Sunday, August 28, 2016

Boycotting Jews and the Jewish State: Nazis then and now

See how different the current BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) campaign against the Jewish State is from the Nazi boycott.

27 August 2016 Update: David Collier exposes the big lie behind the BDS movement.

Police persecution of anti-Jihad campaigner Tommy Robinson continues

Following the disturbing video from Cambridge yesterday I have made a self-explanatory complaint to the Cambridge Police (via

I was extremely disturbed to learn about the Police harassment of Tommy Robinson and his family yesterday while they were sitting in a pub in Cambridge. Apart from the obvious injustice to Mr Robinson I am concerned about why valuable Police resources would be wasted on such an activity. I would be grateful to know who made the decision regarding these valuable police resources and the reasons for it, as that is still unclear to me having listened to the 'explanations' given by the officers in the video. I am sure you will agree that the video casts the Cambridge Police in an extremely bad light.

I will be writing about this on my independent blog ( and will be happy to add any information you are able to provide. 

See also these previous posts

Monday, August 22, 2016

Remembering Daniel

Two years ago today 4-year-old Israeli Daniel Tragerman was killed by a Hamas rocket fired from a UN School. Here is the story I wrote at the time. With Hamas preparing to launch another terrorist war expect exactly the same level of public support for the terrorists and disdain for the true victims.

Sunday, August 14, 2016

Two years ago today: Jewish Chronicle helped fund Hamas

Exactly two years ago today I wrote this article about the Jewish Chronicle's disgraceful decision to include a full page (unpaid for) advert for the DEC Gaza appeal.

We now know that almost all of the funding from that appeal (which was one of the most successful DEC appeals in history in the UK) went directly to Hamas. But anybody with half a brain knew that was going to happen then. Here is the graphic I produced for a follow-up article two days later:

 See also:

Jewish Chronicle's loathsome decision
Jewish Chronicle now relies on Islamic Jihad for its news
The increasingly unhinged Jewish Chronicle
Jewish Chronicle still sinking lower
Jewish Chronicle gets it all wrong

Wednesday, July 27, 2016

LBC's Nick Ferrari: shooting terrorists in France and Germany is right. Shooting them in Israel is a war crime

Had to laugh at LBC Radio's Facebook posting earlier today boasting about how Nick Ferrari ridiculed a caller for daring to say it was wrong for police to shoot to kill the terrorists in France and Germany.

That would be the very same hypocritical jerk Nick Ferrari who spent over 30 minutes (on 25 September 2015)  demonizing Israel for daring to shoot a female Muslim terrorist who was in the act of stabbing a soldier, and then for saying he 'mourned' the death of another terrorist (who had slaughtered passengers on a bus in central Jerusalem on 13 October 2015).

And, incidentally, I actually believe that Nick Ferrari is far and away the best and most objective of all LBC's regular hosts (which is why he needs to be called out when he gets it so wrong).

See also:

Tuesday, July 26, 2016

Media: If today's Church attack had taken place in Israel

This is getting repetitive now, but still needs to be noted....

Note that in November 2014 when Muslim Jihadists slaughtered 5 rabbis as they preyed in a Jerusalem synagogue, this was exactly the response from the media. Obama also demanded that the Israelis 'show restraint', while the Jordanian Government honoured the Jihadists the NEXT day at their opening of Parliament.

Sunday, July 24, 2016

If World War 2 had been conducted like the current 'war on terror'

If World War 2 had been conducted the way Western Governments are now conducting the Jihad war being fought against them we might have had the following kind of behaviour:

The Scene: May 1940. We have just gone through the 254th consecutive night of German bombers blitzing London. The British Government announces its total surprise that on this particular night London should have been chosen to be attacked. The PM goes on the radio and makes the following statements about the current "War on Airplane bombers":
  • Nobody should jump to conclusions about who might be responsible for this particular bombing, especially as we have no conclusive evidence yet that any of the previous 253 bombing raids were in any way related.
  • In fact, our intelligence on previous raids reveals they were carried out by men from different cities with nothing whatsoever in common other than the fact that the cities all happened to be in Germany.  What we must not do is infer from this that the German people mean us any harm whatsoever especially as their Government adheres to the Nazi philosophy which we know seeks worlds peace. 
  • At present we have no idea what the  motive was for any of these attacks but we must treat each one as a separate crime with separate motives. We do not yet know the names and nationalities of the men who carried out tonight's bombing raid. They are just as likely - indeed more likely - to be right-wing British men with a grudge against the London-based Government as men of any other nationality. There is certainly no reason to be believe this is in any way connected with Germany. 
  • And just because we have been bombed now for 254 consecutive nights there is no reason to believe that this will happen again. Obviously citizens should be extremely vigilant as they go about their nightly activities tomorrow - be especially on the look out for right-wing British men complaining about foreigners or income tax who are known to have access to bomber planes. 
  • Above all else what we will not tolerate are those racists who assert that if we spot German bomber planes entering UK airspace tomorrow that we should assume anything other than purely peaceful intent. Attempting to stop such planes flying over London would be considered by us to be unacceptable racial profiling. 
  • In the extremely unlikely event that bombs are dropped again we will treat each individual bombing as a separate criminal act and will spare no expense in attempting to track down the individual pilot responsible in each case. In the unlikely event that such a pilot is found to be from a foreign country (which is just as likely to be Honduras, New Zealand, or Zaire as it is to be Germany) we will expect the government of that country to help us track down the criminal.  Indeed we now have reason to believe that a man named Fritz Schmidt of Hamburg was a pilot involved in a previous bombing and as a result I have asked Herr Hitler the German Chancellor to consider bringing this man into custody. 
  • Moreover, because several men from German towns have been previously implicated My Majesty's government is hereby donating 15 billion pounds to Herr Hitler's Germany to ensure that they have the resources to find and punish the guilty men.

Friday, July 22, 2016

Munich attack: Here we go again

With another attack I have updated this graphic so that the main stream media have as little to do as possible:

Saturday, July 16, 2016

Terrorism in France and Israel

Someone on Facebook posted this image (I understand the original artwork is called "Loss" by Lyceum) but with Israel as the big dog and France the small dog. A commenter said it needed to be the other way round, so here it is:

Here is the previous version:

On using trucks to kill civilians

And to recall, here is the full antisemite test:

Friday, July 15, 2016

Nice attack: Israel responds*

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu today issued the following statement in the light of the tit-for-tat violence in France which yesterday in Nice claimed the lives of a Muslim truck driver, along with a number of Muslim civilians and French colonialists. 

I strongly condemn the ongoing cycle of violence in France and call on both sides to show restraint. We mourn the loss of life on both sides. While I believe that France has a right to exist, our continued support for France's sovereignty cannot be guaranteed if the French continue with their disproportionate response and suppression against its Muslim citizens.  I deplore the French Government decision to impose a State of Emergency  that disproportionately hurts millions of French Muslims who are trying to see their families over the holiday weekend. The French government has to understand that there is no military solution to this conflict. They should immediately abide by the UN resolution we proposed last week to evacuate all non-Muslim French from cities such as Paris, Nice and Marseilles handing it over to the elected representatives of the moderate wing of ISIS.
*Satire: but this is exactly how the media and France has reacted to similar attacks against Israel. Thanks to Mark Honikberg for idea on the State of Emergency (this is exactly how the EU and media reacted when Israel imposed travel restrictions after the Sarona attack).

See also:

Thursday, July 14, 2016

Media is already following the script on Nice attack

With news of a major terrorist attack in Nice just coming in I was just watching some of the rolling news channels and can confirm that they are following the script that I described several months ago (the words 'Islam' and 'Muslims' are now officially banned in favour of 'radical ideologies' and 'radicals'):

Update:Nice attack - Israel responds
Also, see IsraellyCool Nice Attack Lethal Reporting

Monday, July 11, 2016

Shock move after May appointed leader. New Unified Party announced (FTP*)

With Theresa May appointed Leader of the Conservatives and PM without a vote, what exactly divides the mainstream views of any of these parties? Remember it was May who coined the phrase "The Nasty Party" for the Conservatives- and describes calls herself as a Liberal. So it makes perfect sense to merge them into the new unified FTP (F*ck the Plebs) Party.

The new FTP Party will have a built in Commons majority of 649-1.  And the single opposition MP (UKIP member Douglas Carswell) can be expelled as he is officially a racist xenophobe according to the new legislation.

Wednesday, July 06, 2016

Theresa May banned American bloggers from entering the UK because they were 'pro-Israel'

In 2013 I wrote extensively about the banning of Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller from the UK. As part of their subsequent lawsuit against the UK Government, Spencer and Geller received documents confirming that their pro-Israel views had been a major factor in the decision to ban them.

It is important to note that Theresa May who - according to just about everybody - is shortly going to become the next British Prime Minister, is the person who was responsible for this decision as Home Secretary. Who needs Jeremy Corbyn......

See also:

Friday, July 01, 2016

Two flags different outcome: Sharia Compliant UK

Tommy Robinson face banning order over flag
Terrorist flags to fly over London

Palestinian Terrorism: why not?

Following the brutal murder of 13-year-old Jewish Israeli girl Hallel Yafi Ariel while she slept yesterday, today yet another Jewish family was destroyed when their car was attacked by a Palestinian terrorist.

The EU and USA  could stop the terrorism immediately by simply cutting off their multi-billion dollar payments to the PA (which are used not just for incitement but also to pay the salaries of terrorists and their families). They won't of course*. But while they refuse to provide any deterrents, I don't understand why, for all his strong words, Netanyahu doesn't either. All I can see - as far as the Palestinians are concerned - are incentives to keep it up.

* The reason they won't was given to me by the British Foreign Office when I complained about the use of British taxpayer money to fund terrorist salaries. They said that 'cutting off such funds would lead to more violence'.  Aso remember that neither the EU nor USA ever criticise Mahmoud Abbas who this week spewed antisemitic blood libels to the rapturous applause of the European Parliament while his side-kick demanded that Palestinians 'slit the throat of every Israeli they find'.

Friday, June 10, 2016

ISIS and Palestinian terrorists - nothing in common

As usual after a major terrorist attack in Israel those media outlets and commentators who bother to report at all are careful to make clear why such attacks have nothing in common with ISIS, which the following chart clearly proves.

But just when you were convinced they have nothing in common, the following chart should quell your concerns!!!

See also:

Thursday, June 09, 2016

Media portrays Palestinians as the real victims of terrorist attack in Tel Aviv

Exactly as I expected from the Evening Standard. This was the only item they had on the massacre in Tel Aviv. The poor Palestinians who cannot travel to commit further terrorist attacks are the real victims, not Jews murdered while drinking coffee.

 The Standard has a long history of anti-Israel bias.

Clearly another reminder is needed:

Wednesday, June 08, 2016

Wednesday, June 01, 2016

Letter to the CEO of Speakers’ Trust about the anti-Israel speech controversy

Following on from the recent articles here, herehere. and here, a friend has sent this excellent letter to Julie Holness (CEO of Speakers' Trust):

Dear Julie

I cannot imagine how stressful it must be for you right now to find yourself drawn into conflict.

I love the idea of the Speakers’ Trust and believe in the right to free speech. However, in terms of lies and misrepresentation, I’m not a fan of defamatory language intended to spread hatred against any individual, group or other such entity existing in this world within which we are so fortunate to live. Therefore, I want to suggest a couple of changes to the statement issued by Speakers’ Trust and the Jack Petchey Foundation.

I am naturally relieved to hear that Leanne Muhammed will not be going forward in the Speak Out Competition. However, my concern is that I’m unsure if you realise that allowing Leanne to retain the title of “winner" positions anyone in opposition of her diatribe as “perpetrator" and Leanne as "victim”. I am alarmed at your statement clearly indicating that the only reason she is not being put forward is due to “abuse”. Such statement denies any responsibility on your part clearly laying the blame for failing to be selected at the door of those who have expressed their objections.

"As a Regional Final winner the speech was posted online. Following vile and hateful comments posted online during this Bank Holiday weekend Speakers Trust removed the video of Leanne’s speech. We will not tolerate trolling of young people. As a small charity without the capacity to moderate comments 24 hours a day it was considered essential to protect Leanne by temporarily suspending the regional video until we were able to consult fully with her school and family.”

May I respectfully point out that this paragraph is missing the context, i.e., that Leanne’s speech contained harmful antisemitic tropes and blood libels. Please see the European working definition here:

As you are aware a "social media war" ensued where jews and non-jews expressed their deep hurt at the distortion of the behaviour of the Jewish State. Bloggers had discovered Leanne’s twitter feed containing propaganda and other associations she has made via social media tools. Voicing their discoveries and objections utilising social media, they were themselves subject to a torrent of antisemitic abuse. Therefore, in order for the Speakers’ Trust and Jack Petchey Foundation to take responsibility and “stop the war” created, I want to invite you to rethink this statement and reword along the lines of:

“As a Regional Final winner the speech was posted online. Following objections to the content of Leanne’s speech we temporarily suspended the regional video until we were able to consult fully with her school and family and investigated the concerns of those who had objected so strongly [feeling hurt, frightened and angry] to the content."

I wonder if I can help you think through what Leanne is really saying? The subtle nuances contained in Leanne’s video can be tricky for individuals to spot. The “subliminal message” passively received by viewers is antisemitic, i.e., that a bunch of thieves, oppressors [land-grabbers] and baby-killing jews are responsible for her claim of “refugee” status.

With regard to such status alongside Leanne’s “identity achievement”, i.e., as a “British Palestinian”, I wonder if it may help to give you an illustration of how strange these words are to the rational mind. Let me explain. On my father’s side I am a third generation person of European jewish descent. I identify as British. In the last century my father’s father was forced to flee persecution in Russia just part of the longest hatred forcing the human movement of jewish people across the world for no other reason than being a jew. Although jews in many parts of the world are still subject to extreme prejudice, we now have the safe space of the Jewish State. What I want you to do is to imagine if I called myself a “British Russian”, or a “Ukrainian Russian”? Or a “ Third Generation Soviet Union refugee"? Can you imagine how credible I would sound if I made a speech ending with “free Kiev” [from the Soviet aggressors]?

The British public are being brainwashed by the Palestinian narrative. May I respectfully refer you to the research of David Collier. I provide a link to a piece by David that also draws attention to the investigations and explanations of the narrative by Edgar Davidson and Brian John Thomas. Due to incidents such as affording Leanne Muhammed a stage to promote antisemitism, I concur with their view that the future of British Jewry in the UK is hard to imagine. I respectfully refer you to David Collier’s article to help deepen your understanding of the reasons behind why we share such a view.

In terms of the words:"Both the Jack Petchey Foundation and Speakers Trust which runs the Challenge have a primary duty of care to the young people we work with and we cannot accept any form of abuse against them." I agree and echo such sentiment. However, perpetuating the cycle of abuse is emotive language. The complex forces at play contain a multitude of variables and prove difficult for most individuals to grasp. Meaning and the cause of the upset is lost. Society is “triangulated” into conflict. We see individuals drawn into choosing a side based on rhetoric. A current example, amplified by media reporting, is the abuse directed at supporters of Depp and Heard. However, to my mind if you had understood the destructive intention of Leanne’s speech and how instead of achieving her own identity, she has been groomed, exploited and radicalised into becoming a weapon of war, perhaps you may not have given her the opportunity to enter the competition in the first place. Therefore, I invite you to reconsider and remove this inflammatory sentence delivering the meaning that there are people [those opposed to Leanne’s speech] who do not want to live in peace:

"We are determined that all of our young speakers, irrespective of background, race or religion, should be able to speak out in a safe and supportive environment. In our society people have the right to hold and express different views or perspectives. It is important that young people can express these, challenge and question in an appropriate manner and learn to live with each other in peace."

For clarity, Leanne’s speech works directly against the notion of peace. Leanne’s indoctrinators have simply abused the good intentions of your competition to offer a safe supportive environment. Allowing this 15 year old girl to keep her title means that society will hold her up as a martyr. As such, the mechanism under which antisemitism thrives clicks into place thereby rendering the road to peace increasingly invisible.

My final point is that after having been subject to Leanne’s misrepresentation of Israel, a country that has always striven for peace, I was horrified to hear Leanne state: “Islam is perfect. I am not”. This is an extremist view and the reason why individuals like Leanne are so susceptible to radicalisation. When a religion is set up as “perfect” there is no ability to question, no personal power, no growth or development from reform available. Therefore I invite you to think about this final point. As a British citizen who doesn’t follow Islam where am I positioned? Where are you? I feel uncomfortable enough. Do you?

In light of the above, I call for you to remove Leanne’s status as Regional Final winner.

Best wishes

Below is the response video by Brian John Thomas (which includes the original video of Leanne Mohamad's speech):

Monday, May 30, 2016

When you challenge anti-semitic blood libels you become the victim of anti-semitic abuse and threats

This is an update to the posts here, here, and here.

When a non-political charity - against its own rules - awarded first prize in the Redbridge finals of its speaking competition for youngsters to a virulently anti-Israel speech full of lies and blood libels, I was one of the first to complain. Not to demand the speech be censored, but simply to point out that this speech should not have won the competition and that the charity should set the record straight by allowing a proper response to the speech (which had been met with enthusiastic applause at Wanstead High School). I also noted that the student in question had been extensively re-tweeting hateful material from a well-know terrorist supporter called Abbas Sarsour.

The charity said that they had already decided a week earlier that the speech was in breach of their two fundamental rules and that because of this the student was not being put through to the Grand Final.

Because the antisemites (of whom there are far more than Israel supporters) decided that I had played a role  in 'silencing a child' I have now been abused, threatened in many ways - including being reported to the police - and accused of being a child molester and paedophile. I am currently receiving, for example,  hundreds of abusive tweets per hour (even though I only joined twitter a few months ago and before the weekend had received less than a dozen tweets in total). You can see them on my twitter feed and comments on my recent blog postings.  There is also a campaign to 'ban' me (whatever that means):

@Support Please ban @EdgarDavidson81 for online threats to @LeanneMohamad #LetLeanneSpeak

David Collier has a brilliant report on the same thing here.

Daphne Anson: Police have been informed tweets Israel defaming schoolgirl as anti-Israel forces rally

And here is a reminder for all the haters - who say they are not antisemites - now visiting my blog:

Sunday, May 29, 2016

This explains Leanne Mohamad's perverse views about 'Palestine' and the 'Zionists'

Based on her retweets, 'Peace loving' Leanne Mohamad gets all her information about 'Palestine' from Hamas supporter Abbas Sarsour, who glories in the murder of 'Zionists'. Above are some screenshots from his twitter feed
The story of schoolgirl Leanne Mohamad's award-winning anti-Israel speech, full of ignorant lies and blood libels, keeps getting more interesting. I don't normally 'do' twitter but I posted about the story there today and got back a torrent of abuse. Some of it was of this sort:

But most of it was accusing my of 'censoring' Leanne (an interesting accusation given that my letter to the CEO of the Speakers Trust specifically said I was not asking for the video to be removed or censored, and in any case the Trust had already unanimously decided she could not be put through to the Grand Final as the speech broke their fundamental rules). And Leanne herself started re-tweeting these tweets to me, e.g.:

So I decided to have a look at Leanne's twitter feed. And, unsurprisingly, there was this kind of propaganda and lies:

But then I noticed that there were far more offensive re-tweets and they were all from Abbas Sarsor, who is a well-known Hamas supporting propagandist and inciter of violence (the website Canary Mission has found many anti-Israel/antisemitic student activists and academics in the USA use his work). I present below some further examples of Sarsour's work, which Leanne is so keen to re-tweet. It was lucky I took some screenshots because just a few minutes later I discovered that Leanne had blocked me (and I suspect she may also be in the process of removing tweets).

What I would like to know (and will ask her Head Teacher) is if anybody from the School bothered to check her twitter feed before deciding that she was the best student to speak**(UPDATE see below). I will ask the local MP the same question given the Government's determination to identify and eradicate extremism targeting school children.

Anyway here are some more of Sarsour's tweet. All his tweets fall into one of the following categories:

**UPDATE: Here is a screenshot taken minutes ago from Wanstead High School:

UPDATE: Now I have exposed this I have become subject to multiple personal threats and abuse

Saturday, May 28, 2016

A schoolgirl's 3-minute video confirms there is no future for British Jewry

Update: As you can see from clicking the link, the video has now been removed from the Speak Out Challenge website but here is a screenshot below I saved, and the whole video is actually interspersed with the response video from Brian of London at the bottom of this page. Also worth mentioning that the antisemites on twitter are apoplectic at my actions that they say have led to this girl being 'censored'. In fact, the Speakers Trust had already decided not to send the girl through to the Grand Final and, moreover, in my letter to the CEO I specifically said I was not asking for the video to be removed. I was asking for the right to respond to the lies (and specifically have the School hear the response). Brian's video does this.
Another Update: This explain the 'Peace loving' schoolgirl's perverse views on 'Palestine'


This is actually a good news and bad news update to the posting yesterday about how a 3-minute anti-Israel hate speech full of lies and blood libels by Leanne Mohamad of Wanstead High School won the 2015-16 Jack Petchey “Speak Out” Challenge Redbridge Regional Final.

The good news is that I have had a response** (see below) from the  CEO of the Speakers Trust (who run the competition on behalf of the Jack Petchey Foundation); she states that the judging panel have now decided unanimously against sending Leanne Mohamad through to the Grand Final. The reason is that they had the same concerns to those I raised. Note, in particular, how the speech was in breach of the two 'fundamental rules made explicit during training'.

The bad news is that the more I think about Leanne Mohamad's speech, and the jubilant reaction to it, the more it is evident that there is no long-term future for British Jewry (and it seems Brian of London agrees with me). Here we have a very well-educated child in an affluent suburban school who has been groomed and brainwashed into accepting a 'Palestine' narrative that is even more extreme than that proposed by Hamas. Yet, she seems to have had the full support of all the school's teachers and pupils as well as the local authorities who clearly bought into, and supported, the same narrative because so much of Britain's political and academic class is controlled by the Islamic/leftist alliance that deems 'Palestinians' as the ultimate victims of our age and Israelis as the ultimate villains.

A very large proportion of schoolchildren are being brought up with the same extreme views as Leanne Mohamad. People with these views are already dominant in Britain's Universities with their "Israel apartheid" weeks and their closing down of any pro-Israel speech on campus.  Things are clearly going to get a lot worse with the influx of immigrants who have been fed the same antisemitic propaganda from birth. In 5 years time Leanne Mohamad may be intimidating Jewish students on a University campus with her lies and in 15 years time it is highly likely that Leanne Mohamad will be a member of Parliament (she is after all just a younger version of many like her now in the Labour party). Judging by the comments yesterday of Teresa May someone like her would be welcome in the Conservative party and could even become Prime Minister.

Leanne's narrative is driven by hateful antisemitism that refuses to acknowledge any rights of the Jewish people, and completely ignores the reality of Palestinian terrorism and rejectionism, the fact that the 'poor Palestinians' are the recipients of more aid per person than any other people in the world, and that most of the billions of dollars given in aid that have not ended up in terrorist bank accounts has been spent on terror tunnels and weapons. It is a narrative that is clearly promoted not just in Leanne's mosque, but also by the BBC, Sky News and almost every main stream newspaper. That is why not a single person in authority at Wanstead High School or on the various Redbridge committees even questioned the legitimacy of what Leanne was saying or noticed that her speech was in breach of both of the competition's fundamental rules.

The 'official' Jewish leadership of the UK ultimately bears some responsibility for allowing this narrative to take hold, when the simple truth was all that it needed to expose it. Now Jewish parents in the UK are having to send their children to schools and colleges where the Leanne Mohamads dominate all debate, while the Jews cower in silence. That is the future for Jews in the UK.

**Response from Julie Holness, CEO
Thank you very much for your email, which my colleague Rebecca Griffiths has this morning forwarded to me. We take your concerns very seriously. 
Every year thousands of young people are trained in the art of public speaking. They are encouraged to speak out on something they feel passionately about and of course they bring with them their history and culture and beliefs. 
There are, however, two fundamental rules that are made explicit during the training:
- the speech must have a positive and uplifting message - in fact this is one of the core terms of the agreement with the Jack Petchey Foundation.

- a speaker should never inflame or offend the audience or insult others and this, by definition, means that propaganda is ruled out absolutely from the outset.
It is, however, the school that votes through its most talented speaker in an Assembly final and an independent panel of judges from the local community who select their regional winner. Speeches at this level will have been further developed and even rewritten, with the training guidelines but without our input on content. Judges do not mark a speaker down because they disagree with a point of view but they are clearly briefed on the those guidelines. Unfortunately, with over 18,000 young people trained annually, a speech that does not observe these ground rules may very rarely get through on passion and delivery. 
Last Saturday a Speakers Trust and Jack Petchey Foundation judging panel decided unanimously against sending Leanne Mohamad through to the next stage and she will not be speaking at the Grand Final. These were precisely our concerns. 
As a Speakers Trust trainer I was responsible for managing the schools in Redbridge and I have a close affinity with the region. Please let me know if you would like me to forward your email to Wanstead High School so that your comments and reservations may be heard. 
If you wish to discuss this further you have my home office number below, which you are welcome to use at any time. 
Kind regards,
Julie Holness

Chief Executive Officer
Speakers Trust
Getting the Public Speaking
And here is my follow-up:
Dear Julie
Thank you for your very fast response to my letter, which is greatly appreciated.
I am pleased to hear that the judging panel found that the speech by Leanne Mohamad was in breach of both of the fundamental rules you cited and that, as a result, she will not be speaking at the Grand Final.
What I do not understand is that if, as you say, these "two fundamental rules are made explicit during the training" how on earth was it possible for a speech like this not only to be accepted in the first place but to actually win the Redbridge Final? It seems that there must have been a complete breakdown of the competition processes at many levels. It also seems to me that political activists in Redbridge and the School have hijacked the competition to promote what is, ultimately, a deeply antisemitic narrative. 
What I would like to know is how the damage done is going to be redressed. The lies and blood libels in Leanne's speech, which went totally unchallenged, actually go far beyond what even the terrorist organisation Hamas claims. To say these blood libels are deeply offensive to me and my many family members in Israel (some of whom have been murdered by the Palestinian terrorists whose narrative Leanne presents) is an understatement. Yet I see that the video is STILL on your website  on a page which congratulates Leanne as the Redbridge winner. 
I am not, incidentally suggesting that the video must be taken down or censored. But if it is left there must be a clear statement about how it has breached the rules, why it is so offensive and why nothing like that can ever be accepted in the future. There must also be a proper video response. 
As far as the School is concerned I have already written to the Head Teacher, but I think you should also seek answers from them to the above questions.  It frightens me to know how such extreme, hateful and ignorant views have not only become main stream in such a school, but have become a mark of excellence with apparently unanimous support.
See also: How to win a UK child's charity award - make a speech full of lies and blood libels against Israel 

UPDATE: The Jewish Chronicle has picked up the story, although curiously (given that it failed to cover the story first time when the child won the competition) it headlines with the good news that the Panel unanimously voted the speech out of the final.

UPDATE: Brian of London has produced a superb response video. This is what I will ask the head Master of Wanstead High School to show to all the pupils. Please watch it all:

Update: This explain the 'Peace loving' schoolgirl's perverse views on 'Palestine'

Friday, May 27, 2016

How to win a UK child's charity award - make a speech full of lies and blood libels against Israel

Update: As you can see from clicking the link, the video has now been removed from the Speak Out Challenge website but here below is a screenshot I saved and the whole video is actually interspersed with this response video from Brian of London which is also on my update here.

UPDATE: see here for good news and bad news outcome to this story.

Thanks to Daphne Anson for first alerting me to this story.

How do you win an award with a British Charity whose mission statement is
To enable young people (aged 11 – 25 years in London and Essex), to achieve their potential by inspiring, investing in, developing and promoting activities that increase their personal, social, emotional and physical development.  
Obviously, you make a hate speech containing nothing but blood libels against the State of Israel (a speech that also includes the statement "Islam is perfect" and ends with the raising of the Palestine flag and the call to "Free Palestine" which is wildly applauded). Here is self-explanatory letter I have written to the person in charge of this particular scheme at the Charity:

Dear Ms Griffiths (
I have been a long term supporter of the Jack Petchey Foundation [personal details were added here].  What I was not aware of was that the Charity was now in the business of supporting vicious blood libels against the State of Israel.
Specifically, I have watched the speech by Leanne Mohamad of Wanstead High School  that won the 2015-16 Jack Petchey “Speak Out” Challenge Redbridge Regional Final. This speech consists of three minutes of solid lies and blood libels claiming that every day since 1948 (when the State of Israel was established) the 'defenceless' Palestinians have been slaughtered, with 30,000 children murdered.
For the record there are no verified instances of Palestinian children being 'murdered' by Israel, although many dozens have died as a result of Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist groups launching unprovoked rocket attacks against Israeli civilians (often from schools and hospitals) and then using their own children as human shields when Israel has responded. In fact, Amnesty International (an organisation that has traditionally been hostile to Israel) reported just this week that most of the child casualties of the 2014 conflict (that was started by Hamas) were actually killed by Hamas rockets falling short of their 'target'.  In contrast, there have been several hundred Israel children murdered by Palestinian terrorists who all operate as part of 'official' groups (Hamas, Fatah, and Islamic Jihad) and each such murder is a cause of rejoicing in the Palestinian territories. A catalogues of the most recent murders can be found here. Three especially brutal examples you should read up about are:the Ma'alot School massacre; the Haifa school bus massacre; and the Fogel family massacre.
As for the lie that Palestinian children cannot sleep because they are 'bombed every night', perhaps Ms Mohamad is actually thinking of the Jewish children of Sderot who really were bombed almost every day between 2005 and 2014 by the Palestinians of Gaza.
You must surely be aware that supporting hateful and vicious political propaganda puts the Jack Petchey Foundation in breach of its Charity Commission obligations as made clear in the Commission's document here.  
Before I make a formal complaint to the Charities Commission I would like to know what the Charity is going to do about it and, in particular, whether and when it plans to at least put the record straight for the children of Wanstead High School, in terms of ensuring they hear the truth about what is happening in 'Palestine'.  
Yours sincerely
I have also written to Mr Hamlyn ( the Head Teacher at Wanstead High School and Trudy Kilcullen  (CEO of the Jack Petchey Foundation CEO, And I copied in Jonathan Arkush (President of the BoD) as this must surely be of concern to them.

UPDATE: see here for good news and bad news outcome to this story (including response to my letter).

Incidentally I should really sue Ms Mohamad for plagiarism** (**satire for all you antisemites out there) since it seems her speech was based entirely on my definition of what it means to be a Palestinianist:

Thursday, May 26, 2016

Catch a Jew: the most revealing book about Israel's enemies

I finally got round to reading all of Tuvia Tenebom's book last week having had it for a few months and only previously read a few extracts. The book exposes the total corruption and lies of the multiple NGOs (non Government Organisations) and charities who operate in Israel/Palestine and who are massively funded by foreign governments (especially the EU) to deligitimize Israel, and organise Palestinian 'resistance' and propaganda.

Even for a seasoned 'activist' like myself (who has dedicated much time to investigating and exposing the anti-Zionism of the Western narrative and media, anti-Semitism of Palestinians, and who spends a lot of time in Israel), the overall message of the book was shocking and deeply depressing. It shows on the one hand that the irrational antisemitism that underpins the universal anti-Zionist narrative is even more deeply rooted than I feared; and on the other hand that most Israelis are even more oblivious of this than I suspected.

I think this is one of the most important - and in many ways brilliant - books I have read. Crucially, the reviews and extracts I had read did not do the book justice and in many respects were quite misleading. For a start, the popular narrative that Tuvia is a right-wing Zionist is itself a lie. This lie is promoted by those (including many who call themselves Zionists**) who are uncomfortable when their liberal ideas are blown apart by facts, especially when the person who reveals those facts is a Jew using unconventional methods. Rather than confronting the evidence that Tuvia presents (and it really is more clear-cut and damning than most of what you will have seen elsewhere) critics fall back on the 'right-wing Zionist' (or even 'racist') slur to discredit the fact finder and close down the debate (take a look, for example, at this review of the book in Tablet Magazine). In fact, Tuvia is not a 'rightest' in any normal sense of the word and nor, it seems, a Zionist. Some of his harshest criticism is reserved for ultra-orthodox Jews and 'right wing extremists'. The fact that he refers to the Israeli Labour party as 'centrist' indicates that he is naturally a man of the left.  Indeed, both Netanyahu and Lieberman refused interviews with him since (in Tuvia's words) "both their teams have concluded that I am a leftist troublemaker" and his Bohemian lifestyle puts him socially in the extreme liberal category.

But his 6 months in Israel clearly make Tuvia realise that most of the 'left' are the opposite of the liberal intelligentsia that they claim to be. They are intolerant, shallow and hypocritical; the Jews among them are among the most self-hating, while the non-Jews (of the European and other NGOs) are driven by antisemitism. These activists ignore the most brutal behaviour of Arabs while spending their entire lives looking for Jews in Israel who 'misbehave'. Their objective is to use evidence of such misbehaviour  (no matter how trivial and contrived - indeed it is normally set up by the activists themselves) as 'proof' that Jews do not deserve to have their own country.  It's as simple as that. Hence the book's title "Catch a Jew". These people are determined to make most of Israel 'Judenfrei'.

Readers of my blog will know that that I have spent a lot of time exposing the antisemitism behind some of the most popular and respected NGO's and charities.  However, even I was shocked by the extent to which supposedly 'humanitarian' organisations like the International Red Cross and Medecin Sans Frontiers are actually just political anti-Zionist machines. And the depravity and lies of Israeli NGOs like B'Tselem are also at a level far worse than I ever imagined or reported (and remember B'Tselem are Yachad's main Israel partner).

By being able to cast himself as a different character, depending on who he was meeting, Tenenbom discovered what people really understand and believe. Hence, he exposes a level of antisemitism in supposedly moderate and highly educated Arabs, that almost all Israelis (and certainly the entire Israel media) refuse to acknowledge or accept. But it is what he discovers about 'leftist' Israelis and the NGO activists that is most revealing. For example, Haaretz writer Gideon Levy - man who has dedicated his life to the Palestinian cause and who can find no good Zionist Jew and no bad Palestinian -  is a liar who speaks no Arabic and does not have a single Palestinian friend. In fact Tuvia finds that many Israeli leftists love the Arabs far more than they love the Jews, but do not actually have any Palestinian friends. Their love of Palestinian Arabs is based on a purely theoretical view of what the Palestinians are and what they want. The leftists want - and believe - that the Palestinians are like them and that they yearn for peace and mutual respect. The reality that Tuvia finds everywhere is that, when speaking among themselves (as opposed to their NGO friends and Jews) the Palestinians actually yearn for a Jew-free state encompassing the whole of Israel. And the NGOs have brainwashed their followers to believe that this is the only ethical solution also.

One especially poignant passage is this one:

I meet a very nice couple, both widely known, highly educated, highly intellectual, exemplary self-haters, optimal Arab lovers, and they touch me deeply. They are Israeli Jews and I won’t identify them, what they do, or in what part of the town they reside. They tell me three interesting stories.
(1) They live in a beautiful home, which was renovated for them by an Arab contractor whom they knew and blindly trusted. When the contractor was about done with his work, for which he was handsomely paid, he presented them with a wonderful gift, for which he did not want to get paid: a big olive tree that he planted in their garden. They were very touched by his gesture and thanked him profusely. He listened to their thanks, looked them straight in the eye and said: “You don’t have to thank me. I didn’t do it for you, I did it for myself and my family.” They did not understand what he was saying, and he explained: “Soon you will move out of this house.” How so? “Because soon this land will be free of Jews.” They were devastated. How could he say such a thing to them
(2) Years ago, many years ago, the lady was gang- raped by a bunch of Arab youth.
(3) Years later, their granddaughter was sexually abused by an old Arab friend.
These three stories are the total sum of their personal experience with Palestinians, yet they won’t allow themselves to be affected by any of these incidents. The man explains to me: “I believe in humanism, I believe that the Palestinians are good people and that they want to live with us in peace. I believe that we have done them wrong and I believe that they have not done us wrong. It doesn’t matter to me if what I believe in is factually right. I know it’s not, but I don’t care about facts! I want to believe, even if everything I believe in is false.
This is an attitude I have discovered myself in many conversations with Israelis (especially in Tel Aviv) and my British friends find it very hard to believe. For example, after the massacre of the Fogel family in Itamar in 2011 several Israelis told me that they not only felt no sympathy for the Fogel family 'because they chose to live in the occupied territories' but also felt the act was justified as the 'Itamar settlement was a humiliation' for the Palestinians.

Other parts of the book also provide extensive evidence of things I have suspected and written about. For example:
  • I have long moaned about the anti-Zionist bias of Israeli films. Tuvia discovers that almost every Israeli non-fiction film is funded by external NGOs under condition that they support the anti-Zionist narrative. So basically if you want to make a film and do not have your own funding, your only option is to make an anti-Zionist one. But, because of the leftist domination of academia and the arts, almost all Israel government arts funding also goes to film-makers and artists who promote an anti-Zionist narrative.
  • While I have reported on the anti-Zionist activities of the foreign funded NGOs I was unaware of just how many there are, how well funded they are, and the extent to which they are changing facts and behaviour. For example, it is the NGOs who have created the 'Bedouin' crisis that threatens to disrupt the entire Negev and its future development. The NGOs have even brainwashed the Bedouins into regarding themselves as 'Palestinian Arabs' (something they never considered themselves to be 20 years ago). Elsewhere the NGO activists scour the land looking for anything to photograph and video that can cast Jews in a bad light. Most of the time the incidents they report were actually set up by  the activists themselves (including helping Arabs attack Jews). They also bribe Arabs to invent 'crimes' committed by Jews.
  • The International Red Cross - which exerts enormous power and influence in Israel (Tuvia reports on how IDF soldiers and Police cower when confronted by ICRC people) - is run by an unelected group of Swiss nationals (no other nationals are allowed) and this antisemitic group gets decide what constitutes international law. It is they who decided that, of all the many disputed territories in the world (including China's occupation of Tibet and Turkey's occupation of Northern Cyprus) only Israel's 'occupation' is illegal. 
  • The contrast between the media's narrative about the relative prosperity and freedom of Jews and Arabs and the reality (such as in Hebron where the Jews are ghettoised with no freedom of movement, and forbidden from any type of building work on their homes, while their Arab neighbours have no such restrictions; and the many Palestinian mansions all over the 'West Bank').
However, the most disturbing lesson of the book is Tuvia's contrasts between the beliefs of the majority of Israeli Jews and the Palestinian Muslims. The Jews are naive, riddled with self-doubt and crippled by excessive compassion;  but the Palestinians are united in the belief that one day the whole of Israel will belong to them. Witnessing the way Jews have already lost control of areas in Israel he implies that ultimately this contrast will result in the end of the Jewish State unless things change dramatically.  I am not as pessimistic as Tuvia, but if Israel continues to produce 'generals' like Yair Golan and politicians who are not prepared to stand up to them, then Tuvia will be proved right.

**The fact that the organisers of the Limmud conference actually cancelled Tuvia's invitation to speak on its panel session, exposes Limmud as being completely worthless.

***The Amazon cover page for the book says:
This book recounts the adventures of Tuvia Tenenbom, who wanders around Israel of our time calling himself "Tobi the German". In the course of numerous interviews Tuvia extracts information, sentiments, hidden theories and delusional visions motivating the miscellany of peoples forming the present-day Holy Land. Does Palestinian wife number one hate the Jews more than she hates wife number two? Who does a young German tourist hate more, her dead Nazi grandpa or the just-born Jewish baby? Who finances cash-rich NGOs pursuing a Judenrein Israel? Who sets Palestinian olive groves on fire and why? What do you see from a Piper Cherokee above a Bedu camp? Who are the flaming feminists who sacrifice their lives for the rights of polygamists? Whose land is this, anyway? In the course of his seven-months journey Tobi the German discovers Syrian flags growing inside apples, she-asses who used to be men, five-star refugee camps, flying prophets, cash-loving guardians of the poor, masturbating monks in eternal love of Palestinians, human rights activists in eternal hatred of Jews, cash-rich rabbis without congregations, families growing in cemeteries -- among many others. Catch the Jew!, the most humorous composition on the Middle East to date, is a polyglot spin around a cultural miscegenation in a very small space. However, it is never-daunted author finds that with labneh, strudel, olive oil, apple pie, kebab, rugelach, hummus and schnitzel, a happy tummy can bear us through even the most appalling matters. Except the conclusion.

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

On the appropriate response to antisemitic lies and blood-libels directed at Israel

Following my report on  Sunday's counter-demo against an antisemitic 'pro-Palestinian' attempt to spew lies and hatred in London and close down a Jewish-Israeli store a commentator expressed concern at the (well-meaning) banner here held up by one of the pro-Israel demonstrators, feeling it was far too defensive.

Indeed this is a subject I've addressed before - notably here - but it seems few people understand it so I will attempt to make this very simple using the following hypothetical analogy:
Jackie White looks after her 80 year old mother Iris who has been house bound in London with dementia for 10 years. One day a man Patrick Bates with a history of psychopathic violence and delusions, tells the local media that Iris has been murdering street children in Brazil every day for the last 10 years and that he plans to kill her to stop this. 

What should Jackie's reaction be? Should she:

a) Attempt to counter the accusations of Patrick Bates by providing proof of Iris's long-term disabilities and explaining what a caring woman she has always been.


b) Expose Patrick Bates as the liar and dangerously insane psychopath that he clearly is.

If she chooses a) she has already entered into a narrative in which 'both sides' are talking about whether or not Iris is a child killer. A reasonable 'headline' for the media would be:
"Jackie White denies her mother is a child killer"
If she chooses b) she has put the focus solely on the dangerous Patrick Bates. A reasonable headline would be:
"Lying madman threatens to kill 80-year-old housebound woman with dementia"
Given the obvious preference for b) can anybody explain to me why, in response to the obvious lies and blood libels about Israel originating from psychopathic killers like Hamas, Israel supporters choose the equivalent of option a) above and hence ensure that:
  1. The lies and blood libels ("Israel massacres children", "Israel is an Apartheid state" etc) become the focus of the discussion
  2. The lies and blood libels get repeated ad nausea and hence become intrinsically associated with Israel
  3. The systematic lying and psychopathic behaviour of the Palestinians and their supporters is totally ignored.
So, in future, Israel supporters must avoid saying what Israel 'is not' and focus on exposing the lies and psychopathic behaviour of the Palestinians and their supporters. Since almost all of the lies against Israel are simply a reflection of what her accusers really do, the accusations should be turned back against them; for example, here are the kind of things that the banners should say:
"There are 58 apartheid countries in the world: they are the 58 Islamic countries."
"Palestinians glory in the murder of Jewish children"
"The greatest honour in Palestinian society is to kill a Jew in cold blood"
"Believing Palestinian lies inhibits peace"
"Accepting Palestinian lies encourages them to kill"
"Arabs ethnically cleansed Jews from every one of their countries"
We should also be telling the stories and showing the faces of the many Israelis murdered by Palestinians including the hundreds of children.

See also:
All these progressive thinkers, intellectuals and peacemakers cannot be wrong

Monday, May 16, 2016

Read the antisemitic abuse following today's counter demo

I reported earlier on today's counter-demo against an antisemitic  'pro-Palestinian' attempt to spew lies and hatred in London and close down a Jewish-Israeli store. As this video from the anti-Israel agency Russia Today shows, the counter demo was clearly both a surprise and shock to the antisemites who normally have free rein over London's streets.

But just check our the continual stream of antisemitic abuse in the comments on the video. I have captured a few screen shots below:

Sunday, May 15, 2016

The day the Jews of London and their friends fought back

Update: see this follow-up for people who think none of this has anything to do with antisemitism.

Today, like so many days in London over the last 10 years, a group of antisemites who go under the laughable guise of 'Palestine supporters' planned to:
  1. March through the streets of London shouting despicable lies against Israel without being challenged
  2. Hand out leaflets spewing more lies, hatred and antisemitic blood libels to unwitting Londoners trying to enjoy a day out in the sunshine; and finally
  3. Lay siege to a modest Jewish Israeli-owned shop with the explicit intention of forcing it out of business, without a murmur of protest against them.
But NOT today. They met their match because, thanks to outstanding work by Gemma Sheridan (see update* about this below), Paul Besser, Joseph Cohen, Yochy Davis,  and others, Israel supporters had found out their plans and, at short notice, got together an impressive counter demo. And for over 3 hours Israel supporters were right in the faces of the antisemites ensuring that not a single Londoner or tourist heard their lies unchallenged.

It all started when the antisemites gathered in Soho Square and were about to serenade the visitors there trying to have a peaceful lunch with their classic tune "From the river to the sea Palestine will be free".  They were greeted first by Ishmael Sali, who they assumed would be joining their hatefest.

The look on their faces was quite something to see when Ishmael pulled out a large Israeli flag (see more pictures of Ishmael below), followed by others doing the same. Within seconds the terrorist supporting goons were surrounded by more people with Israel flags (more people in fact than the antisemites) and for the 20 minutes they stayed there singing the Israel supporters drowned out their noise with their own, including with some impressive shofar blowing.

When the antisemites started their march toward Covent Garden they were surrounded and followed all the way. For the 2 hours they were outside Sabon Israel supporters made sure to counter their lies. In particular they made sure the lies in these leaflets they were handing out did not go unchallenged:

And their ludicrous stunts - like letting off smoke bombs in red and then in the colours of 'Palestine' and attempting to throw a bag filled with shit were muted.

Even when their demo outside Sabon ended (to a rousing rendition of Hatikvah) the antisemites were followed all the way back. For once they did not have the streets of London to their own and they did not like it one bit.

Although still relatively small in numbers today's direct action by Israel supporters was a thousand times more effective than anything done in the last 10 years by the entire set of organisations run by Britain's 'official Jews' combined (UPDATE: Note I am referring to those 'official' demos and not other direct action events like today of which there have been quite a few). In fact I have no doubt that if the Board of Deputies and CST were aware of what was going to happen they would either have tried to stop it or would have made sure the Israel supporters were penned in as far away from the action as possible (which they manage to do every time) to maintain the image of the 'trembling Jew' **(UPDATE: see below comments about this from the President of the BoD).

Every time the 'Palestine Solidarity Committee' plans one of these stunts I can't help thinking of this. And it's about time they are shown up for the bigots they are.

UPDATE: Look at the antisemitic abuse after a video of the counter demo was posted.

PS I like these photos from today (courtesy Sharon Zacks):

and this one courtesy of Israel Advocacy Movement which perfectly sums up the day:

And here is what Israel Advocacy Movement says about today:

London Palestine Action tried to close down an Israeli cosmetics shop in London called Sabon, their reason? Because the Sabon factory is in Kiryat Gat, a city well within the 1949 Armistice Lines, this was not a protest against "settlements", disgracefully this was a protest against the very existence of Israel.
London Palestine Action promoted this event for over a month, yet without advertising we were able to mobilise far more activists than they had. For one of the first times in years, our chants of "1, 2, 3, 4 stop the boycott, stop the war, 5, 6, 7, 8 stop the boycott, stop the hate", drowned out their screams of "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free"... a call for the destruction of Israel.
With our activists and supporters robed in Israeli flags we were successful in obscuring their message of hate.
The cherry on the cake, was when Chloe organised our supporters to end the day with a shopping spree in Sabon... the perfect response to a boycott.
For those that couldn't make it today, please take 5 minutes to head over to and support a great business that has found itself the focus of a vile and bigoted hate campaign.
Thank you so much each and everyone who came and continues to support Israel with us.
UPDATE: Wow it seems we REALLY got to them:

..and check the antisemitic abuse on the view comments

*UPDATE: Gemma Sheridan was working solidly on this - and the counter-demos that took place the day before - for six weeks and deserves special credit.

**UPDATE: Following my posting of this article the President of the Board of Deputies (Jonathan Arkush) wrote this response (which he is happy for me to share here):
Dear Edgar
I was very pleased indeed to read about the counter-demonstration.  You rather did the Board a disservice with your wide-of-the-mark comment.  The Board has always supported demonstrating and indeed has organised many of the leading ones.  The very last thing we would do is to have restricted this type of event !  Provided, obviously, any demonstration is conducted within the law I can assure you it will have the Board’s support.
I think you are aware that under my presidency the Board has spoken up and acted loudly and clearly for British Jews and Israel and I assure you will continue to do so without fear or favour.

What we need to do is to act with unity.  Let us support each other strongly and steer away from making derogatory comments – we can save those for the real opposition.

UPDATE: a commentator expressed concern at the (well-meaning) banner saying "Israel is not an apartheid state etc") held up by one of the pro-Israel demonstrators, feeling it was far too defensive. I have written about this here.

See also: