I warned that adopting the IHRA would shut down Palestinian protest – I’ve been proved right
Published
by
Richard Kuper
JVL Introduction
As predicted…
Tower Hamlets council decided to ban the Big Ride For Palestine from finishing with a rally in one of its parks was made in secret using a false interpretation of the IHRA definition of antisemitism.
It was, writes Antony Lerman, a clear and potentially illegal attack on freedom of speech.
This article was originally published by The Independent on Sat 10 Aug 2019. Read the original here.
I warned that adopting the IHRA would shut down Palestinian protest – I’ve been proved right
The vagueness of the ‘working definition’ of antisemitism has licensed a free-for-all of interpretation, delighting opponents of Palestinian demands for equal rights
Loading article text…
I totally support what Antony Lerman is saying. What can be done about this?
Whilst comparing Israel to the Nazis is seen as offensive and quite rightly so, the UN (which formerly defined Zionism as racism) has found that the situation in the west Bank at least falls under a legal definition of apartheid. The first person to point this out at the UN was none other than Dr Henrik Vewoerd himself. I think there can be no doubt that Israelis have practised what is now called “ethnic cleansing” since the Nakba & Deir Yassin. Rather I suggest that Tower Hamlets has directly discriminated in an openly racist way.
There is a need to understand the process of what happened.
Elected councillors adopted the IHRA definitiona and examples as policy.
It was then council officers who had to apply the policy in practice.
They always “play it safe” by slavishly following even the slightest basis for refusing anything – this is how all bureaucrats conduct themselves.
That is how they came to ban the end of the cycle ride.
The elected councillors may well have been completely unaware of the ban.
Already, there are now signs of “mission creep”.
The latest fad is now for councils to adopt anti-Islamophobia definitions and examples, based largely on a slight re-wording of the IHRA definition and examples but with the word Jew being replaced by the word Muslim.
Islamists are cashing in on the efforts of Israeli zionists to immunise Israel from any form of objective analysis and criticism.
Soon, anything which is considered critical of Islam or Muslim-ness will be considered Islamophobic.
What next?
anti-Christianism or anti-Hinduism or anti-Sikhism or anti-Shintoism?
All this is doing is re-introducing a religious crime of blasphemy to shield legitimate criticism of regimes which consistently violate human rights.