Campaign Against Antisemitism

This is London, 2024. This is what a modern-day blood libel looks like. In medieval England, Jews were baselessly accused of murdering Christian children to harvest their blood. In the early twentieth century, violent pogroms took place after Jewish communities were again accused of murdering children. Today, Israel – the world’s only Jewish state – is not only accused of intentionally murdering babies and children, but enjoying it. Antisemitic tropes never vanish. Like a virus, it merely adapts and mutates. You are watching the evolution of antisemitism unfold before your eyes.

At this week’s peace march, police speak with a man carrying a flag with the words “Free Palestine” and an inverted red triangle. In recent months, the inverted red triangle and its emoji variant have been used by some anti-Israel activists to signal support for proscribed terrorist organisations such as Hamas, inspired by the appearance of the symbol in Hamas propaganda videos to indicate targets for attack. It is extraordinary that scenes like this on a Saturday have become the norm for Londoners. However, it is encouraging to see that Metropolitan Police have actually pulled this man aside. Could it be that our police forces are beginning to recognise what may possibly count as more nuanced forms of support for banned terror groups? We will be writing to the Met to find out what the outcome of this interaction was and whether any arrests were made.

“Our media, TV, radio and government are controlled by Zionists.” This sign is seen repeatedly at anti-Israel protests. It is hard to believe that the organisers of the protests are not aware of it by now. Naturally, one might start to believe that they may even welcome this sort of placard. Met Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley, Mayor of London Sadiq Khan, and our two successive governments never properly dealt with the antisemitic rot that characterises these demonstrations, and now the bar for what requires action has been dramatically raised so much so that age-old tropes now fly completely under the radar. A staggering 90% of British Jews say that they would avoid travelling to a city centre if a major anti-Israel demonstration was taking place there. Our urban centres have become no-go zones for Jews. With signs like this, is it any wonder why?

Good grief. As a Metropolitan Police officer calmly explains to an anti-Israel protester how wearing a t-shirt bearing a swastika and comparisons between Israel to the Nazis could be seen as offensive, the protester grows belligerent and starts yelling at the officer trying to do his job. The police were right to detain this man. We will be writing to the Met to find out what further action they took.

Protest announcement! It’s time to #BanFran. Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, is going to be lecturing on British campuses. She has previously posted about “the Jewish lobby” and is alleged to have told a Hamas-organised conference that they have “the right to resist”. We will be holding demonstrations at universities where she is scheduled to speak to make clear that she is not welcome. Even if the UN refuses to #BanFran, Britain’s leading educational institutions should. Join us at: • London School of Economics (LSE), 11th November, 11:30 • School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), 11th November, 16:00 • Queen Mary University of London, 12th November, 11:00 We are also writing to the universities which are planning to host her. Should they come to their senses and reconsider the invitation, our protests will be called off. Sign up at antisemitism.org/BanFran Here is just a selection of Ms Albanese’s past rhetoric: • She has made innumerable comparisons between Israelis and the Nazis, in breach of the International (IHRA) Definition of Antisemitism, which has been adopted by the British Government. • In 2022, she reportedly addressed a conference in Gaza in which she stated “You have a right to resist this occupation.” The conference was reportedly organised by Hamas and numerous spokespeople from both Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) were present. Both Hamas and the PIJ are proscribed as terrorist organisations by the UK Government. • Earlier this year, she was condemned by the French Foreign Ministry after she posted on X: “The victims of 7/10 were not killed because of their Judaism but in response to Israel’s oppression,” after President Macron described the 7th October attacks as “the largest antisemitic massacre of our century”. • A 2014 open letter that she posted on her Facebook account read: “America and Europe, one of them subjugated by the Jewish lobby, and the other by the sense of guilt about the Holocaust, remain on the sidelines and continue to condemn the oppressed — the Palestinians — who defend themselves with the only means they have.” This is also a breach of the Definition. • According to The Times of Israel, in 2014 in a now-hidden post on Facebook directed at the BBC, she wrote: “The Israeli lobby is clearly inside your veins and system and you will be remembered to have been on the big brother’s side of this orwellian [sic] nightmare caused once again by Israel’s greed.” Also a breach of the Definition. Is this the kind of person that The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), SOAS University of London and Queen Mary University of London want to be lecturing their students? Do not let this go unanswered. Join us. #BanFran

This is a complete mockery of our visa system. Dana Abu Qamar, a Palestinian student who went on national television to say she was “really, really full of joy” one day after Hamas’ barbaric terrorist attack on 7th October, had her visa revoked by the HomeOffice. This week, a tribunal overturned that decision.

After already being investigated earlier this year in relation to antisemitism, Sir Alan Duncan – emboldened by the Conservatives’ appalling decision not to sanction him – is at it again. In an interview with a YouTube channel, he said of one of the Conservative leadership candidates, Robert Jenrick: “Now this man is an extremist. He does not believe in any kind of two state solution, although he says he does. He knows nothing about it. He takes his script entirely from the Conservative Friends of Israel and the Israelis, so he would be a disaster if he were leader of the Conservative Party.” Sir Alan Duncan was asked why he thinks that Mr Jenrick, whose wife is Jewish, is a supporter of Israel. He replied that “it is disgusting extremism born of ignorance. But there’s also family connections which have a Jewish link. But just because someone’s Jewish doesn’t mean that they have to agree with Netanyahu.” The suggestion that a politician’s political views are adversely dictated by the ethnic heritage of their spouse is surely beyond the pale of our politics. In a further statement, Sir Alan seems to have recognised the damage that his rhetoric might cause him, claiming: “My interview specifically excluded family links as mattering, stating that being Jewish doesn’t mean you necessarily agree with Netanyahu. It’s [Jenrick’s] views as a politician which matter.” But of course that is not what he said at all. And it is not an apology. He has form, and this is just the latest outburst from him. Indeed in the same interview, he was asked: “Something you said in the beginning of this conversation, and something that you wrote in your diaries: ‘The Conservative Friends of Israel and Israelis think that they control the Foreign Office, and probably they do.’ What did you mean by that?” He replied: “I think the influence of donor money really goes straight into No.10 Downing Street, and then they tell the Foreign Office what to do.” He also invoked the Livingstone Formulation, claiming that accusations of antisemitism are levelled to silence criticism of Israel. We will be writing to the Conservative Party. https://lnkd.in/eK5thT95

Happy Diwali to all those celebrating!

After we called out Big Brother for broadcasting an episode in which a ‘housemate’ is seen wearing a T-shirt depicting the map of Israel as a watermelon, the episode has been edited on ITVX to remove the offending image. The watermelon has become a symbol widely associated with anti-Israel sentiment in recent months. It has therefore come to be regarded by the Jewish community as a genocidal message similar to the slogan ‘From the River to the Sea’ which calls for the elimination of the world’s only Jewish state. After the episode was aired, it was removed from ITVX and re-uploaded with the watermelon removed. A spokesman for Big Brother said that the show did not “allow any personal items into the house that could be deemed harmful,” adding: “we regret that the implications of this particular item of clothing were not fully understood in our bag checks or prior to broadcast of last night’s show. We apologise to any viewers who have been offended by the broadcast and assure viewers that Big Brother was unaware of the implications of the image.” We are grateful to ITV for acting swiftly to ensure that this sort of programming is free from unnecessary political or threatening messaging.

“British taxpayers are entitled to know if the Foreign Office obtained legal advice that claimed that there were no risks related to UNWRA, despite its proven track record, before reinstating its funding.” This morning, live on air, our Director of Investigations and Enforcement, Stephen Silverman, called on Foreign Secretary David Lammy to publish the legal advice in the interest of transparency and consistency. This follows the FCDO refusal to disclose to us whether legal advice was sought or obtained regarding the controversial restoration of UNRWA funding.