Why is a festival of Israeli film fighting for censorship in London?

The bid to ban men from seeing The Gift of Fire sets a very dangerous precedent indeed

20 June 2015

9:00 AM

20 June 2015

9:00 AM

You might think that Jews, faced with a relentless campaign to ban their culture, would think once, twice, a hundred times, about instituting bans themselves. After they had thought about it, they would decide that, no, absolutely not, prudence as much as principle directs that they of all people must insist that art should be open to all.

A good liberal idea, you might think. So good and so obvious there’s no need to say more. If you still require an explanation, allow me to help. You don’t try to silence others if you believe in artistic and intellectual freedom. You keep your mind open and the conversation going. Every little Hitler and great dictator in history has tried to tell the public what it can and cannot see, and no one should want to join their company.

It says much about the political and religious neuroses of our time that the best defence of artistic freedom came this week from entertainment corporations, so often depicted in the arts as the home of grasping tyrants who crush creativity as they push their opium on the masses. Specifically, the managers of the Odeon UCI Cinemas Group and the tax exile Guy Hands, whose Terra Firma Capital owns the chain.

They made their stand for freedom on The Gift of Fire, which was due to be shown at London’s Israeli film festival. As far as I can tell, it is a ripping romance about a beautiful Jewish woman in medieval Spain fleeing the Spanish Inquisition. I’d love to tell you more about her scrapes. Alas, I cannot, for I am a man, and my unfortunate possession of a Y chromosome prevents me from seeing the film.

Its screening had been due to take place at the Odeon Swiss Cottage. But the director, Rechy Elias, insisted that only women could attend. Elias is from the ultra-conservative Haredi sect of Judaism, which, like extreme movements in all the world’s major religions, is flourishing with a depressing vigour. As with so many other fundamentalist creeds and cults, sex is an obsessive source of interest to the Haredis. A Haredi school in Stamford Hill recently announced that, Saudi–style, it would not allow women to drive children to its gates. With similar reasoning, Ms Elias said her film was controversial because it contained scenes of women dancing. No man could see them, for lord knows what they would do if they did.

The Odeon refused to ban. The only legal ground for stopping people going into their cinemas was if they were children trying to sneak into an adult movie, it said. Far from supporting it, the festival organisers were so outraged by the company’s defence of equality that they promised to ‘stand outside the cinema and stop men from going in’. When the cinema refused to back down, they withdrew the film. The JW3 arts centre, a private club with no obligation to treat people equally, agreed to show it to an all-female audience instead. The centre’s directors, like the organisers of the festival, said that if the director had known men might see her work she would have made a different film. Not one of them stopped to imagine how their endorsement of selective bans and appeasement of prejudice might look to others.

The line between ‘anti-Zionist’ and ‘anti-Semitic’ protests in Britain has become so blurred of late you can barely see it. We have Jew-hating politicians and Muslim leaders feeding every type of conspiratorial fantasy, and artists have been cheering them on.

Last year London’s Tricycle Theatre banned the annual Jewish film festival because its organisers took a tiny amount of money from the Israeli government. The Tricycle did not insist that other performers — British or foreign — show that every penny of their funding met politically correct standards. The theatre did not believe that the hundreds of thousands of pounds it took from the British state was an endorsement of the government’s wars or policies. But when it came to Jews, different standards applied.

When Lord Keynes established the Arts Council he ensured that it worked at ‘arm’s length’ from ministers. Politicians would not then be able to impose their dogmas on publicly funded culture. The Tricycle offered a parable of how bureaucrats can hijack the public sector and subvert Keynes’s principles. It showed that while politicians, who whatever else you think about them are at least elected, cannot censor and impose party lines, unelected cultural bureaucrats are free to do both.

Individual artists are as disreputable as taxpayer-funded institutions. Just before the Israeli festival opened, Ken Loach, Mike Leigh, Peter Kosminsky and many another British film-makers called on cinemas to cancel performances. Imagine the malice or cold-blooded indifference it takes for one artist to try to ban the work of another. It wasn’t that Loach, Kosminsky and the rest had even paid their fellow directors the courtesy of watching their work. They weren’t saying that the festival was stuffed with Israeli government propaganda. They couldn’t, because it included the work of Israeli Arab and Palestinian film makers. No matter. Because the art was Israeli, it had to go.

Far from recoiling from the arguments of their enemies, the organisers of the festival showed that they were no better. Only in their case, instead of banning Jewish films, they banned Jewish men.

Racial, political, religious and sexual hysteria swirl round the art of a tiny people. Standing against all the prejudices is the profit motive of the modern corporation. I accept that Guy Hands makes an unlikely hero, and what with one thing and another there hasn’t been much good to say about capitalism of late. But I will say this. Capitalism may not be inspiring but at least it welcomes customers without regard for class, colour, creed, gender or sexual orientation. If it is legal to sell a product, it won’t care who buys it.

As extremists of all types tell us what we can see and say, that simple commercial creed feels pure and noble in comparison.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10

Show comments
  • Dan O’Connor

    ” Capitalism may not be inspiring but at least it welcomes customers without regard for class , colour, creed, gender or sexual orientation ”

    In other words , the perfect definition of moral nihilism .
    A great uniformized, de-culturalised , de-nationalised , de-ethnicised , de-historicised, de-genderised , kindergarden of the MacWorld consumer global shopping mall
    The war on the preservation of ethnic/ cultural diversity
    This is so that other far more ethno-centrically conscious groups can have a safe sea to swim around in unobserved and unscrutinised to advance their own groups ethnic interests in the cultural vacuum they have strived to created by guilt tripping their main historícal rivals into accepting that they are an illigitimate non-peoples and meaningless social construct that does not really exist and has no group interests .

    • TrueNorthFree

      The people who have been intensively brainwashed for years “into accepting that they are an illigitimate non-peoples and meaningless social construct” are white people in their own white homelands, Dan.
      What has been done to whites in our own white homelands in the last few decades makes me very sad.

      • Dogsnob

        I took that to be his point?

      • anthony owens

        There are no ‘white homelands’.

        • TrueNorthFree

          There are Black countries, Asian countries, Hispanic countries. etc. White homelands are those countries that white people settled and developed for centuries. The statement: “There are no ‘white homelands” is profoundly racist towards whites. Anti-white racists are working very hard to make sure there will be no white homelands for white people because they believe the world would be much better without white people.

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    “When Frederick Leuchter (author of the Leuchter report) visited England in November 1991 at the invitation of David Irving’s Clarendon Club, to lecture at Chelsea Town Hall in London, he was arrested on-stage by Metropolitan Police officers at the request of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, held in the cells, and deported without appeal back to the United States. In Massachusetts, he was victimised, assaulted, and prosecuted at the instance of local Jewish bodies on the hardly relevant pretext that he had been practicing as an engineer without proper registration (as did over half of that state’s engineers). Fred Leuchter was forced out of work, hounded out of his home, and obliged to change his identity and residence.”
    So clearly on the right track. You don’t attract flak until you’re over the target. The truth needs needs no laws to protect it. Lies however, …
    Jack, Japan Alps

    • What is your motivation?! … Even when David Irving would never approve his daughter getting married to you or some other Oriental!

      • Dan O’Connor

        Do you notice something rather strange about your response ?
        Your response doesn’t seek to refute or even dispute the truth of the events descibed by Jack’
        What you are doing is questioning his ” motivation ” ., as if a person’s motivation for stating 2 + 2 = 4 makes the fact that it does = 4 any less credible
        And by the way, unlike Whites , Orientals can get away with objecting to mixed marriage unapologetically and uncontroversially because they are not White .

        • Jackthesmilingblack

          Cheers, Dan.
          Logic never was Jock’s strength. Oriental? This joker is ball-to-the-wall insane.
          Be advised that I am and always have been British. And you can bet the farm on that.
          Jack, the Japan Alps Brit

          • Why do you feel the need to constantly broadcast about where you currently live?! Who give a rat’s backside but you, you strange foreign saddo (and a wind-up par excellence)! Don’t call yourself a Troll because you are too dumb, and your posts show you are a bit dense!

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Because on occasion you have denied the existence of the Japan Alps. Which makes you a Japan Alps denier.
            Jack, the Japan Alps Brit

          • Gilbert White

            Beautiful wooded forest Jack, the Japanese understood water catchment before most but where do the Alps come in to it?

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            “but where do the Alps come in to it?”

            This is where I reside as a Brit resident abroad; namely an overview of my address. And talking of water, this is the start of the rainy season. Just when you think things can’t get any worse, our local volcano has taken it upon itself to erupt. But at last the rain knocks the ash down. So if Mt. Asama decides to really blow its top, I’ll have a ring-side seat. Be advised that the recent report in the Guardian was inaccurate to the point of fabrication.

            Jack, the Japan Alps Brit

          • No-one gives a rat’s backside about where you live, you wind-up!

          • Ivan Ewan

            “Just when you think things can’t get any worse, our local volcano has taken it upon itself to erupt.”

            Damn, it missed.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Still time to catch it Ivan.

          • Ivan Ewan

            Then get on with it. The only ones who’ll mourn your loss are card-carrying villains.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            You’ve got the wrong villain, Ivan.

          • An idiot from the Far East who doesn’t know what people are really talking about.

          • Jack is himself a Japanese; and he is talking about a particular range of mountains in his own Country. They do exist, but really that is a bit of a nonsense when compared with the real Mt. range.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            “The only “Alps” that there are, and that that one knows of, or I knows of, are in the European Continent, in the Swiss Cantons and Confederation in Switzerland, in Liechtenstein, Austria, Slovenia, and in France and Italy, the French and the Italian Republics, and not out in Japan nor out in the Far East.”
            Recognise that, Jock? You should do, you wrote it.

          • So?! And who gives a rat’s backside but you?! Are you a 10-year-old girl?!

          • So?! You sound like a silly Japanese bloke! Don’t us a favour, and get out of here!

        • Damaris Tighe

          But many on the far right (shorthand) do routinely focus on the motivation of posters by trying to ferret out, or making assumptions about, their ethnic identity – rather than addressing what they say. I’m very glad that you’ve refuted this.

          • Copyright101

            Yes, because we’ve had enough of jews claiming to be white. Claiming to be ‘us’ when all along they are ‘them’.

          • Damaris Tighe

            My case rests.

          • Copyright101

            As does mine!

          • Richard

            What are “Jews”, in fact? There are Sephardic Jews, who have a large Spanish and Moorish admixture, there are Ashkenazi Jews, who have a large Western European admixture, there are Ethiopian Jews, who have no genetic connection with the other Jews and whom many Jews do not regard as authentic, and then Yemenite Jews and Indian Jews and so on.

            In Israel, Sephardic Jews are an out-group to Ashkenazi Jews and vice-versa, and such with the other groups, too. They relate to each other on the basis of Israel in many cases, rather than as Jews.

            Ashkenazi Jews are surely in their cultural orientation, entirely Western European? I think of composers and musicians, and writers and thinkers. Classical music has scores and pop music likewise. Surely if they have issues with what you call “white” people (used to exclude them) it is because they have been persecuted and killed for at least two millennia? The orthodox among Jews reject less orthodox Jews almost as clearly as they do non-Jews, and the Leftists among their number either reject Israel or are as harsh about it as they are about “white” (again, using your definition) countries.

            I listen to Leonard Bernstein’s wonderful version of Wagner’s Wesendonck Lieder as surely as von Karajan’s, or Gerald Finzi’s music as easily as some Elgar. There are Yiddish versions of Gilbert and Sullivan, performed in New York. That Jews form a somewhat (to varying degrees by sector) separate community does not make them less “white”, at least those of Ashkenazi orientation. That is one of the reasons the Jewish Left’s fake creation of a black/Jewish axis has never, and will never, work.

          • Clive

            Jews have unquestionably been persecuted in Europe. In England, they were expelled in 1290 – although some put that down to papal edicts which left Jews with no valid occupation. Prior to that, English Jews had to wear a yellow patch reminiscent of the Nazis.

            I have always wondered how Shakespeare could have formed Shylock since Jews were not officially re-admitted until the late 1650s – mainly through the offices of Oliver Cromwell.

            In both of the above cases there were financial considerations. In mediaeval times the crown made a lot of money from Jews and Cromwell’s administration wanted access to finance from overseas, I believe.

          • Dan O’Connor

            No Jew can be White because no Jew can qualify for White guilt
            Although when Jews do something that might give Jews a bad name they become White ( the mainly Jewish financed and run Bolshevik goverment that presided over the extermination of 20 to 40 million Christian Slavs and the Jewish involvement in the Atlantic Slave Trade ) , but when they do something praise worthy they emphasize their Jewishness
            Jews can change from being a religion, to being a culture , to being a race , and to being all and none of them depending on what is most convienient .
            It only takes a tiny minority with extreme and disproporttionate overrepresentation in comparison to their % of the population in all of the right financial, cultural, academic , media , TV, Hollywood choke points and with an infinite amount of patience and an avtavistic hatred for the tradttional White / WASP / West tradtional conservative host society to totally undermine that society from within by attacking it with Anti White CultMarx/ Liberalism / Progressivism , Multicultiskm , Mass Immigration , because it is used as a vehicle to benefit their group by weakening the identity and group solidarity of the majority society
            I would never allow what one could arguabley describe as one of the most ethnocentrically orientated groups in history and a high IQ to be overrepresented in all of the institutions by a factor of 15 X in the most powerful country in the world and immense and well organise clout in several European countries, when at the same time they never tire of first reminding us that the entire White race and all pof ouir children’s children is responsible for the fate of Jews in WW2, and allow that narrative to be used as the major pretext as moral justification to demographically minoritise and disempower us, and second that they see themselves as being the victims of one long 3000 year old pogrom at the hands of the White man and will never forget that American WASP Conservatives wouldn’t invite them in to their country club in 1924 or something
            This is a recipie for distaster
            There is not an act of in-group nepotism and favouratism racism/ groupism , cruelty, or genocide that Whites have been involved in that Jews haven’t, including their involvement in the Muslim invasion and occupation of Spain for 800 years .
            Muslims play the same trick on gullible and naive Whites by always portraying themselves as the always the unjustly persecuted victim .
            No organised identity group with that kind of power should have been allowed to be become the only one in human history to be beyond any scrutiny, debate or questioning of their actions by evolving one of the worlds most effective Thought Police to persecute, prosecute, demonise , vilify , ruin , intimidate , criminalise and witch hunt amyone who does refer to them in anything less than glowing admiration
            It ends up being a rather sickening form of worship .
            The most clever, most unjustly persecuted, most innocent , least-racist , most misunderstood , most moral , most humanitarian , most tolerant , least nepotistic, most virtuous , most modest people who have ever lived

          • Richard

            Just a few thoughts (sorry for the length of this): in South Africa, many Jews share in “white guilt” and “privilege” and massively try to make amends for what they see as past evils. Second thought is the business of blameworthy or praiseworthy. Einstein was quoted as saying, “If my theory of relativity is proven successful, Germany will claim me as a German and France will declare me a citizen of the world. Should my theory prove untrue, France will say that I am a German, and Germany will declare that I am a Jew.” That is pretty much how it works.

            In South Africa, when the policies of Hendrik Verwoerd became unpopular, he was denounced as a “Dutchman” by many Afrikaners (a different usage by English-speakers in that country, where to be a “Dutchman” meant to be an Afrikaner); when it was popular he was a “true Afrikaner”. I don’t know of any Jews who would say they weren’t British if they received an international award. Some Jews would say those receiving plaudits were Jews first and foremost, others that it formed a layer of their identity.

            It is also important to draw a distinction between American Jewish culture and other, because it is different, from my limited experience. The American business model is purely capitalist, meaning that people will do whatever they think will make them money. Remember, it was non-Jewish people who, for instance, sold guns to the Indians, who later attacked their own co-settlers. Money is the only way in which Jews are able to exercise any control over their environment, since their numbers are very small, and they were prevented from engaging in other activities for a very long time. One of the weaknesses (from an equity point of view) of capitalism is that it does allow those who are particularly adept at it to exercise more control than their numbers would warrant, making it a sort of oligarchy or aristocracy. That is the same gripe black Africans have against Asians, or whites, in Africa.

            I have never encountered any Jews saying that all white non-Jews are responsible for their fate. They have a memory of what happened, and most particularly what happened in the European country into which they were most assimilated (Germany) and unsurprisingly this makes them nervous and perhaps neurotic. Those Jews of the Left have supported mass immigration (which they also support into Israel itself: there are mass protests there of Jews who want huge numbers of African immigrants into Israel on humanitarian grounds) but there are also those who do not support it. Like with supporters of the Conservative Party, the latter tend to be silent, because modern cultural hegemony belongs to the Left. The Left is vocal, and the Jewish Left particularly so, since they tend to be quite good at their jobs.

            In places like South Africa, it was Anglican ministers who were the loudest in their proclamations of white “evil”, not Jews. There was one Jewish MP for years, Helen Suzman, who advocated a qualified franchise (dependent on income and education), which is not exactly wildly Leftist. In Rhodesia, those arrested for anti-Ian Smith protests weren’t the small Jewish community, but English tourists and what you would call “white” locals.

            In the UK, Jews are about evenly split on their Labour/Tory affiliation and voting pattern. You would not know this, if you looked at the media, but consider the number of Jews in Thatcher’s government. It was probably the same as the number of Jews in the Labour Party shadow government of the time.

            My contention is this: if people share the overwhelming part of their ethnicity with you, participate in the same culture as you at a deeper level than trash culture, speak the same language (without a sub-language developing, as is the case with, say blacks in Britain), vote on the same issues with the same splits, do not (apart from a religious minority) send their children to different schools (but will choose the better of those available), how are they different en masse?

            Memories of past events, whether real or imagined, remain with people for a long time. Afrikaners in South Africa, of Protestant, northern European heritage, still on balance dislike British people (including their descendants who are their compatriots, and have been for hundreds of years) because of what they say happened in concentration camps. That almost all of that was likely made-up by the National Party to engender better support through grievance politics is irrelevant. A distinct “them” and “us” developed. The British owned the mines and were better businessmen – and tended to have more liberal attitudes towards the indigenes – and so became targets.

            Perhaps it is down to how you define your in-group, out-group divide. I am most decidedly anti-Leftist, which I see as fascist and intolerant and the cause of ruination, but I cannot put their existence and success down to Jews. On the cultural front, if Franz Schubert was prepared to write a setting to the 92nd Psalm in Hebrew, that’s good enough for me.

          • Dan O’Connor

            Thanks for your interesting reply. Everything should be taken into consideration
            Just as a thought, I wonder if in any Western country, Jews , according to their % of the population are equally represented in organisations, movements and political parties that one could categorise as nationalist , or White nationalist , anti-White minoritisation, anti-immigration ?
            And also how equally or disproportionately represented they are in activist groups , media and organisations that attempt to prevent Whites from organising to prevent our demographic destruction ?
            Do you have any opinions on this ?

          • Richard

            I don’t know, but I do know that in South Africa there were very many Jews who were prominent in the National Party that implemented apartheid, certainly after they lost their Nazi connection. That was before their pragmatic friendship with Israel, too, so that didn’t form part of it. During PW Botha’s term there were even Jews in his President’s Council, a sort of advisory body. Many of these people weren’t anti-black, they simply didn’t feel that they wanted to become an extinct demographic.

            It may of course be that Jews would join such movements in the UK, but many of these movements dislike Jews, which would would presumably put them off. It is very difficult to tell, because surnames don’t necessarily demarcate anything anymore. But I certainly cannot imagine any other than the irrational hard-Left would leap with joy at what is happening to the UK and Europe.

          • EnglishPatriot

            White nationalist movements do not tend to recognise Jews as being white people (they aren’t; they’re a semitic people), and some even go so far as to believe that immigration is a plot implemented by nebulous Jewish interests.

          • Richard

            Ashkenazi Jews have almost no semitic DNA in general. The link with the Middle East is very tenuous, which is one of the weapons used against them by the Arabs.

          • They must still have traces of it, although most under influence of revisionist Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox Judaism in the last 300 or so years would probably like to claim that they are of pure Semitic descent.

            There were virtually no Arabs in Moorish Iberia. The Arabs were the Egyptians (Afro-Asiatics, but not Semites) and the Berbers (Afro-Asiatics, but not Semites) and their West African slaves. Under Moorish rule, the Canon Law of the Papacy could not be put in place or be enforced, and the Sephardi were free to intermarry with the local Visigothic Mozarabic Christians (or to own Christian, non-Muslim Berber and West African slaves) until the completion of the Reconquista.

          • Richard

            There are some traces, but mainly through the male line. That means that some males migrated, probably at the time of the destruction of the second temple, and then intermarried with non-Jewish females as they progressed north and west. After several generations of this, you had people who were really minimally genetically linked to the Middle East. The women came later, and presumably mated with men who perhaps still bore the names of their Jewish forebears and may still have retained a cultural link. In that situation, you can see that you would people who were likely half-Semitic.

            And then, with further centuries in Europe, there would have been additional mating with non-Middle Eastern (we can now speak of Jewish and Middle Eastern, in a genetic sense, as being separable) people, further reducing the Middle Eastern influence. Remember, unlike modern African or Asian immigration, these people are not being genetically replenished by going home to find mates. They exist as separate, settled communities with no links to their homeland, apart from a religious one.

            I am certain that would have been the mechanism at play.

          • We must not fall into the fallacy of presuming that the ancients practised their religions (according modern reconstructed and often anachronistic or revisionist interpretations) literally and strictly.

          • But the Semites are also Whites … And will you please stop hijacking UKIP symbols and insignia if you are in fact to the right of Nick Griffin!

          • EnglishPatriot

            Excuse me, but the semites are most definitely NOT white; that idea has only gained credence since World War II.

          • Damaris Tighe

            This is also my take on the subject.

          • If you classify the human race into 7 races by colour (Whites, Blacks, Yellows, Browns, Negritos, Australians, Papuans), indeed they are.

          • Clive

            Ah, I wondered what all that was about.
            Thank You.

          • Dan O’Connor

            There was one particular religious / historical / ethnic / tribal identity group on the planet ( and only one ) that was the last one I would ever want to be convinced has been exhibiting a monotonously repeditive and very disproportionate pattern of group behaviour for a long period of time, and that has been extremely destructive to our societies especially because I started of as a follower of the counter jihad blogosphere , and I consider Muslim immigration to be a considerable threat , and it was not easy to come to the conclusion that our enemy’s enemy was not our friend
            The other reason is that it takes courage to criticise the behaviour of one particular privilged and protected identity group deal because it is the greatest taboo in history
            So anyone that does decide to do so, never does so lightly
            Anyone who does so needs a lot of convincing and documented evidence

      • Copyright101

        What is your motivation?!

        What’s yours?

        • Dan O’Connor

          Very could. Ha-ha.

          • Copyright101

            Motivation – look in his profile pic (there is at least one better version online).

          • I am not Ramon Battershall. What are you on about?!

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            In fact it is Sir Alec Guinness in the role of George Smiley. So inappropriate.

        • What is this, a BNP Convention?!

    • Clive

      You did not attribute your quote but I found it at http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Leuchter/ which is, I believe, David Irving’s website.

      That raises an immediate problem in that David Irving has been found in an English court by an English judge, Mr Justice Charles Gray, to be a deliberate falsifier of history and a racist.

      The quote itself is a touch disingenuous in several ways.

      – I can find no evidence that Fred Leuchter was ever arrested in Britain. He was the subject of a banning order imposed by Kenneth Baker and no doubt would have been arrested under the terms of that order had he come to Britain – but I can find no evidence that he came to Britain. He was arrested in Germany but they have holocaust denier laws we do not

      – Mr Leuchter appears to have been incompetent. He had no qualification as an engineer but a BA in History. To say only that he was ‘practicing [sic] as an engineer without proper registration’ understates this incompetence

      – Mr Leuchter’s main claim to fame was the design of methods of execution, the most relevant being the gas chamber, although he also designed electric chairs. He was neither chemist nor engineer and had never been asked to investigate the building materials of a gas chamber after it had been in use for some time. Asking Mr Leuchter’s opinion on chemical residues in Auschwitz was therefore rather like asking for Albert Pierrepoint’s opinion, they would be equally valid

      – There are, in consequence, several problems with Mr Leuchter’s method of sample collection in the walls of Auschwitz and Majdanek. He collected samples to depths much, much greater than those at which the cyanide concentrations would have existed. The lab that tested them pulverised the whole sample and tested it. It is therefore unsurprising that they found little significant residue. In fact they did find some residue which Mr Leuchter explained away but that explanation has itself been historically undermined by a later study undertaken by The Institute for Forensic Research, a Polish organisation

      The truth needs needs no laws to protect it I’m not sure about that because in recent years all sorts of people have come out with all sorts of tripe. It appears to be a widely held view in the Middle East that the CIA organised the 9/11 attacks for instance.

      Whatever the reality of that, an English court in a hugely expensive and extensively researched case found David Irving to be a liar about history. I’ll take their word for it.

      I am a member of UKIP. Perhaps it distorts my view.

      • Richard

        I agree with your contention that falsification is objectionable, but surely the charge of “racism” is rather “1984”-ish? Surely it is only if one kills others on the basis of their race that it becomes an issue, not simply holding “racist” views, the meaning of which I still am unable to discern with any certainty.

        • Clive

          From the trial ‘Irving vs. Penguin Books Ltd.’ the judge said (in April 2000)”…the allegation that Irving is a racist is also established…”.

          I certainly agree that the term ‘racist’ has since been appropriated and misused to a ludicrous extent. To the point, in fact, where it is unusable.

          So please forgive me for using it but it was a part of the essentials of that trial.

          • Richard

            Again, thank you for the clarification. My alarm bells always go when I hear or see that term, as it seems to me to be the equivalent of “heretic”.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            That trial was heavily tilted in favour of Penguin, and the Judge chose to believe the witnesses rather than the documents. Irving’s witness testified free of charge, while Penguin’s witnesses were paid up to one million dollars. That sort of payment is nothing short of immoral.

        • vieuxceps2

          Yes, racism seems to mean anything that the lefties want it to mean.We should all take care when they claim language for their own purposes, it’salways a potent weapon in their hands as Political Correctness shows.

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        While you’re researching, try this:
        Franciszek Piper, director of the Auschwitz state archives carried out the same tests as Leuchter; in the middle of night with lawyers present, with the same results. Did he publish the report? Of course not. He simply stamped it and put it away in the safe. Fortunately, someone for whom the stench of hypocrisy was simply too much to endure, supplied a copy of report to Irving.

        Explain that away, if you can.
        Jack, Japan Alps

      • But “Jackthesmilingblack” is a Japanese Neo-Nazi! (But is that even possible?!)

    • Richard

      “The truth needs needs no laws to protect it.”

      Is this really true, though? Look at, for instance, the refusal to discuss the genetic nature of intelligence (people researching this have been hounded into stopping their work) or simple observed differences (if they are racial) in IQ-scores.

      Most of what was in the Leuchter Report was factually incorrect, though I don’t agree with banning anything. The engineering bit is obliquely important, because much of what he claimed was by way of misrepresenting his engineering credentials. They were obviously out to get him, rather like Al Capone was arrested on tax-evasion charges, not the killings of dozens of people.

      But there is a big difference between making claims about an historical incident that, at the time it was uncovered, people knew would attract disbelief in later years, and political pressure over an arts festival. This is about Israel, not about Jews, or the Holocaust.

      • Clive

        ‘They were out to get him’ may have other origins. According to Shelly Shapiro, Mr Leuchter ran a ‘shakedown scheme’ whereby he would suggest to a state that their execution equipment would not work if he did not supply it. It’s not quite as simple as that but you get the gist.

        • Richard

          Another dimension is added. It is regrettable that people post here, and converse in general life, only from particular ideologies and never dispassionately. All part of the human drive for power, I suppose. Thank you for that information.

        • Jackthesmilingblack


        • A Japanese Neo-Nazi … you learn something new everyday!

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        You see, it really doesn’t matter if Leuchter is an expert in lethal gas chamber execution operation or an ice-cream salesman. The fact is that he collected samples from the so-called lethal gas chamber at Auschwitz and the smaller gas chamber used to delouse clothes and bedding, and had the results analysed in an independent laboratory in the United States. The results in case you don’t know were that the walls of the delousing chamber were saturated with Prussian blue (such that it seeped right through the walls to the outside), while the so-called lethal chamber showed no trace.
        Now consider the fall out were key aspects of the Authorised version of the Jewish Holocaust proved to be hugely exaggerated. Because without the mass gassings followed by mass cremations, what you have is simply another 20th Century genocide.
        But don’t expect the Holocaust industry to give up without a struggle. It even keeps up the pretence that Ann Frank’s diary is kosher, when it was proved in court to be a post-war fabrication.
        Wise up Britisher pals, you’re being played.
        Jack, Japan Alps

        • Frank

          If you genuinely believe what you have written above, you need to visit the concentration camps and see for yourself. In the interim, I would suggest that you shut up as you are coming across as a deeply unpleasant, if not deranged individual.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            When you can’t refute, insult.

          • No, that’s your job, you Japanese Troll!

          • andyrwebman

            Firstly, I would hesitate in believing something like that without inviting in some scientists to re-verify it. Great claims require great evidence.

            Secondly, we’ve see the videos made by the American soldiers of the bodies dug up from death camps, of the emaciated survivors, and the testimony of these survivors.

            Claiming a hoax in the light of this evidence is increasingly unlikely.

            Besides which, what do you think the Nazis were going to do with all of those people they shipped across Europe? Turn them loose in the wild to fight with the partisans?

          • e2toe4

            Needs to visit the nut doctor

          • Ivan Ewan

            So what else is new?

        • Richard

          The reason his qualifications were considered important was because of the chemical nature of the interaction. The fact that the concentrations were high enough to kill people did not mean they interacted with the walls. It is quite possible to create air that is deadly and not have it leave traces. Of course, there not being traces does not disprove your thesis (the walls do not provide proof of deadly gas) but that does is only part of the overall burden of evidence that has to be disproved.

          In a medical trial, say to prove causality between administration of a drug and a negative side-effect, when it is not possible to prove mechanism exactly, circumstantial evidence must be considered, too. So, for example, if there is an underlying medical condition, and drugs cannot be proven to have caused a problem by traceable interaction, you would need to look at other indicators. There are usually many of these, such as symptoms, progression of loss of function or pain, temporal factors, other medical evidence (otherwise not necessarily important), etc. There is enough evidence outside of this one factor of the walls in the gas chambers to make the hypothesis of mass gassings entirely plausible.

          To my mind (and I believe to the minds of most people considering the matter from a dispassionate point of view) the point is not the precise number of people who were killed, but the idea of solving what were considered social problems by the Nazis by murdering.

          • PAUL HURST

            Isn’t the the whole point that “plausible” seventy year old war time propaganda is all the holocaust industry has?

            A murder trial requires evidence of motive and means, a time and place the alleged crime was committed, and a corpse; none of which actually exist in fact.

            In ideal laboratory conditions it may well be “quite possible to create air that is deadly and not have it leave traces”, but at Auschwitz one must take into consideration the typically cold damp climate, which, scientifically alone very heavily mitigates against the possibility of zyklonB being used in anything like the quantities required to kill millions of Jews.

            After realizing the official narrative is physically impossible, and based in the main on flawed witness statements, faked photos, forged documents, coerced confessions and consensus trance, one inevitably arrives at the conclusion that there never was even any intention of the German people for the total extermination of Jews; whereas “The Morgenthau plan” “The Kaufmann plan” “The Hooton plan” were three detailed plans for the total extermination of the German people, written by highly influential jews and reflecting powerful jewish traditional interests.

            And then one inevitably arrives at the question: Who generally wanted to exterminate who?

            “May the gas creep into the playrooms of your children. They should drop dead slowly, the little dolls. I’d like to see the wife of the churchwarden and the editor-in-chief and the mother of the sculptor and the sister of the banker die a bitter, excruciating death, all of them, together.” ~ Kurt Tucholsky, German-Jewish “humanist” and writer Die Weltbühne, XXIII, 30, (July 26, 1927), pp. 152f., as quoted in: Dr. Wilhelm Stäglich,The Auschwitz Myth, p. 59.

            “A cancer flourishes in the body of the world and in its mind and soul, and this cancerous thing is Germany, Germanism, and Germans… That this most clumsy of all human tribes—this leaden-hearted German—should dare to pronounce judgment on his superiors, dare to outlaw from the world the name of the Jew—a name that dwarfs him as the tree does the weed at its foot—is an outrageous thing. It is an evil thing.

            “Germany must perish,” echoed Theodore N. Kaufmann in a widely-read book of the same name.

            And the only way to accomplish that is to remove the German from the world… There remains then but one mode of ridding the world forever of Germanism—and that is to stem the source from which issue those war-lusted souls, by preventing the people of Germany from ever again reproducing their kind.

            To implement his plan, Kaufman recommended that when the war was successfully concluded all German men and women should be sterilized.

            Far from being shocked by such a genocidal scheme, leading American journals were thrilled by the concept.

            “A Sensational Idea!” cheered Time magazine.

            “A provocative theory,” echoed the Washington Post.

            While many in America and Great Britain could understand and even commiserate with Jewish emotions, many more were initially aghast by the flaming rhetoric and the murderous cries for extermination of innocent and guilty alike. Nevertheless, the sheer weight and persistence of the propaganda, both subtle and overt, in film, radio, books, magazines, and newspapers, gradually worked its way into
            the thoughts and attitudes of the public mainstream. Eventually, in the minds of a sizable percentage of Americans and Britons, little distinction was drawn between killing a Nazi soldier and killing a German child.
            Excerpted from Thomas Goodrich’s 2010 book Hellstorm http://nodisinfo.com/Home/the-zionist-destruction-of-germany/


            The myth of the German folk “solving what were considered social problems by murdering” is clearly propagated to obfuscate the ancient and ongoing typical Jewish lust for the genocide of Goyim

          • Richard

            It is entirely plausible that one person might have this sort of blood-lust, especially in 1927 (the year of the Nuremberg Rally, as I recall) but that does not mean all Jews felt the same. Apropos the camps, it is now known that Herman Goering’s father was involved in the concentration camps in German South-West Africa, which bore some of the later hallmarks of the Nazis, such as medical experimentation.

            There is more to that quote in Time, by the way, “Since Germans are the perennial disturbers of the world’s peace, … they must be dealt with like any homicidal criminals. But it is unnecessary to put the whole German nation to the sword. It is more humane to sterilize them.” I note that the book was written in 1941, not before the War, so it came as a reaction to what had happened both in 1914 – 1918 and to what had been happening in Europe since 1939. Germany was seen as being the destroyer of all Europe, and people were fed up. I was not there at the time, but if two generations had had to endure massive wars in which Germany was either sole perpetrator, or tantamount to, then I might have felt the same way. I do note, of course, that it did not happen: nobody did actually sterilise the Germans. People at that time said things like, “The only good German is a dead German” and “The Swedes are German in Human Form” which are not really complimentary, either. Sentiments were running high, but, as I say, Germans were not exterminated or sterilised. Nobody came to power on an anti-German platform, unlike the Nazis who came to power on a specifically anti-Jewish ticket. There was an actual conference to discuss “The Final Solution”, it was not so-named in hindsight. Now, I cannot imagine from the regime that had invaded and killed so many that such a solution could be something innocuous and mild. It simply doesn’t follow.

            I have actually met people who were in concentration camps, and have seen the numbers tattooed onto their arms. Can they all be lying? Somebody in my family was one of the people who liberated one of the camps, and he was so traumatised by it that he would not speak about it. I cannot imagine they were all lying. The propaganda films denouncing Jews, the destruction of synagogues, the creation of ghettoes, the stripping of citizenship, the wearing of stars, all these things point to the ability to do other things, too.

            As to the chemistry involved in the Zyklon gas, I do not know enough to be able to comment. There are many contradictory sources of information on the internet, such as this one here: https://malcolmnicholson.wordpress.com/the-truth-about-the-leuchter-report-part-two/

            If one is so-inclined, there is doubtless enough material to keep one occupied for a lifetime, but it does not press upon me to do so. The generality, not whether one million or ten million died, or how they died, is what bothers me.

          • PAUL HURST

            My school librarian was at Auschwitz, we had some very good chats, she was adamant there were no gas chambers – “Impossible”! – She also said that everyone in her barracks received tattoo’s only as part of the post liberation typhus quarantine effort.

            I wrote a post about what she told me of her experience and what I found out later.

            If the atrocities of the “Nazi’s” are typified by Auschwitz it should be first understood that Auschwitz was primarily a ✡Rockefeller / Standard Oil / IG Farben Cartel ran work-camp, and not a “German” venture.

            The Wannsee Conference in Berlin that according to the Holocaust Hysteria myth, decided to exterminate the Jews was actually about
            relocating them, which also is clearly evident from the proceedings of the meeting.
            The Wannsee Conference Protocol Anatomy of a Fabrication, by Johannes Peter Ney. http://codoh.com/library/document/934/

            The allies started WWI, NOT Germany; Germany had not prepared
            or war or expected it. From evidence now available it is quite clear that responsibility for WWI lies squarely at the feet of Rothschild’s / Rockefeller bankster’s, the Milner Group, the mendacious Foreign Secretary, Sir Edward Grey and First Lord of the Admiralty; Churchill.

            The following statement is perfectly applicable for both World Wars:

            “It was England and France who declared war. It was England and France, not Germany, who rejected the offers of peace and insisted not only on the perpetuation of the war but on its escalation. The
            British and French imperialists wanted to turn this war into a world
            war…” ~ Emil Maier-Dorn: In his book Alleinkriegsschuld,
            Unkenntnis oder Feigheit?, p. 51

            The book “Germany must perish,” was written in 1941, before America entered the War. By December 8th 1941, the mainly Jewish operated western media had long been hoping to entrap Americans into the war.

            Only corrupt politicians like the Jewish backed Churchill saw Germany as a particular threat. Hitler’s employment and economic miracle had naturally exposed both the British and Roosevelt’s governments as grossly incompetent.

            The destruction of Germany was for purely economic motives – NOT moral

            `This is an English war to annihilate the German people. We do not care whether a Herr Hitler or a Jesuit Priest is in power in Berlin´.~ Winston Churchill

            “The war was not just a matter of the elimination of Fascism in Germany, but rather of obtaining German sales markets.” –
            Winston Churchill. March, 1946.

            “The war wasn´t only about abolishing fascism, but to conquer sales markets. We could have, if we had intended so, prevented this war from breaking out without doing one shot, but we didn´t want to.” – Winston Churchill to Truman (Fultun, USA March 1946)

            “We painted Hitler as a monster, a devil. And that’s why we could not move away from that portrayal after the war. We had mobilized the masses against the devil incarnate. And so we were forced to continue in this satanic scenario after the war. We could not possibly have explained to our people that the war had actually been only a preventative economic measure.” (Quoted in the German news magazine Der Spiegel, issue 13/1992. NB: source not verified.) ~ James Addison Baker (1930- ), Secretary of State of the United States of America

            “Germans were not exterminated or sterilised. – “nobody did actually sterilise the Germans” – You said

            At least six million German people were exterminated by being deliberately subjected to exposure, deliberately starved, beaten to death, and raped to death under the allies: AFTER the war!

            The millions of German children they would have had, never were, and since then they continue be genocided by replacement level immigration, as now does the whole of Europe, but in addition the Germans have to endure particularly malicious slander designed to engender false-guilt and facilitate extortionate “reparations”

            The asymptote to zero for white Europeans is very adequately facilitated by the promotion of homosexuality and the destruction of family, marriage and other beneficial social traditions; a literal surgical castration is not necessary.

          • Richard

            Some of this grammar is a bit suspect in these quotes, for instance, “The war wasn´t only about abolishing fascism, but to conquer sales markets. We could have, if we had intended so, prevented this war from breaking out WITHOUT DOING ONE SHOT, but we didn´t want to.” – Winston Churchill to Truman (Fultun, USA March 1946)

            “We painted Hitler as a monster, a devil. And that’s why we could not move away from that portrayal after the war. We had mobilized the masses against the devil incarnate. And so we were forced to continue IN THIS satanic scenario after the war. We could not possibly have explained to ouqr people that the war had actually been only a preventative economic measure.” (Quoted in the German news magazine Der Spiegel, issue 13/1992. NB: source not verified.) ~ James Addison Baker (1930- ), Secretary of State of the United States of America

            They don’t sound like a first-language speaker. Also, if quotes can’t be verified or backed-up, I simply can’t take them as input into an argument. Like with scientific arguments, one can’t believe things or not believe things unless they are actual, or proven to be so. Who or what is Fultun?

            Germany did not set WW1 into motion, but it certainly did kill many people, and reputedly in a most barbaric way. That this, together with what happened the next time round, made people anti-German, is not really surprising.

            I don’t know about Germans being starved and the rest of what you say after the War?

            Your last paragraph is certainly leading to the obliteration of Germany. And Merkel’s desire to accept millions of Muslim and African refugees is completing the process.

          • PAUL HURST

            5th March 1946 Winston Churchill gives his famous “Iron
            Curtain” speech in Fulton, Missouri. The “Cold War” hoax went public.

            The source of that particular quote is uncertain to me, the comment was presumably made in private and repeated and was not made publicly.

            Many other quotes bear out the same sentiments though

            “Germany’s unforgivable crime before WW2 was its attempt to loosen its economy out of the world trade system and to build up an independent exchange system from which the world-finance couldn’t profit anymore. …We butchered the wrong pig.” ~ Winston Churchill (The
            Second World War – Bern, 1960)

            “In no country has the historical blackout been more intense and effective than in Great Britain. Here it has been ingeniously christened The Iron Curtain of Discreet Silence. Virtually nothing has been written to reveal the truth about British responsibility for the Second World War and its disastrous results.” – Harry Elmer Barnes. American Historian

            “I believe now that Hitler and the German people did not want war. But we declared war on Germany, intent on destroying it, in accordance with our principle of balance
            of power, and we were encouraged by the ‘Americans’ around Roosevelt. We ignored Hitler’s pleadings not to enter into war. Now we are forced to realize that Hitler was right.” – British Attorney General, Sir. Hartley Shawcross, March,16th, 1984

            “What thrust us into war were not Hitler’s political
            teachings: the cause, this time, was his successful attempt to establish a new economy. The causes of the war were: envy, greed, and fear.” ~ John Frederick Charles Fuller, (“J.F.C.”) (1878-1966), British General and historian As quoted in: Joachim Nolywaika, Die Sieger im Schatten ihrer Schuld, p. 35.

            “We didn’t go to war in 1939 to save Germany from Hitler…or the continent from fascism. Like in 1914, we went to war for the not lesser noble cause that we
            couldn’t accept a German hegemony over Europe.” ~ Sunday Correspondent, London (17.9.1989)

          • Richard

            I have no doubt that Britain entered the War in order to prevent Germany from becoming too powerful. Politics is a game of self-interest. That Hitler did not want war with Britain is well-known. He very much admired the British Empire, and saw Britain’s role akin to what he saw as Germany’s role in Europe.

            People interpret WW2 in a similar way to how they interpret the American Civil War, where unintended effects are turned into the main reason for the conflagration. In the US case, it has been turned into a war about slavery, in the European, about saving Europe from Hitler. Neither was the overt cause.

            A problem I have with these quotes is that I cannot verify any of them. A version of Churchill’s “The Second World War” was not published in Bern in 1960, but in the UK by Cassell, for instance. Hartley Shawcross was the British legal man leading the UK’s case against the Nazis at the Nuremberg Trials. He was most vociferous about Nazi atrocities. What is quoted there seems not quite right for somebody of his orientation regarding those events. Of course, if you have captured his private views, that is another matter. But I cannot believe it unless it is in some way attributable.

            Quoting authorities does not necessarily make what they say correct. Where information is given, rather than opinion, it adds weight to arguments, but otherwise appeals are simply a way of saying, “So-and-so says this, so it must be correct. Who are we to argue with him?”

          • Roger Hudson

            Perhaps the lady was in a part of the huge complex where they were making oil not exterminating people?

          • PAUL HURST

            The points she emphasized were that compared to the other half dozen or so alleged “death camps” that she briefly resided at, Ravensbrook, Majdanek, etc; she felt very well looked after for most of her time at Auschwitz, until the epidemic disease and starvation wrought by indiscriminate allied bombing in the final months, and that for all its size, at Auschwitz, especially among the Jew’s, literally “everybody knew every-one else’s business”: Thousands of homicidal gassing’s and cremations of inmates occurring daily without raising any concern or comment were quite impossible.

        • Roger Hudson

          We know mass murder using de-lousing insecticide happened, Germans involved have admitted it, Britain hanged people for selling it.
          The fact that German companies have been bullied into not calling their vacuum cleaner a ‘Cyclone’ when it clearly is (like a Dyson) speaks more to peoples stupidity.

          • PAUL HURST

            We know mass murder using de-lousing insecticide zyklonB as described is physically impossible, we also now know that many confessions were brutally coerced, that is testicles crushed and they were beaten until they signed confessions; and therefore they must be considered legally invalid.

            “Our investigators would put a black hood over the accused’s head and then punch him in the face with brass knuckles, kick him, and beat him with rubber hose. Many of the German defendants had teeth knocked out. Some had their jaws broken.
            All but two of the Germans, in the 139 cases we investigated, had been kicked in the testicles beyond repair. This was Standard Operating Procedure with
            American investigators.”
            American Atrocities in Germany By JUDGE EDWARD L VAN RODEN From The Progressive, February 1949, p. 21f http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Dachau/VanRoden1948.html

            Bernard Clark, a Jewish illegal ‘torturer’ during the Nuremburg trials, admitted torturing concentration camp commander Rudolf Hoess (Clarke. B in Legions of
            Death, Rupert Butler, pp.236-238)

            The Nuremberg trials themselves were a complete fraud according to the Chief Justice of the United States Harlan Fiske Stone, President John F Kennedy and many others.

            After the war, the allies used concentration camps for longer than the Germans had used them during the war, and the allies did everything that they now accuse the Germans of, by deliberately maintaining conditions of brutality for illegally incarcerated German civilian men women and children.

            Former British Army veteran A.W Perkins of Holland-on-Sea
            described conditions in the ‘Sennelager’ British concentration camp, which shockingly held, not captured troops but civilians. He recounts; “During the latter half of 1945 I was with British troops guarding suspected Nazi
            civilians living on starvation rations in a camp called Sennelager. They were frequently beaten and grew as thin as concentration camp victims, scooping handfuls of swill from our waste bins.”
            This ex-guard described how other guards amused themselves by baiting starving prisoners. “They could be shot on sight if they ventured close to the perimeter fence. It was a common trick to throw a cigarette just inside the fence and shoot any prisoner who tried to reach it.” – Daily Mail, London, 22nd, April, 1995
            HOW ALLIES TREATED GERMAN POWs by Michael Walsh.htm

            December 11, 1945 HOW ALLIES TREATED GERMAN POWs The respected Associated Press Photographer,
            Henry Griffin who had taken the pictures of corpses in Buchenwald and Dachau when visiting Allied POW camps: “The only difference I can see between these men and those corpses is that here they are still breathing.” Congressional Record, December 11, 1945 p. A-5816.

            “According to revelations by members of the House of
            Commons, about 130,000 former German officers and men were held during the winter of 1945-46 in British camps in Belgium under conditions which British officers have described as ‘not much better than Belsen.”
            Gruesome Harvest, R.F. Keeling, Institute of American
            Economics, Chicago, 1947.

            Sir John Colville, Winston Churchill’s former private secretary, told his colleagues in the British Foreign Office in 1946, it was clear that “concentration camps and all they stand for did not come to an end with the defeat of Germany.”

            “”refugee casualties from 1945 to 1949 included more than 7,000 toddlers and babies who were denied not only adequate rations but also any and all medical aid …
            in 1945 alone, 13,492 German refugees died in Danish refugee camps. More than 7,000 of them were children under five years of age; most of them died of malnutrition and dehydration…”” – Why 7000 Children Had to Die_Article from the Hamburger Abendblatt_.htm

            6 Million German Civilians were Murdered in Germany Proper by the Allies After the War by Starving them to Death!!! In addition, 1 – 2 Million German POWs were murdered by the US Military by starving them to death in the US prison camps in Germany…
            When the Allies had completed the most comprehensive physical damage to the Germans and their country by
            1950, the ETHNIC CLEANSING NUMBER OF GERMANS from 1945 to 1950, in other words after the war, stood at 12,000,000. That’s a real holocaust!

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            “We know mass murder using de-lousing insecticide happened (the fabric of the alleged lethal gas chamber contradicts your assertion) Germans involved have admitted it (under torture).”

    • Liberty

      ‘The Leuchter report is a pseudoscientific document authored by American execution technician Fred A. Leuchter, who was commissioned by Ernst Zündel to defend him at his trial in Canada for distributing false news, namely Holocaust denial material..” Wikipedia.

      Also, he was not arrested in the UK but in Germany which has laws against holocaust denial.

      Thought readers should be aware of the above attempt at falsification to attack Jews.

      Charidi Jews should also be aware of the idiocy of their sexual obsessions and the energy and opportunities it gives to Jew haters everywhere [I am a Jew but not Charedi].

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        “American gas chamber expert Fred A. Leuchter Jr.was detained by British police at a private meeting in London on November 15, and held illegally overnight in a cold cell before being kicked out of the country.
        Leuchter and his wife legally entered the United Kingdom at Dover, England, on November 11. Crossing the Channel from Calais, France, Leuchter dutifully presented his passport to a British customs official. Not finding his name on the listing of “undesirable” persons, the official put an entry stamp in the visitor’s passport and permitted Leuchter and his wife to enter the country.”

        You were saying?
        Jack, the Japan Alps Brit

        • Richard

          However, remember that Ken Livingston also allowed a certain rabid anti-semitic preacher into the country. In other words, the immigration service is not doing the bidding of the Jews, or it would not have allowed his entry.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Cock up or conspiracy? I lean towards the latter.

          • Richard

            I knew somebody years ago in a society for the study of UFOs, which I do not dismiss out-of-hand. In the city in which we lived, there was a very good bookshop, and she went in to purchase a certain book on the topic. On being told they had run out of this book, she was convinced that “they” had removed all the books from the shelves to prevent her from “finding out the truth about them.”

            I approached the bookseller, asking about this book. “Oh yes,” he said, it was particularly popular, and we sold out of it. But there’s more stock arriving a a couple of days.”

    • Roger Hudson

      Arrested? on what charge? Or just using the Home Secretary’s power of exclusion , that seems not to apply any more.

  • misomiso

    ‘It showed that while politicians….cannot censor and impose party lines, unelected cultural bureaucrats are free to do both.’

    You’re one of us now Nick!

    All we need now is for you to come out as a Eurosceptic….

  • Clive

    This starts with a self-serving prejudice. All ‘journalists’ want all publishable material to be eligible for publication. Clearly they must stop at what the law bans – like incitement to violence – but all else must be eligible. It has become a knee-jerk reaction by ‘journalists’ to want to publish what is banned or considered poor
    taste – like Al Jazeera with beheadings.

    That attitude reached a much-undiscussed watershed with the Charlie Hebdo cartoons. They were not published in UK publications in the main which I think was a good decision – and it sets a precedent which ‘journalists’ may not like.

    The precedent is that there are special interest groups – in the case of Charlie Hebdo, devout muslims – whose view must be respected when publication is considered. I do not believe the implicit threat of violence was the main force behind the decision. I certainly hope not, although I understand that it may have been a consideration.

    So it is with this film. Nick Cohen starts with You might think that Jews, faced with a relentless campaign to ban their culture, would think once, twice, a hundred times, about instituting bans themselves. But ‘Jews’ are clearly not a homogeneous group. This Haredi lady, Rechy Elias, appears to be the Jewish equivalent of a member of the Plymouth Brethren among Christians – who would not have allowed the film to be made in the first place.

    Calling the Plymouth Brethren or, say the Mennonites, ‘Christians’ would seem disingenuous. Thus it is with this particular branch of the Haredi.

    So the real question is, how big and how steadfast does a group have to be before its sensibilities are respected ?

    For ‘journalists’ clearly the bigger the better – it is easier to see a bus coming toward you than a bicycle.

    Unfortunately for the publishing world, that is still to be determined.

    I find it strange – as Nick Cohen does of the dancing women No man could see them, for lord knows what they would do if they did. – that I am not allowed to see women’s hair because it might inflame me to uncontrollable passions. That has been distinctively enforced in Christianity with the wimple; in Judaism with the sheitel and Islam with the hijab. Maybe it all originates in one place in ‘The Book’, otherwise it’s a staggering coincidence.

    Religion’s obsession with sex is easier to explain. All forms of gratification are targets for control by any philosophy which purports to explain the meaning of your life and thus feels qualified to order that life.

    The notion that capitalism is a palliative, or even a curative, for this obsession is misplaced. Capitalism has its own religion – money. At the micro level, you cannot get into the film if you can’t afford it. At the macro level, economic boycotts work unless some other driving belief overwhelms the economics.

    The fact is, the world is full of people who I think are bonkers.

    The less palatable fact is that for all I know, they may be right.

    I have to respect that.

  • Ajourney

    Cohen regularly blocks people with views he doesn’t like on Twitter….Pompously self-regarding hypocrites are like that.

    • St Martyr

      So that means what he said is wrong? Are you stalking him?

  • Ronovitch

    Nick Cohen summarises his agenda in one line: “The line between ‘anti-Zionist’ and ‘anti-Semitic’ protests in Britain has become so blurred of late you can barely see it”….No it hasn’t. The way propagandists try to close down criticism of Israel with this tedious cliché is pathetic. Cohen should give his permanently enraged old granny schtick a rest – it’s as offensive to Jews as it is to anyone else.

    • St Martyr

      So where is he wrong? Do you criticize your beloved Arabs for still abusing Africans in Sudan to North Nigeria? Or using us as slaves-the people of Congo or Niger? Or do we not matter when it comes to your precious sanctimonious lefty Middle East fight against the Eeeevil Jews?

      At least Britain apologized for colonizing us.

    • Richard

      The trouble with the legitimate criticism of Israel (legitimate as in the ability to criticise the politics of a country) is that that particular bandwagon is also filled with others for whom Israel is a travesty simply for existing as a non-Arab and secular-ish country within a sea of Islam.

      Some UFO researchers really do try to analyse UFOs, but there are many who jump onboard for other reasons, such as a desire for religious belief, the need to seem “different”, etc.

      It is not the fault of the genuine critics (I use the term in the proper sense of willing to “criticise” or analyse) of Israel that those with other agendas have hijacked them, but it cannot be denied, either.

    • Infidelissima

      it kinda seems anti semitic when 58 muslim countries are blood-soaked sh!!holes, in which christians are being ethnically cleansed, yet the only jewish country in the world, the size of wales, get’s this much disproportionate attention for protecting their people and borders against attacks.

      Long Live Israel.

      • Ronovitch

        Your hatred for vast swathes of humanity is as obvious as Cohen’s insidious agenda. The murderous racism you both propagate is the reason so many Jews are becoming increasingly alienated from Israel. It won’t last with evil people like you spewing your support for it, that’s for sure.

        • Infidelissima

          LOOOL – if only I was as loving, not hateful and tolerant, as you peaceful mussies, ey?

          People have been saying Israel’s would not last 1 day – you cockroaches have been certainly trying – and? Looks like Allah has been on Israel’s side since 1948.

          Speaking about hatred: how does it feel not to be able to live in peace with anybody on the planet, including your own? Is that why Allah makes you slaughter your own?

          • Ronovitch

            As I said, and you confirm with every one of your illiterate posts: you’re pure evil and incredibly stupid with it…..The fact that you direct your racist hate at Jews who disagree with your vile prejudice says it all. Paranoid, cowardly, murderous cretins like you shame Israel and all of us who once believed in it.

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        Imagine that Israel had never existed. What do you suppose would be the per-barrel price of petroleum?

  • Damaris Tighe

    The problem here is that the film was made in Israel, where the haredim (ultra-orthodox) can do what they like within their own communities. A haredi film maker then tried to transfer her ridiculous religious mores to a London film festival. The Odeon was absolutely right to object. The private club which is screening the film has the right to admit or not admit whoever it wants & unfortunately we have to defend this, however much we dislike the choices it makes. It’s the same freedom that allows (theoretically at least) a private venue to host a secular men only event.

    As for the festival organisers, a pox on them for pandering to religious nuttery. The film should never have been included in the programme on these terms in the first place.

    • Mr Grumpy

      The Odeon was doing no more than making sure it stayed on the right side of the law.

      Re religious nuttery, I’m inclined to say let them get on with it. Nobody’s getting killed, and we have other fish to fry, e.g. those with one-way tickets to Syria.

      • Damaris Tighe

        I wasn’t really sure what point Nick Cohen was making.

        • Clive

          Paid work is its own reward

          • Damaris Tighe

            I suspect he was asked to write something about ‘Jews’ & ‘Israel’ – it never fails to be good clickbait & I’ve noticed that the number of comments here abouts has been falling like a stone. Maybe people are sick to death with the troll infestation.

  • winestain

    I was listening to a Jewish friend last night who had become very disillusioned with everything about his ‘heritage’ and zionism. I will attempt to paraphrase his remarks

    ‘The very program that worked so well and still works at large in the instance of my former fellow countrymen failed in my case. Not only had I stopped loving myself, I somehow failed to hate the non-jews. This is when I realized for the first time that actually there was no anti-Semitism around. Somehow, when I stopped loving myself, I also started to suspect the entire official Jewish historical narrative, both the Zionist one as well as the biblical one….The more I learned about the subject, the more I realized that anti-Jewish feelings are often intentionally generated and orchestrated by Jews themselves. This was when I became conscious that self-loving Jews love to be hated, and more than that, they need it. Indeed, Zionism is maintained by anti-Semitism. Without anti-Semitism there is no need for a Jewish State and without the Holocaust there wouldn’t even be a Jewish State.’

    Poor chap I could only offer him another pint and then made my excuses and left. Quite depressing really.

    • Nosis

      Must have been one those self hating ones we hear about. Seems like the Zionist dream has turned sour for them, like the communist and the neo-con fantasies. I would feel sorry for them if they didn’t wreak so much havoc in pursuit of these failed earthly paradises. Still, part of the cross we have to bear I suppose.

      • winestain

        No idea about that, just found him a bit depressing. He used to be a fanatic hyper-active sort of chap. Now he slouches around a drowned puppy with a face longer than a wet weekend. His wife reckons its a mid-life crisis but I joked to her that it was a (rhymes with mid) – life crisis. She didn’t find it funny and I suppose it was bad taste but he is a real downer these days.

        • Nosis

          This is interesting in relation to this:
          ‘The Catholic Church has always condemned anti-Semitism because hatred of, the Jewish race is wrong in and ofitself. Beyond that, anti-Semitism is an inappropriate response to what has been called “Jewishness.” Anti-Semitism is a competing form of “Jewishness.” Anti-Semitism cannot deal with “Jewishness,” because a Jew is not someone who can be defined as having Abraham’s DNA in his cells.
          Most Jews aren’t even Semites. The Jew insofar as he appropriates “Jewish ness” is primarily a theological construct. He is a rejecter of Christ. The Talmud, as we
          have said, was created to keep the Jewish people in bondage to a leadership that has existed under various manifestations throughout history-the Sanhedrin, the Kahal,
          the Politburo, the ADL and AIPAC. Each has proposed a false messiah as the antidote and alternative to the true Messiah, and each has led to violent reaction or equally violent disappointment. Sixty years ago, the Communist empire spread across the earth, and yet the Jews who had supported Stalin faithfully experienced widespread disillusionment with Communism. The same thing is happening now to Zionism, at the very moment when the Israel Lobby has reached the pinnacle of worldly power.’

          • winestain

            Catholics seem to have forgotten their own teachings.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            “The Catholic Church has always condemned anti-Semitism because hatred of, the Jewish race is wrong in and of itself.”

            Rubbish. Up until 1964, every Easter from the pulpit, the Catholic Church denounced the Jews for deicide, namely the killing of God in the figure of Jesus Christ. All based on a single verse in St. Matthew’s Gospel. This was long after the Nazis had been found guilty in secular court and punished for their crimes.
            Naturally, this denunciation led to anti-Jewish pogroms every Easter, so don’t give me that “the Catholic Church has always condemned anti-Semitism” BS.

            Jack, Japan Alps

          • Nosis

            You don’t understand the distinction that the church made between racial animus and religious opposition. You are seeing it from a skewed perspective. I suggest you read ‘Civita Cattolica’ for a proper understanding of this distinction.


          • winestain

            I don’t think jack is interested in a balanced account. he is quite willing to question some things but others he has a knee jerk aversion to. Good article by the way.

          • winestain

            I thought you had more sense than to swallow media spin. You obviously haven’t even read the proceedings of Nostrae Aetate (Vatican II). The truth is far from your skewed account above.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Crusades, anti-semetic pogroms ring a bell?

          • winestain

            Yeah a pavlovian bell. There are two sides to these stories.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Your side and the truth,

    • Infidelissima

      frankly, this all sounds completely made up, especially since you put it as one long quote

      do you think we’re all as stupid as you jew-haters?

      • winestain

        You obviously haven’t understood what my friend is trying to convey.

  • Dan O’Connor

    It is cognitive dissonace, and a break down of rational thought, that insists that just because a particular minority is not 100 % of the problem, that they are not a problem at all , and that if they don’t control everything, it means they don’t control anything
    The Western mind, in particular the mind of those that consider themselves the most educated, informed, intellectually sphisticated and the cleverest people to have ever lived , are in fact the most susceptible to this form of self deceit and cognitive blindness.
    This happens when for example an entire society and culture and its best and brighest can be persuaded to conflate a ” truth ” with being synonimous with
    ” racism ” and ” hate ” . i.e , the truth is hate speech
    The mind and soul of Westen man is in a terrible stat. The rest of the non-White world thinks unapologetcally and uncontroversially with the primoridial part of the brain which is an indispensible Darwinian tool of group competition preservation and survival, becaue they are burdened by Pavlovian conditioned auto-reflex collective / racial collective guilt
    White people have become stupid so they demographically and biologically will die . So stupid, gulllible and naive have Whites become, that they believe that you’d always know if another group had any bad intentions or and totally irreconcilable and conflciting group interests and loyalties because if they did they’d broadcast it from the roof tops.

    • Richard

      This is all entirely true. The minute Europeans starting feeling sorry for Africans, and created a parallel system of law called “Universal Human Rights” that made no differentiation between nationals and non-nationals, they doomed themselves to oblivion.

      You cannot act according to morality with a person who is operating at a very primitive level any more than you can claim human rights to a hungry lion in a cage.

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    David Irving is (or at least was) a well-respected historian and author; until “Hitler’s War” was published. And that was because he didn’t mention the Holocaust, because he could find no evidence that Hitler was aware of it. After that the Jewish Mafia made sure his name was dragged through the mud. Now ask yourself why. One billion dollars a year from Germany in reparations, some two million from the United States. No wonder it’s referred to as thew Holocaust Industry.
    Irving is a fluent German (and Spanish) speaker who can read the original documents (in German) and talk to the surviving witnesses (in German). His book, “The Destruction of Dresden” won the trust of the key witnesses he needed to talk to.
    For amusement, look at the way respected British historians were taken in by the so-called Hitler Diaries. Irving denounced them as fake at the meeting called to announce their serialisation, and was promptly thrown out for his trouble. Straight into the hands of the waiting press pack. And the rest, as they say, is history.
    Jack, Japan Alps

    • Dresden, the rallying call of the Revisionism of the Far-Right. (But you are still a Japanese, so you can give it a rest! You are not White and will never be accepted as one!)

  • Stephen Milroy

    Usual liberal ‘double think’. ‘It is wrong to discriminate’. Unless it is an ‘oppressed minority’ then it’s fine. ‘Bigotry is wrong’. Unless it is people who are male. And heterosexual. And (Yahweh forbid! Not that we believe in him…) white. Also ‘I support freedom of speech and assembly (but ban this lot from speaking and showing up!)

  • Frank

    Good article, but surely you know that Ken Loach, Mike Leigh and Peter Kosminksy are what we British call “special”, no-one must criticise them!

  • rebooter

    “But when it came to Jews, different standards applied.”
    One of the most common complaints by writers on Jewish matters is that Jews, the people, are conflated with Israel, the state. Yet it appears that Nick Cohen is ready to employ that particular trick to aid whatever point he is trying to make here.

  • jim

    Come off it.We have the tribe to thank for PC and hate speech legislation .These are the most pernicious censoring instruments ever concocted.These guys also enjoy blacklisting. What goes around comes around. As it happens the Israelis will end up being punished for the excesses of ADL.

    • Richard

      But is that true? A friend put the blame squarely and fairly on the shoulders of Christianity, which posits that all men are in all ways equal. PC is really just the legislative arm of that doctrine. My take on the matter is that after the War, Christian Europeans were so alarmed that their religious doctrine was so manipulated by politicians to become the antithesis of what it really was, that they decided to legislate it into political existence. In other words, take it from the pulpit into parliament, and give it legal teeth. Jews may have been the example that caused the result, but they did not, and could not at that time, actually set the events that led to this repressive PC into motion.

      • jim

        Fair point. I would say Catholic doctrine is more culpable than Protestantism..But then there are the media,the legal profession,the universities. These are the enforcers. No need to go into The Frankfurt School. I don’t see how we can avoid calling a spade a spade here.

        • Richard

          But which arms of the media? The BBC was very left-wing when the only input Jews had was in ITV. The Frankfurt School is a pretty useless (in my opinion) leftie movement that had little input into other than academic papers. You do of course realised that you are saying that non-Jews are too unintelligent to be able to repudiate what they are told? I was taught many things at school and university that I did not accept, and never have.

          Jews have been very visible, both as examples of what can and did happen, and then fighting against it ever happening again. But they are a tiny minority. It takes others to adopt those causes. Left-wing thinking has been around in Britain for centuries, long before there even were sizeable Jewish communities in Britain.

          In a place like South Africa, blacks have overturned the example set by whites over the course of three hundred and fifty years. Their concept of the meaning of left/right divide has changed radically in the space of one generation. Are you really saying that Britons cannot do the same because of a couple of hundred thousand Jews? If they cannot it is because they themselves hold these views, independent of any Jewish involvement.

          • jim

            The UK does not matter. Western opinion is shaped by the USA. And in the USA everything I have said holds true. PC is the creature of the tribe. Besides, we’re far beyond left and right divides these days. International Socialists and Global Capitalists have long since agreed a common ground.They both favour policies that will ruin us.. Our friends in the tribe have always favoured mass immigration into the west and always opposed any attempt to regulate it. This may have been a subject for debate within other ad hoc groups but not within theirs. Am I supposed to pretend not to know this.? You say others could have resisted?They could, though it would be in the teeth of PC demonization. What goes around comes around. I’m disinclined to do favours for Israel. This is despite the fact that I am sympathetic to their position and despite the fact that I believe they are being unfairly singled out for boycotting. Why not boycott the entire middle-east? That would be more fair. But I’m afraid they have burned their bridges with me. America is the problem .What I see there seems to be little more than institutionalized anti-gentilism. In the USA there is more goy bashing than gay bashing. And we in the UKWestern Europe have long since lost any faith in our own judgement.

          • Richard

            From my discussions with Israelis, they are generally in despair about what Europe is doing to itself. What is it about America that makes people who live there think the way they do? For instance, “Irish” Americans hold views no real Irishman does anymore, and from what you say, Jews in general in the US hold their own hard-line Leftist opinions. But then again, I know American Jews who are quite right-wing, and vote Republican. Some say they talk Left where necessary, but don’t vote that way. CNN and Ted Turner are extremely Leftist, but is not Jewish. The campaign against South Africa was famously not led by Israel, but by people in the US and Europe, many of them church-men. Jews like Noam Chomsky hate Israel, and even before the modern state of Israel was proclaimed, there were Left-wing Jews speaking out against it. So it is not just goys they despise, but anybody who is not Left-wing. Israel suffers as much from their stridency as other countries.

            The real issue, to me, is why it is that Leftists seem to intimidate everybody else. That seems to me to be the main thing. Jews are as susceptible to this as everybody else. The success of the Left since the Russian Revolution is what needs to turned around. It hasn’t taken long since the elections in the UK for the Left already to have started marching again. The past hundred years have been a disaster for the West. I just can’t really believe that all Jews are responsible for the actions of their Left-wing exponents.

          • jim

            I used to live in Israel for a few years and I absolutely concur. The Israelis I knew were very skeptical about the American settlers and aghast at European immigration policies.Israelis are very pragmatic.But we were talking about American Jews…and once again I have to agree when you call our American hyphenate friends on their unnerring ability to make a bad situation worse..Is it because they are all so ideological? Is it the polarization of politics? Jewish-Americans; Irish- Americans; Cuban-Americans….all are viewed with suspicion in the home countries(for want of a better expression). And I agree when you say the likes of the ADL are perhaps doing long term damage to Israel.
            I think we can safely separate Israel from the discussion. It is perfectly possible for someone like me to back the Israelis when it comes to the sometimes harsh measures they take in defence of the 1% of the middle-eastern landmass that jews are allowed to live on.I find much of the (european) criticism aimed at Israel to be at best unfair and at worst just plain stupid.At the same time I am enraged that the western world (especially America) must tippy toe on eggshells when it comes to voicing even the most qualified critiques of any political position associated with jewish opinion.
            But we are easily intimidated aren’t we? Human beings are weak.They like to belong and PC is a form of witchburning. You separate the trouble maker and demonize him.In truth any opinion worth a damn must be offensive to somebody otherwise you’re not really expressing an opinion at all. If it’s not annoying somebody it’s just PR or advertising. And it seems there are some people you must never offend.

          • Richard

            I think Americans hold these cloud-cuckoo ideas because they are very remote from the actual events, and also have created a system in which everything is reducible to money and capitalism. They cannot understand ethnic or tribal differences, because to them if you can make money with somebody, you have more in common than difference. They think others are stupid for not making money their sine qua non. And of course, given their parameters, they are correct.

            Identity can be pursued from afar, because it does not make any difference to their present. So, in other words, you can be Irish and take on the Irish cause because it is somewhere else. You have to accept whatever is told by the narrative that bests represents an “identity” because as a “pure” capitalist you have no other way to access it. And so the rest of the world becomes a sort of Disneyland of fixed identities and histories, and you take your pick (and pay for it, of course).

            BUT, as America’s power wanes, that sort of mentality will be on the decline. I would say that they will become more realistic, but I think it will simply plunge them into dissolution. What will replace their vision may well be much worse.

          • jim

            It won’t be any better on our side of the pond I’m afraid. If a blackhispanic America is hopeless then what chance has an afro-arab islamicised europe? Time for some plain speaking. If someone preaches multi-culti but lives whitebread then they are destructive hypocrites and I would say an enemy. The least diverse place in London is Golders Green.

          • Richard

            The last time I was there I only saw Muslims, running the kosher delicatessens!

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    Can’t help noticing that the intellectuals are out in force on this one. You know, those Liberal Arts Muppets who would prefer to believe self-serving dodgy witnesses, rather than the documents and scientific data.

    • What are “Liberal Arts Muppets”?! One of your own made-up phrases in your own made-up fantasy-land?!

      According to your own definition, you would be a “Liberal Arts Muppets” yourself. You had obviously read some kind of cultural studies in University.

      You do not like the artes liberales, and that obviously explains your own lack of logic and correct grammar. You are an ungrammatical idiot with an obsession with checking other people’s spellings.

  • Ivan Ewan

    Sheesh, I go away for a couple of days and there’s already neo-Nazis clogging the system.

    Jooooz did it. It’s all the joooooz fault. No proof. Vague, insubstantial “evidence”. Who needs evidence when there are jooooz you can point to.

    I mean, what, are you all trying to get the editor to turn Disqus off?

    • Damaris Tighe

      Welcome back to the madhouse.

    • Richard

      I think non-Jews can be suspicious of Jews because they can be excluding of others. However, I do think that is on a socio-economic level, not a religious one. I had an American Jewish colleague in London years ago, and she said she was distressed at finding her new social group was becoming increasingly Jewish. When I pressed her on this, she said it was because she did not want to spend her social time talking about the footie and going to the pub, and she found Jews to be in a different intellectual space. It was not as Jews that she responded to them, it was a socio-economic matter.

    • GraveDave

      It’s the 4 b 2s.

  • Onsere1985

    < ✜✱✪✪✲✜ +spectator +*********….. < Now Go R­e­­a­d M­o­r­e


    • GraveDave

      Cant you spammers just f u c k off.

  • J. K.

    The whole ban is wrong and unacceptable indifferent of the religious beliefs of the creators and the sect they belong to. Discrimination based on the sexes has been long abandoned by advanced societies. Any attempt to put them back into practice in modern countries should be prevented. “Tradition” or “culture” cannot be an excuse. Some things are simply stupid and obsolete. Get rid of them.

  • GraveDave

    I’ve used up my allowance of b(l)og paper for this week.

    I got the gist though. So nice one Nick.

  • albert pike

    “The line between ‘anti-Zionist’ and ‘anti-Semitic’ protests in Britain has become so blurred of late you can barely see it.”

    It is a real shame that the millions of jews who were against zionism are no longer around to explain the difference to those too ignorant to understand it.

    • TNT

      Where did they go? Did they vanish with your slipper?

      • albert pike

        Have you not heard of ‘The Holocaust’.?

        Though there are still religious jews who are antizionists the mainstream media give them no voice

        • Infidelissima

          nobody gives a phack

          go blow up your own ppl – bye.

    • Infidelissima


      Go rape your sister and behead your brother, Abdul. Allah hates you.

      Proud Zionist

      • albert pike

        “Proud Zionist”

        It shows

        • Infidelissima

          What shows? That we zionists help, protect and defend our people, instead of raping, beheading, gassing and burying them alive, like you mussies are doing to your own? Nobody kills as many mussies, as other mussies – it’s BRILLIANT!

          Fancy being a morally superior pedophile worshipper, LOL.
          Maybe that’s why Allah sh!!s on your ilk everyday…who knows.

          • TNT

            The Infidelissima tells it like it is.

          • Infidelissima

            better a zionist than a pedo worshipper – Allah seems to agree ;D

          • albert pike

            “What shows?”

            That you are a proud zionist.

    • Augustus

      The aim of Zionism was simply the establishment of a Jewish State as a safe haven for Jews living in the diaspora who were being threatened. This ideology hasn’t lost any of its validity today. With the founding of Israel in 1948, and with the subsequent waves of immigration of millions of Jews from Europe, Russia and elsewhere, from all political persuasions, who wholeheartedly embraced the Zionist quest for a sovereign State for all Jews, it’s difficult to see where those ‘millions of Jews’ you cite, who were against Zionism who are ‘no longer around’ actually came from.

      • albert pike

        “The aim of Zionism was simply the establishment of a Jewish State as a
        safe haven for Jews living in the diaspora who were being threatened.”

        Untrue. Zionism was the idea of christians and had nothing to do with them escaping persecution. It was 100 years before they actually found a jew, albeit an atheist one, who was willing to go along with their little game.

        difficult to see where those ‘millions of Jews’ you cite, who were
        against Zionism who are ‘no longer around’ actually came from.”

        Many came from Germany. Hatred of zionism among the jewish population was so great in Germany that it was impossible for them to hold meetings there, at one time. But I appreciate that that is something you could never acknowledge.

        • Augustus

          “Untrue. Zionism was the idea of Christians and had nothing to do with them escaping persecution.”

          Just Google Theodor Herzl: “Herzl formed the World Zionist Organization and promoted Jewish migration to Palestine in an effort to form a Jewish state (Israel).” And he was a Jew, so Heaven knows where you get your information from. And why do you think he came to believe that the Jews must remove themselves from Europe and create their own state? Exactly, to escape persecution. And the Jews of Germany and Austria, in particular, were certainly hated long before Hitler came to power, and constantly beset by anti-Semitism and social discrimination.

          • albert pike

            I don’t see what point you are trying to make.

            Yes Herzl did found the WZO. However before they found this atheist jew, christan missionaries had spent around 100 years looking for jews willing to embark on their plan. Herzl was the one, the first one, in one hundred years, to agree to it.

            As for the necessity for a refuge from the alleged persecution: the Sultan had refused Herzl Palestine, but had offered alternatives which were rejected. The British offered Uganda, rich in water and space enough for their project to have a land in which they can be free from persecution. Although the vote was 2 to 1 in fav

          • Augustus

            “Fortunately WWI came along and halfway through it, when Britain was staring defeat in the face, they promised to allow Jews to make Palestine their national home…”

            Yes, and those rights were executed in a political and legal settlement during the post-war years between 1919 and 1923. Insofar as the Ottoman Empire was concerned, the settlement embraced the claims of not only the Zionists, but also the Arab National movement, the Kurds, the Assyrians and the Armenians. As part of the settlement, in which, btw, the Arabs received most of the lands formerly under Turkish sovereignty in the Middle East, the whole of Palestine, on both sides of the Jordan, was reserved exclusively for the Jewish people as their national home and future independent state.

            How generous was the outcome of that?

          • albert pike

            Bull droppings.

            Arabs received. It was already theirs dick

          • Richard

            It is tricky. For instance, blacks in South Africa regard the land as theirs, because they booted the indigenous San Bushmen out. They have now pushed the San Bushmen into the Kalahari Desert.

            For the Arabs, think of black South Africans. Originally from elsewhere, but insisting it is all theirs, and they aren’t keen to share it. For the Jews, think the Bushmen, who have returned to take back what the blacks (originally from the Great Lakes area) took from them.

          • albert pike

            The Russian jews originate from Khazaria, so they are not returning jews.

            What happens when the Canaanites return and kick Israelis out?

          • Damaris Tighe

            As I’ve pointed out to you more than once, the Khazar thesis has been disproved by modern genetic research (except possibly for a small number of Hungarian Jews). Around half of Ashkenazi Jews carry a gene which they share with Near Easterners.

            As for the Canaanites, modern archaeologists believe that the original Hebrews emerged from ‘highland Canaanites’. In other words, there was no Exodus, no conquest – which would account for why no evidence of such a migration has ever been found in Sinai.

          • Richard

            The one thing that was proved was the migration after the sacking of the Temple, but that occurred on a smaller scale than records would have us believe, and it was males who did the fleeing, rather than females.

          • Damaris Tighe

            Peasants tend to stick with the land & would rather change their religion than move. There is probably a small core of people of all religions – Muslim, Jewish & Christian – living in Israel/Palestine who are descended from the original Hebrews & have never migrated. An Israeli has found evidence of the Jewish origins of some Palestinians (they’re happy to talk about it in private). So the idea of who is ‘native’ to the area is completely the reverse of the usual narrative.

          • Richard

            Indeed. The establishment of the modern state of Israel is a triumph of culture over nature, a very post-War phenomenon. Jews from Europe and elsewhere who settled there latterly were cultural Jews, but the genetic Jews (a clumsy phrase but you understand what I mean) were the people who now call themselves Palestinians. To some extent the Jews from elsewhere have semitic DNA, but it is likely not to the same extent. I suppose it is a case of who bears the burden and the responsibility takes on the identity, rather than simply having an ancestor who was likely an early Jew.

            This raises interesting questions vis-a-vis Europe and identity, too. Is somebody who converts to Islam still a European, simply because their ancestors were, or have they turned their backs on it by embracing an alien identity? Genetically, they are certainly Europeans, but they don’t “bear the burden or take the responsibility”. Have I coined a phrase relating to identity politics just there? And can a non-European immigrant become European by doing just that? Of course in practice, they don’t, so the question is academic.

          • Damaris Tighe

            Some interesting points. I’d argue that there has to be a link between identity & ancestry, so I lean more towards ‘nature’ & away from ‘culture’. But the adoption of a culture does allow the assimilation of those who don’t belong by birth. Nothing wrong with that.

            The important factor is numbers. A very large number of members of the identity group ‘by adoption’ cuts off the link to the ancestors, & then we have not the old group but a new one – especially as at this point there is likely to be reverse assimilation to some degree to the incoming group.

          • albert pike

            “Around half of Ashkenazi Jews carry a gene which they share with Near Easterners.”

            Because they had traded and had relations of the sexual kind prior to the mass conversion.

          • Richard

            The Khazaria theory has been disproved by genetic testing. One must try to keep up with the latest information. Ancient Egyptians weren’t black, nor were the ancient Greeks, disproving another notion held by some. Non sub-Saharan Africans all have Neanderthal DNA to varying degrees, another DNA result.

          • albert pike

            “The Khazaria theory has been disproved by genetic testing.”

            Rubbish. It’s been disclaimed but not disproven

          • Richard

            Genetic testing can only tell you by how much your genes correspond with people living in a certain area today. Since the Khazaria-origin theory states that that origin is quite recent, you would expect it to show between the groups. It does not. However, it was possible to trace the descendants of Richard III fairly easily, so I wouldn’t say that what I said was “rubbish”.

          • albert pike

            That’s sounds very convincing ;). Are you trying to say that there were no such people as the Khazars?

  • Dominic Stockford

    This is the darkest and most dangerous form of feminism masquerading as a religious defence of equality, and you seem to have bought the claim it is instead Jewish extremism..

  • JimHHalpert

    Another article from tax-avoider Nick Cohen.

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      Any hot tips, Nick?

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    You deleted my finest work, you scumbags.

    • Damaris Tighe

      Your whole oeuvre is still here. Unfortunately.

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        Not a fan. I can tell.

        • Damaris Tighe

          Tee hee – at least you have a sense of humour Jack.

    • As in (a yellow-blooded Japanese, such as you are) copying from FPP and Stormfront …

  • Easy. You want to see it that badly, put on a dress and a wig and insist that you “identify” as female. Threaten to go to the papers if they resist and throw around daft made-up words like “transphobic” and “cisgender”

    Fight crazy with crazy.

  • Retired Nurse

    Can’t they simply make an ‘Editor’s Cut’ with all the women blacked out, like the Haredi newspaper HaMevaser did in their photo of world leaders at the
    #JeSuisCharlie rally in Paris?… http://www.timesofisrael.com/merkel-image-edited-out-of-haredi-paper/ – there are some really talented cinematographers working with ISIS at the moment…

  • Innit Bruv


    • Infidelissima

      WTF is ‘Palestina’?
      Never heard of it, neither have Jordan and Egypt!


  • Verbatim

    Welcome to the new Muslim world order where anti-semitism is once again on the menu. You needed to be careful of what you wished for when you let your borders down to all the riff raff in this world. You are going down with the ship.

    • Damaris Tighe

      Nothing here I disagree with, but haven’t you commented on the wrong article?

  • LindaIGarcia

    ….All time hit the spectator Find Here

  • Roger Hudson

    This comment thread displays some very extreme polarisation of views, ignore the people on the extremes and think of the ordinary people who want to get on with their lives as Jews in Britain.
    Ignore ‘The gift of fire’ and get ‘Fiddler on the roof’ on DVD.

    • Damaris Tighe

      Agree entirely – & Fiddler gives some insight into why some Jews became Bolsheviks at the beginning of the 20th century.

  • cromwell

    Whatever you say at the end of the day Its all about Palestine. Why its got anything to do about England I cannot think unless its about terrorism like the bombing of the King David hotel or the hanging of murdered Brititish soldiers in the orange groves by the Haganah

    • Coleridge1

      Cromwell is plainly a Madrassa-reared Islamist settler from apartheid Pakistan. Go home buddy.

    • Infidelissima

      phack off Abdul!

      If only those terrible Israelis were as nice and peaceful towards Brits, as you mussies, ey?

  • andyrwebman

    “As extremists of all types tell us what we can see and say, that simple commercial creed feels pure and noble in comparison”

    A fine statement to end a decent article. Those who call themselves “liberals” would do well to consider the truth of that.

    Perhaps the success, nobility and indeed efficiency of a culture needs to be measured by how few things it needs to ban.

  • Coleridge1

    It’s pretty obvious that these Holocaust-denying comments are being posed by some sick Islamist settler who badly needs to be shown the way home back to his racist apartheid Pakistani homeland.

  • SunshineSunshineSunshine

    Creeps me dorky crawlies.