Melanie Phillips: Don’t fall for bogus claims of 'Islamophobia'
At last Sunday’s rally against antisemitism in Westminster, more than 3,000 people listened to a range of speakers denounce anti-Jewish bigotry.
Beyond that rally, however, reaction among the general public to the hatred in the Labour party directed at Israel and the Jewish people does not seem to reflect its eye-watering scale and viciousness.
Leaked evidence collected by the Jewish Labour Movement exposed a virtual tsunami of crazed venom, with statements that Jews were “subhuman” and should “be grateful we don’t make them eat bacon for breakfast every day”, that they were connected to Isis or 9/11, or they were traitors and “bent-nosed manipulative liars”.
Despite all this, there’s still a failure to grasp the full dimensions of this horror. For there are two issues over which widespread moral confusion is hampering proper acknowledgment of this onslaught against the Jews.
The first is support for the Palestinian cause and the related belief that, while antisemitism is a loathsome prejudice against Jews as people, anti-Zionism and Israel-bashing are legitimate attacks on a political project. This distinction is bogus.
Anti-Zionism is the modern mutation of antisemitism with which it shares the same, unique characteristics of deranged and obsessive falsehoods, demonic conspiracy theory and double standards. It is furthermore an attack on Judaism itself, in which the land of Israel is an inseparable element.
Toxic mutation of an ancient hatred: Left-wing Antisemitism
When the postmodern left emerged in the 1950s and 1960s, its worldview absorbed much of this Soviet propaganda, with a key tenet remaining a commitment to anti-Zionism — the view that the State of Israel is illegitimate and should not exist. Added to the anti-Zionist denial of Israel’s claim to an ancestral homeland was “a contradictory claim that the Jews sought to maintain a ‘racial state’ in Israel.”[15]Commentary Magazine Podcast: Yes, It’s OK to Ask About Bernie and Anti-Semitism
In historical terms, anti-Zionism has been quite distinct from antisemitism. Whereas the racist prejudice of antisemitism was largely a phenomenon of the political right, anti-Zionism was based on what Australian scholar Philip Mendes has described as “a relatively objective assessment of the prospects for success for some Jews in Israel/Palestine.”[16] In recent decades, however, as anti-Zionism has developed into a rejection of the legitimacy of the State of Israel, anti-Zionism and antisemitism have converged.
The postmodern left’s anti-Zionism was certainly influenced by Soviet hostility to Israel. However, it is a phenomenon which owes even more to the determination among the post-World War II generation to oppose racism and colonialism. Israel, according to the postmodern left, is an illegitimate remnant of western colonialism in the Middle East — a view increasingly endorsed by the United Nations as it added newly decolonised states to its membership.
Postmodern left anti-Zionists invariably insist their target is neither Jews nor individual Israeli citizens going about their ordinary lives. Rather, their target is the State of Israel itself, which they hold to be a political regime promulgating illegal, coercive, and dehumanizing treatment of Palestinians. It is a line of argument that attempts to defend the distinction between anti-Jewish remarks and criticism of Israeli government policy.
A piece we published on Friday by our own Noah Rothman kicked up a social-media dust storm over the weekend—the view of Noah’s critics being that it is illegitimate to question associations between Bernie Sanders, his campaign, and anti-Semites. We disagree. At length. Give a listen. (h/t IsaacStorm)
A Lawsuit Exposes the Chain Linking U.S. “Charities,” BDS, and Terrorists in Gaza
The Jewish National Fund (JNF)—which owns much of the land in Israel—together with a few Israeli families who live near the Gaza Strip, has filed suit in an American court against organizations that, they allege, support arson attacks on southwestern Israel, often accomplished by attaching makeshift incendiary devices to kites and balloons. In doing so, writes Nadav Shragai, the plaintiffs have an opportunity to shed light on the how Palestinian terrorist groups raise funds in the United States:
If the details of the suit are found to have a legal basis, it will be possible to point to three links in the money chain, the first of which are the Palestinian National and Islamic Forces (PNIF). The group was established by the former PLO leader Yasir Arafat during the second intifada [to] coordinate among the various organizations fighting against Israel. . . . It turns out that the PNIF was never dismantled and in fact helped establish the Supreme National Authority of the Return Marches and Lifting the Siege, [which coordinates attacks from Gaza and attempts to breach the border fence]
A total of twelve religious and nationalist Palestinian factions belong to the PNIF, including Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, [and] the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. . . . All of them are recognized as terrorist groups by Israel, the U.S., and Europe.
The second link is the BDS National Committee (BNC), a leading player in the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement that was founded in Ramallah. BNC sees itself as an umbrella organization that heads the international movement to boycott Israel.
The third link is the specific group named in the lawsuit: the American charity Education for Just Peace in the Middle East U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights (USCPR). According to the lawsuit, at least as far back as 2017 the group has functioned as a pipeline to transfer donations to terrorist organizations, utilizing the BNC [for that purpose]. The funds USCPR transfers to the BNC are designated charitable donations, and are therefore tax-exempt. The lawsuit argues that starting in 2018, the USCPR has been involved in a conspiracy to support, promote, and encourage the marches of return, which are directed [and] led by a terrorist coalition. Therefore, the suit argues, the BNC receives tax-free donations and uses them to promote an agenda of hatred and the arson-balloon and kite attacks against Israel.




























