Amos Oz: Doves should be hawkish on Palestinian compliance (& Saudi “Game of Thrones”; Corbyn applauds call for ‘dismantling’ of Israel)

January 06, 2019

The Palestinian murderer of British student Hannah Bladon in Jerusalem, was sentenced to 18 years in prison by an Israeli court last week. Her killer is being hailed as a hero by many Palestinians.

In the past, some British media have condemned Israel for imprisoning any Palestinian murderers of Israelis. Now that the victim is a British citizen, The Guardian and others have highlighted criticism of the Israeli court for not handing down a harsher sentence.


Bladon, 20, who was studying for a semester at Jerusalem’s Hebrew University, was a keen supporter of Derby County soccer club. Thousands of English fans from both Derby and Huddersfield stood out of respect for Hannah Bladon the Saturday after she was murdered in April 2017, while players from each team bowed their heads and linked arms in a minute’s silence.



[Note by Tom Gross]

I attach a variety of items on the Middle East, not directly connected to one another. They concern Israel, the Palestinians, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iran, the role of social media in stoking extremism, and the British Labour Party leader.

(If you only have time to read one piece, I suggest you read the third piece, by Stephen Daisley, who is a Scottish journalist, and a subscriber to this list.)



1. “Doves should be hawkish on Palestinian compliance” (By Amos Oz, Jerusalem Post, Sep 3, 1993)
2. “Turks leave home in droves, draining money and talent” (By Carlotta Gall, NY Times, Jan 4, 2019)
3. “The real racism against the Palestinians” (By Stephen Daisley, Spectator, Jan 4, 2019)
4. “Hitler would have loved social media” (By Marvin Hier, Abraham Cooper, LA Times, Jan 4, 2019)
5. “Funeral for Saudi prince provides peek into royal tensions” (By Simon Henderson, The Hill, Dec 28, 2018)
6. “Iran’s continued push for a nuclear-ready missile capability” (By Farzin Nadimi, Washington Institute, Jan 4, 2019)
7. “Corbyn filmed applauding Jewish extremist who called for ‘dismantling’ of Israel” (JTA, Jan 4, 2019)



Doves Should Be Hawkish On Palestinian Compliance
By Amos Oz
The Jerusalem Post
September 3, 1993

(This is an extract from an article by Amos Oz for The Jerusalem Post on September 3, 1993. It was published before the Declaration of Principles of the Oslo Peace accords were signed in Washington, after which Yasser Arafat launched his wave of suicide bombers.)

“What if they cheat? What if they take whatever we give them and demand even more, still exercising violence and terror? Within the proposed settlement, Israel will be in a position to close in on Palestine and undo the deal.

If the worse comes to the worst, if it turns out that the peace is no peace, it will always be militarily easier for Israel to break the backbone of a tiny, demilitarized Palestinian entity than to go on and on breaking the backbones of eight-year-old stone-throwing Palestinians.

Once peace comes, Israeli doves, more than other Israelis, must assume a clear-cut ‘hawkish’ attitude concerning the duty of the future Palestinian regime to live by the letter and the spirit of its obligations.

The plan now being negotiated, Gaza and Jericho first, is a sober and reasonable option. If the Palestinians want to hold onto Gaza and Jericho, eventually assuming power in other parts of the occupied territories, they will have to prove to us, to themselves and to the whole world, that they have abandoned violence and terror, that they are capable of suppressing their fanatics, that they are renouncing the destructive Palestinian Charter and withdrawing from what they used to call ‘the right of return.’

They will also have to show that they are willing to tolerate in their midst a minority of Israelis who may choose to live where there is no Israeli government.”

* Among past dispatches on Amos Oz: “Without a wound,” he once said, “there is no author”



Turks Leave Home in Droves, Draining Money and Talent
By Carlotta Gall (New York Times, January 4, 2019)


More than a quarter of a million Turks emigrated in 2017, an increase of 42% over 2016.

The flight of people, talent and capital is being driven by a combination of factors that have come to define life under Erdogan.

These include political persecution, a deepening distrust of the judiciary and the arbitrariness of the rule of law, and a deteriorating business climate, accelerated by worries that President Erdogan is unsoundly manipulating management of the economy to benefit himself and his inner circle.

Ibrahim Sirkeci of Regent’s University in London estimates that 10,000 Turks have made use of a business visa plan to move to Britain in the last few years. The number of Turks applying for asylum worldwide jumped by 10,000 in 2017 to more than 33,000.

At least 12,000 of Turkey’s millionaires moved their assets out of the country in 2016 and 2017, according to the Global Wealth Migration Review, with most of them moving to Europe or the United Arab Emirates.

* Among other recent dispatches on Turkey:
The Turkish dissidents kidnapped from Europe (& ‘Jew’ Sarah Jessica Parker attacked by Erdogan MP)



The real racism against the Palestinians
By Stephen Daisley
The Spectator (UK)
January 4, 2019

This is a story about two people going to jail and the countries sending them there. Both are Palestinians and were sentenced on Monday in courts separated by an hour’s drive. Jamil Tamimi was sent down for 18 years at Jerusalem district court, in Israel, for the murder of British student Hannah Bladon. Bladon, a religious studies undergraduate at Birmingham university, was in Israel on an exchange programme.

On Good Friday 2017, she was riding the Jerusalem light rail to church when Tamimi stabbed her seven times with a seven-inch knife. The frenzied assault stopped only when the other passengers managed to overpower him. Hannah was taken to hospital but died soon after arrival. She was 20 years old.

The murder bore all the markers of a terrorist attack. In fact, Tamimi had just been released from a psychiatric hospital and is thought to have been attempting ‘suicide-by-cop’ – slaying the student in the hopes a responding police officer would shoot him dead. He was charged with murder but reportedly reached a plea bargain with prosecutors on the grounds of mental illness, reducing his sentence from life to 18 years. ‘This was not a terrorist incident,’ the prosecutor told the court. ‘This was a terrible murder carried out by a mentally ill person.’ In a statement, Hannah’s family protested the leniency of the sentence, saying ‘it makes no difference whether this was a terror attack or just another crazed murderer’.

Our second convict is Issam Akel, and he did get a life sentence. He was convicted at Ramallah high court, in the Palestinian-run section of the West Bank, of attempting to sell land to a Jew. Akel was also sentenced to hard labour for the transaction, which involved property in Jerusalem’s Old City. He actually got off lightly; selling land to a Jew carries the death penalty under Palestinian law. Fortunately for him, he also holds US citizenship and the state department is reportedly working to extradite him.

If you get your news from the BBC, you might have missed this story, what with it not appearing to merit a single word on the corporation’s website. Happily, there was space on the Middle East page for a puff piece on Kholoud Nassar, ‘a Palestinian Instagrammer in the Gaza Strip [who] wants to show us a different side of life there’.

When Tamimi and Akel stood to hear their sentences on Monday, the world got to hear – if it chooses to listen – two countries with two very different values systems. But it seems we are on the periphery of the only Middle East territory nobody wants to occupy: The Land of Awkward Facts. Isn’t saying Israel and the Palestinians have different values perilously close to saying one country’s values are superior to the other’s? It is and they are, as these two convictions underline.

There is racism at work here but it doesn’t lie in preferring the society that produced the sentence given to Jamil Tamimi to the one that jailed Issam Akel. Israel showed leniency to a vulnerable person who committed a horrific crime. The Palestinians showed no mercy to a member of their own population who committed the crime of selling real estate to a Jew. The primary victims of the Arabs’ century-long war against a Jewish homeland have been the Arabs themselves. They don’t just miss opportunities for co-existence, they jail them.

And we avert our eyes and let them get on with it. To do otherwise would mean confronting awkward facts that might disturb safe certainties. Why talk about the Palestinians jailed for selling land to Jews when we can demand Israel release the Palestinians jailed for killing Jews? Why talk about the stipends paid to the families of terrorists who murder Israelis when we can condemn Israel for the security fence built to stop the terrorists getting in?

Why talk about the Palestinians’ insistence that the West Bank be rendered Jew-free before they pledge to accept a state there when we can repudiate Israel’s cunning scheme to ‘Judaise’ Judea?

Why talk about Mahmoud Abbas, the moderate Palestinian president, and his explicit, on-the-record, even book-length distortions of the Holocaust and Zionism when we can decry Netanyahu’s chauvinism and alliances with fellow chauvinists? Why, in short, face up to the real ‘obstacles to peace’ when we can pretend building houses in the West Bank is what’s really holding things back?

Interrogating Palestinian politics, culture and social attitudes terrifies liberal souls because we might find things we don’t like. Things like Issam Akel’s sentence. Like jihad-themed kindergarten graduations. Like rocket launchers set up in civilian areas. Things that can’t be willed away with a sombre head shake and a plea to ‘both sides’. Things that might lead us to question the Palestinians’ interest in peace. Question our entire approach to the conflict since at least 1967. Question the viability, or even desirability, of a Palestinian state.

I’ve always railed against liberal blindness and hypocrisy on Palestinian extremism as a product of anti-Israel bias. I’m not so sure anymore. I’m starting to wonder if the real bias is against the Palestinians. We expect Israel to operate like Belgium south of Beirut and castigate it for failing to live up to our values (or what we claim to be our values).

We expect almost nothing of the Palestinians, and certainly not for them to conduct their affairs as we do (or tell ourselves we do). In Jerusalem, we see Boers; in Ramallah, Zulus. This is not pro-Israel – it is based on the myth of Israel as a white European colonial enterprise – but it is flagrantly anti-Palestinian. Yes, these two cultures are distinct (though there is a deal of crossover).

Yes, Palestinian culture has a lot of work to do to catch up on democracy, human rights, minority rights, and much else besides. But none of this is inherent to being Palestinian; these are political and social values and they, and the cultures that espouse them, can change. This, however, is at odds with the underlying assumptions of Western policy on the Middle East in which Israeli misdeeds are aberrations to be condemned and corrected while Palestinian misdeeds are shrugged off, excused or justified. This is just who they are.

The sentiment is sympathy but the logic is pure bigotry. We are not friends of the Palestinians. We are not lending them solidarity by indulging their outrages. We are treating them like a savage tribe from an Edgar Wallace adventure, benighted but noble in their own way, wide-eyed grateful to the white man for understanding their backwards customs. There is your racism. Issam Akel is going to jail for selling land to a Jew and our hearts break for his jailers because they couldn’t possibly know any better.

* For more on Hannah Bladon, please see: Rare respect in the UK for the victim of a Palestinian terror attack



Hitler would have loved social media
By Marvin Hier and Abraham Cooper
Los Angeles Times
January 4, 2019

On April 29, 1945, just one day before he would commit suicide in his bunker, Hitler made this prediction:

“Centuries will pass away, but out of the ruins of our towns and monuments the hatred against … international Jewry and its helpers will grow.”

Hitler knew he had lost the war – and that despite the killing of millions of Jews throughout Europe, his goal of eradicating all Jews had failed. Allied armies took control of death factories from Auschwitz to Mauthausen and recorded the grisly evidence of what would be called the Nazi Holocaust. The swastika became a symbol reviled by the world.

But Hitler was dead wrong in his prediction of what would come next. He believed it would take centuries for anti-Semitism to come roaring back. It has taken just 75 years.

Rabbis in Paris, London, Amsterdam, Copenhagen and Stockholm are now cautioning parishioners not to don yarmulkes or Star of David necklaces, lest they be attacked in broad daylight in these capital cities.

Hitler believed it would take centuries for anti-Semitism to come roaring back. It has taken just 75 years.

In Gothenburg, Sweden, resurgent, violent neo-Nazis protested near the city’s synagogue on Yom Kippur; later it was firebombed. Elsewhere in Sweden, a Jewish community center in the north was forced to permanently close because of threats from latter-day Nazis.

In Denmark, incensed Jewish leaders are demanding that authorities ban far-right extremists from launching verbal attacks against Jews at the national monument to the victims of World War II. Everywhere in Europe, identifiable Jewish schools and houses of prayer must have visible armed security or risk the consequences.

Democratic Germany is not immune to anti-Semitism, so much so that numerous states have followed suit after Berlin named Dr. Felix Klein the first national commissioner to combat anti-Semitism.

In 2019, Jews in Europe will continue to face multi-pronged threats from neo-Nazi and xenophobic groups on the far right, from elements of the left, millions of whom believe Israel is treating Palestinians the way the Nazis treated Jews, and Islamist emigres who were brought up in their native lands to hate all things Jewish and Israeli.

Is it any wonder that a recent European Commission poll found that nine out of 10 European Jews believe anti-Semitism has increased over the last five years and nearly a third avoid attending any Jewish event?

We once asked the late Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal, if he was surprised by how many Nazis there were. “No,” he replied, “only by how few anti-Nazis there were.”

Embattled European Jewish communities, built on the ashes of the Holocaust, must be wondering if today’s Europe has enough anti-Nazis to overcome the massive silence and indifference to contemporary anti-Jewish bigotry.

America is not immune from the hate. In fact, FBI annual hate crime statistics compiled since the 1990s confirm two facts: African Americans are the No. 1 target of racial hate crimes and Jews, despite constituting just 2% of the population, are the largest target of religion-based hate crimes.

The massacre of 11 Jews at prayer on a Sabbath morning at a Pittsburgh synagogue was the worst anti-Semitic attack in the history of the United States. American Jewry was buoyed by the outpouring of love and solidarity from their non-Jewish neighbors. including members of the Pittsburgh Steelers, who attended a funeral for one of the victims, and the Pittsburgh newspaper, which ran the Hebrew Kaddish on its front page. Around the nation, non-Jews quietly attended Sabbath services the following week to express their grief and support.

However, some Americans responded differently. At U.S. campuses nationwide, swastikas were scrawled and menorahs were desecrated as Hanukkah approached and was celebrated.

Moving forward as a nation, our greatest challenge isn’t a mass movement of haters, at least not yet. Our need now is to recognize that social media provides the extremists among us the most powerful marketing tool ever created. The man accused in the Pittsburgh shooting found validation for hate and encouragement for violence on the internet, as have many others. Intercepting that hate and degrading bigots’ marketing capabilities stands as one of our greatest challenges.

Responding to a college student’s question in 1980 whether the Holocaust could happen again, Mr. Wiesenthal responded: “If the technology available to Adolf Hitler had been available in 1492, no Jew would have survived in Spain, no Catholic in England, no Protestant in France.”

Now that we have the internet, a far more powerful technology for spreading hate than Hitler could have imagined, it’s crucial for all of us to be alert to hate. We must call it out when we see it, and to make it unacceptable in all circumstances.

* For a recent article of mine on social media:
In defense of social media and the internet: correcting fake news



Funeral for Saudi prince provides peek into royal tensions
By Simon Henderson (Washington Institute for Near East Policy)
The Hill (Washington)
December 28, 2018

A royal funeral took place in Riyadh last Sunday that matched all the photographic intrigue of the gathering of British royals on Christmas Day.

At the latter, tabloid reporters hunted for any signs of hostility between the “warring wives of Windsor” – Kate and Meghan, the spouses of Princes William and Harry, who are reported not to get on.

The Saudi version, however, is politically far more substantial and will feed speculation about when and how a leadership change may take place in the kingdom.

In Riyadh, King Salman, accompanied by Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, aka MbS, attended the funeral of Prince Talal, an older half-brother of the king and father of Prince al-Waleed, who at this time last year was detained in the city’s Ritz-Carlton hotel along with more than 200 other princes and businessmen accused of corruption. Two other sons of Talal also have been in detention. All three attended the funeral.

Unlike other cases, there is no evidence that Prince al-Waleed had to transfer ownership of any assets to secure his subsequent release. He later told Reuters the whole affair was a “misunderstanding.” Al-Waleed led the shoulder bearers of the stretcher carrying the body at the funeral. MbS is in the same shot but off to one side. Another photo, a close-up of the two men apparently speaking to each other, suggests no particular deference by Waleed toward the 33-year-old crown prince, a much younger cousin but his effective jailer in the Ritz-Carlton.

The most notable pictures were those of the king, who looked devastated by his half-brother’s passing. The two men were known to be close. The 82-year-old monarch sat in a chair as other mourners stood to recite funeral prayers.

Prince Talal had been a controversial figure in the House of Saud, serving as a government minister in the 1950s and 1960s but then leading a group of royals, known as the Free Princes Movement, advocating a constitutional monarchy. His assets were confiscated and he lived in exile in Beirut and Cairo for a time before returning home and into political oblivion. Diplomats regarded him as smart and engaging, although eccentric.

His mother was from Armenia, a non-Arab pedigree that usually means he would have been sidelined from the prospect of ever being king. Yet, when I wrote this in an analysis several years ago, an aide emailed and telephoned me to say that King Abdullah, Salman’s predecessor, had once asked Talal to be his crown prince. (I subsequently judged that this had happened and it was not just a case of Abdullah being polite before offering the role to a younger, perhaps better qualified, brother when Talal declined.)

Other attendees at the funeral included Salman’s sole surviving full brother, Ahmed, who returned from effective exile in London last month to be at Talal’s bedside in his final weeks. He was quoted earlier in the year as making a comment deemed to be critical of MbS. (Even so, the Saudi Press Agency photographer caught a moment of interaction between the two men.) Also there was Prince Mohammed bin Nawaf, the Saudi ambassador in London, who was dismissed Thursday in a government reshuffle.

Yet another attendee was another half-brother of the king, Muqrin, who was briefly crown prince in 2015 until being pushed aside. He, too, was a pallbearer.

Funerals can be theater, and often can be predictive. That of Prince Talal, a marginalized prince, could well be the first act of the 2019 production of the Saudis’ own version of “Game of Thrones.”

* Among other recent dispatches on Saudi Arabia:
Al Jazeera vs. Saudi Arabia (& Trump’s Mideast peace plan at risk without MbS?)



Iran’s continued push for a nuclear-ready missile capability
The latest test launch represents a potential technological milestone for Iran – and a wakeup call for Europe.
By Farzin Nadimi
Washington Institute for Near East Policy
January 4, 2019

On January 3, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned Iran not to conduct any planned satellite launches using rockets that share commonalities with intercontinental ballistic missiles. The warning followed his December 1 revelation that Iran had test-fired a ballistic missile “designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons” to the entire Middle East and parts of Europe. Those words were carefully chosen – UN Security Council Resolution 2231 calls on Iran “not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches.” Yet the resolution does not expressly prohibit such activities, a point well taken by Iran.

The characteristics Pompeo referred to on December 1 match those of the Khoramshahr, a relatively new medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) unveiled in September 2017 and test-fired on at least three occasions. Although known details of the missile are scarce, it is believed to be Iran’s first departure from the generic Scud-B design, and more similar to the North Korean BM-25/Hwasong-10 first delivered to Iran around 2005.

Iranian officials quickly dismissed Pompeo’s remarks and emphasized that their missile program is defensive and deterrent in nature, does not violate Resolution 2231, and will continue despite international objections. The commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Aerospace Force (IRGCASF), Brig. Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, characterized the U.S. reaction as “anxious and selective,” claiming that Iran “conducts over forty to fifty missile tests a year.”

Evidence from various sources indicates that Hajizadeh’s claim could be an exaggeration, however. In a December 9 report, German newspaper Die Welt noted that Iran had test fired only seven MRBMs and three short-range missiles in 2018, according to “documents from Western intelligence sources.” Similarly, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies cataloged only four test launches in the first seven months of 2017. If these numbers are accurate, Iran is more likely to fire its missiles in offensive operations than in “defensive” test launches – last fall alone, it fired six of them against Kurdish groups in northern Iraq (September 28) and six more against Islamic State targets in Syria (October 1).


On December 5, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif argued that Iranian missiles “are only designed for a conventional role because they have precision strike capability,” echoing his claim in a New York Times op-ed a year earlier: “Nuclear weapons do not need to be precise – conventional warheads, however do.” Yet such claims do not hold water because there is ample precedent for high-precision, nuclear-capable ballistic missiles. For example, the Pershing II of the 1980s could deliver a reduced-yield nuclear warhead to targets with an accuracy of less than 50 meters.

Zarif’s “precision” claim also seems odd given the specifications of the test missile that spurred his remarks. The Khoramshahr can reportedly carry a far heavier payload than would be required for a weapon whose purpose is pinpoint accuracy – its claimed 1,800 kg warhead would make it the largest in Iran’s arsenal.

One possibility is that this extra capacity is designed to carry multiple warheads. When Khoramshahr was first unveiled, Hajizadeh claimed that a single missile could hit “several targets.” If Iran has in fact successfully tested such a capability for the first time, it would be an alarming milestone, since multiple warheads have a better chance of defeating missile defenses.

The Khoramshahr’s large payload would also make the job of mating it with a first-generation nuclear warhead relatively easy, at least in theory. One rule of thumb among experts is that any missile capable of carrying a 500-1,000 kg warhead can be mounted with a nuclear device. Khoramshahr reportedly offers twice that capacity – a troubling figure given the fact that miniaturizing a warhead is arguably one of the most daunting tasks in nuclear weapons design.

Aside from its theoretical nuclear capability, Khoramshahr could also fill a distinct place in Iran’s missile doctrine. Assuming its claimed specifications are true – 2,000 km range, 1,800 kg warhead – it can offer either a multi-warhead configuration with the potential capability of defeating missile defenses, a unitary conventional warhead to cause very significant damage over a wide area (without precision guidance), or the ability to defeat some hardened targets (with precision guidance).


Iran has made clear that it has the potential to continue extending the reach of its ballistic missiles, raising questions about the 2,000 km range limit set by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and other officials in the presumed hope of assuaging Western fears and forestalling additional sanctions. During his remarks last month, Hajizadeh declared, “We can build longer-range missiles, 2,000 is no magic number for us. We face no technical or legal hurdles with regard to the range of our missiles.” This mindset has been in place for some time – in a November 2014 interview, for example, acting IRGCASF commander Gen. Seyed Majid Mousavi admitted that Iran’s Space Research Center had developed satellite launch rockets “mainly to advance missile technologies under the guise of a civilian space program, especially to circumvent the self-imposed 2,000 km limitation on range.”

Iran’s 2,000 km missiles may already pose a threat to the southeastern margins of Europe, while longer-range versions of the Khoramshahr could expand that threat to the entire continent (presumably at the expense of payload weight). On November 27, IRGC deputy commander Brig. Gen. Hossein Salami spoke of the “strategic logic” behind such range extensions, warning that “the Europeans will become a threat if they try to meddle in our missile affairs and do not recognize our defensive missile power. We will then increase the range of our missiles to reach Europe.” In fact, the liquid-fuel Khoramshahr may have been developed with the European theater in mind; according to Hajizadeh, Iran prefers solid-fuel missiles like the Sejjil for the Israeli theater (perhaps due to their superior survivability).


Western countries should prepare for the possibility of more Iranian MRBM tests or the unveiling of new designs, especially if hardliners decide to muster a defiant stance during next month’s celebration of the Islamic Revolution’s fortieth anniversary. According to deputy defense minister and IRGC general Ghasem Taghizadeh, Iran is also expected to launch a satellite into orbit by February, a plan that Hajizadeh has alluded to as well. Although Tehran may view this option as less confrontational than a ballistic missile test, it would undoubtedly raise further international outcry against the missile program, as Secretary Pompeo made clear this week.

More broadly, the international community should not forget that the program remains a central pillar of Iran’s strategy for dominating the region. Although Tehran became less public about its missile advancements following the nuclear deal, there has been no substantive halt in the program’s progress. Most troubling, the latest test indicates that the IRGC is moving forward with the Khoramshahr, a ballistic missile design that may already have the capability of lifting a heavy payload to targets anywhere in the Middle East or southern Europe.



Jeremy Corbyn filmed applauding Jewish extremist who called for ‘dismantling’ of Israel
Footage published this week was taken in 2011 at a pro-Palestinian conference the Labour Party leader attended alongside activists who have been accused of anti-Semitism
By Cnaan Liphshiz
January 4, 2019

Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of Britain’s Labour party, was filmed applauding in 2011 a speaker at a conference who called for the dismantlement of Israel, which he also said “kidnapped” Judaism.

The footage published Thursday was taken at a pro-Palestinian conference that Corbyn, a far-left politician, attended in 2011 alongside several anti-Israel activists who have been accused of anti-Semitism.

In it, Yisrael Dovid Weiss of the Neturei Karta Haredi sect, is seen saying: “You said there should be the end of a Jewish state. I just wanted to respectfully say: The end of a Zionist state that has kidnapped the name of Judaism. It’s not a Jewish state.” He added: “We want … a peaceful dismantlement of the state and to live together in harmony, God willing it will happen.”

Corbyn is seen clapping at Weiss, who in 2006 attended in Iran a conference aimed at denying and ridiculing the Holocaust.

Since his election in 2015 to head Labour, Corbyn has fought allegations that his critical attitude toward Israel and alleged tolerance of anti-Semitism have injected Jew hatred into the heart of the party.

Amid scrutiny, Corbyn in 2016 for the first time said Israel has a right to exist.

In 2009, he called Hamas and Hezbollah his friends and said that Hamas is working to achieve peace and justice. In 2013 he defended an anti-Semtiic mural. In 2015 he laid flowers on the graves of Palestinian terrorists who murdered Israeli athletes in Munich in 1972. That year he also said British “Zionists” don’t understand British irony.

* For a recent article of mine on Jeremy Corbyn:
A sea of Palestinian flags at the Labour Party conference (& guess who wrote this in 1854?)


* You can also find other items that are not in these dispatches if you “like” this page on Facebook

All notes and summaries copyright © Tom Gross. All rights reserved.