General Antisemitism

Yes, George Galloway is antisemitic. #JeSuisHadley


On Feb. 5th we posted about an episode of BBC’s Question Time in which Guardian executive editor Jonathan Freedland accused George Galloway, the pro-Hamas, pro-Hezbollah MP from Bradford West, of fueling antisemitism with his conspiracy-ridden, obsessive hatred of Israel.

gal_2407919b

George Galloway, MP

Galloway responded on the program to Freedland’s accusation by lashing out at the entire British Jewish community, and has since moaned that he was unfairly treated by the BBC, and ‘set up’.

Evidently Galloway is still upset over being called out for his antisemitism. A Jewish Guardian journalist named Hadley Freeman – while responding to a tweet by former Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald (naturally) defending Galloway – tweeted the following:

freeman

Shortly, thereafter:

galloway

Freeman subsequently deleted her tweet.

Whilst you can read more about the “vague” British law which Galloway is exploiting to silence the Guardian journalist here, we hope to galvanize those among you passionate about both free speech and combatting antisemitism to rally around Freeman, and to expose Galloway as the anti-Semite we believe him to be.  

(It should first be noted that when we accuse someone of being antisemitic, we’re using the EUMC Working Definition of Antisemitism as our guide.)

Though Galloway has largely couched his hatred and bizarre conspiracy theories in ‘anti-Zionist’ terms, let’s be clear:

When Galloway openly calls for “the destruction of the political state of Israel”, he’s not only sanctioning the end of the only Jewish state in the world, but advocating a position which will all but certainly lead to the ethnic cleansing of millions of Jews.

When Galloway expresses support for violent, antisemitic extremist movements like Hamas and Hezbollah, he’s in effect endorsing their insidious Jew hatred.

When Galloway said he was “enthralled” by Gilad Atzmon’s book The Wandering Who? (described by CST as “probably the most antisemitic book published in this country in recent years.”), he was legitimizing – if not outright endorsing – Atzmon’s neo-Nazi style anti-Jewish racism.

And, when Galloway walked out of a debate with an Israeli Jew, declaring “I don’t recognize Israel and I don’t debate Israelis”, as when he declared his district an “Israeli-free zone, he was not only ostracizing and demonizing six million Jews, but sending a message to the millions of non-Israeli Jews in the world who are Zionists that they are morally beyond the pale.

This latter point is extremely important, because expressions of violent antisemitism have historically been preceded by such ostracism, the nurturing of a climate in which Jews were rendered (to use Daniel Goldhagen’s term) “socially dead”.

Moreover, as attacks on synagogues and kosher shops in Europe (by “anti-Israel activists”) during the summer war, and efforts by BDS advocates in South Africa to expel Jewish students from Durban University, demonstrate, the moral distinction between the statements “Zionists are our misfortune” and “Jews are our misfortune” is increasingly meaningless, insofar as the lives of actual Jews are concerned. 

In short, you cannot putatively like Jews in the abstract, while demonizing and delegitimizing the overwhelming majority of real living Jews, and claim innocence when charged with antisemitism.

Hadley Freeman was right. George Galloway has said and done plenty of things that cross the line from anti-Israel to antisemitic.

Say it, share it, tweet it: #JeSuisHadley

155 replies »

  1. I think he wanted Bradford to be an Israeli free zone. If he tried making London an Israeli free zone, they’d never find his body.

    • this is the second time in a few weeks in the EU that antisemites are going to court for this. In Germany to Arabs were done for antisemitism for screaming antizionist slogans last year during a demonstration. For the judge it was proven that antizionism is the new antisemitism. I think they may have even gone to jail for this.

      • If we’re talking about Essen, the one man was given a three-month sentence – unfortunately on probation. He’s submitted an appeal, although that might end up landing him a heavier sentence.
        btw: apparently he’s of Turkish descent, not Arab.

    • another thought is that the judiciary needs to set an example, as more and more antisemitism masquerading as free speech antizionism spreads across Europe.
      GG needs to be convicted. this may be a chance.

  2. Availing of the chance to disseminate HP piece

    The halacha of George Galloway

    Excerpt

    ‘Nevertheless, it seems that Galloway specifically wanted to have Masterson prosecuted for ‘religiously aggravated assault’. This is the clear implication of

    ‘Had the charge of religiously aggravated assault not been dropped I’m sure [his sentence] would have been considerably longer. I fail to see why that charge was dropped given that he was wearing an IDF (Israel Defence Force) T-shirt and screaming about Israel and me.’ urlm.in/tgbd

    The ‘religion’ intended can only have been Judaism. Galloway is desperate to represent his assailant as Jewish, and hence waft blame or culpability in the direction of British Jews.

    But look at what Galloway does: he interprets Masterson’s support for Israel as his very Judaism and Jewishness, exactly what he denies he does elsewhere, as we know. Such is ‘a dangerous game’, he glowers at the Jews of Finchley, especially, ‘I beg you‘, in London.’

    http://hurryupharry.org/2015/02/10/the-halachah-of-george-galloway/

  3. A legal expert’s answer to Media Lens’ demand of Freeman for ‘plenty’ of examples of Galloway’s crossing the line

    ‘Plenty would be more than a few, five would be a good number, though possibly three.

    I would take the QT video, his whole response to Masterson, his refusal to debate an Israeli in Oxford (though he has debated with many Arab and Christian Israeli Passport holders), Declaring Bradford an Israeli free zone (but he means only Jewish Israelis) which itself would be unlawful under equalities legislation.

    I think that is plenty. Also the @013 Defamation Act (GG is not paying attention to legal changes) strengthens fair comment in the public interest defences (particularly protecting Journalists) and GG would have to show actual intended Malice and really serious harm.

    Not a chance for GG,’

  4. Please read my piece on Galloway’s characterizing of Neil Masterson, and appreciate how problematical are its implications for Galloway’s professed stance.

  5. BRING IT ON !
    Let Galloway go to the High Court and issue Libel proceedings . The fool will be ruined within 12 months .
    It will serve as a precedent to all the other anti Semites out there .

    Its easy to make a threat , its harder to carry it out .

    If there are any MPs with the necessary kahoonas out there they can under parliamentary privilege can call him whatever they want to and they cannot be sued for libel .

    The more that Galloway is called out as anti Semite and racist then he cannot sue everyone .

    For the avoidance of doubt –
    Galloway In my opinion : you are anti-Semitic , racist , a bigot and corrupt . You have funded terrorism . My lawyers are waiting if he wants to sue .

  6. He who treats others unfairly, so should he also be treated. A sound lesson in consequences for the dishonourable member for Bradford West.

  7. Of course Galloway is a notorious and obvious anti-Semite. And like all these hateful bigots, they squeal like stuck pigs when outed–which is exactly how they should be treated and exposed.
    The racism of Galloway and his fellow traveler Israel-bashers is made beyond obvious when 1 looks at their track record–how many times has someone like Galloway, with a big big mouth about Israel and its imagined wrongdoings–said anything about the very REAL and clear human rights violators in the Mideast, e.g. Syria, Iran, ISIS, and all their brutal murders? Oh never? Gee, why would that be?
    Tells you everything you need to know about the likes of hateful buttwipes like Galloway.

  8. CiFWatch calls to rally around Guardian columnist!
    And rightly so.

    Still – the news will be hard to swallow for those here who insist that the G. is the modern-day Der Stürmer.

    • Nice one Adam

      It would be, err, nice others in here to acknowledge that the two most prominent attacks on Galloway have been by GUARDIAN journalists.

      PS we’ll see if Galloway has actually issued legal proceedings or is it yet more bluster from the bullshitmeister.

      • Noted but disagree. He has had 3 prominent attacks and 2 broken ribs .

        He isn’t suing the Gooniadian . he is aiming at one of the few Jewish Journos [ and seemingly best friend of Peter Bradshaw] who work for that rag in a personal capacity . It would be more interesting to see if the Gooniadian backs up their journo or throws her to the hyenas.

        He uses a firm of lawyers up in Bradford called Chambers Solicitors to issue his threats . I do not know which Counsel they use . But IMAO I don’t think any lawyer would say that his case is a winner .

        He has not suffered any loss of reputation , His reputation is in the toilet already , except with Iran and jihadis .

        If I was Ms Freeman’s lawyers , any writ Galloway issues for libel , I would apply for security for costs to be paid in by Galloway in advance of the court case .
        When I perused Galloway’s twitter page , he seemed to have a problem raising campaign funds this time round

        Even in the remote circumstances he won the court case , he would likely receive nominal damages and the issue would be court costs of litigation , which at the High Court could easily be hundreds of thousands of pounds .

        • “He has had 3 prominent attacks and 2 broken ribs” – Ho Ho. But I knew someone would pick me up when I mistakenly left out the word ‘Recent’.

          As for the other comments – you know more about libel law than me but I do know that the only ones who win usually are the lawyers. I’m not surprised that Hadley deleted the tweet.

  9. In my opinion, Goerge Galloway has frequently expressed views which are anti-semitic, according to the definition above.
    There

  10. I wonder whether the Guardian will be as supportive of employee Hadley Freeman’s right to free speech as they were to Snowden’s and Manning’s?

    Not much chance I imagine when its their own pounds on the line if his lawsuit goes against her.

    • Tricky balance that. Legally she is ‘publishing’ those comments on Twitter under her own name and has nothing to do with the Guardian per Se. So its highly unlikely that the Guardian will be drawn in to court unless they, in effect, repeat the alleged defamation.

      But if you are wondering how many £ the Guardian will voluntarily spend to support her case…that’s a tough one.

    • Remember when anti-Semites were actually proud of their batshit craziness? Henry Ford. Charles Lindburgh. Men with gumption albeit pea sized brains.

      Today’s anti-Semites are worthless fucks compared to those jokers, dontchathink? Redefining history means so very little when you refuse to admit your own hatefilled tendencies.

      Check this, George and Glenn: I’m a PROUD Zionist AND I STILL believe in the 2-state solution.

      (The funny thing about a GG head explosion is that it’s remarkably like popping a whitehead. Makes that, a whitesheethead.)

  11. George Galloway. Isn’t an antisemite. That is far too polite a description. He is a Jew-hating scumbag. And he can sue me too.

      • Most what?

        Anti-Semites?

        Nazi sympathizers?

        Moronic dipshits?

        Islamist nutballs?

        Uneducated pea sized brain idiots?

        Sibyl Nazis?

        I know…. Most morons think Israel is an illegal entity. Therefore, we should adhere to most morons because they’re special.

        You’re not special. You’re a Sibyl Nazi. Meaning what? Let’s start with someone too stupid to actually figure out what being a Sibyl Nazi really means.

        The joke, as always, is you.

        • There was a view prevalent in the West, especially amongst Zionist commentators, that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was very complicated. Such people were fond of shaking their heads and saying that the dispute was impossible to understand because of history, the two sides’ differing narratives, the mystical attachment to land, the Bible, the Holocaust, strong emotions, the Middle Eastern temperament and a host of other things thrown like so much dust in the eyes. Views predicated on this premise served not only to obscure the real situations but also forced on one the conclusion that the solution to such a problem was bound to be no less complex and probably impossible to define, let alone achieve.

          In reality, nothing was further from the truth.

          The issue was in essence quite simple: a European settler movement that ineluctably displaced an indigenous population and wilfully denied its basic rights, inevitably provoking resistance and incessant strife. The obvious way to end that strife was to redress the injustice done to the indigenous people as far as practically possible, and to find a reasonable accommodation of the needs and rights of everyone involved.

          The parameters of such a solution were clear, and the only difficulty was how to implement them, not because of their complexity, but because of Israel’s obdurate clinging to its settler, colonialist ideology, Zionism, and the Western support that allowed or even encouraged it to do so.

          • I think you’ve got BDS: Bowel Deficiency Syndrome. When all you do is shit out of your mouth.

            All peace deals have come from Zionists. That’s a well known fact.

            And you, Sibyl, are pathetic. And weak. And maybe the real Peter Bradshaw should sue your White Power ass to the stone ages seeing as how you’re implying he’s a racist moron.

            • This is intended as a response to ‘Bradshaw’, but I may have pressed the wrong ‘reply’ button, k, in which case I apologise.

              That’s rubbish for a start. Palestinian Christians and Muslims weren’t aliens on Mars for 2000 years. They were part of imperial Christendom and Islam respectively, with traditional Christian and Islamic views and attitudes towards Jews, namely their being a people exiled and dispossessed for rejecting Jesus and the prophets, in which state they were happy for imperial Christianity and Islam to keep Jews.

              A consequence of that normative Christian and Islamic belief is that, in the 19th and 20th centuries, most European, North African and Asian Jews were regarded less as nationally European or , say, Arab, than nationally Jewish, that is to say, Judaean, that is to say, ‘Palestinian’. With a further result’s being their effective alienation or expulsion even from the lands of exile, in Old World Christendom and Islam. Before 1914 this was mostly to America, after 1914 mostly to Palestine, or what became Israel. Hence the two largest Jewish communities today.

              Palestinian Muslims and Christians resisted Jews living in the land in above the tiny numbers imperial Christianity and Islam both mandated and maintained. When Jews began to slip through the cracks of the crumbling Ottoman Islamic empire, their nascent national movement evolved from successfully lobbying the Sublime Porte to ban all Jewish immigration and land sales to Jews, to seeking to expel or eliminate the Jews of Palestine during the Mandate period.

              By 1937 the leader of the Palestinian Muslim and Christian national movement declared that most Palestinian Jews would have to go, one way or the other.

              This was the enemy, along with its Arab allies, Palestinian then Israeli Jews. Yes Zionist Jews committed expulsions, but the same or worse was threatened against them, and periodically executed e.g. the Jews expelled from Hebron in 1929, what became East Jerusalem in the 1930s, every area conquered by the Arabs 1948-49.

              I think this complicates your overly simplistic narrative, somewhat.

            • I have a longer comment below, but this

              ‘The issue was in essence quite simple: a European settler movement that ineluctably displaced an indigenous population and wilfully denied its basic rights, inevitably provoking resistance and incessant strife.’

              The European cultural Christians expelling or alienating ‘their’ Jews clearly didn’t regard them as ‘European’, no more than did Arab Muslims’ expelling or alienating ‘their’ Jews didn’t think them properly ‘Arab’.

              Most European, North African, Asian and, above all, Palestinian Christians and Muslims regarded Jews as properly a people exiled and dispossessed for most of the last 2000 years, in which state of stateless they were to remain.

              That is why Jews returned specifically thither: pretty much everyone, including Palestinian Christians and Muslims, said they came thence.

              That is also why Palestinian Christians and Muslims did not want Jews living among them in above the tiny numbers imperial Christianity and Islam had mandated, and so resisted an above tiny Jewish presence, often highly discriminated against. A resistance which grew from exclusion to then seeking to expel or eliminate the Jews of Palestine, and then Israel.

              That is the context of the expulsions of the war of 48-49: Palestinian Jews had to defend themselves against enemies who more or less openly declared their mandatory expulsion.

              The solution is 2 states for 2 peoples, with 2 rights of return, division of Jerusalem, old and new, borders on the 1967 lines or with 1:1 territorial compensation.

              Unfortunately there is a real question mark as to whether either current leadership is truly committed to pursuing such a path.

              • “Confusion about the origins of the conflict all too often has obscured Americans’ understanding of its true dimension. It began as a conflict resulting from immigrants struggling to displace the local majority population. All else is derivative from this basic reality.”

                – Donald Neff, former Senior Editor, Time Magazine, Fallen Pillars: U.S. Policy towards Palestine and Israel since 1945

                • “It began as a conflict resulting from immigrants struggling to displace the local majority population”

                  You mean when the Roman Empire as a deliberate act of reprisal against the Jewish revolt decided to eradicate the Temple and Jerusalem itself?

                • That explanation is simplistic and reductionist: Jews could have lived in large number throughout original British ruled Palestine, which originally included Transjordan, near 75% of that original area.

                  That was closed to all Jewish immigration in 1920, in accord with Arab wishes. Thereafter Jews could only settle east of the Jordan. They did so legally, buying land for the highest prices in the world. By 1948 they had been able to settle near 400 000 on less than 7% of the available area.

                  Had Palestinian and other Arab Muslims and Christians accepted partition, there would have been no expulsions or dispossessions. The last 70 years would have been very different. But they rejected partition, their and their allies’ going to war to abort any Jewish state in the womb, borne by a discourse that was more or less openly expulsionist or eliminationist towards the Jews of Palestine, then Israel, and remained so until at least 1968, and arguably even up to 1988, in the case of the PLO, to this very day, in the case of Hamas.

                  Those who complain how unfair or unjust this all was remind me of the more idiotic Zionists or Jewish nationalists today who I have heard complain who unjust or unfair was the original Roman destruction of the temple, and loss of Jerusalem, as though it magically happened without Jews’ first disastrously deciding to revolt against the imperial power.

                  Fortunately there is a solution: 2 states, for 2 peoples, with 2 rights of return, division of Jerusalem, old and new, borders on the 1967 lines or with 1:1 territorial compensation.

                • Isn’t it interesting that in a 1998 article indicting Israel’s alleged warmongering from infancy, Neff cannot seem to mention that Palestinian Jews accepted UNGR 181, Palestinian and their Arab Muslim and Christian allies rejected it, and went to war to thwart it, or worse.

                  http://www.wrmea.com/backissues/0598/9805080.html

                  Another individual whose magical thinking erases from history the reasons Palestinian then Israeli Jews had to go to war in the first place.

                • You’re an idiot, ‘bonehead’, in my post, I clearly acknowledge Zionist Jewish expulsions occurred.

          • European settler movement –
            No.
            Sephardic Jews made up a half of the early Israeli population.

            indigenous population –
            No.
            Some were,many were much more recent.
            Apart from the Jews of course who were the oldest indigenous population.

            wilfully denied its basic rights –
            No.
            The Arabs rejected their own state because that meant recognizing a Jewish state.
            It’s basic racism.

            Western support –
            Israel has had support,and lack of support,and opposition from all quarters.

          • “the mystical attachment to land,”

            Yes, that “Palestinian,” (more soberly and historically known as Arab), side of the argument usually gets lost in all your Israel bashing. The mythical attachment of a mythical nation’s mythical history. Thank you for including it this time, Petey!

              • “Landy-Stealy Jews:”

                Thanks for ending the pretense about “Zionists” at least and coming out as the full-fledged anti-Semite that you are.
                The Jewish People are indigenous to the land of Israel. That history goes back several millennia, well before your ancestors, aka rape suspects, began chattering in English.

                • Janet, the Tanakh is not only the oldest ancient account by ancient Palestinians about who and how they think they are and came to be, written in the oldest Palestinian script and language that has survived, it is the only such account. It is the Jews and Samaritans who have preserved it.

                  It is ultimately the source of both Christianity and even Islam, which report essentially the same historical accounts, and which are, may I remind you, the faith cultures and identities of both Palestinian Christians and Muslims, who even by their own original and traditional narratives (as opposed to their modernly revised nationalist ones) arrived later. They thought they had been each chosen by God to replace their de-selected predecessor in turn. That they came later didn’t matter to them.

                  A ‘Palestinian’ expert, Janet,rather than a mere Jew-hater or antisemite, ought to have known that.

          • That’s rubbish for a start. Palestinian Christians and Muslims weren’t aliens on Mars for 2000 years. They were part of imperial Christendom and Islam respectively, with traditional Christian and Islamic views and attitudes towards Jews, namely their being a people exiled and dispossessed for rejecting Jesus and the prophets, in which state they were happy for imperial Christianity and Islam to keep Jews.

            A consequence of that normative Christian and Islamic belief is that, in the 19th and 20th centuries, most European, North African and Asian Jews were regarded less as nationally European or , say, Arab, than nationally Jewish, that is to say, Judaean, that is to say, ‘Palestinian’. With a further result’s being their effective alienation or expulsion even from the lands of exile, in Old World Christendom and Islam. Before 1914 this was mostly to America, after 1914 mostly to Palestine, or what became Israel. Hence the two largest Jewish communities today.

            Palestinian Muslims and Christians resisted Jews living in the land in above the tiny numbers imperial Christianity and Islam both mandated and maintained. When Jews began to slip through the cracks of the crumbling Ottoman Islamic empire, their nascent national movement evolved from successfully lobbying the Sublime Porte to ban all Jewish immigration and land sales to Jews, to seeking to expel or eliminate the Jews of Palestine during the Mandate period.

            By 1937 the leader of the Palestinian Muslim and Christian national movement declared that most Palestinian Jews would have to go, one way or the other.

            This was the enemy, along with its Arab allies, Palestinian then Israeli Jews. Yes Zionist Jews committed expulsions, but the same or worse was threatened against them, and periodically executed e.g. the Jews expelled from Hebron in 1929, what became East Jerusalem in the 1930s, every area conquered by the Arabs 1948-49.

            I think this complicates your overly simplistic narrative, somewhat.

            • ” Palestinian Christians and Muslims weren’t aliens on Mars for 2000 years.”

              2000 years ago was the year 15. “Palestine” was known as Judea and neither Christianity nor Islam existed, nor did the Palestinians even by the usual stretching of that term for propaganda purposes. Arabs were somewhere else, Arabia I believe. There were also no Americans or Englishmen here on earth at that time. Go figure.

              • i used ‘2000 years’ as an approximation, meaning ‘most of the last 2000 years’. You’ll find Zionist Jews did too in the early 20th century, also as an approximation. It is a common enough usage.

                The first person to define his place of origin as ‘Palestine’ is the Christian Justin Martyr in the 2nd century, a Greco-Roman colonial citizen of Samarian Flavia Neapolis, and Christians have been there for most of the last 2000 years: their diocese comport with the borders of Palaestiniae Prima, Secunda and Tertia, witnessing to their connection with antiquity.

                Muslims somewhat less, but still the majority of time. Between them, imperial Christianity and Islam alternated rule thereof.

                In the late antique period, ‘Palestine’ was normative usage among Greek and Latin speaking Christians.

                ‘Palestinian’ is a convenient geographical descriptor to use for the peoples of the reason, and was and remains normative usage among Zionist or Israeli Jewish historians of the period e.g. Amnon Cohen’s excellent ‘Palestine in the 18th century’ or Moshe Gil’s magisterial ‘Palestine: 634-1099’.

                You should try thinking before writing, and reading before responding to something.

                Whose ‘propaganda’ do you think I write? Have you even read beyond the first few lines of my piece?

              • Josephus, in the late 1st century, sometimes uses the term ‘Palestine’ to refer to the area of the lands of Judah, Israel or Judaea, after Herodotus’ usage to the same effect:

                Josephus, Ant. VIII 10.3: Now Herodotus of Halicarnassus mentions this expedition, having only mistaken the king’s name; and [in saying that] he made war upon many other nations also, and brought Syria of Palestine into subjection, and took the men that were therein prisoners without fighting. Now it is manifest that he intended to declare that our nation was subdued by him; for he saith that he left behind him pillars in the land of those that delivered themselves up to him without fighting, and engraved upon them the secret parts of women. Now our king Rehoboam delivered up our city without fighting. He says withal that the Ethiopians learned to circumcise their privy parts from the Egyptians, with this addition, that the Phoenicians and Syrians that live in Palestine confess that they learned it of the Egyptians. Yet it is evident that no other of the Syrians that live in Palestine, besides us alone, are circumcised. But as to such matters, let every one speak what is agreeable to his own opinion.

                Josephus, Ant. XX 11.2: I shall now, therefore, make an end here of my Antiquities; after the conclusion of which events, I began to write that account of the war; and these Antiquities contain what hath been delivered down to us from the original creation of man, until the twelfth year of the reign of Nero, as to what hath befallen the Jews, as well in Egypt as in Syria and in Palestine.

                Herodotus had of course so described the region in the mid to late 5th century BCE: Herodotus, Hist. III 14: Now the only entrance into Egypt is by this desert: the country from Phoenicia to the borders of the city Cadytis belongs to the people called the Palaestine Syrians.

                ‘Cadytis’ is generally thought Herodotus’ term for Jerusalem, probably representing a cognate with ‘K D SH’.

              • It’s true that most of those that lived in the region Greeks often called ‘Palestine’ i.e. Jews and Samaritans did not not, up to the 2nd century, themselves call it ‘Palestine’, rather ‘the land of Israel, Judah/Judea or Samaria’. But it was a term for it that preceded the actual provincial establishment of ‘Palestine’ by several centuries.

                • any turd-burglar that quotes from the bible, at length (!! lol !!) needs to get a life.

                  jezzus, did someone kick you off the debating team when you was in skool?

                  lol. idiot.

          • That’s rubbish for a start. Palestinian Christians and Muslims weren’t aliens on Mars for 2000 years. They were part of imperial Christendom and Islam respectively, with traditional Christian and Islamic views and attitudes towards Jews, namely their being a people exiled and dispossessed for rejecting Jesus and the prophets, in which state they were happy for imperial Christianity and Islam to keep Jews.

            A consequence of that normative Christian and Islamic belief is that, in the 19th and 20th centuries, most European, North African and Asian Jews were regarded less as nationally European or , say, Arab, than nationally Jewish, that is to say, Judaean, that is to say, ‘Palestinian’. With a further result’s being their effective alienation or expulsion even from the lands of exile, in Old World Christendom and Islam. Before 1914 this was mostly to America, after 1914 mostly to Palestine, or what became Israel. Hence the two largest Jewish communities today.

            Palestinian Muslims and Christians resisted Jews living in the land in above the tiny numbers imperial Christianity and Islam both mandated and maintained. When Jews began to slip through the cracks of the crumbling Ottoman Islamic empire, their nascent national movement evolved from successfully lobbying the Sublime Porte to ban all Jewish immigration and land sales to Jews, to seeking to expel or eliminate the Jews of Palestine during the Mandate period.

            By 1937 the leader of the Palestinian Muslim and Christian national movement declared that most Palestinian Jews would have to go, one way or the other.

            This was the enemy, along with its Arab allies, Palestinian then Israeli Jews. Yes Zionist Jews committed expulsions, but the same or worse was threatened against them, and periodically executed e.g. the Jews expelled from Hebron in 1929, what became East Jerusalem in the 1930s, every area conquered by the Arabs 1948-49.

            I think this complicates your overly simplistic narrative, somewhat.

            • Ah I see you have mistakenly ‘copied and pasted’ the same piece of, historically and factually incorrect, bullshit twice.
              Come back when you have an original thought in your head.
              On the evidence of your ‘post’ and ‘moniker’ I will not hold my breath waiting.

              • It was an accident, because although directly responding to ‘Peter Bradshaw’, the nature of the thread meant it was posted far below him, making me think that I had perhaps made a mistake.

                As for your other criticisms, see my response to Jeff.

                • To ‘copy and paste’ the works of others is intellectually challenged to say the least.

                  Now do you have any original thoughts of your own?

                • “[T]he story of 1948… is the simple but horrific story of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine… Retrieving it from oblivion is incumbent upon us, not just as a greatly overdue act of historiographical reconstruction or professional duty; it is… the very first step we must take if we ever want reconciliation to have a chance, and peace to take root, in the torn lands of Palestine and Israel.”

                  – Ilan Pappe, Israeli Historian, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine

                • And I have cited directly several primary sources. You have cited none whatsoever.

                  In fact you have not told me which particular points you find of mine inaccurate or why.

                  All you have said, en effait, is ‘You are wrong’ (nor how or why), providing no details as to why or how whatsoever.

                  Moreover you have just accused me of copying and pasting the work of others, without even telling me whom I am allegedly copying and pasting.

                  Re ‘intellectually challenged’, Sir Giraldus, I think you need to look into the mirror.

                • ‘Bibi Bonehead’

                  And Palestinian Arab Muslims and Christians need to be honest about their discrimination against Jews before the Mandate, as well as the anti-Jewish exclusionism, expulsionism and eliminationism of their national/nationalist movement subsequently.

                  Truth and reconciliation works both ways: it’s not just for Jews, but even for the Muslims and Christians in any given situation.

        • go to artistsforpalestine.org.uk.
          Peter Kosminsky, Mike Leigh, Jimmy McGovern, Phyllida Lloyd, Max Stafford-Clark, Will Alsop OBE, John Berger, Miriam Margolyes, Maggie Steed, Riz Ahmed, Anna Carteret, Jeremy Hardy, Brian Eno, Richard Ashcroft, Gillian Slovo, China Miéville, Aminatta Forna, Hari Kunzru, Liz Lochhead, Hanan Al-Shaykh, Peter Ahrends, David Calder, Caryl Churchill, Sacha Craddock, Selma Dabbagh, Ken Loach, Roger Michell, April De Angelis, Andy de la Tour, Mike Hodges, Rachel Holmes, Ann Jungman, Kika Markham, Simon McBurney, Andrew O’Hagan, Courttia Newland, Michael Radford, Lynne Reid Banks, Kamila Shamsie, Alexei Sayle, Roger Waters, Mark Thomas, Susan Wooldridge, Laura Mulvey, Pauline Melville, Khalid Abdalla, Bidisha, Nicholas Blincoe, Leah Borrromeo, Haim Bresheeth, Victoria Brittain, Niall Buggy, Tam Dean Burn, Jonathan Burrows, Taghrid Choucair-Vizoso, Ian Christie, Liam Cunningham, Ivor Dembina, Shane Dempsey, Patrick Driver, Okin Earl, Leon Rosselson, Sally El Hosaini, Paul Laverty, Eyal Sivan, John Smith, Mitra Tabrizian, Siobhan Redmond, Ian Rickson, Tom Leonard, Sonja Linden, David Mabb, Rose Issa, Gareth Evans, Alisa Lebow, Annie Firbank, James Floyd, Jane Frere, Kadija George, Bob Giles, Mel Gooding, Tony Graham, Penny Woolcock, Omar Robert Hamilton, James Holcombe, Adrian Hornsby, John Keane, Brigid Keenan, Hannah Khalil, Shahid Khan, Sabrina Mahfouz, Sarah McDade, Jonathan Munby, Lizzie Nunnery, Rebecca O’Brien, Timothy Pottier, Maha Rahwanji, Ravinder Randhawa, Leila Sansour, Seni Seneviratne, Anna Sherbany, Eyal Sivan, Kareem Samara, Cat Villiers, Esther Wilson, Emily Young, Andrea Luka Zimmerman, Jeremy Page, Sarah Streatfeild, Colin Darke, Russell Mills, Elaine Di Campo, Treasa O’Brien

      • Agreed, but your punctuation is wrong. The correct statement would be:
        ” He objects to Israeli foreign policy, as do most sorry chumps.”

          • Quoting Putin’s private TV network which specializes in misinformation in the war on information. See Ukraine…..
            nice try.

            • Finkelstein hasn’t a clue about international law….he just parrots propaganda.
              Neither it seems does the so-called expert ,Amir Oren. But then he’s from the Ha’aretz newspaper…..Israel’s Guardian equivalent. Need one say more?
              Suggest they both read Howard Grief’s work “The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law”.
              The best & most authoritative work on the subject.

            • Yup. Palestinian Warriors = Junior High School Mom Jokester

              You guys have been digging your holes for decades. And, like Hitler, it’ll become your bunkers when you finally decide to eat the bullet because there are just too many Jews on this planet.

              You think you’re insulting us, Sibyl, but we really are just amazed at your batshit desperation. But, shit, if CNN loves you….

      • He certainly does, particularly Israel’s right to self defence.
        Clever that….bombard the Jews with rockets, mortars etc. aiming particularly at children going to and from school. Eventually said Jews will have to respond militarily to stop them or just take it.
        He and you think Jews should carry on as per last 2,000 years at hands of their tormentors, namely, lie down and die.
        Said Jews lately refuse that option. Hence his (&your) fury at Israel’s ‘foreign’ policy.
        Is that clear? Yes? Good!

  12. Get Some!
    he will be told by a court that he is an antisemite.
    Prefect.
    GG loves the attention. and his Muslim voters will rally around him.

  13. So the Guardian cowards will not support their own journalist for speaking the truth? Is it sexism or the usual wishy washy antisemitism?

  14. Galloway reads this site . Its got his name on the title of this thread . He is that vain
    But bottom line is he wasn’t gonna sue anyone for libel and she did damage limitation by deleting tweet .
    He still has a cause of action. The tweet and various disparaging comments about Galloway have been made through many many social media outlets . Far worse than what she humbly said . Also her tweet has gone viral . As in too late , horse out of stable situ . Small detail tho , she has various defences available to her . Her lawyers would have advised her by now.
    His lawyers will have advised him on chances for success/failure and also given him a costs warning . He also knows deep down that if it went to court and he lost , then the damage to him , it would be the end .

  15. I don’t know your laws however it should be rather clear cut. #Galloway is a Pro Hamas supporter. I’m sure you can fInd both audio/video and writings of his that show this and that he doesn’t disagree with their policies & probably extolls the virtues of Hamas. The Charter of Hamas calls for the murder of Jews wherever and whenever they can be found anywhere in the World. It has nothIng to do with Israel a lot to do wIth the MuslIm Brotherhood and Islam. By Galloway’s unmitigated support you have your answer regarding #Anti-Semitism

  16. Before we “galvanize those among you passionate about both free speech and combatting antisemitism to rally around Freeman” please note what she herself said about Israel: she is “Proud … to work for a paper that covers the atrocities in Palestine so diligently” (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/08/dont-tell-me-what-think-about-israel)

    No specifics of these claimed ‘atrocities’, and no criticism of the Palestinians. She is one of the anti-Israel Jews who fill the pool that with the sewage Galloway swims round in.

    So don’t support her – let her fight her own battles, just as she leaves the Israeli civilian victims of Palestinian attacks to do.

  17. The Jews were thrown out of their country of origin and then returned (usually by means of purchasing the land from Turkish absentee landlords). Thereafter a war erupted where a million Jews were driven out of Arab lands to Israel and a like number of Arabs, only recently denominated as Palestinians, were also displaced. The number of the displaced on each side was dwarfed by the numbers of people displaced by. Contemporaneous wars in Europe and the Indian subcontinent, yet those peoples have roughly settled into a stasis. Only the newly minted Palestinians refuse to accept a peaceful solution. Well, too bad for them. The world, even the Arab world, no longer buys their self absorbed and self pitying nonsense.

    • “The Palestinian Holocaust is unsurpassed in history. For a country to be occupied, emptied of its people, its physical and cultural landmarks obliterated, its destruction hailed as a miraculous act of God, all done according to a premeditated plan, meticulously executed, internationally supported, and still maintained today…”

      – Dr. Salman Abu-Sitta, Palestine Right Of Return, Sacred, Legal, and Possible

      • That sounds exactly what Palestinian Christians and Muslims have been saying about the original creation of provincial Palestine, in place of the Jews they held to have been expelled for rejecting Jesus and the prophets, for most of the last 2000 years, and whom they kept to a tiny, highly discriminated against minority for most of the same.

        Sounds like a classic piece of Palestinian Muslim nationalist anti-Jewish projection, to me: to the Jews concerned is imputed the worldview, or designs, of the head of the imputer.

        a) most Palestinian Arab Muslims and Christians still live within the borders of original British ruled Palestine i.e. Transjordan, while most of the rest live very close to those borders

        b) while expulsions of the same occurred, they and their allies not only threatened the same, or worse, against Palestinian or Israeli Jews, they periodically carried them out e.g. Hebron in 1929, what became East Jerusalem in the 1930s, the Old City in 1948, every area conquered by Arab forces 1948-49.

    • yous is not an ‘argument’, cogently argued with evidence to back up your assertions….yours is ‘The Jewz was ‘ere first, and then we was robbed’.

      Time to grow up!

  18. And you have some evidence that the entire bible, like your grade school diploma, is a fraud and the Jews weren’t there first? Where did they come from originally, Mars? And in light of the fact that they were murdered and brutalized and exiled from every country they were in that wasn’t their own country of origin, where do you suggest they go? The growing up must come from the Palestinians but it will (unfortunately for their children) take them another century or so to expend their infantile rage. A hundred years or a thousand won’t matter-Israel will be there ready to make peace with them when they are ready themselves.

    • Mmmm, so no one was there before those Israelite tribes? Like, the first men on the planet!? wow, that sounds like fact!

  19. I think its great that this site has its own pet anti Semite bigoted Nazi with multiple personalities and no friends . We can insult him and he still comes back for more food . Its his choice . He is begging for the attention .
    Peter/James/Janet/whatever , do you like being a ‘Jew-pet’? How does that fit into your ideology ? You hate us so much yet you are constantly trying to chat to us .

  20. As the EUMC “working definition” says that antisemitism could include “Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel”, then the Prime Minister of the state of Israel is antisemitic for speaking on behalf of Jews.

        • Well, these Nazi ccumbags like Peter of.. and Jonathan have fulfilled their task by sucessfully, demonstrating that the nazi hate of Jews is still living.
          Thanks for the cooperation, low-life.

  21. These ‘conversations’ have degenerated into assertions, obscenity and insult. I think we established quite early on the nature of George Galloway’s views and I don’t think much more can be added on that score. I believe that it is time to move on now, rather than to allow these conversations to continue ad absurdum.

  22. Al Neuman
    February 12, 2015 at 11:01 am
    11 Votes
    Of course Galloway is a notorious and obvious anti-Semite. And like all these hateful bigots, they squeal like stuck pigs when outed–which is exactly how they should be treated and exposed.
    The racism of Galloway and his fellow traveler Israel-bashers is made beyond obvious when 1 looks at their track record–how many times has someone like Galloway, with a big big mouth about Israel and its imagined wrongdoings–said anything about the very REAL and clear human rights violators in the Mideast, e.g. Syria, Iran, ISIS, and all their brutal murders? Oh never? Gee, why would that be?
    Tells you everything you need to know about the likes of hateful buttwipes like Galloway.

    The libel above has been forwarded to Mr Galloway.