not antisemitic per se toquestion (or criticise) the politicalactivities of Jews, or pro-Israel lobbygroups. The durability of antisemiticconspiracy theories, however, confersa responsibility for such questioningto be done with care.

Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, a noted anti-racist and regular columnist in TheIndependent, wrote a comment pieceon the David Abrahams affair in whichshe warned about the dangers of extremist abuse of the Abrahamsaffair. Her article used rhetoric andimagery that risked inadvertentlyresonating with antisemites: despiteher accompanying emphases thatantisemitic conclusions should not be drawn.

The article’s title, “The shadowy role of Labour Friends of Israel”25, riskedevoking the image of sinister Jews,lurking in the shadows. Alibhai-Brownbegan by declaring how “nervous” shewas to raise questions about theAbrahams affair as, “For an easy life,

some things, you learn, are best left unsaid”.

Alibhai-Brown emphasised that herquestions “are raised here in goodfaith” and then wrote:

“I have no wish to bring the wrath of Moses upon me and I can alreadyhear the accusations of anti-Semitismbecause I dare to raise the question: Can someone explain what exactly is the role of the Labour Friends of Israel(LFI) in our political life? And its twin, the Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI)too. In an open democracy, we areentitled to make such queries indeed, it is a duty.”

The expression, “the wrath of Moses”,compromises an article that sincerelyrejects antisemitism. It implies thatJews are wrathful by nature andtradition. In this particular context, it brings all Jews into an article thatis premised upon the (wrongful)suggestion that LFI and CFI conductcovert and subversive activities onbehalf of a foreign power, Israel, and a foreign ideology, Zionism.

Alibhai-Brown then described DavidAbrahams as “the strange shape-shifterat the centre of the funding furore”.The depiction of Abrahams as “thestrange shape-shifter” most likelyderives from allegations surrounding his donations. For antisemites, however,this expression also carries historicantisemitic charges of devious Jewswhose true identity may be hidden, and whose secret character andmachinations mean that no Jew can ever be wholly trusted.26


23 Robert Winnett andGordon Rayner,“Hunt for ‘mysterybenefactor’ in illegaldonations scandal.” 29 November 2007 Daily Telegraph

24 http://www.newstatesman.com/200712010002

25 Yasmin Alibhai-Brown,“The shadowy role ofLabour Friends ofIsrael”. 3 December 2007 The Independent

26 The comedian, SachaBaron Cohen, usedthe “shape shifter”motif to comic effectin his 2006 spoof film,Borat, in which thelead character throwsmoney at cockroachesthat he believes to bean elderly Jewishcouple, who have“shape shifted”.Another recentexample of “shapeshifters” occurs in thework of author, DavidIcke, who hasheatedly denied publicaccusations that hissupposed “reptilian-mammalianDNA…‘shape-shift’”conspiracy is anallusion to Jews. Farmore seriously, thenotion of shapeshifting Jews alsounderpinned theSoviet Union’sinfamous antisemiticcoda, “Jewishcosmopolitans”.

After mentioning the supposed influenceof Lord Levy and Jon Mendelson uponTony Blair and Gordon Brown, Alibhai-Brown then effectively stated that Zionistsor pro-Israelis should not be allowed to fully participate in British politics.She asserted:

“So we can assume LFI plays a part in shaping our foreign policies in theMiddle East the most inflammable tinderbox in the world today. And that isneither right nor fair. The LFI take, by definition, has to be partisan.It exists to present the official Israeliview; it cannot be nuanced orconsiderate to “the enemy”. I wouldventure to suggest that Tony Blair’sabject performance during the last Israeliassault on Lebanon was partly the resultof the special relationship with LFI.”

Having raised these innuendos, Alibhai-Brown both acknowledged and sternlywarned against their potentialantisemitic utility:

“The current scandal and its links to LFIonly encourage fascist and Islamicistpropagators of the idea of a worldwideJewish conspiracy. Look on the crazedwebsites today and you see how theyfeed on this crisis and rejoice.”

Nevertheless, the warning ended withthe assertion, “LFI is the mostsuccessful of many interest groupswhich have been allowed to exertundue pressure on policies.”

The article concluded with negativereferences to the activities of Indianand Muslim Labour lobby groups,before appealing for all such groups tobe scrutinised and for “insider lobbying”to end:

“Such lobbyists and their considerableback-room influence, how they canmanipulate the politicians and themedia, and the secrecy of theconversations they have with thepowerful, should make us very uneasy.There are no records…Yet decisionsthey can drive through do affect thefuture of the whole world.

Whatever the outcome of the variousinvestigations into the unlawful proxydonations…the issue of insider lobbyingby interest groups is as serious,possibly more so, and must not beignored…This corruption has no whiff,no colour. It is deadly and must now be stopped at source.”

The following day’s Independent printedtwo readers’ letters, one for and oneagainst the article:27

“…I wonder if she is aware of howoffensive a phrase like ‘the wrath ofMoses’ might appear? For someone whoprefaces all of her anti-Zionist ramblingswith a confident declaration that she willbe accused of anti-semitism for criticisingIsrael, she has a bad habit of theninviting such accusations…Such aninsulting and potentially inflammatoryphrase as she used is not needed, and does neither her nor your newspaperany credit to publish it...”

“Thank you to Yasmin Alibhai-Brown. She is a brave woman. It is disturbing to think that our politicians are workingfor the benefit of a foreign country…If we want to trust our politicians in future, we may have to accept that the only way forward is by public fundingof political parties.”


27 “Letters: Tellingthe differencebetween anti-Zionismand anti-semitism”. 4 December 2007 The Independent

“Israel’s deep seated penetrationof our political system”In late 2007, a coalition of anti-Israelactivists sent a letter to the Committeeon Standards in Public Life. This wasentitled “How the Israel LobbyUndermines the Principles of Standardsin Public Life”. It began with allegationsagainst Israel’s conduct in Gaza, beforeanother subtitle, “British MPs eating outof the Israeli government’s hand”. The letter stated:

“…the lobby group, Friends of Israel,has embedded itself in the Britishpolitical establishment and at the very heart of government. Its statedpurpose is to promote Israel’sinterests in our Parliament and swayBritish policy…MPs are surely not at liberty to act in the interest of a foreign military power at theexpense of our own national interests,or to let foreign influence cloud theirjudgement”.

The letter concluded by calling for an investigation into the allegedconspiratorial power of the Labour and Conservative parliamentary Friendsof Israel groups

“Given that Israel’s deep seatedpenetration of our political systemapparently prevents Britain fromtaking a principled stand on MiddleEast matters, including the violationof Palestinian human rights, we inviteyour Committee – minus those withan interest – to uphold the Principlesof Public Life and consider theactivities of the Friends of Israel as a matter for urgent investigation”.28

Phrases such as “has embedded itself”,“undermines the Principles of PublicLife”, and “deep seated penetration of our political system”, all contain the resonance of antisemitic conspiracytheories. This is language that depicts a sinister, powerful and treasonousalien clique or parasite that is dedicatedto undermining the traditions andauthenticity of its host society.


28 Bernard Josephs,“New Push to Smear‘Israel Lobby’ MPs”. 18 January 2007 Jewish Chronicle

Background: Jewish identity andhistory of boycottsUntil recent history, Jews were shut out from the rest of society on thebasis that they endangered everybodyelse. For many centuries, Jews weredenied all manner of rights, includingphysical movement and access to trades and education. In manyinstances, the isolation of Jews wasachieved by forcing them to wearyellow stars or distinctive hats;physically restricting them to Jewishquarters, walled ghettoes and pales of settlement; and enforcing quota limitsfor Jews in major cities and elsewhere.

Today’s anti-Israel boycotts risk evokingthis Jewish past and exemplify thehighly charged debate over what isantisemitic, and what is not antisemitic,in the context of anti-Israel activities.

Boycotts todayFor some, the singling out of the world’ssole Jewish state for unique criticismand isolation is in itself a prima faciecase of antisemitism, particularly if no other countries are subject to such treatment. Evoking thehistorical isolation of Jews, this has leadto the idea that Israel is treated as ‘theJew amongst the nations of the world’.

Boycott supporters, however,heatedly deny any antisemiticmotivation, and often claim that the charge of antisemitism is knowinglyand falsely levelled against them in order to shield Israel. Opinions are then further polarised by thevicious cycle of debate that ensuesfrom these opposing perspectives.

Israel plays a complex role in the self-identity of most British Jews,particularly for those with affiliations to the mainstream Jewish community.This applies in both the practical senseof physical, emotional and family linksthat many Jews enjoy with Israel, as well as the psychological sense ofIsrael as the guarantor of Jewish refuge and rebirth in the post-Holocaust age.

Most leading British Jewishrepresentative groups (including CST)avoid categorising anti-Israel boycottsas antisemitic per se, but areextremely concerned by the actualand potential antisemitic impact of the boycotts. Enacted boycotts of Israeli people and products (such as the removal of many kosher goods)would have overwhelmingly negativephysical and psychological impacts on British Jews.29

In direct contrast to the boycotters’stated motivations, the Jewishcollective memory of boycotts isdominated by the Nazi boycott ofJews, regarded as an important steptowards the eventual Holocaust. Thetwo boycotts cannot be equated, butBritish Jews fear that the (real andimagined) linkage between Israel andJews means that anti-Israel boycottsinevitably cause a degree ofstigmatisation and isolation ofmainstream Jewish communities. This has already been the case on campus, where Jewish students are targeted by anti-Israelcampaigners, and Jewish studentsocieties have, in previous years,faced threats of banning unless theydenounce Israel and Zionism. Anti-Israel boycotts lead many BritishJews to fear that their freedom is


Anti-Israel Boycotts and Antisemitism

29 Israel is a leadingresearcher and producerin many hi-tech fields,including computing,telecommunications and health. A properlyenforced boycott of theseproducts wouldsignificantly affect all ofBritish society.

becoming dependent upon unfairreactions to an overseas conflict that isbeyond their control or responsibility(and about which they hold diverseopinions). This fear is compounded bythe fact that boycott campaigns are ledby supposedly progressive sections ofsociety from whom Jews havepreviously expected friendship,protection and acceptance.

University and College Union: Israel boycott and antisemitism denialThe focus of the anti-Israel boycottdebate in 2007 was the decision of the University and College Union(UCU) to promote discussion of a boycott, passed at its conference in Bournemouth on 30 May 2007. This controversial motion impactedupon what was already an extremelyvolatile atmosphere on campus.

The academic boycott campaign was ledby Tom Hickey, chair of Brighton UCUbranch. Hickey’s article for the BritishMedical Journal’s debate of the issuerebutted concerns about antisemitism,but nevertheless stated that Israel wassuited for academic boycott preciselybecause of the related Israeli and Jewish traditions of education:30

“…We are accused of unfairly singling outIsrael – the Jewish state – and hence of being anti-semites. We are asked whywe do not propose a boycott of otherstates whose policies are barbaric andinhuman, such as China, Saudi Arabia,Iran, or Zimbabwe.

But whether a boycott is appropriate in such places depends on the merits of each individual case. In the case of Israel we are speaking about asociety whose dominant self image

is one of a bastion of civilisation in a seaof medieval reaction. And we are speakingof a culture, both in Israel and in thelong history of the Jewish diaspora, in which education and scholarship are held in high regard. That is why an academic boycott might have a desirable political effect in Israel, an effect that might not be expectedelsewhere.”

Hickey then denied that he and hissupporters (many of them Jewish) werein any way motivated by antisemitism:

“The accusation of anti-semitism is bothabsurd and offensive. Accusing those whocriticise Israel of being anti-semitespresumes an identity of interests betweenIsrael and all Jewish people, whereverthey may be. This is illogical and contraryto the facts. Most people who spoke infavour of the motion at the our (sic)congress are Jewish, as are members of the British Committee for theUniversities of Palestine. The response of Israel’s defenders is to say that suchpeople are not proper Jews – that theyare ‘self-hating’ Jews. Jewishness thusbecomes transformed from a cultural or religious identity into an ideologicalposition.”

Hickey’s response ignored how theboycott and accompanying debate wouldadversely affect many Jews on campus,and it typified the manner in which manyanti-Israel activists construct their ownutterly rigid and formulaic definitions of antisemitism. These ideologicallydriven constructions are at completeodds with the same activists’ usual readyacceptance of concerns raised by otherminorities about bias and racism. The statement also shows how thepresence of Jewish anti-Israel activists


30 Tom Hickey, “Shouldwe consider aboycott of Israeliacademic institutions?Yes”.http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/335/7611/124

is used to evade and then dismiss the concerns of mainstream majorityJewish representative bodies. SomeJewish anti-Israel activists are indeedaccused of ‘self hatred’, but theexpression is avoided in the attitudeand statements of mainstream Jewishbodies. It is also a somewhat ironiccomplaint, given the extreme hostilitythat leading Jewish anti-Israel activistsrepeatedly display towards therepresentative bodies of the Jewishcommunity.

Hickey’s refusal to consider antisemitismseriously was repeated in the actualUCU motion31 which promoteddiscussion of the academic boycott,whilst explicitly dismissing all concernsabout antisemitism. It contained a list of anti-Israel condemnations and thenstated: “In these circumstancespassivity or neutrality is unacceptableand criticism of Israel cannot beconstrued as antisemitic”. The motionwas subsequently dropped in September2007 upon legal advice from LordLester, architect of the Race RelationsAct, who advised that it was “unlawful”.32

The motion came four months after 76UCU members had signed a petitionstating that the UCU’s response to theParliamentary Inquiry into Antisemitismreport “does not speak in our name”.The petitioners described UCU’s responseto the inquiry into antisemitism as“evasive, disingenuous and complacent”.33

The petition typified the argumentsbetween Israel boycotters and theiropponents, particularly around theboycotters’ formulations as to whatconstitutes antisemitism, and whatmotivates concerns from their opponents.

Their arguments were as follows:

• In its response to the parliamentaryinquiry, UCU “emphatically reject thesuggestion that criticism of the Israeligovernment is itself antisemitic anymore than criticism of the Britishgovernment is ‘anti-British’.”

The 76 petitioners described this as“evasion one” and stressed that thisclaim is not made by the parliamentaryreport, and was not made by any of the contributors to the report. The petitioners stated: “We suggestthat the reason no one serious makesthis claim is because it is absurd…The claim is an obvious straw man.”

• UCU’s response to the inquiryrepeatedly refers to “criticism” ratherthan “boycott”, despite the boycottbeing the concern of the parliamentaryinquiry. The petitioners stated: “Theevasion here is blatant and theseparagraphs of UCUR [UCU report] areintellectually disgraceful…the authors ofUCUR talk past their critics: they denyclaims that their critics do not make.”

• UCU told the inquiry: “Unfortunatelydefenders of the Israeli government’sactions have used a charge ofantisemitism as a tactic in order to smother democratic debate…(and) to restrict academic freedom.”The petitioners countered that UCU’scritics were genuinely concerned that“the boycott was, in effect, antisemitic”and that UCU was making “a seriousaccusation” by suggesting “hiddenintent…to stifle or deligitimise criticism of Israel.” They also objected to UCU’s“conflation of ‘defenders of the Israeligovernment’s actions’ with those whooppose the boycott.”


31 “Circular UCU/31…Motion30 as amended…Call forAcademic and CulturalBoycott of Israel…Text of General Secretary’sLetter…”http://www.ucu.org.uk/circ/html/ucu31.html

32 Bernard Josephs, “Boycott‘defeated’ as union forcedinto U-turn”. 2 October 2007 Jewish Chronicle

33 “The UCU’s Response to Parliamentary Criticismover Antisemitism is Evasive, Disingenuousand Complacent”http://www.engageonline.org.uk/blog/article.php?id=839

• UCU challenged the parliamentaryinquiry’s remit, stating: “It seemsinappropriate to have takenantisemitism as a topic in isolation at a time when Islamophobia is also on the increase and when the twoissues surely need a joint balancedapproach.” The petitioners describedthis as an attempt “to change thesubject” and objected to “the attemptto play off one form of unjustdiscrimination against another.”

Other anti-Israel boycottsThe “academic boycott” was only one of many anti-Israel boycott motionspassed by British trade unions during2007. One supporter of the short livedNational Union of Journalists boycottdisplayed rank antisemitism when shesent the following email to a Jewishcommunal organisation:34

“Ohmigod. You are worried aboutDarfur! Yet you have in Israel a wonderful Nazi like killing machine(thousands of Palestinians have died or are incarcerated in camps, includingGaza and the West Bank) backed bythe world’s richest Jews and America,you are joking about Darfur aren’t you?

Whatever you say, and I don’t want to hear what you have to say because it will be the same old rhetoric, we in the UK have had enough of Israel,we (the NUJ of which I am a member)have finally voted to boycott Israeli goods.

We are working against Israel whereasbefore we supported you, and we willdo all in our collective power to makelife as uncomfortable for you as youmake it for the Palestines (sic), shameon you, shame on all jews (sic), mayyour lives be cursed.”

Another union to boycott Israel wasthe Transport and General WorkersUnion (TGWU). The TGWU deputygeneral-secretary Barry Camfield tolddelegates at the boycott vote thatBritain had stood against Hitler and had liberated Jewish victims of the Holocaust35,

“so we will not have the Israeli statetelling us that the boycott is antisemitic”.

This illustrates how hostility to Israelcan influence attitudes to contemporaryantisemitism, including a refusal to even hear the concerns of Israelis, or those deemed to be pro-Israeli.Israel is a Jewish state, founded in the aftermath of the Holocaust, yet a senior British trade unionistdenies Israel’s right to comment on antisemitism.

“Would you not boycott Dr Mengele?”British Medical JournalIn July 2007, the prestigious BritishMedical Journal (BMJ) publication ranan online poll asking if readerssupported or opposed an academicboycott of Israel. BMJ, on record as opposing such a boycott, was“overwhelmed with readers’ responses”36,many of which displayed antisemitism,or extreme anti-Israel rhetoric thatincluded the equation of Israel withNazi Germany. Responses included the following (all spellings are as in the original):37

“anyone voting ‘no’ is either a jew or ignorant”

“you boycotted hitlers regime”

“Israeli occupation forces are as bad as Nazis”


34 Letter received byvictim, 26 May 2007,subsequently passedto Police and CST.See also:http://www.spectator.co.uk/stephenpollard/31234/the-real-antisemitism-undrelining-the-boycottors.html

35 Bernard Josephs,“TGWU joins thecampaign”.06 July 2007 Jewish Chronicle

36 Fiona Godlee, editor,BMJ

37 BMJ’s website statesthat the poll isclosed. Thesequotations appear inEve Gerrard’s article“The reasons they give”.26 July 2007. See:http://normblog.typepad.com/normblog/2007/07


“It’s time the Zionists stopped milkingthe holocaust industry. Jews haven’tbeen victims in decades. They are nowthe victimizers, the persecutors, theoppressors. Too bad the only lessonthey learned form Hitler was how totreat Palestinians the way they weretreated. Shameful!”

“Zionism is the new Naziism”

“Israel is a fraud. It is not a defencelesslittle state surroundedby enemies. Israel has NEVER been attacked. Israelis nothing less than an arrogant bullypropped up by an American governmentwhich is bought and paid for by Zionistlobbyists.”

“Because they are the root of ALL EVIL”

“this country is the main problem in the world, has no consideration to other humans other than juish.”

“Israel has become the mostmurderous and inhumane country in the middle east. Would you notboycott dr mengele?”

“…jews are trouble maker and they are not used to listen to arguments.they should be bycotted as south africawas bycotted and their special privilegeand treatment and immunity to criticism should put to an end”

“because they are all liers and killersand deamons!”

“Israel is the main root for all the problems in the world,especially its bruitality towardsPhalestinians.”

Anti-Israel boycotts and antisemiticisolation of “Zionists” Anti-Israel boycotts may lead to a particularly pernicious form of antisemitism, whereby Jews who are suspected or accused of “Zionism”(of any sort) are isolated and deniedequal rights, despite any other aspectsof their identity and past actions.

The Workers’ Liberty group accused the executive of Britain’s largest tradeunion, Unison, of such behaviour in May2007 after it refused a funding requestfrom Labourstart, an international tradeunion news website, on the groundsthat its editor, Eric Lee, was a Zionist.Workers’ Liberty commented:38

“The basic argument is that the unioncannot support projects, howeverworthwhile, if the people running themare Jewish. Supporters of ‘boycotting’Labourstart will reply that the objectionis not that people like Eric Lee areJewish, but that they are ‘Zionists’. But to brand left Zionists like Eric as outside the range of people whomwe can work with is to ‘boycott’ almostall Jews around the world.”

Mr Lee told the Jewish Chronicle39,“Some people told me afterwards theyfelt this was worse than either the NUJor UCU boycotts, because this was anattack on a Jewish person. One seniorfigure told me the discussion about mewas bigoted. He was so disgusted hegave me a lump sum and monthlydonations out of his own pocket.”

The following month, Unison formallyvoted in favour of boycotting Israeligoods, culture, sport and academia.(The union has since stated that thepolicy is not being enacted).

38 http://www.workersliberty.org/node/8555

39 Leon Symons, “Unionrefuses to hand over£2,000 to ‘Zionist’editor”. 15 June 2007 Jewish Chronicle.

Another example of this highly perniciousform of antisemitism is the “BoycottCompendium” of the Boycott IsraeliGoods Campaign40. This contains an extensive list of Israeli products, but also includes British companies and stores that should be subject to“picketing or other activities” for stockingIsraeli products, or for having supportedpro-Israel events in the UK. If enacted,this “Boycott Compendium” wouldprevent British Jews from purchasingIsraeli products and effectively close the kosher sections of leadingsupermarkets. It would also isolate allother non-commercial aspects of pro-Israel or “Zionist” behaviour from therest of society.

One especially shocking example of isolating so-called Zionism fromsociety is the Boycott Israeli Goodsdepiction of the mainstream free BritishJewish newspaper, “Jewish News” as a “Zionist paper”. Worse still is the boycotters’ demand that Tesco and J Sainsbury Plc be picketed orotherwise pressured to remove “JewishNews” from their stores41. This casevividly illustrates the inherent risk of antisemitic attitudes and impactsarising from anti-Israel boycotts.


40 “’A BoycottCompendium’ Guide tothe Boycott IsraeliGoods Campaign forPalestine”.

41 Ibid p.17, 18.

“Jewish atrocities in Palestine go unpunished…Boycott JewishGoods & Services”. British neo-Nazi sticker c.1962, which displaysboth blatant antisemitism and hatred of Israel.

The Holocaust is a dominant part of the collective memory of Jews.Mainstream Jewish support for Israeland Zionism are central to the Jewishresponse to the Holocaust. Indeed, the United Nations’ creation of Israelwas also largely a response to theHolocaust.

Extreme anti-Zionists, however, seek to undermine these responses to theHolocaust by alleging Zionist-Nazicollaboration. This propaganda drive is an invention of the Soviet Union thathas outlived its creator and has largelyfailed due to its inherent historicalperversion. Nevertheless, the allegationof Zionist-Nazi collaboration holds a powerful appeal for the more extremefringes of the British anti-Zionist far left, particularly in their reaction to the instituting of a national HolocaustMemorial Day.

The Scottish Palestine SolidarityCampaign (SPSC) used the 2007 nationalremembrance of Holocaust Memorial Dayto stage a reading of the notorious play,“Perdition”42, which alleges Zionistcollaboration in the 1944 Naziextermination campaign againstHungarian Jewry. “Perdition”, firstpublished in 1987 43, was described by its author, Jim Allen, as “the most lethalattack on Zionism ever written”. It hasbeen comprehensively debunked byhistorians44 but was briefly advertised on the official 2007 Holocaust MemorialDay (HMD) website as “a devastatingwork which reveals the extent of thecollaboration between the victims and the perpetrators of the Holocaust in Hungary towards the end of the FinalSolution.” The advertisement furtherclaimed that the play had been “houndedand suppressed for over 20 years.”

The advertisement appeared to havebeen written by the SPSC, and wasremoved by the memorial dayorganisers after they had been alertedto its content and meaning. The HMDorganisers stated45:

“In our opinion, the play is antisemiticbecause it purports to reveal a vastconspiracy in which Zionists in NaziEurope, London and Washingtonconspired with the Nazis to bringabout the deaths of millions of Jewsin order to achieve the creation of theState of Israel.

A common theme of antisemitism isthe existence of a world conspiracy in which Jews control London andWashington, in effect, blaming themfor millions of deaths. The play,therefore, labels Jews and the wholeZionist movement as complicit in theHolocaust. This is a distortion of thefacts, and has no place in HolocaustMemorial Day. The play will go ahead,however, it will not be promoted bythe Trust through its website.”

SPSC chair, Mick Napier, denied that the play was antisemitic, and stated“Zionists incessantly cover up theirshameful behaviour by labelling criticsas ‘anti-Semitic’” .46


Abuse of Holocaust Memorial Day:“Perdition”

42 Stan Crooke, ““Anti-Zionist” play willmark HolocaustMemorial Day: a drama of anti-semiticthemes”.http://www.workersliberty.org/print/7583

43 Jim Allen, Perdition(London: IthacaPress, 1987).

44 For example, DavidCesarani, “ThePerdition Affair” in Robert Wistrich,ed., Anti-Zionism andAntisemitism in theContemporary World(London: Macmillan,1991).

45 The HMD statementis reproduced on thewebsite of ScotlandAgainst CriminalisingCommunities (SACC),within SACC PressRelease, “CivilLibertiescampaignerscondemn censorshipof HolocaustMemorial DayEvents”.

46 Mick Napier,“Holocaust Trustbanned play is notanti-Semitic”, letterpublished in ThirdForce News. 2 July 2007

Explicit antisemitism regularly featureswithin the blog and comment sections of mainstream media internet sites,including those of the Guardian andBBC, particularly when issues aboutprominent Jews or Israel are discussed47.The hosts of these websites will removeoffensive material if their self-appointedmoderator agrees that it is in breach of their own regulations; but often thiswill only occur if the moderator48

is alerted to the content by a reader (or readers), and is then persuaded by that reader to remove the content. If, however, the moderator refuses to remove the content then this maygive the impression that the hostwebsite is effectively endorsing it, and that the content is not in breach of regulations.

Responsibility for policing websitecontent has, therefore, effectivelypassed onto the reader by some mediaoutlets, despite the fact that thesehosts would scrupulously avoid evertransmitting or publishing such materialin their other media activities. Inaddition, the moderators may lack theknowledge or seniority of other editorsin print or broadcast functions. In somecases the moderation is contracted outto a third party, as is the case withsome BBC website content.

The Guardian, Comment is FreeThe Guardian’s Comment is Free websiteis commonly regarded as the mostsuccessful mainstream online outlet ofits type. Examples of antisemitism withinComment is Free from 2007 included thefollowing, all of which were subsequentlyremoved by moderators:

“Star of David has been flying insidenumber 10 since Thatcher days; you are

just too blinded by your hatred for theMuslims to notice it.” Guardian Commentis Free, 11:44hrs, 15 August 2007.Posted by “Tehrankid 77”.

“Jewish people control the westernworld. Of course they will use thatcontrol to get away with anything…Ifyou look around, you will find all highpolitical offices of all western countriesare filled with jews. When you own highpolitical offices, you own the country.

That is what jews are about. Takingcontrol of people. Look around. Everyorganization or every important or highstatus job has a jew in it…Everybodyelse is just window dressing to cover up the fact that the jewish people, for cultural reasons or some otherreason, act to control all positions of power in all western cultures.

If they did this back in 1940, no wonderHitler started a war. Is that a bad thingto say? A man who saw his countrytaken over by a certain group of peoplewho think only of themselves and screweveryone else, decides to take back his country and stop those people fromusing the countries around him to mount attacks on him?

…I will bet the pro Israel crowd will be screaming to the mods [ie websitemoderators] right away. Why notanswer the question instead ofcomplaining?...Because you can’t?Because historical fact probablysupports the idea that the jewishpeople controlled Germany and theworld back then in the same way theycontrol the USA and the world today?”Guardian Comment is Free, 10:25hrs,16 July 2007. Posted by “ItsAllLies”.


The internet: Antisemitism in Mainstream Media

47In June 2008, the Guardian’sComment is Free websiteinstituted a new moderationpolicy that was significantlystricter and more proactivethan the previous policy.

48Moderators may also ban senders of extremistmaterial from websites.Senders can, however,avoid such bans bychanging theirregistrations.

“Mr Cockburn, you are a courageousand an (sic) excellent writer who is absolutely spot on. Is it purecoincidence that both Perle andWolfwoitz plus other of their neoconcronies are Jews, some of them withIsraeli passports?...Can we now haveanother article Mr Cockburn, on theIsraeli/Jewish malign influence onBritish politics through the Jewish fifthcolumnists in the UK?” GuardianComment is Free, 26 April 2007.Posted by “Chambura”.

BBC website The BBC website includes numerousblog and comment sections, carryingessentially the same guidelines as thoseof other mainstream media outlets. One antisemitic posting from “Jamie,Croydon” that was removed from a BBCnews forum49 said:

“It is actually going to get worse. If youread the Protocols of the Elders of Zionyou’ll see plans for the domination ofthe entire Middle East by Zionists.Worried? We should all be, the plansare already afoot. Israel by itsarrogance will drag us all into WWIII.”

In July 2007, controversy followed therefusal of BBC Radio 5 Live messageboard moderators to remove a postingthat drew upon a classic late 19th

century antisemitic text “The TalmudUnmasked”, and claimed on the basisof these lies that Zionism gave Jews“supremacy over all other races andfaiths. This is found in the Talmud”.

In Britain, “The Talmud Unmasked”formed part of mass antisemitic mail-outs by Nazi sympathisers in the early1990s, for which the late Dowager Lady

Jane Birdwood was found guilty of distributing threatening, abusive and insulting material in 1994 50.(The actual Talmud is a multi-volumecompilation of Jewish law, ethics,customs and history, primarily compiledfrom the 3rd to 6th centuries).

In its entirety, the Radio Five Liveposting states51:

“Zionism is a racist ideology where jewsare given supremacy over all otherraces and faiths. This is found in theTalmud. There is a law called BabaMezia which allows jews to lie as longas its to non-jews. Many pro jewishsupporters will cringe at this beingexposed because they know it exists,yet they keep quiet about it, hey frip,jla and co (sic) The Law of Baba Mezia!!Tsk tsk tsk! Its in the Talmud.”

The posting therefore alleges thefollowing:

• That Zionism, the Jewish nationalproject, is racist

• That Zionism is racist because Jewishlaw tells it to be so

• That Jewish law tells Jews to believethemselves superior to all otherpeople

• That Jewish law instructs Jews to lie to non Jews as necessary

• That many “pro jewish (sic)supporters” know of this Jewish lawand conspire to conceal it from publicview

The posting first appeared on 10 July2007, and by 13 July numerousindividuals and organisations (includingCST and the Board of Deputies ofBritish Jews) had contacted the BBC in expectation that it would be quickly


49 Formerly at:http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/no1/thread.jspa?threadID=6951&&edition=2&ttl=20070725155059

50 Birdwood andcolleagues wrote inthe name of Inter-CityResearchers.Birdwood wasconvicted for theunsolicited distributionof their 1991compilation, “TheLongest Hatred – Anexamination of Anti-Gentilism”, whichincluded the Talmudmaterial.

51 Message 62 on BBCwebsite at:http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbfivelive/F2148564?thread=4348803&skip=60&show=20

removed. The posting was indeedremoved on 13 July, but the BBCmoderators then placed it back on theBBC website by the afternoon of 16July; after having considered itscontent.52

Complainants were variously told thatthe posting did not contravene theBBC’s rules, and that the allegationshad been adequately rebutted by otherwriters in the comments thread, so didnot need removal (despite no suchqualification appearing in the messageboard rules or applying in othercircumstances). The controversyreached UK and international media,including the Jerusalem Post53, whowere told:

“The Radio Five Live message boardis a forum of debate and people canexpress their views, some of whichothers will strongly disagree with. Thecomplaint was brought to the attentionof our moderators who looked into theissue and concluded that the post wasnot one that merited removal from thesite as it was not felt to have breachedthe message board rules. A guide tothe house rules is found on the FiveLive message board. Posts that areremoved include ones that areconsidered likely to disrupt, provokeattack or offend others or areconsidered racist, homophobic, sexuallyexplicit or otherwise objectionable.”

The posting remains in place, and is ironically part of a commentthread relating to Richard Littlejohn’sinvestigative programme for Channel 4,entitled “The War on Britain’s Jews?”.


52 Numerousconversations and emailcorrespondencebetween CST, the Boardof Deputies of BritishJews and the BBC

53Jonny Paul, “BBC won’tremove anti-Semiticposting”. 17 July 2007 Jerusalem Post

This complex graphic is the cover of a UK Islamist book entitled “Pharaoh’sLegacy – The New World Order”. The word Pharaoh is used to indicate pre-Islamic idolatory and ignorance; whereas “New World Order” is of late 20thcentury far right origin and denotes the alleged post-Cold War Zionist takeoverof the USA. The book purports to explain the root of Western Islamophobia,summarised on the back cover as “Europe (Romans) who are the slaves of BaniIsrael, gave birth to her mistress, America.” (Bani Israel is Arabic for Childrenof Israel.)

The graphic shows dollars and an American flag twisted together above thesymbol for the atom (used here to represent energy). The inside of the atomsymbol is drawn in bold to create a Star of David, which has the United Nationsemblem in its centre and triangles containing the flags of the USA, Russia,India, France and Britain. The remaining triangle, in the top central position,contains an eye; the extreme far right and Islamist symbol depicting an allegedJewish-Masonic / ‘Illuminati’ conspiracy. (This is a bizarre yet relatively widelyheld conspiracy belief. The ‘eye’ motif is derived from the design of Americanbanknotes.)


Background Antisemitism from Muslim sources canbe a controversial and sensitive issue.Some commentators and activists denythat such antisemitism can even exist,whilst others claim that Muslims areirrevocably antisemitic. Both contrastingextremes are opportunistic, incorrectand wrongly cast Britain’s highly diverseMuslim community as a single politicalentity.

There is, however, no doubting thecentrality of antisemitism to the ideologyof international radical Islamist movements,nor its promotion by some Arab and Muslim regimes, such as IranianGovernment promotion of Holocaustdenial. Furthermore, the situation isrepeatedly exacerbated by ongoingMiddle East conflicts and their portrayalin Arab and Muslim media. The impact of these phenomena in the UK has beenillustrated (in 2007, as in previousyears) by media exposes, think tankprojects, court cases and the radicalIslamists’ own propaganda.

Media exposes of radical IslamistantisemitismA number of media features during2007 claimed to have found antisemiticbooks and other materials at Muslimbookshops and schools.

One example of this was Channel 4’s“Undercover Mosque” programme54 whichfound that antisemitic DVDs were beingsold by a bookshop at London’s Regent’sPark Mosque. The most notable of theseincluded a talk by Sheikh FeizMuhammad, in which he imitates a pigand refers to Jews who will be destroyedon the “day of judgement”:

“This creature will say ‘Oh Muslim’behind me is the Jew. Come and killhim. They will be [here, Feiz makes pig snorting noises], all of them, everysingle one of them”.

A teacher in a legal dispute for wrongfuldismissal with his former employer, King Fahad Academy in West London,revealed that the Saudi Governmentfunded school was using Saudieducation ministry textbooks that referto Jews as “monkeys” and Christians as “pigs”. The textbooks also ask pupilsto name “some of the repugnantcharacteristics of the Jews”, and to“give examples of worthless religions,such as Judaism, Christianity, idolworship and others”55. The school’sheadmistress denied teaching hatredand claimed the quotes were footnotesthat had been taken out of context56.The teacher later won his dispute andthe school was reported as havingshredded the books, after photocopyingthem.57

Antisemitism from Radical Islamist Sources

54 “Undercover Mosque”,Dispatches 15 January 2007 Channel 4

55 Sean O’Neill “Saudi-backed school ‘taughtracism’”. 6 February 2007 The Times. Also, BBC2Newsnight 7 February 2007

56John Crace, “Tripped up by a footnote”.20 February 2007 The Guardian

57“Muslim school ‘thattaught pupils from racehate textbooks madephotocopies after order to shred them’”. 22 February 2008http://www.thisislondon.co.uk

Cartoon showing a group ofJews whose noses are growing,Pinocchio-style, as they tell liesabout the Holocaust; the Jews’big noses then smash down a Palestinian house. This cartoonwon a prize in Iran’s HolocaustCartoon contest in November 2006.

Background: recent history of antisemitic terrorist attacksJewish communities and individualsthroughout the world have beenrepeatedly targeted and attacked byterrorist groups for decades58. Targetshave ranged from commercial premisessuch as restaurants, to cultural centres,synagogues, and leading communalfigures. Perpetrators have included neo-Nazi extremists, far leftists, Palestinianand Arab nationalists, and in recentyears, Islamist extremists. The attacksmay be perpetrated by anything from a single ‘lone wolf’ extremist, to a formalnetwork operating under the instructionof a foreign sovereign state.

The worst antisemitic terrorist attack in recent years occurred on 18 July1994, when a suicide attacker explodeda vehicle bomb outside the six storeyAMIA Jewish community centrein Buenos Aires, Argentina, causing the destruction of the building and the deaths of 85 people. Two hundred others were injured.Subsequent investigations revealed thatthe attack was perpetrated by Hizbollahand was instigated by senior Iranianfigures.

Jewish communities employ extensivesecurity measures in response to theantisemitic terrorist threat. This securityburden is a significant financial cost and practical responsibility, far exceedingthat borne by any other comparablesection of society. In addition, there is the psychological burden of physicalsecurity apparatus and personnel beingcommonplace at synagogues, Jewishschools and Jewish events.

The impact of a successful terroristattack against a single Jewishcommunity can be extremelydamaging. This applies not onlyin the physical sense of casualtiesand wrecked lives and buildings, but also in the psychological impactagainst the entire Jewish community,who may question the safety of leading their Jewish lives as theychoose. In addition, such terroristattacks may raise fears and tensionsamongst the rest of society about the threat to their own security thatis supposedly caused by having Jewsin their midst.

In December 2001, the antisemiticterrorist threat increased significantlywhen Al Qaeda instructed its supportersto attack and kill Jews throughout theworld. Since then, jihadist terroristshave successfully perpetrated suicideattacks against Jewish communities inTunisia, Turkey and Morocco, causingscores of deaths. Police actions haverepeatedly revealed the targeting ofother local Jewish communities by suchgroups throughout the world, includingEurope, North America and Australia.


Terrorism and Antisemitism

58 Over 400 suchattacks are analysedin CST’s report,“Terrorist IncidentsAgainst JewishCommunities andIsraeli CitizensAbroad 1968-2003”.Seewww.thecst.org.uk/downloads/Terrorist_Incidents_Report.pdf

Antisemitism in British jihadistterrorismAnalysis of UK anti-terrorist trials showsantisemitism to be a consistentcomponent of the ideology and activitiesof those convicted. In 2007, this includedthe following cases:

• Five men were sentenced to lifeimprisonment for conspiring to causeexplosions in the Operation Crevicetrial, the longest running terror trial in British history. The defendants werefound to have amassed 600kgof ammonium nitrate for usein explosives. Their primary targetsappeared to have been Bluewatershopping centre in Kent and Ministryof Sound nightclub in London. A 12-page list of synagogues fromaround Britain (taken from theinternet) was found at the home ofone of the ringleaders, Omar Khyam,who had met with the 7 July 2005London bombers Mohammad SidiqueKhan and Shehzad Tanweer on fouroccasions in 2004.

David Waters QC, prosecuting, said of the synagogue list: “The likelypurpose of this information, you maythink, was in relation to potentialtargets”.59

Omar Khyam was also found to haveused Jewish sounding names,including Goldberg and Goldreid,when raising finds for Kashmiriterrorists. When asked in court whyhe used such names, he replied “I found it funny”.60

• Seven men were jailed for up to 26 years each for key roles in an Al Qaeda linked conspiracy tocause explosions in the UK and USA

between 2001 and 2004. The menwere part of a ‘sleeper cell’ centredon Dhiren Barot, who had conducteda reconnaissance trip to the USA andfilmed potential targets including“Jewish buildings and a synagogue”.61

• In the trial of six men accused ofattempting the 21 July 2005 Londonunderground bombings, Yassin Omarwas found to have constructedexplosives at his home, where Policealso found a video on religion that“discussed the hatred of Shia Muslims,Hindus, Russians, and Jews”.62

• Three men were jailed for using theinternet to incite others to commitacts of terrorism, including Tariq Al-Daour, who was jailed for ten years.Al-Daour, a law student, hadpreviously been charged in connectionwith a series of violent antisemiticassaults against visibly orthodox Jewsin Stamford Hill, North London in2005. The previous case had collapsedafter a witness failed to appear.63

• Sheikh Abdullah el-Faisal wasdeported from the UK after servingfour years of a seven year sentencefor soliciting the murder of Jews,Americans and Hindus.64

The Government’s official account of the 7 July 2005 London bombingshad identified Faisal as a mentor toJermaine Lindsay, who killed 25people on a train near Kings Cross.


59 Simon Hughes and JamesClench “Bomb Bluewaterand slags in club”. 23 March 2006The Sun

60 “Al Qaeda suspect‘discussed blowing up the Commons’”. 16 September 2006 Daily Mail

61http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article627443.ece

62 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6313799

63 http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/asw2005/uk.htm

64 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6691701.stm

UK support for Hizbollah and Hamas Global jihadist terrorism is resolutelycondemned by virtually every sector of UK society, including the overwhelmingmajority of British Muslims. There is,however, support for terrorist groupsthat are not within Al Qaeda’s immediatecircle, especially Hamas and Hizbollah;and a particular willingness to support or excuse terrorist attacks against allIsraeli citizens. Furthermore, bothHamas and Hizbollah promote the mostextreme antisemitic propaganda, takenfrom Islamic and non-Islamic sources.65

Over the last ten years, support forHamas and Hizbollah has permeatedmost British far left and Islamistcampaigning structures, most vividlyshown by the popularity of Hizbollahflags (featuring Arabic writing and anassault rifle) on UK demonstrations, and the chant “we are all Hizbollah”.66

British leftists now also meet directlywith Hamas and Hizbollahrepresentatives at the annual CairoConference67, in addition to frequentlyworking alongside pro-Hamas activists in the UK.

Most crucially of all, however, thewidespread promotion of these groups’ideology, methods and representatives isgreatly increasing the future potential forterrorist attacks against British Jews.


65 For example, theHamas Charterexplicitly cites TheProtocols of theElders of Zion.Hizbollah’s Al-Manartelevision stationbroadcast Al-Shatat(The Diaspora), a 29-part Syrian-producedtelevision seriesbased upon theProtocols. Thisincluded a scene inwhich Jewish leaderskidnap and kill aChristian boy inorder to use hisblood for religiousrites. (This literallyrepeats the notoriousantisemitic MedievalChristian blood libel.)

66 For example, anti-Israel demonstrationsin London andManchester by the Stop the WarCoalition, during thesummer 2006conflict in Lebanonbetween Israel andHizbollah.

67 The CairoConferences drawtogether opponentsof America and Israelfrom Islamist, Arabnationalist and leftistgroups.

Bombed exterior of Neve Shalom Synagogue, Istanbul, Turkey,following car bomb attack during Sabbath morning service, 15November 2003. At the same time, the Beth Israel synagogue inIstanbul was also attacked. Twenty-three people were killed and 300injured in the attacks, which were perpetrated by local global jihadistelements.

Cover of 2007 English language version of Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s booklet, “Fatawa on Palestine”, distributed in UK.The booklet is a powerful case study in contemporary Islamistantisemitism.


The following two case studies quote at length from source documentation in order to show the complexity ofcontemporary antisemitic discourse.Both case studies derive from overseas,but were distributed by British groupswho felt that they were appropriate fortheir British supporters.

These studies show antisemitic discourseas a globalised phenomenon anddemonstrate how one distinct ideologicalstream of antisemitism may beinfluenced by other types of antisemitism,anti-Zionism and anti-Israel hatred.

Case Study No.1 Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi:“Fatawa on Palestine”

“The Judgement Day Will Not OccurUnless You Fight Jews”The case of the influential SheikhYusuf al-Qaradawi embodies many of the arguments between opponentsof antisemitism and apologists (or deniers) for Jew-hatred fromradical Islamist sources.

The 2007 English addition of al-Qaradawi’sbook, “Fatawa on Palestine”68, is a startling combination of religiousincitement to both terrorism andantisemitism in which the present dayIsraeli-Palestinian conflict is framed bytheological prophecy of a “battle”between “all Muslims and all Jews”in which Muslims will triumph. This“battle” (whether it occurs in this orfuture generations) is given yet furtherimportance by al-Qaradawi’s insistencethat it must happen at some stage priorto the coming of “Judgement day”.

BackgroundHamas is part of the internationalMuslim Brotherhood network, and al-Qaradawi is the Brotherhood’s mostsenior theologian. From his base inQatar, al-Qaradawi plays a leading rolein providing the theological justificationsfor Hamas terrorism, encouragesMuslims throughout the world tosupport it and positions this within a wider context of religious conflictbetween all Muslims and all Jews.

There is some debate as to the extent to which traditional Islamic anti-Jewishtheology drives contemporary Muslimantisemitism. In the British context,however, al-Qaradawi’s supporters and their allies tend to simply deny that there is any antisemitism; either historic or modern. These denials are exposed bythe “Fatawa”, which are ostensibly about“Palestine”, but include both modernantisemitic slurs and repeated referencesto Islamic theology about Muslims fightingJews prior to the coming promise of Islam’s eventual triumph.

“Fatawa on Palestine”In 2007, the Cairo based Al-FalahFoundation published an Englishlanguage booklet comprising religiousrulings by al-Qaradawi, entitled “Fatawaon Palestine”. This is a translation of al-Qaradawi’s book in the original Arabic,“Fatawa Min Ajl Falastin”, and isdirected at English speaking Muslims.It was subsequently distributed viabooksellers and Islamic events, and provides a highly instructive casestudy of the extent and urgency of Muslim Brotherhood theologicalinvective and instruction againstIsrael, Zionism, and Jews.

Case studies

68 Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi“Fatawa on Palestine”.Publisher: Al-FalahFoundation ForTranslation, Publicationand Distribution (Cairo)1428 / 2007. Translatedby: Ahmad M.Hassan & Ahmad Saad.

The booklet shows al-Qaradawi’s:

• Belief that victory over the Jews will presage Islam’s triumph: “The Judgement Day Will Not OccurUnless You Fight Jews”

• Apocaliptic based anti-Zionism and antisemitism within Muslimtheological anti-Jewish invective: “Thisbattle will occur between the collectivebody of Muslims and the collective bodyof Jews ie all Muslims and all Jews”

• Existential primacy of Israeli-Palestinian conflict within Muslimworldview

• Mixing of the terms Israel, Zionist andJew

• Instruction for anti-Israel terrorism (in particular suicide bombings)

• Instruction for boycott of Israel,Zionism, “Jewish goods” and USA

The preface, by Al-Falah’s GeneralDirector, Sheikh Mouhammad ‘Abdu,stresses the absolute primacy of thePalestinian issue to Muslims: “Palestine,all Palestine, from the sea to the river [ie the Mediterranean to the Jordan]remains the bleeding wound in the bodyof the Muslim nation. It remains thechief concern of anyone who believes in Allah as a Lord, in Islam as a religion,and in Muhammad as a prophet and messenger.”

‘Abdu then explains the significance ofthe booklet, the existential primacy ofthe Muslims’ war against Zionists, andthe religious promise of victory:

“In this book, the eminent contemporaryscholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi gives clearanswers…these answers acquaintMuslims with the dimensions of the issue with the Zionists…The battlebetween them and us is not a battle of borders but a battle of existence. It is the battle that will end and theMuslims that will be victorious. This victory will raise the Adhan [call to prayer] on the voiceless minaretand will return monotheism to thevoiceless pulpit.”

Al-Qaradawi’s introduction states: “The whole book focuses on one pivotalissue which is ‘the issue of Palestine’and our battle with the Jews whousurped our land, startled our families,shed our blood and violated our sacredplaces.” He disabuses the reader of any prospect for a peaceful solution:“Some Muslim scholars do not knowwhat is behind the claims of peaceassumed by Israel. It is like the miragein a desert, which the thirsty onethinks it to be water; until he comesup to it, he finds it to be nothing.”

The rejection of peace then continuesin the first section of the book, as al-Qaradawi calls for all Muslims to takeup the struggle:

“…there is no doubt that peace shouldbe our resort when the enemy inclinesto it. However, this is not the case withthose Jews who have usurped our landsand do not want peace... I have alwaysstressed that Palestine is a Muslim landbelonging to all generations of theMuslim nation… If Palestinians neglecttheir duty of defending this land, thewhole Muslim nation is required to takethis responsibility and defend the landeither by force or word.”


Having globalised the conflict, al-Qaradawi discusses “The Legitimacy of Martyrdom Operations in OccupiedPalestine”. His support for this is wellknown, and the booklet repeats hispraise for “martyrs” (both male andfemale), and describes Israel as “a military society in its totality”in which the killing of children and oldpeople “should be forgiven since it isunintentional”. He also explains thereligious and social approval that“martyrs” should obtain.

Al-Qaradawi’s ruling against Palestiniansaccepting compensation includes a swipeat Holocaust restitution payments:

“Israel has gained ten, even hundreds of billions of dollars, deutschemarks andother currencies in compensation allegedby Jews or in compensation for some ofwhat Israel considered as a concessionon its side…why do not the victimizedPalestinians get compensated for theirtorture and suffering? They are moredeserving of such compensation.”

The section on “Boycotting Israeli and American Goods” demonstrates the importance of boycotts to the anti-Israel struggle, and repeatedly mixesall embracing antisemitism (such as“world Jewish community”, “every Jewin the world thinks himself a soldier”)with anti-Zionism and anti-Americanism.It further stresses the existential natureof the conflict:

“Palestine…The conquerors are thosewith the greatest enmity towards thebelievers, and they are supported bythe strongest state on earth – theUSA, and by the world Jewishcommunity…If we cannot strengthenour brothers, then we have the duty

to weaken the enemy…Americangoods, exactly like “Israeli” goods, are forbidden. It is also forbidden to advertise these goods…The USAtoday is more than a friend to ourenemy; it is wholeheartedly devoted to Israel…

Muslims in America must work withcompanies that are the least hostile to Muslims and the least allied to theZionists…Arabs and Muslims mustboycott all companies that supportZionism and Israel, regardless of thenational origin of that company [eg Marks and Spencer], and anyother company which supports theZionists and helps Israel….

If every Jew in the world thinks himselfa soldier, and supports Israel as muchas he can, surely every Muslim shouldbe a soldier using his very soul andwealth to liberate al-Aqsa. The least the Muslim can do is to boycott theenemies’ goods…If the consumer buyingJewish or American goods is committinga major sin, surely the merchant buyingthese goods and acting as an agent is the greatest sinner…

Finally, I call upon the wise, reasonable,and experienced people in everycountry to organize themselves to build a boycott, to create alternativesand avoid negative issues, and carry on educating the masses, until the wordof truth is raised and falsehood isdestroyed. Surely it will perish.”

The boycott principle continues in the next section, which warns againstvisiting Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa Mosque, as “the Ummah is always requiredto keep good relations with allies and show enmity to the enemies


and never surrender to aggressors.Almighty Allah says, O you who believe!Take not My enemies and your enemies(ie disbelievers and polytheists, etc) as friends. (Al-Mumtahanah: 1)”

Al-Qaradawi continues with warningsthat are reminiscent of Christian andfar right antisemitic charges of Jewsconspiring to spread disease andimmorality. He quotes Islamic sourcesin support of this:

“Mixing with those people (ie Israelis)…has a lot of hazardsand dangers since it threatens Arab and Muslim societies and spreads viceand moral corruption and deviationamongst Muslims. Such people havebeen weaned on vice and perversionand so many diseases including AIDShave become widespread amongstthem. They plan for such a goal of exporting these ailments to theMuslim society while Muslims are totallyunaware. Therefore, blocking the doorleading to such temptation is considereda religious obligation and necessity… it [Al Aqsa Mosque] is subject to manyexcavations and sabotage aiming to remove it completely. Jews want to build their temple on its remains.Such are the Jewish plans about whichAllah says,

‘They were plotting and Allah too wasplanning, and Allah is the Best of theplanners’. (Al-Anfal: 30)”

Al-Qaradawi rules against “FriendlyRelations with Israelis”, in the contextof what “Jews, in general, and Israelis,in particular, are doing to us these days”.Claiming that the Jewish “Divine book”has been “altered and changed”, he next states that Jews/Israel desire

to take over most of the Middle East,and cites Islamic sources to show thatJews are “the true examples of miserliness and stinginess”:

“…they originally have a Divine bookthough it has been altered andchanged. Yet, Allah prohibits us frombeing friends with those who fight usbecause of our religion and drive usout of our homes and help ouroppressors. This is simply what Jews,in general, and Israelis, in particular,are doing to us these days…dreamingof a state that extends from the RiverNile to the Euphrates and from theCedar trees (ie southern Lebanon) to the Palm trees (ie the Arabianpeninsula)…

The Israeli ambassador thinks he willutilize the poverty and destitution ofsome Egyptians to win theirhearts...We should also ask about thisnew-found generosity and philanthropyof the Jews while they are the trueexamples of miserliness and stinginess.Describing them, Almight Allah says,

‘Or have they a share in the dominion?Then in that case they would not givemankind even a Naqira (speck on theback of a date stone)’. (An-Nisa’: 53)

…The only thing between us and theZionists is jihad and we will neversubmit to them…we should recall thememories of the victory of Badr andthe conquest of Makkah. All such greatdays should give us power and hopeto continue our march for a new and coming victory.”


As the booklet nears its conclusion, al-Qaradawi addresses the hadith (oraltradition relating to life and deeds ofMohammed) concerning the necessityof Muslims fighting Jews as a precursorto “Judgement Day”. This hadith issubject to debate and is employed by radical extremists to legitimise theirtargeting of Jewish communities aroundthe world. Al-Qaradawi’s booklet quotesthe hadith in its chapter heading, “TheJudgement Day Will Not Occur UnlessYou Fight Jews” and the hadith’scontent that follows:

“The last day will not come unless you fight Jews. A Jew will hide himselfbehind stones and tress and stones and trees will say ‘O servant of Allah-or O Muslim- there is a Jew behind me,come and kill him.’”

Al-Qaradawi is asked the following:

“My question is: Based on this hadith, can we say that our fight against theJews will continue till Judgement day?Will stones and trees really speak? Is thisconsidered something like honor forMuslims? Do present day Muslimsdeserve such an honor or will such anhonor be kept for the coming generationthat will appear before Judgement Dayas mentioned in the hadith?

Al-Qaradwi’s reply emphasises theauthenticity of the hadith, “there is nodoubt about the authenticity of the hadith...it is one of the miracles of our Prophet…”.

In what is perhaps the most startlingpassage of the booklet, al-Qaradawi nowshows the true theological depth, andcomprehensively antisemitic nature, ofthe “battle” between Muslims and Jews:

“Yet, we believe that the battle betweenus and the Jews is coming. In such a battle, Muslims will be victorious aftermany defeats. This battle is the one we are told about in the hadith of theProphet (peace be upon him). But when isthe battle going to occur? No one can tellfor the knowledge of its timing belongs toAllah only. Such a battle is not driven bynationalistic causes or patriotic belonging; it is rather driven by religious incentives.This battle is not going to happen betweenArabs and Zionists, or between Jews andPalestinians, or between Jews or anybodyelse. It is between Muslims and Jews as isclearly stated in the hadith. This battle willoccur between the collective body ofMuslims and the collective body of Jews ie all Muslims and all Jews. Reality tells usthat Jews spared no pain in planning andexecuting their plans, taking power fromthe teachings of the Torah and the rulingsof the Talmud.

As for Muslims, they have kept Islamoutside the battlefield. Jews re unitingthemselves in the name of Judaismwhile we are never gathered under the banner of Islam. They respect theSabbath and we dishonour Fridays, theyseek the help of each other in the nameof religion while we give no value or respect to our religion.”

Having emphasised the nature of thebattle, al-Qaradawi addresses the actualwording of the hadith, “The questionarises as to the way stones and treeswill speak to us”. He says that this willindeed happen as, “this marvel is notsomething impossible since we havealready seen many things thought to be very odd and strange before”.


Al-Qaradawi then stresses that somehadiths, such as the promised Muslimconquest over the Turks, have alreadybeen fulfilled, and he goes on to callfor the “victory over the Jews” to comeas soon as possible:

“The questioner might have thought thatgaining victory over the Jews will bedelayed till before the day of Judgement,but there is no clear evidence to say this.We hope – Insha’ Allah – that it shallhappen soon…All this brings us closer to victory and surely victory is near.”

The booklet’s penultimate chapter isentitled, “Discussing the Verses on BanuIsrael [‘Sons’ or ‘Children’ of Israel] and Their Mischief”. This presents“mischief” as an eternal Jewish trait,which is predicted in Islamic theology,and for which Jews will pay the price. It states:

“And we decreed for the Children ofIsrael in the Scripture, that indeed youwould do mischief on the earth twice andyou will become tyrants and extremelyarrogant! So, when the promise came forthe first of the two, We sent against youslaves of Ours given to terriblewarfare…And it was a promise(completely) fulfilled. Then we gave youonce again, a return of victory overthem…Then, when the second promisecame to pass, (We permitted yourenemies) to make your faces sorrowfuland to enter the mosque (of Jerusalem)as they had entered it before, and todestroy with utter destruction all that fellinto their hands…if you return (to sins),We shall return (to Our Punishment).” (Al-Isra’: 4-8)

Al-Qaradawi notes that there is somescholarly disagreement regarding when“the times of mischief” occur, but helists alleged Jewish crimes, includingthose against “their Prophets”. Thisconstitutes a damning religiousindictment of Jews’ alleged corruptionof G-d’s will:

“Most probably it [“mischief”] involvestheir violation of sanctities, breaching of promises, intruding privacies, applyingsome of the teachings of the scripturesand abandoning many others, and aboveall, revolting against their Prophets to the extent of killing them…They havekilled Prophet Zakariyya and ProphetYahya and wove conspiracies againstJesus Christ scriptures. In fact theQur’an gives a full account of theirviolations and perversions...

Many viewed that the first punishment[for “mischief”] was giving theBabylonians an upper hand over them.The Babylonians defeated them anddestroyed their state and annihilatedtheir dwellings and distorted theirTorah. Enslaved by their captors, Jewsled a life of exile and degradation inBabylon for seventy years. As for thesecond punishment, it was executed bythe Romans who put an end to theJewish presence in Palestine. They ledsuch a life of Diaspora until the comingof modern Zionism.”

Al-Qaradawi continues, moving beyondIsraeli Jews, to make the globalantisemitic allegation that, “owningmass media, their word has becomeprevailing and heard everywhere”. He then pleads, “Surely, Allah’s promiseto punish them and give victory toMuslims over them will come true”.


Al-Qaradawi then briefly discusses eightrefutations of the view that “the secondtime of mischief” is currently ongoing,before concluding:

“It is clear that they fall under a Divinelaw nowadays which makes themsubject to punishment whenever theyget back into aggression, Almighty Allahwill punish them. Now, they have falleninto the abyss of aggression again andthe law of Allah dictates that they shouldbe punished severely so that they stoptheir aggression and avoid their evilways. This can also be understood fromthe verse of the Qur’an that reads,

‘And (remember) when your Lorddeclared that He would certainly keep on sending against them (ie the Jews),till the Day of resurrection, those whowould afflict them with a humiliatingtorment. (Al-A’raf: 167).”

The book ends with a chapter that iscritical of the “Meeting Between theGrand Sheikh of Al-Azhar and theGrand Rabbi of Israel”. This blames“the misguidance of Satan” for suchbehaviour, and makes clear that noreconciliation can be countenanced:

“The whole issue is now clear and it isbecause of the misguidance of Satan thatpeople are misled…there is no need fordialogue between religious leaders here;rather, it takes politicians and armedmen to settle this dispute.”

Case Study No.2British People’s Party: “Declarationof Independence From Zionism”

The complexity of contemporaryantisemitic discourse is shown by the “Declaration of Independencefrom Zionism”, published in the 14August 2007 issue of the BritishPeople’s Party electronic newsletter,“Nationalist Week”.69

This is a standard British far rightsetting, yet the declaration itself is a heady mixture of not onlytraditional antisemitic themes of Jewishmoney power and conspiracy, but alsocontemporary anti-Israel argumentsthat extensively draw upon anti-racistand anti-imperialist terminology.

The declaration originally appeared in the 7 July 2007 electronicnewsletter of the “EcclesiasticalCouncil for the Restoration ofCovenant Israel”, an American groupthat believes “...the Anglo-Saxon,Celtic and Caucasian peoples [are] the true and only descendants of the Twelve Tribes of Israel.”

The Council depicts Jews as havingrejected G-d and lists their allegedhistoric and modern crimes:

“The Jews have given the worldmassive debt through usury, ethnicstrife (especially with their false and violent claims on Palestine),special interest politics…and decadence (pornography,organised crime, anti-Christianactivism)…the Jews were expelledfrom every nation in Europebecause of their practice of usuryand foreclosure and for practicing


69 “Nationalist Week”no.140.http://www.bpp.org.uk/nw140.html

their sick and perverse Talmudicreligion of deception…It is the Jewswho pretend to be Israel so thatthey might reclaim the inheritancewhich their forefather, Esau, sofoolishly sold to his brother…theirgod is the serpent, the liar…Readyour Bible and come out ofBabylon.”

The declaration shows how modernanti-Zionist discourse appeals to eventhe most bizarre antisemitic sects, aswell as more traditional nationalistand racist groups such as the BritishPeople’s Party. It includes:

“When, in the course of humanevents, a tyranny of one specialinterest becomes so grievous thatthe people can no longer tolerate itspresence, then the people must voiceopposition against it. This tyrannyseeks to silence its critics with claimsof “anti-Semitism”…

…this tyranny exploits its vast globaleconomic resources, including theworld’s largest banking, media andindustrial corporations, by pressuringthe Congress, the Court System, andthe Office of the President intosupporting wars of aggressiontowards sovereign nations. It ownsinstruments of oppression, such asthe Anti-Defamation League…, theWorld Jewish Congress, the AmericanIsrael Public Affairs Committee, anddozens of other such lobbyingorganisations, which use all of theireconomic and political influence tokeep America’s domestic and foreignpolicies tied to the State of Israel,which is an imperialistic presence inthe Middle East.

Through their ownership of variousmedia, such as television, radio,magazines, book publishing andentertainment, these Zionistorganisations never fail to demonizetheir perceived enemies whilepretending to be the world’swatchdogs for international “terrorism”.At the same time, the state-sponsored terrorism of the Israelistate is never mentioned by this“free” press…

Zionism is an international fraud,perpetuating its existence on moneyextorted from the taxpayers ofvarious nations, including itsexploitation of the Holocaust, whichthey will not allow us to forget, whilenever mentioning the horrible crimesof the Zionists against the Palestinian,Lebanese, Christian and Muslimpeople who live near the Israelistate…our government has, fornearly one hundred years, servedthe interests of International Zionismfirst and America last…Following theadvice and direction of these Zionistwarmongers, America has become ashameful imperialistic nation…

How many more Americans have todie for International Zionism beforethe American people cry foul and putan end to this tyranny?

Also during the Wilson Presidency,the Zionists pushed the FederalReserve Act through Congress,giving the House of Rothschildbanking family and otherinternational Zionist banking familiesthe exclusive monopoly to issueAmerica’s money…


Zionism is international imperialismdressed up as Jewish survivalism. It is supremacism masquerading asliberalism. It is the proverbial “wolfin sheep’s clothing”, speaking in thename of “freedom” but denyingfreedom of speech to its critics…

The brutal and blatant occupation of Palestine by the Zionists is acompletely unjustified aggression,not just against the Palestinianpeople, but against the whole world,for when one person is deprived ofhis or her human rights, no one issafe. Zionism seeks to justify itsoccupation of Palestine based on thepremise that “the Nazis persecutedthe Jewish people.” However, twowrongs do not make a right. ThePalestinian people never persecutedor wronged the Jewish people in anyway…The Zionist Israeli State is anexclusive state, which denies fullrights to Palestinians, making theIsraeli State a de facto system ofApartheid…Justifying their aggressionby reason of their own pastoppression, they have become whatthey claim to be against: Bigotry andOppression.

Their chief propaganda device, theIsraeli State, was conceived by fraud(the Balfour Declaration), institutedby Terror (the Stern Gang, the IrgunGang, and other terrorist groupsfinanced by the Rothschild bankingfamily), and maintained by Extortion,using pressure groups within othernations…If Apartheid was evil inSouth Africa, then why is itacceptable in Israel?...

The time has come for America to end its de facto occupation by Zionistbankers, corporations, warmongersand political insiders, who haveexploited America for so manydecades. The time has come forAmerica to declare its Independencefrom Zionism, just as we declared ourIndependence from the British Crownin 1776. There is a New Tyrant in theLand, and his name is Zionism…

EXPOSE ZIONIST TREACHERY!

DOWN WITH ZIONISM! DOWN WITHTHE UNITED NATIONS! DOWN WITHTHE NEW WORLD ORDER!”


This cartoon, from the BritishPeople’s Party website,accompanied an attack on theleadership of the rival BritishNational Party for (supposedly)adopting a “pro-Zionist, pro-Israeli stance”. This cartoon demonstrates themanner in which far rightgroups now use the wordZionism where previously Jewwould have been used.

www.thecst.org.uk

London (Head Office) 020 8457 9999

Emergency 24 hour pager 07659 101 668

Manchester (Northern Regional Office) 0161 792 6666

Emergency 24 hour number 0800 980 0668

ISBN: 0-9548471-1-3

antisemitic discourse in britain in 2007 - cst discourse report 2007_web.pdf · antisemitic...

Documents