This comment was posted on the blog this morning in response to my article on Tory proposals to crack down on extremism:
It's always about you isn't it, you disgusting, arrogant piece of shit.
Well, guess what, they actually came for the Jews first, again. And what did you have to say about it?
Fuck all.
And now?
Most of the left are actively supporting the terrorists who murdered those Jews and are taking part in “protests” glorifying it and calling for the genocide of Jews and the destruction of Israel.
The hypocrisy is breathtaking. Just shows how racist the left is. Safe spaces and anti-bigotry for everyone – except the if (sic) you are Jewish.
I wondered whether to post the comment or treat it as trolling - which in so many ways (including the anonymity used to hide what was meant by TBJ - which only I, as moderator, could see) it is.
But then I decided that the commentator has a right to an opinion, even if it is one I very clearly disagree with. What follows was written as a response for the comments section. I have decided to post it here, but have not changed the personal nature of the response that I offer, so please appreciate that all that follows is addressed to TBJ who posted it, whoever he or she might be.
--------
Let me deal with your allegations.
Firstly, yes, that piece was about me: it was an opinion piece. It reflected my opinion. So, of course, it was about me. I don't write opinion pieces for anyone else. I am not, therefore, sure what you are alleging I have done wrong unless you are saying you wish to deny me the right to express that opinion. Is that it?
Second, as far as I can see, there is nothing about that piece that refers directly, or even very obliquely, to any issue relating to Israel, Gaza, Jews or Palestinians. So, quite why you twist it in that way is hard to understand, but you have. Maybe you might explain?
Third, I would have thought that what I wrote was clearly pro-human rights, and pro-oppressed and vulnerable people whoever they might be. There was nothing else that could be implied from it.
Fourth, what I wrote was clearly anti-racist, without in any way carving out distinctions (I hope). That is what I am: I am an anti-racist. In partial explanation (and whilst talking about me, again), it's not trendy to say it, but I remember the feeling of suspicion and even resentment from some about my Irish name when I was young when anti-Irish sentiment was still quite prevalent in the UK. That feeling has never quite left me. It was not a big issue, but it has left me acutely aware of what discrimination is and what it must feel like. I have written before about what I perceived as my father's lifelong desire to assimilate, never quite thinking he was accepted. Please do not say I have no idea what I am talking about. And please don't accuse me of being racist.
Or of being an anti-Semite because I am not. I have never been. I never will be.
And do not accuse me of denying the right of Israel to exist. I am absolutely sure it has that right.
I am also as sure that the Palestinian people have a right to their own state.
And as well also know, those two states will have to - as we all know - coexist in a limited geographic space. Anyone denying that is guilty of prejudice. I am not.
Likewise, please do not accuse me of ever supporting Hamas. I do not and never will. Just as the IRA never did represent those wanting Ireland to self-govern, I am certain Hamas does not represent the Palestinian people who want to live peacefully in a state of their own. I can differentiate the two issues.
Nor, incidentally, should you confuse my criticism of the far-right government of Netanyahu with criticism of Israel or anyone who is Jewish. Netanyahu is not Israel, nor are his opinions those of all Israelis or all Jews. I can abhor his government and defend the right of Israel to defend itself within the rules of law.
I can also defend the right of Palestinians to their own state and condemn the actions of Hamas that seem contrary to that aim.
But, of course, this requires that you accept nuance, non-binary positions, and subtlety in argument, but that's what such situations demand.
So, am I, as you suggest, actively supporting the terrorists who murdered those Jews? I am emphatically not doing so. I condemn them.
And am I, or most on the left, taking part in “protests” glorifying Hamas whilst calling for the genocide of Jews and the destruction of Israel? No, they are not. In fact, I won't go to these protests because there are too many flags for my liking, and I do not trust flags: they are the symbol of binary choice and I do not believe in that. So you have most definitely picked the wrong target with me on that issue. And I am far from alone.
That said, I uphold the right of those who are protesting about Israel's government breaking international law on warfare because I think it unambiguously has, but I blame Netanyahu, and not Isreal itself, or any Jew. I name a person.
And when it comes to a ceasefire - when I call for one, I mean one that demands Hamas also stop firing. I am not just asking for Israel to stop.
That said, I do expect Israel to stop firing in contravention of law without Hamas ceasing its onslaught whilst reserving Israel's right to self-defence if Hamas does carry on firing.
There are distinctions in these positions which are important, and very clear if only you will think about them. Those distinctions are what a complex situation demands.
So please do not accuse me of things I have not, again, said.
And finally, maybe you have not been to Dachau, but I have. I needed to know and understand what happened. I have written here before now about that experience and the fact that my eldest son, aged 15 when we went, came up to me having spent some time reading the history of the camp and said, "They'd have put you in here, Dad". He was right, because as Pastor Martin Niemöller noted in a poem that has been endorsed by the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust:
First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
And that is what actually happened. So your claim about the Jews being first was also wrong, although saying so is not in any way a denial of what went on to happen to Jews, and Romany's, disabled people and others, with the Jews undoubtedly suffering much the worst of all.
My point in saying so is that the evil of fascism is universal.
And what that means is that Jews are also capable of that evil. That's not because they are Jewish. Or because they live in Israel. It is because they are human and have been corrupted by far-right ideology and the binary thinking of populism, as I would suggest the current Israeli government has been. But I still, quite emphatically uphold the right of Israel to exist and do not for a moment confuse that government with Israel or a Jew anywhere.
So now, what are you trying to argue with me about?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Well said.
What a tragedy that some Jews choose to weaponize the holocaust to justify their oppression of others.
I’m old enough to know what anti-Irish prejudice in the UK felt like in the 1970s. As an 18 year old student visiting London for the first time I was helped understand that “your sort” being “over here” were unwelcome by being pushed repeatedly onto some bolts protruding from a corrugated metal fence – – by two London policemen. I was guilty of being in the wrong place at the wrong time and, needless to say, met people without the faintest idea of Britain’s brutal history in its first overseas colony. They knew nothing and cared less. I wasn’t then or since a supporter of the IRA, but had I been treated like that in my own country by representatives of an army of occupation I would have been. I like to think most people would react similarly.
How fortunate we all were then that when a supermajority of the Irish people voted for self-government in 1918 the British government respected their wishes and left without a shot being fired, just as they did later in Palestine. Oh wait, I forgot they sent the Black & Tans to Palestine and Zionist “terrorists” dared to resist them.
What a tragedy that some Israelis cannot see either the hypocrisy of their oppression of Palestinians or the futility of thinking that they are ever going to “lie down” and accept indefinite subjugation in the world’s largest open air jail. That isn’t ever going to happen.
Very well said Richard. You have expressed exactly what I have been thinking about the danger of simple, angry, binary responses to what is happening in Israel/Gaza. I wish protestors carried posters saying that they stand with all people in Israel/Gaza who are suffering and grieving at the moment. Netanyahu’s responses are making a bad situation worse – perhaps they elect someone more moderate next time. If only in 1948, the international community had either set up two separate states or had taken care to promote a dual state with emphasis on mutual respect and equal representation in government. The lack of such structures combined with the actions of politicians like Netanyahu has caused a deep and bitter resentment to grow. I hope world leaders will put all their efforts into both pushing for a ceasefire on both sides and pushing for the fundamental changes that are necessary. This conflict is so dangerous – now that Iran, Russia, China and India might start to see themselves as a bloc in opposition to the US and the dollar
I do agree, however I think you are over-simplifying 1948.
I believe that an Israeli state had to be created. But it was imposed by outsiders without consultation with or consideration of those most affected. How would you feel if, for example, the Americans told the population of Scotland to leave because the land was needed by others. That is not far off what happened. The failure, and it was a huge failure, was to leave them to get on with it. The Israeli people were living in a hostile land, a tiny country surrounded by neighbours who hated them. The US suppoprted them from a distance, but no-one tried to make it work. And it hasn’t worked.
It is something else about which to despair.
It’s awful to see an overreaction like I read today.
I admit to being nonplussed by it as it was avowedly about events unfolding right now elsewhere.
I remember saying on the Guardian website once that the first crime the Nazi’s committed was against their fellow Germans by using fascist technology to make them receptive to anti-Semitism. The Nazis turned their own society (and others) into places where murder was possible on a huge scale and where people could turn a blind eye. I was arguing at the time that fascism was raising its ugly head in the UK and we had to watch out for this and not be taken in by it as the Germans and East Europeans had in WWII.
The howls of derision I got were unexpected and my post was taken down. I never bothered again. It seemed to me that a proper discussion on the subject was impossible. I sort of understood why Hannah Arendt had had such a hard time herself trying to explain and understand how such evil was possible in men.
I understood that it was not just her gender that had caused her so much trouble – it was daring to process the horror.
Trying to understand it seems is not on the cards for some. No – what you have to do is just feel and be outraged it seems. Which sort of reminds me of something – yes – that’s right – Fascism itself. Right? Don’t understand – just feel the fear and react.
To Jews everywhere now – as fellow human beings – the Holocaust happened to you beyond any doubt. But it did not just happen to you. Others – from socialists to gay people, were all caught up in it and dehumanised and murdered. The holocaust was a human disaster – not just a Jewish one.
It offends us all and there is no ranking system that puts one human community’s suffering above another as far as I am concerned other than to acknowledge the scale of loss of Jews and their communities which is a loss that hurts humanity deeply to this day.
And what about the other holocausts – the slaughter of Armenians by Turkey in the early 1900s – which is another issue we are not encouraged to talk about is it? What would we call events that happened to the Rohingya people recently not so long ago?
So I say to the Jews – the Holocaust happened to you but you do not own it exclusively I’m afraid. Others are allowed to talk about it, acknowledge it and hope that holocausts don’t happen again anywhere. Holocausts are a human problem not just a Jewish one.
The Jews have a long and troubled history they did not invite. But to our shame as species they are not the only persecuted people out there in history or today. And what is worse is that if we are not allowed to discuss and reflect on holocausts, then where is our moral compass in responding to them?
Preventing them?
Avoiding tumbling angrily into making one happen – again?
I don’t know…………………..
Ultimately if the Jews are to live in fear for the rest of their lives then it can be said that the Nazi’s have actually won in the end and are still winning even now.
We should not let them. We should all together share suffering and become wiser together for it.
Very well expressed Mr Murphy. Very cogent and well argued. Yes I recall negative comments about Irish people in the more recent past. The contributor you refer to has resorted to offensive language – which I find is the refuge of those who don’t have a good case to argue. I think they see it as an alternative to debate!
Nobody who has watched the reading of the names of all the children killed could think that the left are racist.
Nobody who has seen all the humanitarian charities begging for relief and a ceasefire so they can get their work done and relieve the hunger and sickness in Gaza could think that they are only on the side of the Palestinians.
Nobody who has seen the hundreds of thousands people marching for peace and a ceasefire could think that it’s all in favour of Palestine.
So sick, the person who thinks that, and sick to use this blog to try and get the point across.
Carry on with your good work, Richard. Most of us know better than to be taken in by that sick person.
Thanks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eac1l1ozfLc
The interesting bit comes at about 06.30 the journalist (herself Israeli) is interviewing a (Israeli) settler – who describes a normalisation process – which I’m guessing could be extended to other times & locations (Poland 1943?).
What is sad is the failure of the settler to reflect that what might have happened to his ancestors was caused by a process he himself experiences/experienced wrt the Palestinians and how he has “normalised” their treatment.
For the avoidance of doubt – as a boy we used to live next door to a synagogue & I would switch on the lights (and hot water) for Rabbi Greenstein on Saturday morning. I found them a nice bunch & unfailingly kind to us. Kind.
But. You can’t call yourself civilised if you support what is happening in Gaza.
It reminds me that I spent my time with a Jewish lad in my class at school – he’s now a barrister I believe and his brother is an actor – I did spend time with him and his family and all I can say it was a family filled with love – his Mum was so supportive of him – it was a real eye opener and generous and welcoming too to outsiders like myself – you got swept along with it and included and mothered. Wonderful times ,wonderful memories for a working class English boy like me from a more austere background.
I think Pastor Neimollers poem went over the head of TBJ and the the only word he took out of it was ‘Jews’.
As you rightly stated Richard the concentration camps were filled with all types of people the state deemed unfit for the new Reich.( Sounds scaringly familiar with Braverman’s latest idea)
The camps were filled with,
Communists
Socialists
Trade unionists
The Disabled, both physically and mentally
Gay people, particularly men.
Gypsies.
Serbs.
Russian POW’s
Political persons who spoke against the Regime.
People who were disfigured at birth and appeared repellent to look at.
Jehovas Witnesses.
And Jews, which of course was by far the greatest number, 6 million murdered.
No one is disputing that TBJ. The whole world mourns with what was one of the biggest atrocities of mankind in human history.
Also, no one disputes that the Hamas attack was deplorable and sickening but the Israeli response has been seen by many as not so much defence, as they are entitled to, but more of revenge with approaching to ten times the response.
Tens of thousands of Israeli citizens regularly demonstrate against Netanyahu and his regime.
Perhaps you should reflect on that TBJ.
Thank you
Richard,
I do not always agree with you but I want to hear what you have to say because you compel me to think about things that I may never have thought about before or think harder on thinks that I have fleetingly thought about. To me (a Yank), this is WHOLE point of free speech.
Please, do not ever stop posting on whatever subject you want to comment on. If for some reason I am not interested. I will simply not read it and go on to your next post.
Thanks for all you do with this blog.
Thank you
And I never ask anyone to read!
A visit to Dachau was an education in just what you say – the wide range of people who were held there, well before the full horror of the Holocaust started. And it is just outside Munich… The Jewish museum in Berlin also shows how the steady erosion of rights for different sections of society built up over the years. A reminder both of Niemoller’s words, and an echo of how our current government behaves with people like Braverman and Patel in the vanguard.
There are Israeli organisations like +972 and Jews For Justice for Palestinians who are a reminder that there are Israelis who have long protested against the treatment of Palestinians. They in turn have been abused and prosecuted by Netanyahu’s government and the far right, ultra orthodox, ‘settler’ movements that have dominated Israeli society and politics. They need supporting as well.
It is telling that even an Israeli general described the treatment of West Bank Palestinians by ‘settlers’ aided by the IDF as pogroms.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/settler-extremists-sowing-terror-huwara-riot-was-a-pogrom-top-general-says/
Agreed, Robin. Thank you.
It is worth reflecting on the limits of Israel’s right to self defence. Craig Murray has just published this:
“Israel does have the right of self defence, but only in precisely the same way other countries do. In fact, the only unique factor about Israel here is that it is the only country to have been found by the International Court of Justice specifically to have abused and exceeded the concept of right of self-defence, in its treatment of the Palestinians.
In 2004 the International Court of Justice, in an advisory Opinion to the UN General Assembly, ruled illegal Israel’s construction of its great Wall which is a fundamental part of the Israeli Apartheid system. The court considered Israel’s argument of self-defence and ruled that this did not justify the numerous breaches of international law represented by the Wall:
‘While Israel has the right, and indeed the duty to respond to the numerous and
deadly acts of violence directed against its civilian population, in order to protect the life of its
citizens, the measures taken are bound to remain in conformity with applicable international law.
Israel cannot rely on a right of self-defence or on a state of necessity in order to preclude the
wrongfulness of the construction of the wall. The Court accordingly finds that the construction of
the wall, and its associated régime, are contrary to international law.’
It flows from this that Israel cannot use “self-defence” as a trump card to tear up international law in the current situation in Palestine. The use of collective punishment against a civilian population including via starvation, thirst and deprivation of medicine, the carpet bombing, the use of white phosphorous, the attacks on medical facilities, the attacks on medical staff, the execution of prisoners, the clearly genocidal attempt, none of these war crimes is excusable as “self-defence”.
The military cooperation of the US, UK and Australian governments in an attack which they know is engaged is committing egregious war crimes also opens those responsible to war crimes charges for their active complicity and indeed conspiracy.
Furthermore, there is in fact a positive legal duty on states to be acting against Israel in view of Israel’s refusal to dismantle the Wall and the Apartheid system in the occupied territories – including the widespread criminal settling and stealing of land which that syatem embodies. This is the Ineternational Court of Justice judgment on the obligations of other states:
Given the character and the importance of the rights and obligations involved, the Court is of
the view that all States are under an obligation not to recognize the illegal situation resulting from
the construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East
Jerusalem. They are also under an obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the
situation created by such construction. It is also for all States, while respecting the United Nations
Charter and international law, to see to it that any impediment, resulting from the construction of
the wall, to the exercise by the Palestinian people of its right to self-determination is brought to an
end. In addition, all the States parties to the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of
Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 are under an obligation, while respecting the
United Nations Charter and international law, to ensure compliance by Israel with international
humanitarian law as embodied in that Convention.
Read that paragraph very carefully. Israel has not undertaken any of the actions specified by the ICJ and has indeed built more settlements and imposed more restrictions. It is absoultely plain that the UK, US and European Union are not only not fulfilling their duty in international law as set out by the International Court of Justice.
The US, UK and EU are acting directly opposite to their obligation in international law under the ICJ ruling.
The BDS movement is acting precisely in line with the obligations set out by the International Court of Justice, while the states attempting to ban the BDS movement are acting precisely against the obligations opposed on them by the International Court of Justice.
Finally, the ruling must imply the Palestinians do indeed have the right of self defence. Because you cannot have the “right of self-determination”, which the court acknowledges, without the right of self defence. Because it is impossible to exercise self-determination if sombody else can remove your bodily integrity at whim. That right of self-defence must perforce be exercised by whoever has de facto control of Palestinian territory at the time.
I am indebted to a number of staff and national delegates at the United Nations in Geneva for pointing out to me the importance of the 2004 ICJ ruling in the current context. I hope it helps you understand why the lies of Biden, Von der Leyen, Sunak, Starmer, Macron etc. are indeed lies.”
Especially in the context of Richard’s original excellent post on being branded an extremist which elicited the response from TBJ.
I am not a fan of Craig Murray, who I frequently think unhelpfully unwise, but this is useful comment.
Richard you show here, as you have in the past, the attributes of an anti semitic.. you were claiming Corbyn was also not an anti semitic.. says it all really
Two things Brian.
First, where did I say anything about Corbyn and anti-Semitism, let alone defend him? I don’t ever recall doing so.
Secondly, given that this claim is wrong, what else are you using to justify your claim? Or could it be that you are just making stuff up? That’s really not the basis for an argument.
Brian, where is your or anyone else’s proof that Corbyn is anti-semitic?
He can’t tell us, because he has none.
I had a similar reaction to my placard in Trafalgar Square ‘Stop the Killing’ (I sort of agree with you Riccard about flags – but understand why they are there at this time) .
He accused me of wanting to eliminate Israel.
He was in amongst the crowd – the police I asked said they regarded the demo as essentially peaceful – not a festival of hate or whatever Braverman calls them.
There will always be these extreme anonymous trolls like TBJ – but it has been really disappointing that Simon Schama, Howard Jacobson and others have been signing open letters apparently adopting the Dail Mail smear that ‘the left’does not care about the Oct 7 atrocity, because one out of a 100,000 demonstrators had an offensive label or slogan.
I saw the chief of police at the Met say that he didn’t recognise the phrase ‘hate march’.
https://act.sumofus.org/go/677644?aktmid=tm20698140.jDFN1K&akid=a227902617.15863691.KoVSSW&t=1&source=conf
Here’s something to sign to make up for those who sign open letters saying that the left don’t care. Just in case you haven’t signed it already.
The only unsettling thing I find about the discussions on this topic are:
1. That Brian Stein could still feel that this exhibits “the attributes of an anti semitic”. That so many cannot accept the moral equivalence of the deaths of people on both sides simply shows they have lost their humanity (or perhaps that humanity is more malevolent than I would like to believe).
2. That there is too often the conflation of Jews with Israel. Attacks on Israeli government policy may sometimes be a proxy for antisemitism, but as both Israelis and the broader Jewish diaspora are showing, that is far from always the case. It is no accident that Labour has disproportionately expelled Jews from its membership for antisemitism as compared to non Jews. “Not in my name” is an important call from a group who can sense that the policies of the Israeli Government are (designed to?) cause an increase in antisemitism elsewhere.
3. That this war has more to do with the Christian right than the Jewish Zionist movement. Indeed, the Jewish people can be seen as victims of an evangelical religious cult with many tens of millions of followers in the US. Barbarity and religion is not confined to Isis. American democratic reality lies behind this barbarity.
4. That Europe, to its shame, has demonstrated simple cowardice and impotence by following the American lead: content for others to pay the price of its own past atrocities.
5. That the net result of this barbarism, and the abandonment of the rules based international order, debatably begun with the bombing of Belgrade, and continued with Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine etc. makes the current decade closer to the 1930’s than any of us would care to believe. I would recommend this brief comment at 41:30 by Ann Pettifor here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBkL6dn2b-E
“That this war has more to do with the Christian right than the Jewish Zionist movement. Indeed, the Jewish people can be seen as victims of an evangelical religious cult with many tens of millions of followers in the US. Barbarity and religion is not confined to Isis. American democratic reality lies behind this barbarity.”
There is a valid point in this statement but it is not as “cut & dry” as the statement presents.
As a Yank, living in multicultural Florida, I know.
I would very much like to understand the ‘nuances’ which BayTampaBay refers to.
I understand American democracy is complex, like any society. Sometimes that complexity (a lack of ‘cut and dried’) can obscure the net overall result. My conclusion derives primarily from this sort of material:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGO3eBxQX7Q&list=PLqnzBdOyKbnZ3tc6xFu6FEAMPRcdSEtyW&index=17 by Gideon Levy in 2015
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Zionism and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christians_United_for_Israel
https://apnews.com/article/congress-house-censure-resolution-tlaib-8085189047a4c40f2d44ada4604aa076
Mark,
I would say the majority of people I have come in contact with have deep concern for both the Israeli and Palestinian civilians but have zero use for Hamas and not much more use for Bibi* Netanyahu.
*Most USA newscasters and commentators refer to Mr. Netanyahu as “Bibi” not “Benjamin”.
You cannot win, I’m afraid, in the face of a generally coordinated smear campaign conducted by those willing to spread unfounded accusations. My only response would be the children argument: the deliberate killing of children condemned regardless of the aggressor or the antecedents of the child. However, I have had a response, face to face, that all Palestinian children are terrorists in the making!
The most amazing thing I’ve seen was an interview with an Israeli who’d had one of their relations kidnapped by Hamas.
Muslims (I think mothers, women) had reached out to her and she seemed to have appreciated it.
It maybe is that she feels she has no real option but to show appreciation but it felt like a genuine human moment to me that is sorely lacking elsewhere in the conflict.
I think it is courageous of a non-Jew like yourself and your (mostly non-Jewish but humane) commenters here to withstand the smearing you get of antisemitism. It gives me pause to air my views on this and I’m Jewish.
I met with a cousin of mine last week where we carefully avoided speaking about this because we guessed we would be on opposite sides of this. I was subsequently told by another family member what the Facebook page of my cousin looks like and was relieved we hadn’t talked about it.
I’m not sure where to go now with those of my family who deny that Israel is the oppressor here.
I had to leave the Labour Party when I saw them becoming actually, systemically antisemitic in targeting those of us Jews who reject the apartheid and Fascism of the Israeli government and Labour’s embracing of the exclusively Zionist IHRA definition of antisemitism, itself conflating Zionism, the Israeli Government and Judaism which narrative is now being exposed for the self-serving untruth that it is.
It’s horrific that this exposure of truth is due to the undeniable cruelty that the Israeli Government is exacting on both the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank and that shows them being completely disinterested in the security of even its own citizens. This inhumanity is mirrored by the Hamas leaders, holed up safely in Qatar and condoned by the leaders (but not populace of) anglophone states and most of Europe.
Here are links to three YT bits that I think illuminate this quite well:
https://youtu.be/iVm6nIC2kJM?si=9ihliH5jy2VshFhR
https://youtu.be/rJZse8sPOn8?si=ycWtePz8wTVRDF_1
https://youtu.be/8169EWXfeIQ?si=Cz4XEbn3ZcoGv5o1
I understand if this might be too personal for you to publish and am very grateful to you and your contributors for your deep interest and humanity, always.
Thanks Richard, Samuel Johnson, PSR, Jen W, etc
And thank you too.
“To be a Jew means always being with the oppressed, never with the oppressors.”
Marek Edelman – last surviving leader, Warsaw ghetto uprising
Quoted on the header of Jewish Voice for Labour; I am an associate member. So many, even with Holocaust antecedents, accused of antisemitism. Zionism knows no moral boundaries.