Palestine-Israel: A Jewish Perspective Thursday Granville Centre

Palestinian Nakba: Past, Present and what the Future holds - May 14th Queens Park Community School

May 14th 7pm until 8.30pm

Three Palestinians and a British human rights’ lawyer talk about the history of the Palestinian people, their legal status and their hopes and challenges for their future as they seek peace and justice through non-violence. 

 

Dr Asad Abu Shark: Retired Professor of Linguistics, Palestinian human rights activist and international spokesperson for the Great March of Return. He is from the Gaza strip and currently lives in Ireland.

 

Dr Ghada Karmi: Palestinian physician, academic and writer. She was born in Jerusalem, but had to flee with her family in 1948 and has lived in the UK since then. She is the author of several books on the Israel-Palestinian conflict, and is a well known spokesperson on Palestine in the UK and Middle Eastern media.

 

Daniel Machover: Eminent British Human Rights lawyer and co-founder of Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights.

 

Yana Shabana: Palestinian who grew up in the West Bank, she studied at Hebron University and then taught English language at Al-Najah National University in Nablus. She is currently undertaking doctoral research at the University of Birmingham in the role of translation in indigenous elimination through settler-colonialism.

 

Event put on by Kensal and Kilburn Better 2019 in association with Palestine Community Foundation.

 Queens Park Community School, Aylestone Avenue, NW6 7BQ

FREE TICKETS HERE

Brent's leading role in the anti-apartheid struggle has lessons for us today

Friday's talk about Nelson Mandela, the Anti-Apartheid struggle and Brent, organised by the Wembley Hisotry Society,  not only brought back memories for many of those attending, but also provoked thoughts about that campaign and what can be learned from it for those of us campaigning now on issues such as Palestine and Divestment from Fossil fuels.

Nelson Mandela first came to Brent in 1962 when he visited what was then Willesden Trades Council. Campaigners in Brent founded a Boycott South African Goods campaign in 1960 answering a call from Chief Albert Luthili, President of the African National Congress (ANC) LINK.

South African fruit was a particular target and small groups were set up across the country and in universities with at its peak  140-150 groups.  The deaths of two students in 1976 in the Soweto Students Uprising generated further support for action against apartheid and in 1984 Brent Anti-Apartheid was working with the National Union of Students, women's groups and black organisations appealing to Trade Unions not to handle South African goods. 

There were calls for boycotts that  have similarities with those promoted today by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign with a wider focus targeting sporting links, divest from companies profiting from apartheid, pension fund divestment, arms embargo and the release of political prisoners.  Barclays Bank, the biggest  high street  bank in South Africa,was targeted locally and Brent Labour Party moved its account to the Co-operative Bank.

In contrast with today's  timid Labour Council, the Labour Council at the time was part of a local authority delegation to Margaret Thatcher to present a petition if favour of the boycott and the Council stopped contracts with firms with South African links and councillors took part in pickets of supermarkets urging them not to stock South African goods.

All this helped the borough earn the 'Barmy Brent' label - they weren't 'barny' - just ahead of their time. In 1981   Brent was one of the first to name streets and buildings after Nelson Mandela with Mandela Close and then named Winnie Mandela House in London Road, Wembley.

1988  saw the huge Nelson Mandela's 70th Birthday concert at Wembley Stadium broadcast to 57 countries and watched by more than 600 million people - a huge impetus to the struggle. One of the audience at Friday's talk pointed out that there was no commemoration of the concert at Wembley Stadium or the Quintain development and urged the present council to make sure that this omission is put right.

With Mandela now seen as a heroic figure, celebrated throughout the world and locally in Brent schools during Black History month,  it is important to remember that he was denounced as a terrorist by Margaret Thatcher and Young Tories sported t-shirts calling for him to be hanged. Supporters of the anti-apartheid struggle were attacked as extremists, and supporters of terrorism, in newspapers and the House of Commons. Sound familiar?

As recently as 1990 as you will see in the video Tories in Brent went to the High Court to stop Mandela being honoured by the borough and this was only put right in 2013 at the instigation of Jim Moher, former councillor and  chair of Wembley History Society.

Local historian Philip Grant adds:
 

FOR INFORMATION:

Brent Council still has the scroll, pictured above, which would have been presented to Nelson Mandela in April 1990 if the Council had passed its resolution to make him a Freeman of the Borough.

It was brought along to the Wembley History meeting on 18 January by the Leader of the Council, Cllr. Butt, and shown to the c.40 people who had come to the talk.

It is hoped that the scroll, and the silver casket made to hold it, will be on public display at Brent Museum later this year. Look out for further news, if you would like to see it! 

 

Cracks in the Wall - Beyond Apartheid in Palestine/Israel - November 20th 7.30pm Granville Centre - with Ben White

Brent rallies to Palestinian cause

In a move of great significance for the movement supporting the Palestinian's quest for justice

Brent  & Harrow Palestine Solidarity Campaign and Brent Trades Council organised a joint  meeting on 'Solidarity with the Palestinian People'. Local people crowded into the meeting addressed by national speakers showing the strength of feeling on the issue in our community. The meeting ended on a high note with participants urged to deepen and widen the Palestine solidarity movement.
Brent & Harrow PSC can be contacted at brent2harrowpsc@outlook.com email to join the mailing list or for further information. New members welcome.


Hugh Lanning, Chair of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign speaks, introduced by Mary Adossides, Chair of Brent Trades Council. 


Kiri Tunks President, National Union of Teachers section of the National Education Union.



David Rosenberg, Jewish Socialists' Group


Salma Karmi Ayyoub, criminal lawyer and external consultant for Al Haq, Palestinian human rights organisation


Graham Durham of Brent Central Labour Party


Questions and discussion part 1


Questions and discussion part 2

Brent Council to discuss motion on Gaza inquiry & arms control

Brent Council is to discuss a motion on Gaza at Monday's meeting put forward by the Labour Group:

Full Council – 9 July 2018 Motion selected by the Labour Group 

This council joins international condemnation of the recent killings of 130 Palestinian protestors by Israeli forces – firing live ammunition into crowds of unarmed civilians is illegal and must not be tolerated; any escalation in this long-running dispute is deeply regrettable. 

This council is appalled that more than two thirds of Palestinians are reliant on humanitarian assistance, with limited access to essential amenities such as water and electricity. 

This council supports the right to protest against such awful conditions, against the continuing blockade of Gaza, and occupation of Palestinian land, and in support of a viable two state solution. 

This council calls upon the UK government to encourage the UN Secretary General to renew his call for an independent international inquiry into these killings, and review the sale of arms that could be used in violation of international law. 

Councillor Kieron Gill Brondesbury Park Ward

UPDATED: Tulip Siddiq: Israeli soldiers' action unjustified & inhumane

Tulip Siddiq, MP for Hampstead and Kilburn has released the following statement on the situation in Gaza (please see comments below for a qualification of this statement given to the Jewish Chronicle  by Tulip Siddiq LINK ):

The reaction by Israeli soldiers to protests on the Gaza border over the past week has been as unjustified as it is inhumane. I condemn without reservation these violations of international law and human rights by Israel. The international community should immediately act together to demand an end to the senseless killing, the bullets and the tear gas, and to urge a halt to the bloodshed.

The protest has been twofold - to highlight the shocking conditions which Palestinians are forced to live in and to demand their right to return to their homes. These issues should not be forgotten in the carnage which is now unfolding.

I dearly hope that this violence does not continue over the coming days, and I will be monitoring the situation closely.

I have written to the Foreign Secretary to raise the plight of the killed protesters and will share your thoughts when I have an opportunity. I have also signed EDM 1163 ‘Violence against protesters in Gaza’. I will also apply for a debate in Parliament to discuss this shameful situation, but it will depend on the parliamentary lottery system whether I am chosen for it. If another MP does manage to secure a debate on this topic then I will also raise the issue there.

Yesterday evening Hampstead and Kilburn Constituency Labour Party overwhelmingly passed a motion welcoming her statement ands condemning Israel’s action:

This CLP condemns Monday’s massacre of dozens of Palestinian protesters in Gaza, and the wounding of thousands by Israeli snipers using live fire and expanding bullets. The numbers of unarmed people killed during six weeks of protest, including children and journalists, is now close over 100.

Palestinians have been protesting with the Great March of Return leading up the 70^th anniversary of the establishment of the state of Israel and the Nakba – the uprooting of the Palestinian people as a result of the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948. This coincided with the provocative decision by the US government to move its embassy to illegally-occupied Jerusalem.

We believe that these protesters – many of them refugees from areas inside the state of Israel – have the right to return to their homes and lands, as enshrined in UN General Assembly Resolution 194. We call for an immediate end to the slaughter, for Israel’s withdrawal from the occupied territories, for an end to all discrimination inside Israel, and for progress towards a just and peaceful future for Palestinians and Israelis.

We welcome the statement from Tulip [Siddiq], and Jeremy Corbyn’s call for an end of arms sales to and from Israel and urge the widest possible support for vigils and demonstrations called around the UK to demand an end to violent suppression of legitimate Palestinian protests.

We also condemn the attempts of Trump, Israel and its apologists to place the blame on Hamas and away from the Israeli soldiers and their commanders who carried out the massacre. It compounds murder with insult by denial of the agency of Gazans driven to risk death by the vicious nature of the Israeli siege and wrecking of their lives. In particular, we note the statement by Labour Friends of Israel “Tragic events on the Gazan border; all civilian deaths are regrettable. Hamas must accept responsibility for these events. Their successful attempt to hijack peaceful protest as cover to attack Israeli border communities must be condemned by all who seek peace in the Middle East.” We urge the Party to make clear that it totally rejects such sentiments.

Tulip Siddiq told the meeting that she had never signed up for Labour Friends of Israel despite being listed on their website as a supporter.

-->

FAIR TRADE: A PALESTINIAN PERSPECTIVE - February 26th London Interfaith Centre

From Brent Fair Trade Network

Monday 26th February 7.30pm-9pm 

London Interfaith Centre,

125 Salusbury Road, NW6 6RG

What difference does fair trade really make? 

 To celebrate Fairtrade Fortnight, come to hear Bassema Barahmeh (pictured), olive farmer and board member of the Palestine Fair Trade Association, and Taysir Arbasi, Zaytoun's Director in Palestine, talk about the impact of fair trade on their lives. There will be time to discuss their presentations and to buy fair trade products from Zaytoun and Traidcraft. All are welcome: entrance is free. Fairtrade refreshments will be served. 

London Interfaith Centre, 125 Salusbury Road, NW6 6RG

Transport: Brondesbury Park (Overground), Queen's Park (Bakerloo, Overground) and Bus 206 (Brooksville Avenue).

Register HERE (free)

Further details: petermooreconsulting@hotmail.com.

Justice Now: Make it right for Palestine - March and Rally on Saturday

National March and Rally 

Saturday 4 November 2017 Justice Now: Make it right for Palestine

Assemble 12noon Grosvenor Square W1K 6LF London - March to Parliament Square

Members of Brent and Harrow Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Brent Stop the War and other local activists will be taking part in this march on Saturday marking the 100th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration on November 2nd which built the path for the dispossession of Palestinian rights.

Speakers at the rally will include"

Dr Mustafa Barghouti / Ken Loach / Andy Slaughter MP / Mick Whelan
General Secretary ASLEF / Gail Cartmail TUC /  Matt Wrack
General Secretary FBU /  Margaret McKee  President Unison /
 John Pilger  / Senator Paul Gavan Sinn Fein / Leanne Mohamad / Hugh
Lanning PSC / Asad Rehman, War on Want / Reem Kelani / Philipa Harvey NEU-NUT
Section / Daoud Abdalah BMI / Ajmal Masrour Imam & broadcaster / Prof
Manuel Hassassian / Tariq Ali / Salma Yacoub / Dave Randall /  Hawiyya
Dance Company / John Nicolson SNP – And many more to be announced.


Organised by Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC), Palestinian Forum in Britain (PFB), Friends of Al Aqsa (FOA), Stop the War Coalition (STW), Muslim Association of Britain (MAB).

Supported by Unite the Union, UNISON, National Education Union- NUT Section,GMB, ASLEF, RMT, FBU, UCU, PCS, CWU, Europal Forum, CND, Pax Christi, APCUK, Kairos UK, Friends of Sabeel UK, ICAHD UK, Amos Trust, APCUK.

The march is scheduled to set off at around 1:00pm from Grosvenor Square along the following route:

• North Audley Street
• Oxford Street 
• New Bond Street
• Clifford Street
• Cork Street
• Burlington Gardens
• Old Bond Street
• Piccadilly
• Regent Street 
• Pall Mall
• Cockspur Street
• Whitehall
• Ending on Parliament Square

Labour Party branches rally to support of expelled local Jewish Israeli activist accused of anti--semitism

Local Labour Party branches in Brent and Camden have rallied to the defence of Moshe Machover who lives in Queens Park, following the expulsion of the 81 year old Israeli Jewish professor with decades of activism as a socialist from the Labour Party over allegations of anti-semitism.

So far, Kilburn (Brent), Queens Park and West Hampstead & Fortune Green braches of Hampstead and Kilburn CLP has passed motions in support of Moshe.

Dudden Hill and Kensal Green branches of Brent Central CLP have also passed resolutions in support of Moshe.

Both CLPs are due to meet on Thursday October 19th. A full account of the expulsion can be read on the Jewish Socialists' Group website HERE

The resolution passed in Kilburn said:

This Branch/CLP is outraged that:

·Professor Emeritus Moshe Machover has been expelled from the Party. Prof Machover is Jewish and Israeli, the distinguished co-founder of Matzpen, the socialist organisation which from the 60s to the 80s brought together Arab and Jewish opposition to the illegal occupation of Palestine; 

· the Head of Disputes has accused Prof Machover of writing an “apparently antisemitic article” according to the new IHRA definition, and further accused him of “membership or support for another political party, or a political organisation with incompatible aims to the Labour Party” on the basis of “participation in CPGB events and regular contributions to the CPGB’s newspaper, the Weekly Worker”.

This Branch/CLP notes that:

·The Chakrabarti Inquiry found that the party’s “. . . complaints and disciplinary procedures . . . lacked sufficient transparency, uniformity and expertise . . .” and called for “the vital legal principles of due process (or natural justice) and proportionality”.

· The IHRA definition is being monitored by Camden Council to ensure that it is not used to stifle free expression and criticism of Israeli policies.

·Prof Machover who denies the accusations, has not been given the opportunity to challenge either the accusation of antisemitism nor his alleged support for another party or organisation with incompatible aims to the Labour Party.

·This expulsion is a frightening precedent in a party which is working to be more democratic and called for, in the words of its leader Jeremy Corbyn, ‘support to end the oppression of the Palestinian people, the 50-year occupation and the illegal settlement expansion’.

This Branch/CLP therefore calls for:

·Prof Machover’s expulsion to be immediately rescinded and for due process to take place so Prof Machover is given the opportunity to challenge the claims of the Head of Disputes.

More resolutions and statements of support can be found on the Jewish Voice for Labour website HERE

Speakers against Brent Council's adoption of the IHRA definition and examples of anti-semitism warned against its potential misuse to accuse pro-Palestinan activists of anti-semitism. LINK

100 years on from Balfour: What now for Palestine and Israel?

100 years on from Balfour: What now for Palestine and Israel?

Joint Brent Stop the War/Brent Palestine Solidarity Campaign Public Meeting

                                       Monday, October 9^th  7.30pm

Brent Mencap, 379-381 Willesden High Rd, London NW10 2JR

Bernard Regan  (author of The Balfour Declaration: Empire, Mandate and Resistance in Palestine’& Executive member of Palestine Solidarity Campaign)

Sahbi Benzid  (Hertfordshire NUT Membership Secretary and a recent visitor to Palestine)

A hundred years after its signing, Bernard Regan recasts the history of the Balfour Declaration as one of the major events in the story of the Middle East, which have polarised the region and the entire world. How can we help bring peace and justice to Palestine?

Israel is the only country in the world that systematically prosecutes children in military courts – between 500 and 700 each year.

Sahbi Benzid will report back on his recent visit, during which he visited several schools in Palestine and saw first-hand the effects of Israeli policies.

http://www.brentpsc.blogspot.co.uk/

brent2harrowpsc@outlook.com

Brent Mencap:  https://brentmencap.org.uk/about-us/how-to-find-us

Confusing debate on anti-Semitism motion at Brent Council

In a debate at Brent Full Council, made even more confusing than usual by another round of musical chairs in the Conservative groups, eventually the following motion was agreed with three abstentions. It is the original Joel Davidson motion amended by Cllr Shafique Choudhary (amendment highlighted in yellow). There was cross party support with three abstentions.  Council refused permission for the amended motion moved by Reg Colwill (see posting below) to be debated. I find the amendment on Palestinian rights confusingly worded although the intention appears to be to give equal recognition to Israeli and Palestinian rights. The motion retains many of the guidelines that speakers presenting deputations opposed at the meeting.

On the face of it I think the Reg Colwill motion was much clearer and I cannot understand why the Labour group voted against it being debated. Any interesting insight from the backrooms?

ADOPTION OF INTERNATIONAL HOLOCAUST REMEMBRANCE ALLIANCE DEFINITION OF ANTISEMITISM

This Council notes with alarm the rise in antisemitism in recent years across the UK. This includes incidents when criticism of Israel has been expressed using antisemitic tropes. Criticism of Israel can be legitimate, but not if it employs the tropes and imagery of antisemitism.

We therefore welcome the UK Government’s announcement on December 11^th 2016 that it will sign up to the internationally recognised International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) guidelines on antisemitism which define antisemitism thus:

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

The guidelines highlight possible manifestations of antisemitism as sometimes including:

·      “Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion. 


·      Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions. 


·      Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews. 


·      Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust). 


·      Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust. 


·      Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews 
worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations. 
 

      Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination alongside Palestinian’s right to self-determination  (Removes ‘e.g. by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor’)

·      Applying double standards by requiring of it behaviour not expected or demanded of any other 
democratic nation. 


·      Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews 
killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis. 


·      Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis. 


·      Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.” 
This Council welcomes the cross-party support within the Council for combating antisemitism in all its manifestations.

This Council hereby adopts the above definition of antisemitism as set out by the 


International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance and pledges to combat this pernicious form of racism.

Oppose anti-semitism and support free speech Brent councillors urged

Brent and Harrow PSC have written to Brent councillors about the motion on anti-Semitism to be discussed at the Council meeting on Monday 18^th September.

Dear Councillor 

RE: Full Council – 18 September 2017

Motion selected by the Conservative Group ADOPTION OF INTERNATIONAL

HOLOCAUST REMEMBRANCE ALLIANCE DEFINITION OF ANTISEMITISM

Councillor Joel Davidson Brondesbury Park Ward 

We welcome the discussion on how to combat anti-Semitism in the ongoing battle against racism in all its forms.

The International Holocaust Remember Association’s definition is as follows:

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” 

However, the guidance issued by the IHRA uses a number of controversial examples of forms of anti-Semitism, most of which (7/11) refer to Israel. We submit that the effect of adopting the guidance would be to prevent criticism of the actions of the Israeli State and of a legitimate critique of Zionism as a political ideology. For example, the guidance states that to call Israel a racist enterprise can be anti-Semitic. This has been used to describe anyone who refers to Israel as an apartheid state as ‘anti-Semitic’ and to withdraw meeting facilities from them.  Similarly, the example of not holding Israel to a standard has been used to say calling for boycott is anti -Semitic, which in the opinion of eminent QC Hugh Tomlinson is a threat to legally protected freedom of expression.

Mixing the issue of anti-Semitism with the policies and actions of the Israeli State, it is likely to make it harder to identify and oppose anti-Semitism, a goal to which we are all committed. DETAILS

If you wish to support the adoption of the (38 word) definition, we ask therefore, that this does not include the highly controversial guidance. In this way, opposition to anti-Semitism is made clear, without any limitation of legitimate criticism of the Israeli State or the ideology of Zionism. 

Balfour declaration: origin and relevance to today - public meeting May 16th

Early notice - Brent meeting on birth of Israel and the future of Palestine

Brent Palestine Day - Bridge Park - Saturday

London AMs asked to rethink positions on anti-semitism motion

Brent Central Labour Party is holding a discussion on The Labour Party and Anti-Semitism tonight (7.30pm Christchurh Nursery, St Albans Road, Harlesden, NW10 8UG).

Richard Kuper (Free Speech on Israel) and Jeremy Newmark (Chair, Jewish Labour Movement)  will lead the discussion.

By coincidence the issue of criticism of Israeli government action being conflated with anti-semitism has produced intensive discussion  in both the Labour Party and the Greens.

It has arisen after the London Asembly unanimously approved a resolution on the issue:

This Assembly expresses alarm at the rise in anti-Semitism in recent years across the UK including London. This includes incidents when criticism of Israel has been expressed using anti-Semitic tropes.

We therefore welcome the UK Government’s announcement on December 11^th 2016 that it will sign up to the internationally recognised International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) guidelines on anti-Semitism which define anti-Semitism thus:

“Anti-Semitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic. Anti-Semitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.

The guidelines highlight manifestations of anti-Semitism as including:

• Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
• Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
• Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
• Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
• Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
• Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
• Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.
• Applying double standards by requiring of it behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
• Using the symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
• Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
• Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

This Assembly hereby adopts the above definition of anti-Semitism as set out by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance and pledges to combat this pernicious form of racism.

Free Speech on Israel, a Jewish ed organisation, committeed to open and transparent debate on Palestine-Israel issue the folowing ststaement:

Free Speech on Israel, a Jewish-led organisation, condemns the decision of the London Assembly on Feb 8 to adopt a position on antisemitism that is a charter for censors. It threatens to make effective campaigning for justice for Palestinians impossible.

Antisemitism is an age-old visceral hatred of Jews simply because they are Jews. It must be vigorously fought against, along with all forms of bigotry. To confuse it with opposition to a state which calls itself Jewish, or to the founding ideology of that state, Zionism, is to obscure the real meaning of the term antisemitism and make combatting it more difficult. This is exactly what the motion passed by the Assembly does.


Setting the limits of debate about “the Jewish state” is a key goal of pro-Israel lobbyists only recently unmasked as working hand in glove with the Israeli Embassy to brand any criticism as antisemitic. Labour Friends of Israel, to which the motion’s proposer Andrew Dismore belongs, were shown to be key players in this witch hunt, which has resulted in a wave of suspensions and interrogations of pro-Palestinian Labour Party members. The victims include Jews who, contrary to the claims of the pro-Israel lobby, do not have Zionism woven into their DNA. Jewish organisations have been among those calling for a full inquiry into the extent of Israeli interference in UK politics.

We defer to Avi Shlaim, professor emeritus of history at Oxford and an Israeli Jew, who writes: “Israeli propagandists deliberately, yes deliberately, conflate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism in order to discredit, bully, and muzzle critics of Israel.”

It is not necessary to agree with Palestinians and their supporters when they question the founding principles of the State of Israel, compare it to Apartheid South Africa or call it to account for its well-documented racism, in order to recognise their right to say such things. The London Assembly has taken a position which endangers that right.

At a time when minority ethnic communities, particularly Muslims, are under constant attack in our society, the London Assembly, on the pretext of defending Jews against racism, has placed itself in the invidious position of defending Israeli propagandists against Palestinians and their supporters. This can only have the unintended consequence of stoking new hostility to Jews who will be seen as attempting to determine what non-Jews may or may not say about a foreign state.

We urge members of the Assembly to reconsider this politically ill-advised move.

Butt attacks BDS as he apologises for sharing 'Israel slur'

The Veolia protest outside Brent Civic Centre

On July 14^th the Times of Israel published an article by Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt headed ‘I’m sorry for sharing Israel slur – boycotts are wrong.’ LINK

The article came a considerable time after the minor storm that blew up over Butt’s sharing of a Facebook post of a  video that showed an Israeli soldier  mistreating a young Palestinian girl.  It was not so much the video that led to Butt being accused of anti-Semitism but a comment beneath the video that likened Israel to Isis.

Sharing the video was taken as Butt’s approval of that sentiment.  Anyone who engages in social media will know that in sharing a Facebook post decisions made in seconds and few would check all the comments that are made beneath the post.

At the time, when it appeared that the  allegation may have been used against Butt ahead of the Brent Labour leadership election contest, I tweeted that there were many better reasons to oppose him.  It was at a time when the mass media were in active pursuit of Jeremy Corbyn accusing him of anti-Semitism through his support for justice for the Palestinian people and Butt appeared to have been caught in the backwash.

At the time other Labour figures, including councillors, had been suspended while accusation of anti-Semitism were investigated and the Chakrabarti  inquiry was set up.  In the light of the publicity some were surprised that Butt had not been suspended.

There are several reasons why Butt’s article is curious. 

• It is written in a style utterly difference from any of Butt’s previous utterances and articles – almost as if it had been written by someone else entirely.
• It comes long after the initial controversy, at a time when the Chakrabarti report appears to have calmed things down regarding anti-Semitism and the media have found new grounds for discrediting Corbyn.   Was the article aimed at rehabilitating Butt after he resigned from London Councils as it lead on Equalities following the Facebook controversy?
• Butt’s linking of his apology to opposition to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign, a non-violent campaign aimed at changing Israeli government policy towards the Palestinians, including the Gaza blockade and the building of illegal settlements.

In his article Butt states:

As far as I can see, it [BDS]  does nothing for peace between Israelis and Palestinians. It only provides more ammunition to those who wish to divide and polarise. What it does do is make our own Jewish community feel isolated and disturbed as to why the world’s only Jewish state appears to be the focus of the most vociferous boycott movement. So when boycotters wanted Brent to cancel its contracts with vendors who do business in Israel, the decision to say no was one of the quickest and easiest I have had to make.

The rather vague reference to ‘vendors who do business in Israel’  can only be a reference to the Bin Veolia campaign, of which I was a part.  The campaign was supported by many groups in Brent including Jews for Justice for Palestinians and was backed by Brent Central Labour Party GC, Butt’s local party. LINK

Our case was that Brent Council should not be handing over cash from Brent’s residents to a company that at the time (it has since withdrawn from these activities, arguably because of the national and international campaign against its involvement) provided infrastructural support to Israel’s illegal settlements on Palestinian land.

Although ambivalent about boycotts of all Israeli goods, Labour Friends of Palestine and the Middle East, is clear that the settlements are a ‘gross injustice’. LINK

Grahame Morris MP, Chair of LFPME said:

We should not have to boycott settlement goods; we should not be allowed to buy them in the first place. I am appalled that the government are more focused on preventing boycotts and disinvestment from the illegal settlements rather than attempting to end settlement trade.

This undermines their commitment to international law, human rights and resolving the conflict.

Cllr Butt’s statement claims that it was his decision to say no to a Council boycott.  At the time he said that the decision on whether to boycott Veolia did not rest with him but with officers, particularly Fiona Ledden, head of  Brent legal and prcorement at the time. He was concerned that Veolia, a large French-owned multi-national would take legal action against the Council.

The decision was to be based on external legal advice (source never revealed despite requests) and although campaigners were denounced as having a political agenda the Council decision would not be made on political grounds.

Now, retrospectively, Butt is claiming in an effort to bolster his credentials, that it was a political decision not to boycott Veolia, and one made by him personally.

The Liberal Democrat opposition at the time was  refused permission to put a motion  on the issue on the advice of Brent Council officer. LINK

The Brent Bin Veolia campaign had a two-pronged approach, mobilizing popular support for the cause and taking on the Council’s legal arguments via legal advice of our own.

The position regarding local councils is summed up by a recent update from the BDS Movement LINK

In a typically straightforward statement Archbishop Tutu made the case for BDS back in 2014 having visited Israel and Palestine to see things for himself:

We could not have achieved our democracy without the help of people around the world, who through... non-violent means, such as boycotts and disinvestment, encouraged their governments and other corporate actors to reverse decades-long support for the apartheid regime.

In his article Butt refers to the importance of Israel in the life of Brent’s Jewish residents ignoring the fact that many of those supporting the Veolia campaign were themselves Jewish people who support the Palestinan cause.

He does not mention his responsibility towards Brent residents of Palestinian origin.

Follow this link for the Free Speech on Israel submission to the Chakrabarti Inquiry LINK

This is the full text of Muhammed Butt's article:


I’m sorry for sharing Israel slur – boycotts are wrong MUHAMMED BUTT

JULY 14, 2016, 11:42 AM 


The Labour Party – my party – is currently going through challenging times. Frankly, the behaviour of some of my fellow members has not been good enough, particularly towards the Jewish community.

 I too fell short of what standards should be expected in a thoughtless act. Earlier this year, I shared a post on Facebook without properly checking the comments below it.

The post contained a video of a violent incident between an Israeli soldier and young Palestinian girl. As a father of a daughter, I felt an instinctive empathy for the young girl and shared the video.

This was a mistake, not least because I had not read the comments below the video.  One made a claim that was both wrong and offensive: that Israel was in some way comparable to the so­ called Islamic State. I don’t believe this and have never believed it. You can sincerely believe that Israel’s rule over the Palestinian people is a tragedy for both parties, while refusing to indulge in that malicious and lazy smear.

As a local authority leader, I work hard to stop young people and children being groomed into the kind of extremism that ISIS represents. I do not need to be told how evil they are: They have deliberately killed thousands of civilians, used rape as a weapon of war and deployed mass executions as propaganda tools.

 ISIS represents nothing but fear. Israel, however, always offers hope. Right from its Declaration of Independence, it pledged itself to democracy, the rule of law and the equal treatment of minorities – an inspirational determination that was born at a time when much of the world lived under dictatorship.

However, whether on purpose or by accident, I shared the comment that made a wholly inappropriate and offensive comparison. I have to accept responsibility for that and say again how sorry I am.

I am the proud leader of Brent, the most diverse borough in the UK. I take my commitment to all our communities very seriously. We must all stand together and that means respect, understanding the realities of each other’s lives.

 I understand how critical Israel is to Jewish life in the UK: It could only be, when a plurality of the world Jewish community – more than 40 percent – live in Israel.

My Jewish residents will have parents, siblings and children in Israel.

That’s why I have no time for boycotts. As far as I can see, it does nothing for peace between Israelis and Palestinians. It only provides more ammunition to those who wish to divide and polarise.

What it does do is make our own Jewish community feel isolated and disturbed as to why the world’s only Jewish state appears to be the focus of the most vociferous boycott movement.

 So when boycotters wanted Brent to cancel its contracts with vendors who do business in Israel, the decision to say no was one of the quickest and easiest I have had to make.

I have always felt a huge amount of solidarity with the Jewish community. My family was forced out of Kashmir. I know what it is to be from a victimised community, looking to find a safe place and a welcoming community in which to live. When they came to Wembley, Jewish neighbours were among the most welcoming – not to be taken lightly during the often difficult 1970s and 1980s.

I share the frustration of the Jewish community at how long it is taking Labour to grapple with the problem of anti­Semitism in our ranks. It makes me very sad to think that I could have been a part of making matters worse. You can be sure that I will be much more careful about what I share in future.

For me the Chakrabarti report has not gone far enough. I would have liked it spelled out that not only should Zionist not be used as a term of abuse, but that Zionism is an entirely legitimate belief. As it happens, British Zionist groups such as Yachad are doing far more for peace than the official boycott movement ever has.

I can pledge that, for Brent Labour, it will only be the start of our thinking on the issue of antiSemitism, not the end. We can, we must and we will go further to make sure that Jews feel valued and safe in our party and in our borough, working with our local synagogues, the Board of Deputies, the Community Security Trust, and the local police.

I personally look forward to travelling to Israel in the near future to see the facts for myself. Whatever our disagreements about the Middle East, making outlandish claims such as Israel being in any way comparable to ISIS do not help the cause of peace. They only cause hurt and unhelpful divisions. We can, we must, do better.