“Lawyers for Israel” censorship attempt quashed—victory for free speech

 

Good news! Former BBC journalist Tony Gosling has won his battle with the Zionist censors. UK Lawyers for Israel had targeted his radio program, Politics This Week, in a complaint to OFCOM, the UK’s communications regulatory agency. The Zionist complaint against Tony alleged that his show is “being used for the propagation of conspiracy theories and extremist views.” Ofcom’s ruling in Tony’s favor is explained below.  – Kevin BarrettVeterans Today Editor

UK Lawyers for Israel broadcasting regulator complaint against BCfm Politics show dismissed by Ofcom

by Tony Gosling

I’m pleased to announce that Ofcom have ruled there was no breach of Rule 5.13 after a complaint – submitted by UK Lawyers For Israel – about this show generally and specifically our broadcast on Friday 23rd November last year. The complaint by UKLFI’s Jonathan Turner could have led to this show being taken off the air permanently – BCfm being fined or made bankrupt, or having our licence revoked.

The complaint included several falsehoods, including that we’d said;

• that the Manchester Arena bombing was carried out by MI5 and the Rothschild family

• that “Illuminati” infiltrate and control the government.

These are both malicious exaggerations. Jonathan Turner said – in his complaint – that “The Politics Show is filled with conspiracy theories, extremism, racism and propaganda and in breach of multiple provisions of the OFCOM Code.”

He said “We identified and analysed 14 breaches of the OFCOM Code in a single episode of a programme that is broadcast every week.

This must be a cause for alarm. OFCOM should ensure that an extremist is not permitted a platform to spread his message of conspiracy and hate.” So UK Lawyers for Israel tried to take me off the air for running a neo-Nazi propaganda show. An inversion of the truth which Ofcom have now refuted.

The actual OFCOM investigation boiled down to three issues

First – the peddling of conspiracy theories, which I explained is a meaningless term used to smear investigative journalists

– by conflating real conspiracies with fake ones

– it was introduced into the US media in 1967 by the CIA

– after the Warren commission into the 1963 assassination of John F Kennedy – to cover up the CIA’s role in the president’s murder.

Second – lack of balance with regard to the state of Israel

– in response I pointed out that on six occasions from August 2018 I’d aired extended interviews with five Israeli cabinet ministers – including the prime minister

– more than any UK radio programme

– This was the most serious of the complaints because it alleged the programme was racist and antisemitic

– In fact the prophet Mohammed

– instructed his followers to practice – much like the right of self defence in international law – the self-defence jihad

– this part of the Koran has been twisted by the Salafist and Takfiri doctrines to justify sabotage and terrorism against ones enemies, creation of a ‘Caliphate’

– even the killing of fellow Muslims – is fairly well understood

– We decided to look at the other side of the coin – extreme fundamentalist Zionist doctrines

– What some Jewish scholars call the twisting of old testament prophecy to justify war – and interviewed Canadian author David Livingstone

– Who’s just about to come out with another book examining these subjects

– Entitled Ordo Ab Chao

– Latin for Order From Chaos

– David argues some nihilistic Zionists actually want a Middle East war in order to evoke the Jewish messiah – but that they may end up evoking the antichrist instead.

This programme includes many justifications for creating the state of Israel

– not least of which last week is the Holocaust of six million

– suffered by European Jews under the Nazis – but history teaches us that all religions can be hijacked by ruthless people for political and criminal purposes

– and so November programme was taking a balanced look at the extremes of Zionist as against Islamist pseudo-religious doctrine. Which I’m pleased to say

– this station

– and last week Ofcom too – stood by.

The final comment Ofcom decided may have merit was that the programme was biased against MI5 – this programme aired on the week of parliament’s Intelligence and Security committee;

– chaired by Dominic Grieve MP’s report into the London and Manchester terror attacks

– every mainstream press headline was critical of MI5 including the Manchester press

– and the show did include contrary views supporting MI5’s innocence.


‘Truth’ for Jews is ‘whatever serves Israel’s interests’ – Polish priest


The Australian Jewish News:

Why I campaigned to ban David Icke

David Icke.

IT’S no easy feat to defeat antisemitism, but as always, it is a fight worth having.

When I discovered that David Icke, a serial hate-monger and conspiracy theorist who says that Jews played a starring role in spreading evil around the world, was visiting our shores to deliver sold-out shows, I knew that we had to sound the alarm bells.

We could not run from this issue, because denial has never been our strategy. We had to stand up and call it like it is, because combating the normalisation of antisemitism has to begin with the Jewish community.

We were going to delegitimise David Icke, name the blood libels and ancient pathological prejudices that he mouths, and say that he has no business being here. We were determined to disrupt his dangerous speech, and to ensure that he does not misuse our freedoms to travel around with a bullhorn, spouting his putrid lies.

The easy thing would have been to sweep this under the rug and to turn a blind eye. After all, he had been here before.

But complacency is never in order when dealing with a man who has made mendacious, demonising, dehumanising allegations about Jews.
Especially not in these supercharged times when all forms of assaults against Jews have skyrocketed, when once taboo trip-wires are being crossed, and when boundaries of mainstream expression are transgressed.

As history has taught us, polite silence is acquiescence, and acquiescence is complicity. As Bonhoeffer said, before being murdered by the Nazis, “Not to speak is to speak. Not to act, is to act.”

Avoiding a conflict and the kind of abuse I know would rain on me, could not come at the expense of our community’s wellbeing and sense of security. We had to fight the darkness that Icke spews with light, and the lies he delivers with truth. Ignoring this individual with his poisonous rhetoric, would have signalled to everyone that we find it acceptable, okay and normal to defame Jews.

As always, I thought of the victims and the Holocaust survivors, who would wake up in the morning knowing that a man who claims that the Jews funded Hitler is free to roam here and to spread his harmful and contemptuous canards. And so, we launched a public media campaign, calling on the government to revoke Icke’s visa.

Icke’s antisemitism is often cloaked by trading sound bites about his ‘lizard theories’. I knew that we had to provide the government with a smoking gun, with irrefutable evidence. Though it made my skin crawl, I delved into the cesspool of his speeches and writings, and analysing, page by page, his book And The Truth Shall Set you Free.

Looking through this dark text, it provided me with a truckload of quotes that demonstrated, beyond doubt, Icke’s antisemitism.
For the first time ever, I can reveal parts of the information that we provided to the government in making our ironclad case.

Here is some of what Icke claims: The Jews are responsible for WWI, WWII, the Russian Revolution and, “financed Hitler to power in 1933 and made the funds available for his rearmament”; the Jews wrote The Protocols of the Elders of Zion; violent neo-Nazi organisations like the “‘far-right’ group, Combat 18, is a front for the sinister Anti-Defamation League, the United States arm of the Israeli/Rothschild secret service, Mossad”; Jews are responsible for the slave trade and control the Ku Klux Klan; Jews are behind antisemitic attacks such as desecration of graves, assaults and terrorists attacks; Jews bankrolled Hitler and the Holocaust; the Global Elite (the Jews) along with the Mossad were responsible for the Oklahoma bombing; Holocaust denial should be taught at schools, and those who deny the Holocaust are not Nazis or apologists for Hitler.

This decision was a victory for decency and for our core values of equality and respect for all, and I applaud the Minister for Immigration, David Coleman, for the admirable act of unflinching moral courage. It reaffirmed that freedom of speech has to be balanced with the need to limit hate, and that being safe from racial and religious vilification is a core guarantor of any democracy.

I am also heartened that the Liberal and Labor candidates for Macnamara, Kate Ashmor and Josh Burns, locked arms with me in joining the chorus of voices advocating for a ban.

It’s been a tough week for the three of us as the sewer lids have been taken off. We have been rocked by a flood of blood-chilling messages and threats, most too horrifying to reprint. These unvarnished displays of venom tell us that we are not home yet, that there is a long road ahead in ensuring that antisemitism never becomes deeply embedded in the inner core of Australia’s culture.

I’m also gratified by the scores of phone calls and messages, from people across the social, ethnic and political spectrum, and from around the world, who have saluted our stance.

Let’s face it, no one stomped on Icke’s freedom to express his noxious views. He can do so from England and on his social media. But not here.

Words of hate and incitement matter, and often escalate into thuggish intolerance and real-life violence.
When people are told that Jews are bad and malevolent, members of a shadowy cabal responsible for the world’s ills, they feel empowered to harass, demean, degrade and carry out attacks against them.

This cancer invalidates our dignity, it says that we are not Australians, that we are not worthy of respect, that we should go back where we came from. It makes our kids, in particular those who proudly wear their Judaism on their hearts and sleeves, feel less safe and less comfortable walking the streets or in school.

And to those who still wishfully think that we are somehow immune from the lows of Europe, I say, “We should not wait until Australia becomes another Malmo, Brussels, Toulouse, Copenhagen.”

At the end of the day, this righteous decision communicates the message that Australia stands for better, that it will continue to be a safe haven for us all, and that the likes of David Icke are not welcome here. And may it always be so.

DVIR ABRAMOVICH is chairman of the Anti-Defamation Commission.


The Political Lynching of Marc Lamont Hill: What You’re Not Being Told

Renegade Editor’s Note: Marc Lamont Hill and his supporters are definitely not going to stand up for the rights of White people, who are being targeted for genocide and ethnic cleansing by the same forces who are oppressing the Palestinians. Instead they will constantly equate jewish supremacism with apartheid, to make Israel just seem like an extension of “White supremacy.” However, this piece does go to show what we already know, that both sides of the political spectrum are completely controlled by powerful jewish interests who demand complete obedience.

By 

(MPN— After his UN Speech marking the International Day of Solidarity with Palestine last week was twisted so as to smear him as an anti-Semite, Marc Lamont Hill was subjected to a “political lynching” that saw him fired from his role as a political commentator on CNN and will now see Temple University — his other employer — investigate whether and how to reprimand him for his statements.

During his speech, Hill had called for solidarity with Palestinians and drew on the history of African Americans’ struggle against slavery and apartheid in the United States as an inspiration for the solidarity. Hill then noted that “if we are to operate in true solidarity with Palestinian people, we must allow the Palestinian people the same range of opportunity and political possibility” that were afforded African Americans, including “self-defense” and other tactics that do not fit neatly with “non-violence.”

However, the part of Hill’s speech that has been deemed the most controversial was his concluding call for a “a free Palestine from the river to the sea,” which recognizes the reality that the area historically known as Palestine is, in fact, not free, as Palestinians in the territory are currently under siege from a decade-long blockade, under military occupation, or under an apartheid legal system. Yet Hill’s detractors have directed their outrage at that single line, twisting it to mean the destruction or “genocide” of the Israeli state, while also failing to recognize the genocide of Palestinians that accompanied the creation of the state of Israel in the first place.

Since he was dismissed from his role at CNN, many of the same voices that pressured the news organization to fire Hill are now pushing for Temple University to do the same. On Tuesday, Temple University’s newspaper — The Temple News — published a story reporting that the university is set to “investigate” Hill and is determining whether he can be “reprimanded” by the university for the statements that he had made at the United Nations. The university had previously stood by Hill. Notably, many of the strongest voices that have been calling for Hill to be fired first from CNN and now from Temple University have close ties to the Israeli government, top U.S. Israel lobby organizations, or pro-Israel stalwarts with ties to the U.S. political establishment.

Trouble at Temple

Last Friday, the Philadelphia Inquirer published an article in which it noted that one of the people pushing for Hill to be fired from Temple University was Leonard Barrack, who was described as a “Temple trustee and major donor to the university.” Barrack, who is also a Temple alumnus and former finance chairman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), was quoted as saying that “He [Hill] called for the destruction of the State of Israel in code words. I am very upset about it. I think it was anti-Semitic.”

However, the article fails to note that Leonard Barrack is also former president of the Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia,which regularly hosts events in Philadelphia with American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), arguably the most influential Israel lobby group in the U.S., and StandWithUs, an Israel lobby group whose activities on U.S. college campuses were exposed in a recently leaked documentary.

Even though the article mentions the Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia immediately below where it quotes Barrack, it does not mention this connection between the two nor does it note that the Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia or the Israel lobby groups it collaborates with promote Israeli colonialism, the apartheid system imposed on Palestinians by the Israeli state ,and the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from historical Palestine.

Barrack, given that he is a Temple trustee as well as a major donor who is also politically influential, clearly made his outrage heard, as evidenced by recent statements from the chairman of Temple’s board of trustees, Patrick O’Connor, who told the Inquirer, “the board’s not happy. The administration’s not happy. People wanted to fire him right away. We’re going to look at what remedies we have.” Both O’Connor and Barrack are prominent lawyers in Philadelphia in addition to being Temple trustees.

Another Temple University alumnus with connections to the Israel lobby pushing for Hill to be fired is the President of the Zionist Organization of American (ZOA), Morton Klein. Klein went even further than Barrack in expressing his outrage over Hill’s speech, calling for the university to fire Hill, whom he called a “Bigot Jew-hater.” Klein also condemns Hill for his past statements on Palestine, including voicing his support for Ahed Tamimi — whom Klein calls a “convicted Palestinian-Arab terrorist” — and for denouncing “settler encroachment” and the “systematic abuse of Palestinian children,” which Klein equated to “blood libel.”

Klein concludes his long statement on Hill, which was quoted by numerous news outlets, by stating:

As a Temple University alumnus from where I received two degrees, I am especially shocked, embarrassed and ashamed that Mr. Hill teaches at my alma mater and has a named Chair no less. His working at Temple can only hurt fundraising and support for the University.”

Like Barrack, Klein has considerable political pull in this situation, not because of his ties to Temple University necessarily, but because of his ties to the Trump administration and Trump’s largest political donor, Sheldon Adelson. Klein, who is also close to former Trump advisor Steve Bannon, was instrumental in installing John Bolton as National Security Adviser by leading the campaign to have Bolton’s predecessor, H.R. McMaster, fired over alleged “anti-Israel” beliefs. Bolton is a close confidant of Sheldon Adelson, the largest donor to Trump and the Republican Party. Adelson also funds the organization Klein leads, ZOA.

Hill’s head sought by pro-Israel right and left

In addition to ZOA, other notable Israel lobby groups, such as the American Jewish Committee (AJC), have been vocally calling for Hill to be fired. For instance, AJC’s “chief storyteller,” Avi Mayer claimed that Hill’s speech called for the “violent annihilation” of Israel and mischaracterized Hill as a Hamas supporter for opposing U.S. funding of Israel’s Iron Dome defense system. The U.S. gives Israel over $3 billion annually in military aid, which is set to top $3.8 billion this year.

Embedded video

Avi Mayer

@AviMayer

On Tuesday @CNN aired a devastating report on antisemitism in Europe. Today CNN’s @marclamonthill echoed Jihadist calls for Israel’s violent annihilation, calling for “resist[ance]” to achieve “a free Palestine from the river to the sea.” Not a great look.

Notably, prior to working for AJC, Mayer worked as a “foreign media liaison” for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). He has also worked in the Israeli embassy in Washington and for AIPAC.

AJC claims to be very different from ZOA in the sense that AJC seeks to cater to “liberals” while ZOA is focused more on Republicans and conservatives. However, both are equally committed to promoting Zionism. Indeed, AJC was instrumental in promoting the Israel-centric definition of anti-Semitism that seeks to define certain criticisms of the Israeli state as anti-Semitism. The group is exceptionally well-funded, with an annual income of over $49 million, most of which comes from private donors.

Notably, a subsidiary of AJC, UN Watch, has also been very vocal in its condemnation of Hill. UN Watch is frequently quoted by media outlets on a variety of issues related to the United Nations and its alleged bias towards Israel. However, the fact that it is a “wholly owned subsidiary” of AJC is rarely noted, with the outlets only sometimes noting that UN Watch is a “pro-Israel monitor.”

In crosshairs of “fiercely Zionistic” National Council of Young Israel

Another important and controversial Zionist organization pushing for Hill to be fired from Temple University is the National Council of Young Israel (NCYI). NCYI’s call to have Hill fired was widely quoted by both Israeli and U.S. media outlets.

NCYI Young Israel@NCYIYoungIsrael

The is calling on @cnn @templeuniv to fire Marc Lamont Hill following his highly offensive & virulent anti-Semitism remarks. They’re abhorrent, & his senseless promotion of violence against Israel is repugnant.
He can’t be given a platform to serve as a pundit or professor!

NCYI, essentially an umbrella group for over 100 smaller organizations spread throughout different areas of the United States, has a storied history, having been founded over 100 years ago.

As an example, NCYI boasts on its web page that, prior to Israel’s founding in 1948, it funneled weapons to Zionist terror groups like Irgun. Irgun, which NCYI calls a “defense force” on its website, began bombing and attacking Palestinian civilian targets in 1938, 10 years before Israel’s founding. It is best known for the bombing of the King David hotel in Jerusalem, which killed 91 people, as well as the Deir Yassin massacre, which killed over 100 Palestinian civilians as part of a self-described “cleansing” campaign.

Irgun’s leader, Menachem Begin, was called a terrorist and fascist by Albert Einstein and many other prominent Jewish American intellectuals in an open letter published in the New York Times in 1948. He went on to found the precursor to today’s Likud political party. Notably, the Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia, which has strongly condemned Hill’s speech and smeared him as “anti-Semitic,” recently hosted an event celebrating Begin’s legacy, bizarrely likening Begin to Martin Luther King Jr.

In addition to considering its past support of terror groups as a point of pride, NCYI also led the effort to commute the sentence of convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard, who had given top-secret classified U.S. government information to Israel and other countries. Pollard was imprisoned in the late 1980s and released in 2015.

NCYI, which describes itself as “fiercely Zionistic,” now promotes anti-BDS initiatives on U.S. college campuses, including Temple University. Owing to its decentralized nature, there is little information on the group’s finances and donors.

A skirmish in a larger war to silence pro-Palestinian advocacy

The firestorm of criticism around Marc Lamont Hill’s speech was undeniably engineered, particularly given the fact that the outrage centered on a single phrase at the end of the lengthy speech and the fact that the subsequent campaign against Hill employed prominent figures and organizations in the Israel lobby, many of whom hold extremist positions and are openly racist.

Ultimately, the controversy that has resulted from Hill’s speech is just the latest iteration of a larger effort to silence advocacy for Palestinian rights in the United States, particularly at a time when Israel’s right-wing government is seeking to annex Palestine’s West Bank and when the Gaza Strip is approaching its breaking point as a result of the inhuman decade-long blockade of the enclave by Israel. It also comes at a time when the Trump administration is set to reveal its Israel-centric “peace plan” that is set to be a disaster for Palestinians and major give-away to Zionist interests.

The Israel lobby that represents extreme political Zionism in the United States is seeking to make an example of Hill in order to avoid having to discuss the important issues he brought up in his speech. These critics of Hill have claimed that he implicitly called for the destruction of Israel as a state. Though Hill did not make that claim, the alarm raised by these critics is ironic given that Israel is currently — and has been for decades — seeking to ethnically cleanse the historic land of Palestine of all of its indigenous inhabitants.


This article originally appeared on MintPress News.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.