Guardian

Who’s afraid of Richard Millett?


Richard Millett was called a “typical Israeli” last night at an SOAS Palestine Society event in London.

(The event included a presentation by Abdel Bari Atwan – a ‘Comment is Free’ contributor who can be seen here explaining that if Iranian missiles hit Tel Aviv he would “dance in [London’s] Trafalgar Square” and here praising a terrorist attack against Israeli civilians.)

If you’re wondering whether the abuse hurled at Richard was racist, simply replace “Israeli” with any other identity and repeat the charge.  “You’re a typical Arab.” “You’re at typical Black,” etc.

Of course, Richard is not an Israeli.  He’s a British Jew who routinely defends Israel and Jews at events hosted by the most hostile anti-Zionist, pro-Islamist (and often antisemitic) activists. His blog posts are frequently personal reports, using both photos and videos compiled while  monitoring events hosted by the UK’s ubiquitous array of groups hostile to Israel’s existence.

His reports unambiguously demonstrate the illiberal nature of much of the pro-Palestinian movement. One post shows Baroness Jenny Tonge praising Hamas leaders at a Palestinian Return Centre event, another post details a confrontation with a Holocaust denier who attended a Palestinian Solidarity event and yet another recounts a PSC event at which Jews were compared to Nazis.

It’s quite telling that the incident began last night when participants objected to Richard filming their public event (where no restrictions on such recordings were in place and, as Richard noted, others were filming the event).  What did they have to fear from a lone Jewish blogger who was merely attempting to disseminate information about what was said by a few pro-Palestinian activists?

One of the biggest scandals of the Guardian’s coverage of Israel and the Palestinians is the dishonest manner in which they frame the debate: a binarism which imputes good will and progressivism to nearly anyone claiming to advocate on behalf of the Palestinians on one hand and racism (or at least illiberality) to those unapologetically advocating for the Jewish state.

Perhaps Richard Millett is feared so much because he consistently gives lie to this absurd moral paradigm.  

75 replies »

  1. There is nothing worse for the Arab fascists who run the meetings that Richard so bravely films as to have some sunlight shone on them. Like the sewer rats they are, they prefer to scuttle around in the dark.

    I suggest to any who can to form a film squad of a half-dozen or so equipped with video cameras or decent smartphones with video capability to accompany Richard to these meetings and film them. They will also be able to film any attacks on each other for use in prosecutions. The bigger and tougher the film squad is, the better, by the way.

    • The bigger and tougher the film squad is, the better, by the way.

      The more intimidating they are, the less likely a person or persons will be likely to use any violence against them.

      Very small and effective video cameras are cheap now and can be bought quite cheaply over the Internet. One at least, is ‘hidden’ in a pair of glasses. It can be bought more cheaply than some of the more popular brands of sunglasses.

    • I heard people say things like “you’re a typical American”, “you’re a typical Briton”, “you’re a typical Israeli”… countless times. This is not a racial insult since it is not based on race, but on nationality, two very different notions. I find it a bit strange that Adam Levick does not seem to grasp the difference betwen race and nationality.

      • Surely, Nat, that depends on the context? This was a rabidly anti-Israel audience.

        Surely it’s the lame brained Islamists at SOAS and elsewhere and their fellow traveller useful idiots who write above and below the line in the Guardian who do not seem to grasp the difference between race and nationality. Islamist barbarians and their hangers on fail to distinguish between “Israeli” and “Jew” after all.

      • Nat, surely you know that in modern times the term Israeli is used to circumvent the law against racists attacks. In Jew hate terms Israeli and Jew are synonymous. Maybe you don’t go to many such hate fests – you should treat yourself!

  2. Bravo, Richard, for your brave work.

    I agree with AKUS, too, that as many filmers as possible, and the tougher the better, should attend these events. Were I younger and fitter….

    I also agree with AKUS when he compares these to sewer rats. They have no right to argue that they are pro-Palestinian because their violence and behaviour is not in the furtherance of Palestinian rights – rather it gives them an outlet for their hatred of Israel and its Jews, which is why the Palestinians will never get a state of their own if they rely on scum like these to present their case.

  3. This was a shameful incident, and even more shameful is the silence from the SOAS.

    If anyone wants to share their disgust with SOAS management the address is pw2@soas.ac.uk.

    Obviously I would not encourage people to be abusive or threatening, but they should share their concern and ask for th authorities to take action against the people responsibile.

    • SOAS’ silence is shameful but not surprising. After all universities in the UK are having to fight hard to keep themselves afloat and which spineless pro-Vice Chancellor would risk his tenure by fronting up to the cash cows of Islamism who send students to SOAS in droves, and SOAS charges them much more than British born in fees.

      But a line has been drawn in the sand here. There has already been one shameful incident at SOAS, where an Islamist animal behaved according to his lights, and you would think that the university would not want a similar black mark against it, wouldn’t you?

      Well, you’d be wrong. Appeasement of Islamism and worship of Mammon is the name of the game here. SOAS doesn’t care about Jews or others so long as their Islamist sympathisers are kept sweet, pay up and cause them no trouble.

      The pro-Vice Chancellor should resign forthwith. He is plainly not up to the job when he ignores racism in his university.

  4. Well done Richard!

    You have got these pro-Palestinian fascists to show their true colours. They are simply bullies, whose case is so weak they have to resort to violence whenever they are challenged.

    It’s about time we had a government inquiry into intiimidation at SOAS at other universities.

      • The fact that The bird-beak in question reportedly sported unusually large nostrils, which – combined with the identification ring – raised suspicions is certainly not a coincidence.

      • Obviously a Jew-bird based on Bernard Malamud’s prototype, and improved by the Mossad .

        The bird-beak in question reportedly sported “unusually large nostrils,” [a dead-give-away for Jewbirds] which – combined with the identification ring – raised suspicions that the bird was “implanted with a surveillance device” and that it arrived in Turkey as part of an espionage mission.

        “But aren’t you a crow?”
        “Me? I’m a Jewbird.”
        Cohen laughed heartily. “What do you mean by that?”
        The bird began dovening. He prayed without Book or tallith, but with passion. Edie bowed her head though not Cohen. And Maurie rocked back and forth with the prayer, looking up with one wide-open eye.
        When the prayer was done Cohen remarked, “No hat, no phylacteries?”
        “I’m an old radical.”
        “You’re sure you’re not some kind of a ghost or dybbuk?”
        “Not a dybbuk,” answered the bird, “though one of my relatives had such an experience once. It’s all over now, thanks God. They freed her from a former lover, a crazy jealous man. She’s now the mother of two wonderful children.”
        “Birds?” Cohen asked slyly.
        “Why not?”
        “What kind of birds?”
        “Like me. Jewbirds.”

        “Like me. Jewbirds.”

  5. “If you’re wondering whether the abuse hurled at Richard was racist, simply replace “Israeli” with any other identity and repeat the charge. “You’re a typical Arab.” “You’re at typical Black,” etc.”

    Except ‘Arab’ and ‘Black’ refer to races whilst ‘Israeli’ refers to a nationality – quite a different thing. To talk of a typical Frenchman or Italian is commonplace and only regarded as racist by the most politically correct. Why are Israelis so special?.

    • sencar are you really so dumb that you consider the word “Israeli” in this context as a nationality or you are just pretending?

      • peter,
        sencar is just pretending. If you’ve looked at his posts in the past, you’ll recognize that it’s his M.O.

        • “In any context, I’m afraid, ‘israeli’ is a nationality.”

          sencar yes and in the context of racist offences a racial group is defined by the Crown Prosecution Service as, and I quote;

          ” Racial group- this is a legal definition and means any group of people who are defined by reference to their race, colour, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origin.”

          Now which part of that sentence do you fail to understand?

          Do I have to also remind you that a ‘racist incident’ is defined by the Stephen Lawrence Report as ” any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person.”

        • “In any context, I’m afraid, ‘Israeli is a nationality.”
          But in this specific context, it was used both a slander as well as a slur, i.e., a bigoted stereotype coming from the mouths of some real bigots, and accusing a man of being something he isn’t.

          • Oh, and by the way, sencar, who told you that the term Arab refers to a race? Arabs tend to think of themselves as a nationality, i.e., the Arab Nation.

    • Stop splitting hairs, sencar.

      You’d be foaming at the mouth, wouldn’t you, if anyone used “black” or “Arab” as an epithet? I’ll repeat to you what I said to Nat, which concerns what you are conveniently choosing to ignore, that much depends on the context of the remark and this was a rabidly anti-Israel and probably equally rabidly anti-Jewish venue.

      I’ll also repeat that since most of the Islamist frothers and haters at the meeting and their fellow traveller useful idiots (who are useless at being pro-Palestinian until they can stop being anti-Israel) often don’t care to distinguish between “Israeli” and “Jew” and insult both equally your “argument” is nonsensical and disingenuous in this case.

  6. Frankly I’d say Richar Millett deserves a medal just for being willing to sit through a discussion featuring Abdel Bari Atwan.

  7. As for whether the “typical Israeli” line constitutes racial abuse, a crucial factor is always what the accuser is thinking. While sencar is clearly just out for a fight – because obviously there are cases where such a line is just another way of saying “fucking Jew” – it’s not clear cut here.

    In any case: the bloke who said it is one individual who nobody knows anything about.

    The main issue here is why RM wasn’t allowed to film at a public meeting.

    • Nope – you are wrong Pretzelberg.

      In England, Wales, and Scotland, the Public Order Act 1986 prohibits, by its Part 3, expressions of racial hatred, which is defined as hatred against a group of persons by reason of the group’s colour, race, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins. Section 18 of the Act says:

      A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if—
      (a) he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or (b) having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.

      • @ Tony N

        You’re out of your depth in terms of UK racial discrimination law – trust me.

          • What a pathetic, Youtubeesque response. Gets the usual thumbs-up from the usual idiots, of course.

            • If Tony N is wrong then please explain why the entire staff of Nottingham university were once sent for racial awareness training when an Irish chap took offence at someone who told an Irish joke in his presence?

    • As I have said above, pretzelberg, you have to look at the context. Can you imagine this shower being at all polite about Israel or Israelis or Jews given the subject matter and the venue?

      And you are right that another important issue is why Richard was not allowed to film at a public meeting when others were allowed to do so, but that is not difficult to answer. As someone above has said these people hate having the light shone on them and Richard would surely have done that.

      Richard is simply the wrong sort of Jew for them. These Islamists prefer ones they can terrify.

  8. From the whinging and whining on his big ‘scoop’ story, I’d say Richard Millet is probably afraid of his own reflection. I think I would be afraid of looking back at myself and seeing a supporter of oppression and occupation.

    • So in moist-world it’s acceptable to steal someone’s bag, to physically intimidate them because you don’t agree with them, to refuse them permission to film a public event (while allowing others to do so)?

      • Gooner, in moist’s world you can throw people off buildings, bury them alive, burn them in pits, It merits no reaction or moral condemnation if they weren’t the victims of Zionist oppression /Jewish power.

    • Mostly a wanker. You are a typical bully. A fallse hero who would shit themselves if you found yourself in Richard’s position in ‘real’ life.

    • Millett’s reference to having been “physically assaulted” was OTT – although perhaps an understandable emotional reaction given the intimidation (the same excuse cannot be made re. the tweets on the left of this page).

      But where is he “a supporter of oppression and occupation”?

    • Moistly,
      Apparently you were so afraid of my simple question to you that you still haven’t answered.
      I too would be afraid if, like you, I were in thrall to supremacist, racist anti-Semites and their open calls to genocide.

  9. ‘ to steal someone’s bag, to physically intimidate’ – Allegedly.

    I am sure RM will have given us a true account of the events and not presented a one sided view, ahem. I am sure he knows best he is after all a ‘non practising solicitor’

    • To MH
      1) Go to the blog
      2) Watch the films
      3) See for yourself the intimidation, racist abuse and his bag being stolen. (Its all on there.)
      4) Apologise

      • intimidation – but RM is soooo brave going onto the jaws of the lion and all, surely he can deal with a bit of intimidation

        racist abuse – being called an Israeli is now abuse? OK agreed

        bag being stolen – now, I’m not a ‘non-practising solicitor’ but even I know to steal is to ‘permanently deprive’, there seemed to be no permanence and the only deprivation was the rights of Palestinians RM is sooooo keen to downplay.

        • So, to sum up – in moistly’s world it IS acceptable to be physically intimidated, have your bag stolen (I am a practicing solicitor – the law is that you have to have the intention to permanently deprive the owner of their item – if you change your mind later and return it, that will help mitigate your sentence, but it does in no way excuse you of the crime. in any event, we have no idea how he had his bag returned, perhaps the thief simply dumped it and it was returned by a well-meaning bystander) etc, as long as you are either an Israeli or a supporter of Israel.

          Just as long as we’ve got that straight.

        • I realise you are a troll, but I am intrigued to know how Miller was depriving Palestinians and their lickspittles of their rights by the act of listening to them.

          Of course, the uncharitable explaination is that they didn’t want an unbiased observer listening to their vile outpouring of racist hatred, recording it for posterity and circulating it to a wider audience, explding the myth of the Palestinian as victim and revealing the truth of their brutal agression.

        • Does it ever occur to you, moistly, that such intimidation should never have occurred, would never have occurred at a location other than at a meeting of Islamofascists?. I call them Islamofascists because that is what they are, and their behaviour is reminiscent of Hitler’s thugs in the 1930’s towards anyone who didn’t agree with them or who they considered to be a threat.

          Why are they so afraid, do you think, of being recorded? Would Richard have cramped their style? Might they have had to deprive their slavering audience (were you among them?) of their fix of Israel/Jew-hatred if he had remained and filmed it and disseminated what went on?

          These charmers depend upon apathy/ignorance and overheightened emotion for their success. That is why they couldn’t allow Richard to burst their bubble and substitute reality

    • moistly, if you can’t believe the evidence of your own eyes it’s time to go into seclusion after a consultation with a psychiatrist.

      I can well believe that Richard may have felt nervous in the face of these thugs and this is shown in the tone of his voice during the recordings, but the fact is that he recorded their behaviour as it happened and that behaviour WAS threatening and abusive.

      You would probably p*ss yourself under similar circumstances. Richard, however, stood up to them and had the presence of mind to call the police.

    • So what you’re saying is that Ward Kayal and Thaira Zoabi, if they even exist, are definitely telling the truth about their undocumented accounts, but “poor old Richy”, with his pesky video evidence, is lying. Hmm.

      • No, gooner – he is simply repeating the mindless guff and supposition as fact from a distinctly questionable source. That is moistly default position.

    • No, good old Richard, moistly. His account of his experience is about to go viral and it will be accepted by intelligent people (ie not people like you).

      It seems that SOAS and the speakers and organisers shot themselves in the collective foot and it’s all recorded on camera.

      Poor moistly – wrong again.

      • ‘His account of his experience is about to go viral’

        Oh pleeeease don’t make me laugh, viral is not some 2 bit Israeli apologist websites posting it.

        Let’s just leave it to the police and the CPS shall we?

        • Is that an admission of defeat, moistly?

          Video evidence is akin to eye witness testimony moistly.

    • Wow, you are really something to behold. Your head is so stuffed with rubbish you can’t see a straight line ahead of you. Why don’t you curl up and keep quiet.

  10. I’ve just been reading about the IDF’s meeting passive resistance during the first intifada with multiple instances of brutality and torture. In comparison to this the mild humiliation of RM fades into insignificance. Yes, if he was ill-treated, he should not have been, but for people who support the inhuman treatment of Palestinians by the Israeli apartheid state to make a martyr of himi is just farcical.

    • you are now keeping the world record of giving a brand new horizon to the expression “whatabotery”. The intifada never was “passive”, the brutality was a perfectly legitimate reaction to the demonstrators’ violence, but what it has to do with the present day Jew-abusing in London thousands of miles and a quarter century later is beyond me.

      • (peter, you can’t blame sencar. He/she/it cannot think for itself or at all critically. Note that it doesn’t provide the source of what he read. It was probably as biased as he is. He couldn’t bear to read opposing accounts and reach a conclusion synthesised from them all and present such balanced findings here)

    • And BTW calling Israel an apartheid state only proves that you are an antisemite turd.

      • The long list of people who have said Israel practices apartheid. includes such well-known anti-semites as:

        General Michael BenYair, former Israeli Attorney General;
        Shulamit Aloni and Yossi Sarid, former Israeli ministers of education;
        Meron Benvenist, former deputy mayor of Jerusalem;
        Alon Liel, former Israeli Ambassador to South Africa;
        and of course good old Desmond Tutu.

        Corporate bodies coming to the same conclusion include:

        B’Tselem;
        The Association for Civil Rights in Israel;
        and the Haaretz editorial board.

            • Oh ho!!! The old “I’m not the only one who thinks so” and look at the sources! Now I know why sencar is such a lousy researcher (have you ever actually been to libraries, sencar, rather than relied on wiki?)

              He even quotes that well-known paragon of honest and even-handed reporting, Chris McGreal! What a joke!

              sencar, are you aware of how ridiculous you come across, and if you are, do you even care?

              • My primary source for all the names is Norman Finkelstein’s latest book. Now I know what you think of NF but even his worst enemies recognise his qualities as a researcher, and he’s not likely to lie about quotations. As for using Guardian sources, it is obvious that if you are looking for criticisms of Israel’s hard right policies you are likely to find them in the liberal press; that says nothing about the accuracy of simple facts such as quotations, which can be checked by anyone.

                I notice that you don’t actually dispute the truth of whwt I say, just my sources.

        • Aloni and Sarid are two failed politicians disowned by their own party and they are venting their bitterness on every possible forum, both of them are the favorites of neo-nazi websites – they are full of Aloni/Sarid quotes
          Desmond Tutu is an outright and well known Jew-hater
          B’Tselem is a far-left anti-Israeli organisation
          the editorial board of the Ha’aretz newspaper – a wonderful collection of far left Jewish Israel haters
          Alon Liel is an obviously sick and senile idiot calling Israel an apartheid state because of a draft bill forbidding foreign funding of anti-Israel organisations (a law less strict than the same one in the US)
          Bienvenist is exactly the same – calling Israel an apartheid state why? because Sharon’s plan of separating Israel from Gaza
          Ben-Yair said that Israel is in danger to create an apartheid regime on the Occupied Territories – not in Israel and “it is in danger to become one.

          So to make a long story short you proved again that you are an antisemite turd – now it can be added that you are an ignorant and lying one.

      • Yes, Peter, sencar is an antisemite, but also an ignoramus who doesn’t actually know what apartheid was, much less that it cannot be applied to Israel.

        Did I read here once that sencar is a researcher? Oh my, I wouldn’t trust this one to research the route to the lavatory.

  11. Very courageous of Richard.
    SOAS shows just the behaviour of people who have something to hide from the public.
    It is a pity that London turned into a hotbed of terror supporting organisations.