Zainab Khan

Gilad Atzmon, solidarity in Reading and RISC – the anti-Israel hosts

Last week, Gilad Atzmon gave a talk at the Reading International Solidarity Centre (RISC).

This blog isn’t about free speech. You want a racist book? You want to subscribe to a white supremacist magazine that hates Jews, blacks and gays? Then go ahead, nobody is stopping you. But you shouldn’t expect the National Lottery fund to subsidise the product. The public purse can be legitimately discerning about where it provides funding. That is not an argument over free speech.

Which is why publicly funded Reading International Solidarity Centre were so outrageously ‘off the mark’ when they allowed this event to go ahead.

Gilad Atzmon the idiot

Gilad Atzmon is an idiot with a highly exaggerated sense of his own intelligence. Just as any functioning computer, Gilad Atzmon operates with the data he has to play with. If some founding pieces, have been contaminated, then the final output is likely to be an incoherent mess. Thus, Gilad Atzmon remains oblivious to the fact that his basic reasoning is badly flawed and his conclusions are askew. A consensus opinion held even by many of those who ‘hate’ Israel.  Gilad Atzmon has been outed as an antisemite by many in the anti-Israel camp.

The event in Reading highlighted all this perfectly. In effect, you have to be unbelievably stupid or an antisemite yourself, not to see the antisemite in Gilad Atzmon. There is a working processor churning away behind Gilad Atzmon’s ideology. He correctly identifies some serious problems in society – discussing identity politics, political correctness, automation, and the related scary cliff we face over the possibility of a growing disenfranchised ‘underclass’.  Gilad Atzmon’s problem is an infected operating system. Gilad Atzmon has a virus called antisemitism.

From the point that your computer picks up a virus, it seems to act in crazy manner because the virus itself is a program running in the background. Atzmon’s virus identifies everything as the fault of Jews. Or in the case of this talk and his latest book, it is all ‘Jerusalem’s’ fault.

We are all just zombies

I have no idea why Gilad Atzmon feels the way that he does. Whether he has been plagued by some childhood trauma or not is not my concern. What matters is the poison Atzmon spreads. Atzmon’s type of antisemitism is covered in a political argument that refers back to genuine issues in society. It then wraps itself around philosophical arguments (in this case the ‘Athens = reason’ and ‘Jerusalem = revelation’ dichotomy of Leo Strauss) to add a sense of legitimacy.

This is why Jewish opposition to Atzmon is so strong. Not for the first time, we have a man who spews anti-Jewish racism as an answer to today’s social issues. Within minutes he is discussing the ‘Jewish lobby’ and explains that identity politics turns every person in the west, into a tribal player that operates ‘like a Jew’.

The talk quickly degenerates into these strands of conspiracy and never recovers. Gilad Atzmon’s world labels everyone as a zombie, controlled, or left in the dark, by a never explicitly-identified ‘Illuminati’. A ‘they’ that uses power and money to maintain and further their control on everyone else. Whenever he explicitly mentions a group or name, it is either a Jew or a Jewish organisation. Gilad Atzmon has ‘seen the light’, and he wants everyone to learn his truth.  He said he ‘de-zombie-ised’ himself, in much the same way as he has claimed in the past he had rid himself of the inner ‘Jew’. Gilad clearly takes this as a sign of personal growth. His war is a war against the ‘Jew’ in us all.

Gilad Atzmon

Rambling hate speech

Gilad Atzmon loses himself in one obscure reference after another. Inside the paradigm of Athens v Jerusalem (that Atzmon has decided is a battle to the death), he suddenly spins on a 1994 book called The Bell Curve, that argued that racial social inequality was caused (for the most part) by differences in intellectual ability (!) In other words the racist pseudo-science posited that blacks may be poorer (in general) because they are more stupid (in general). It is important to note that Atzmon did reject the central theory, but wished to use the book anyway because it relies on the growing existence of a ‘cognitive elite’ – Atzmon’s illuminati.

Just as Atzmon twisted the Jerusalem, Athens argument of Strauss, into something unrecognisable, so too, he performs a similar act with the Bell Curve. This is Atzmon’s philosophy, nobody elses, and it is unsupported bunkum that is driven almost entirely by the virus driving his operating system. When someone in the audience highlighted a clear problem with the argument being put forward, Atzmon’s intellectual response was ‘It doesn’t matter if you agree or not, this is the situation‘. As I listened to this exchange, the term ‘poppycock’ sprung to mind.

Manipulating history

Atzmon mistakenly discussed both leftist fragmentation and nationalism as if they were new. He continually referred to a nostalgic vision of better days that in reality never existed. He suggests Israel, the US and UK created the ‘monster’ called ISIS and then draws parallels between ISIS and Israel. Atzmon turned the Grenfell fire into a Jewish reference. He called the wars in Iraq, Syria and Libya the ‘Zio-Con’ wars.

Atzmon suggests the attacks on the UK homeland might be ‘false flags’ (he ‘doesn’t want to go into it‘). He claims nobody talks about the ‘right of return’ (I suggest he hasn’t ever read the aims of BDS). He suggests Ken Livingstone was expelled for telling the truth. The talk is peppered with twisted narrative. His entire theory is developing in a parallel universe where the space-time continuum seems to operate somewhat differently.

Gilad Atzmon’s manipulation of history continues over the origins of the ‘Nakba’ narrative emerged. Placing it in the historical timeline of the 1990’s he suggested it came about as ‘some new historians (Pappe and Morris), realised that what was happening in Kosovo, ethnic cleansing, was very similar to the events that took place in 1948’. This is total hogwash, as Morris was already back-stepping by this point in time. The ‘new historians’ pre-date Kosovo by almost two decades. The term, ‘Nakba’ preceded the ‘new historians’ by another few decades. The driving force behind the revisionist history was the opening of Israeli archives. This is all more poppycock.

In a clear use of antisemitic tropes about money, a classic moment of Atzmon ‘humour’ occurred when trying to plug sales for his own book:

‘It is just £10, if you buy a thousand then you get one for free. Huh, a Jew or not a Jew? Huh, I can teach – I can be a Rabbi’

The Anti-Israel hosts

Reading PSC is well known as a hotbed for Jew hate. Tony Gratrex, who used to be the central figure at Reading PSC, is a 9/11 ‘truther’ and antisemite. The first time I spoke to Tony, he went into a long winded explanation about Jewish conspiracy surrounding the Federal Reserve. *Apparently the group hosting this particular party wasn’t Reading PSC*. I am sure that the PSC know better than to highlight their connection to people like Atzmon. Instead, it was another local group called ‘Reading Friends of Palestine’.

Who? That’s right, I have never heard of them either. There is a Facebook page with eleven likes. The Chairman of ‘Reading Friends of Palestine’ and host of the event was Paul Timperley:

Paul TimperleyA year ago, he was Chairman of Reading PSC:

paul timperley 2

Perish the thought that ‘Reading PSC’ are just ‘Reading FoP’ for the sake of holding Gilad Atzmon events. Paul Timperley and Tony Gratrex are hardly strangers, with Timperley responding to many of Gratrex’s posts. Here is just one example:


Paul Timperley

So what possessed the Reading International Solidarity Centre to permit Gilad Atzmon inside its halls? Have they seen him talk? Have they read the antisemitic diatribe called the ‘Wandering Who‘?

Once an event like this sparks an outcry, there will inevitably be an internal discussion over the merits of the opposition. The event still went ahead, which meant we seek an enabler, a person on the inside of RISC, who identifies with these politics, defended Atzmon and pushed for permission for the event to go ahead by belittling the accusations of antisemitism. One such person was specifically credited in the talk.

The enabler

As Paul Timperley gave thanks to RISC for withstanding the pressure, he mentioned an RISC member, ‘Zainab Khan’. Zainab was present at the event and had a front row seat. In the image below, Zainab is in the green top, just about to re-take her seat. As a further indication of her involvement, during the video, Zainab is again specifically mentioned by name. This time by another audience member, as someone who had previously spoken to her about the existence of vocal opposition to the event.

Zainab Khan

At RISC, Zainab is listed as ‘events co-ordinator’. Her available profile clearly indicates she is engaged in anti-Israel activism. She follows Atzmon. She is highly active in the ‘Reading Peace Group’ Facebook page. Over 35 (thirty-five) of Zainab’s shares have been to a website called ‘’. I am familiar with the site because of my research into antisemitism inside anti-Zionist activism.  The website is an antisemitic conspiracy website, staunchly anti-west, and with an inability to differentiate between real news and junk conspiracy. Thirty-five shares(!) It is the ‘news’ website Zainab seems to share more than any other.

These are just some of the articles on the Globalresearch website. These are not articles Zainab shared (her main focus is Iraq/Syria), they are given here as an indication of the level of conspiracy and fake news on the website. The Manchester attack as false flag, discussion of the Holocaust as ‘Holohoax’,  ISIS as Israel, and Charlie Hebdo as false flag. 9/11 is a website favourite, and there are too many on Rothschild and Jewish money to list. This is what Rational Wiki has to say:

Global research


Is this who RISC turned to for advice when deciding whether to go ahead with the event? When anti-racists oppose the platforming of racists, it is always important to remember that the dialogue this creates within the venue will ultimately be dictated by those seen as ‘experts’ within. In this case, it may well have been an anti-Israel activist, who uses an antisemitic conspiracy website as a primary source of information. No surprise that under these conditions, RISC gave the event a green light.


Help support my research

I fight antisemitism and the revisionist narrative that demonises Israel. My research is intensive and I am currently working on both short and long-term projects.

This research does make a difference. I was recently named as one of the J100 (‘top 100 people positively influencing Jewish life’) by The Algemeiner. The generous donations I receive from the community allow me to carry on with this work. I am independent and cannot continue without your support.

Please if you can, consider making a donation to help with the fight. Either a single amount or if you can a small monthly contribution. I believe that attacking the lies and distortion is vital. We need to be there to expose it. We need to research the facts to tell the truth. Even producing just one of these pieces does take days, sometimes weeks, and whilst I do what I can, there are serious constraints that impact on what is possible. Your assistance can and does make a difference. Every contribution is greatly appreciated.

Keep up to date, subscribe to the blog by using the link on the page. Follow the FB page for this blog: and follow me on Twitter.





34 thoughts on “Gilad Atzmon, solidarity in Reading and RISC – the anti-Israel hosts

  1. “I am not a Jew anymore.”

    This statement says it all. You cannot change your ethnicity because you don’t like it. You cannot become Caucasian if you’re not Caucasian, you cannot become Arab if you’re not Arab, you cannot become African-American if you’re not African-American. You cannot “unJew” yourself because you don’t like your genes.

    1. Exactly, you cannot become Caucasian or Arab or Black or Chinese or any other ethnicity. One can become a Jew. It’s a religious club, nothing more and one can just as easily leave it behind just like one can leave Catholicism or Protestant or Muslim. It’s very simple. Sorry to burst your bubble.

      1. It is clearly ‘more’ than just a religious club. Take this comment from Gilad:

        “Being a secular Jew, Elam probably mistakes Islam to be very similar to Jewishness”

        How can one be a secular Jew if ‘Jew’ is just a carrying card of a religious club?

        1. They can’t in reality, this is simply an invented notion by chosenites that’s become an accepted fallacy. As i pointed out, any doofus can become a Jew. It’s a club that can be joined and therefore it can be broken up with. There is no Jewish blood (although incest can create some sort of blood connection). Jews are from different ethnical backgrounds, just like all other religions. Secular Jews is a laughable term. They dropped the religion but kept the chosen identity.

      2. You clearly have no understanding of the very nature of what it is to be a Jew. Judaism comprises people (ethnicity), laws (Torah), land (Israel). You can be a secular Jew in the land of Israel and be non-observant or a fully Torah-observant Jew in the diaspora. Whilst there is a legal conversion process, this doesn’t change your ethnicity or where you live. You cannot leave behind your ethnicity if you are born Jewish. Suck it up, buttercup.

        1. One is born German or Polish or Israeli. One is raised Jewish. Being born Jewish has its roots in the religion, not secularism. The Torah is religious. The land…let’s talk about the land. So, the argument is the land is promised to the Jews by the almighty real estate agent in the sky, God (religious). How do secular Jews reconcile this in their head’s.? They don’t believe in the religion or the God but by virtue of being “born” Jewish (religious tenet) they get to benefit by land theft. Indeed, this is chosensim. If I convert tomorrow, I can start working towards returning to the land of “my people”. Secular, religious, cultural….just keep moving the goal post to confuse the goyim. And they’ve been successful to some degree, I’ll say that. It’s also manifested into one disaster after another.

  2. What a long winded load of zero substance right up until the shameful begging for money to support your “research” . You criticize Atzmon by innacurately paraphrasing his thoughts (is it a comprehension deficit disorder, predictable conscious lying or a combination of both?) but never once do you provide an argument.

    As far as conspiracies, Atzmon never speaks of conspiracies. He brilliantly points out that everything is done out in the open. Jews aren’t a race which eliminates your slanderous accusation of him being a racist and he never speaks about Jews as a people or a biology, he is critical of Jewish politics and ideology. Certainly you aren’t suggesting these elements are above criticism or that would make you a supremacist.

    Provide a legitimate argument if you have one but resorting to school yard name calling (you beat the computer analogy into boring oblivion) simply exposes you as the idiot.

    1. Hello ‘Devon’,

      I will play the game of not knowing who you are, because I cannot be bothered wasting my own time arguing over it. As a first point, I’d love to know why you think my request for donations is any different from Gilad plugging his own book? What exactly about ‘MY’ asking for financial support over my work, research and writing is ‘begging’ and ‘shameful’?

      I criticise Atzmon because his speech was an incoherent mess. An example I use was his drawing on Kosovo to explain the appearance of the Nakba narrative. Another was his drawing together of ISIS and Israel, an issue which during his talk, took separate time periods, meshed them together and ignored the contradictory tune this played with his accompanying talk of ‘the good old days’. But these are just two issues, there were many. It might feel comfortable for you to suggest there is no argument – but the underlying message is exactly this – Gilad wouldn’t see a problem because of the ‘twisted software’ ruining his operating system. (Why knock a good analogy when it works so well)

      Conspiracies? Gilad never speaks of conspiracies? So he didn’t mention ‘false flags’ in his talk? How about this ‘best’ 9/11 deconstruction? Given everything is done ‘out in the open’, how is all this possible?

      I don’t need to argue over how Atzmon sees the ‘Jew’, in him, or in anyone else. Atzmon’s view of this inner ‘Jew’, is his opinion. An opinion I believe that is shaped by his antisemitic software. Clearly he believes he has ‘rid’ himself of this ‘Jew’ and sees it as something distasteful. However, as someone who takes pride in my identity, that of a ‘Jew’, and as someone who obviously sees distaste from Atzmon over the ‘Jew’ in me, I can hardly consider him anything but antisemitic.

      I’ve offered to have this discussion with Gilad out in the open, it went nowhere. Gilad gets some of what is wrong in the world. He sees upcoming issues and is clever enough sometimes to dissect the opinion of others, separating the good from the bad (as he did with the Bell Curve), but it is how he puts it together himself that is so warped. In the end, because he speaks of issues others can identify with (such as social issues), it resonates with people. Yet because Atzmon is talking to people who are generally ‘further down the bell curve than he is’, they cannot always see the failings in the man who is trying to put it all together. I can.

      1. Lol, let’s be clear. I am Devon so not sure what that statement even means. It’s not alleged, it is my name. Paranoid much?

        That Gilad was able to develop ethical thinking given his family history of strong Zionist upbringing and some hardcore Zionist family members is a miracle and you should consider integrating him into the Bible. He is definitely qualified to be your last prophet.

        The reason you don’t understand is because you are a jerusalemite, unacquainted with logic and reasoning and ethical thinking. As Atzmon points out, being Jewish isn’t a requirement of being Jerusalemite, so save yourself another baseless accusation of “Antisemitism”

        Why didn’t you embed the video into your article you claim is incoherent? Do you mind if I post it?

        If you really want an open debate with Gilad, (and you can bring a team of Zionists and AZZ’s, if you like) just say the word. It can be arranged within the next five hours. More than a few British venues would be delighted to host this event.

        RISC looked into every accusation and found them ALL to misquoted, misleading, and in many cases plainly duplicitous.

        I think in short it’s about time you make a decision as to what it is about Gilad that you don’t like. You seem to be slightly confused about it.

        1. Oh ‘Devon’, I see you have let all of the previous points slip by. No comment on the Kosovo as Nakba, no mention of Gilad’s absurd ‘nostalgia’ back to a time when Labour… oh, strongly supported Zionism, and now, a dropping of the issue over Gilad’s support for conspiracy theory. One minute you posit Gilad never mentions conspiracy, and then you side-step when it becomes clear that he does. How many issues do you wish me to find with the speech?

          As you are clearly so well acquainted with him, here is a question for Gilad- can he name some people he does consider antisemites? Perhaps an example or two of an antisemitic comment? Was his joke about being a Jew when he made the ‘1 book free’ comment during the speech – antisemitic (can you please ask him to refrain from making the predictable political statement by returning with comments from the BOD or so on that he thinks he can squeeze into suitable examples)?

          Of course I have no trouble with you linking to the speech, why would I? We clearly don’t know each other well. I love disagreement and opposing views. It is how I learn. That is another of Gilad’s points I agree with – read the books they tell you not to. I do it all the time. How on earth can you disagree with someone’s point of view, if you haven’t read it, with the honest intention of trying to understand? My own library is a collection of every book I have been told not to read. It is why I can both identify Gilad’s ramblings, and find him more interesting than most tepid anti-Zionist authors. My favourite idiot was Blumenthal, you know it is only when I read his book ‘the 51 day war’, that I realised he actually wasn’t there for any of it. If I believed the position a correct one, I’d wager I would make a great anti-Zionist, far better than the second rate rabble that is on offer today.

          A ‘Jerusalemite’? My my, such an assertion. ‘unacquainted with logic and reasoning and ethical thinking’ no less. Tut tut. Surely you are not taking up the position that on the basis of my opposition to Gilad’s talk and writing, I thus become placed into the box marked ‘wrong’. How ‘Yerushalmi’ of you. The possibility that you might be wrong, would surely be a standing pillar for any ‘Athenite’, a simple first step in logic that seems lost on you. Else you are merely constructing yet another fake paradigm built on the underlying assumption of absolute certainty, lost inside the temporary tranquility of ‘normal science’.

          RISC relied on someone who uses a fake news, antisemitic conspiracy site for news as their ‘expert’. Hardly think ‘they looked into every accusation’ covers it properly. When you actually want to deal with raised questions, rather than side-step the ones you don’t like, then get back to me. In the meantime, this ‘doofus’ (that’s like a ‘tembel’, right?) has more serious challenges to get on with.

          1. More word vomit. Put your money where mouth is, slick. You asserted Atzmon avoided meeting you after several offers (quite possibly the most absurd assertion to date) so here’s YOUR chance to ask him anything you like. Just say the word.

            1. Gilad rambled on about poppycock for 90 minutes and you talk about word vomit? As for the ‘absurd assertion’, Go check Gilad’s Twitter history, and then tell me why the meeting never went ahead last time. As for meeting now, I’d love to meet him, why wouldn’t I…

          2. As for Antisemitism, (((David))) I’ll speak for myself when I say I’m certain it exists. One most obvious way is against the Semitic Palestinians since 1948. It’s been the longest and most brutal and vicious case of antisemitic behavior at the hands of Ashkenazi Jews. European expats, who have co-opted Semitic land, food and culture and then cry Antisemitism is yet another completely insidious and unethical attempt to tie themselves to land they have absolutely no ties to. So, indeed, I agree it exists.

            But what does this have to do with you or what Atzmon speaks about?

            1. I refer you back to yet another comment you ignored –

              ‘can you please ask him to refrain from making the predictable political statement’

              yawn, so predictable.

          3. So, what day is good for you,(((David))) to have a public forum? I’m happy to do what I can to facilitate it.

            1. I am sure you are ‘Devon’. Any idea why the last attempt fell through? Must be a couple of years ago now. Actually have you any idea why you haven’t actually addressed a single point raised here at all? Come back to me with some serious (lets say 3) examples of what Gilad would consider antisemitism (and please no cheap political tricks, or deliberately misusing the word anti-Semitism to use against ‘semites’ like you just did ), and I will try and sort out some dates is my diary.

          4. BTW, your screen shot of the tweet by @giladatzmon to @onepondone is an example of your silly antics. @onepoundone got shut down from Twitter for his little hate-filled exchange. Atzmon didn’t. I figured this was worth mentioning.

            1. That’s a pathetic deflection. I don’t care what happened to anyone elses account, there are no racist tweets of mine anywhere, because it isn’t about the ‘other’ person, it is about me, what I think and what I say. That you are now seeking to deflect from the content of that tweet because of the level of the other person’s attitude, shows that you both understand the Tweet in question is a major problem, and that you are willing to use deflection as a tool to escape those problems. Honesty and introspection, never come into it. And you claimed to be an ‘Athenite’ (!!)

          5. (((david))) I’ll venture to the last attempts fell through because they didn’t happen in reality and these question can be the first ones you ask him. I only tackle what he’s already stated, clearly. I stay away from predicting what anyone might say in the future. I gave you my own honest response to the nonsensical question to which you didn’t produce an argument, you simply pointed out you don’t like my answer. You’re entitled, though it does lack even the slightest intellectual integrity.

            As far as RISC, on the contrary and unlike you and his other detractors, they went straight to the source: his own writings. They didn’t read what his detractors say he says. Atzmon’s been at this a long time so it makes more sense to go directly to the source, as it’s quite prolific. And it’s revealing why his detractors never source his own words, but prefer to misquote him or simply invent statements all together.

            Let me know when you’re ready. No contingencies. You’re untruths aren’t about lil ‘ol me, they are about Atzmon.

            1. Oh you really are not doing anybody any favours here at all.

              a few interesting tweets - atzmon-collier

              Also – thank you for informing me that the RISC did not even look at what his detractors say. It is a further sign of the internal activist, whereby opposition is cast aside by a member on the inside. To be totally truthful I am tired of your blatant dishonesty and bad faith. It rises from the deflection involving every challenge I have made. Tell me when Gilad wants to put ‘Devon’ away and come out and play himself.

          6. (((You))) claim, “Gilad was mouthy in public and simply didn’t respond when I contacted him via his website as he instructed me to do. ”. A propagandist and a comedian.

            Ok, (((david))), Gilad has available Nov 26, 27, & 28 for an open and public debate. Pick one, name the place. You’re welcome to bring whatever advocates of the Jewish/Israeli cause you like.

            1. My my ‘Devon’, bit by bit, you have become more and more ‘touchy’ as this exchange has gone on. My blog clearly rattled Gilad and struck a few chords. Item by item you have been exposed as little more than an annoying sock puppet. Do you remember the good old days when you suggested here Gilad didn’t promote conspiracy? How did that work out for you? Now, you are at the point of simply childish grandstanding. As he did not respond to my last attempt two years ago, I have no intention of feeding the same strategy in a similar manner. Can you please ask him to contact me via this site. Just so we can finalise ‘dates details, topic, procedure etc‘. I am sure, given the circumstances, Gilad will understand this is a reasonable request:

              Atzmon details

              Oh and (((((((((David))))))) doesn’t need any help.

        2. (((david))), you show a tweet, ok. I’m saying line up some real dates or as Gilad said here, reach out to him in email, if your serious. Maybe you can through your emails and see what went wrong. Then you don’t have to wonder.

          Lol. Someone who has blatantly lied and been slanderous in writing without providing a single ounce of proof to those lies is calling me dishonest. Oh, dear, you are something special. And projection is a predictable tactic.


          1. I think anyone who has followed this exchange can clearly see which one of us has maintained an ‘honest’ position.

            As for the ‘challenge’. I know what happened last time. Gilad was mouthy in public and simply didn’t respond when I contacted him via his website as he instructed me to do. This exchange is now deteriorating and pointless. Tell Gilad to contact me via this site, we can look at the dates and topics, and move it forward. I welcome the chance to have an open discussion with him. If he doesn’t want to do it in public, I’ll meet with him for a quiet coffee. I really do not care which way it goes. Maybe we will both learn something.

        3. Lol, (((david))) more projection of all sorts of things. Operate in the open, dear, where this thread has taken place. Commit to a date, here in public. Or would YOU like a second attempt at saying Gilad never responded to your email.

          The man is on stage almost every day of the year either playing music, giving a lecture or both, but YOU intimidate him? Is this what you’re trying to pass off as legitimate?

          Details can be handled via email. But pick a date, publicly. That’s not grandstanding, that’s the honest ethical thing to do.

          1. ‘Devon’, I am glad you mentioned ‘ethics’, because it was my academic field of study. I must have missed the module about ethical handling of sock puppets. The situation is currently surreal. You stand and accuse me of this, that and the other, all the while as Gilad has the deniability of hiding behind a sock puppet.

            I have clearly shown you as badly mistaken on more than one occasion and there is little reason for me to take you seriously at all. Both Gilad and I are adults, I think we are more than capable of arranging something without the interference of someone acting like a petulant child. If he is serious, he can contact me via this site, and we can arrange something between us.

          2. Reading about ethics and the application living ethically are two completely different things.

            Gilad is traveling all over Europe this month. I handle some of his bookings in North America, I’m handling this one. You’ve been given three dates from which to choose and you can pick the location. The details will be worked out via email. All this other nonsense is really very cowardly.

    1. I find it a never-ending source of absurdity that people point to 1917-1930 anti-Zionist arguments and suggest they have relevance. Anti-Zionism was so badly wrong, it cost millions of Jewish lives (many of them anti-Zionists). Almost the entire Bundist movement was wiped out, just as it stood there suggesting Europe could provide a safe haven for Jews.

      What antisemitism highlights, whether it existed in the 1905 Alien act or as a motivation behind Balfour, was that Zionism was right. For all sane people, the Holocaust ended the argument completely. As both Nationalist antisemitism and Marxist antisemitism is on the rise again, where do you suggest Jews should lower their anchor? Would you want to be a minority group, any minority group in Europe today, or in the States?

      A question. If Montagu could foresee the Holocaust. Do you think his position would still have been the same?

      1. David you are the historian I am just an umble todayist. I, at least, am clever enough to understand the difference between cleverness and expertise.

        Further I merely suggested that the piece was interesting. I didn’t claim that it proved anything. Maybe I should get to be an historian after all. I seem to have the right kind of open mind o*)

        1. Hardly a historian, merely someone with an interest in historicity. I have just read hundreds of articles over the last two days, all pushing a similar line. Anti-Zionism from that period, isn’t the same as anti-Zionism today. After a while, I just get snappish. Apologies.

  3. Isn’t it pathetic that a seemingly smart chap despises himself so much so as to deny who he is. It reminds me of the film Watermelon Man. Perhaps he should watch it – he may see himself reflected back though his vision.

    BTW, who cares who he despises – he’s inconsequential.

    1. Goodness me it’s Sharon

      “It never struck anybody amongst the Jewish community in teh UK that just as we the Jews and Israel are subject to adverse propaganda so are the EDL demonised. I have met some of them and spoken with them and they are salt of the earth people fighting for a democratically free England and Englishmen based in Christianity and the morals and ethics of the Old Testament, just as we are fighting for Israel and Jews based in the same ethics and values of the Old Testament. Just as we have little in common with Islam and the liberal secular “elitists” who desire that Jews, Israel and the EDL would simply pass on by, so does the EDL. As I said many times before, Jabotinsky taught us that in times of strife we must fight the greater enemy together with those whose greater enemy we share. We all share the greater enemy that is Islam and all it represents in its efforts to destroy the Judeo-Christian ethic that is our Western Civilisation and we must hang together in peace for the sake of peace.”

      ” Hey Richard – great piece! Nice to see the view fromWagamamas as it is evident that the suport was miniscule!! Bravo to the youngsters who came out for Israel – no violence on their tongues and no hatred in their eyes; and thanks to the EDL who supported us from across the road, resepecting the fact that many amongst the Jewish community did not want them to mingle with us, unlike the hate filled mob sporting Hizbollah flags emblazoned with a rifle, supported by those frock-coated filthy bearded Yiddish speakers. They will one day have to account to God for their sins!”

Comments are closed.