The "Blame Game" - Why just blaming Muslims or Leftists for the rise in antisemitism is dangerous

A cursory glance at social media posts from pro-Jewish/ Israeli pages will soon reveal how contributors are understating or oversimplifying the root causes of modern day antisemitism. Many blame modern hate against Jews as being the fault of  "the Left", without ever clearly defining who they really mean. For some it refers to those on the hard left (Communists, anarchists etc), while for others it includes liberals, social democrats or those who associate their ideas with the Democratic Party.

But there is another sizable group joining the "Blame Game" and these are those who broadly support the Radical Right and point a grubby racist finger at Muslims, despite evidence showing most hate crime against Jews has led to the arrest of White British or American citizens. This is not to say that some Muslims are not antisemitic, or that a disturbing number of incidents have occurred where some Muslims have used various techniques to threaten or intimidate Jews, but, I would argue they are a minority amongst the larger Islamic population who wish to live peaceably. For those Muslims perpetrating threatening behaviour I would argue our judicial system is capable of inflicting harsh custodial sentencing and I would urge this to be put into action.

In the UK there are currently approximately 4m Muslims accounting for roughly 6.5% of the overall  population. Of these, it is believed about 200,000 could be described as 'radical', though not necessarily criminal. Unquestionably this is entirely unacceptable and no society can, or should accept rule by a minority desiring the implementation of Sharia Law. Indeed, this writer would argue if you do not like the rules of a country the solution is very simple - leave or we should help you. But all this is an entirely different argument and for another time.

In the UK last year there were roughly 4,000 reported hate crimes perpetrated against Jewish people and there are signs this may be on the increase, BUT there is no evidence Muslims are the key perpetrators, suggesting accusations of Muslim created antisemitic violence against Jews is both fallacious and dangerous.

As for arguing the fault lies with the "Left" this is also problematic. In the UK there is sound evidence of antisemitism in the history of the Labour party, the trade union movement, as well as other socialist movements. Indeed, it was Marx he myself, one of the founders of modern socialism who said: "What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money". He added, "The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew".

                                             Karl Marx

Now we do know in the last few years the Labour Party in the UK has had a significant problem with internal antisemitism. We also know the far Left have consistently pilloried Israel and pushed many lies to further the 'Palestinian' cause, arguing anti-Zionism is not antisemitism despite this they have  continually pushed a range of anti-Jewish tropes to justify their actions.

It is clear these opinion are not universal across the entire Left. In the UK there are number of sizeable Leftist groups and individuals who work hard to eliminate antisemitism (eg Stop the Hate, Runnymede Trust, Antisemitism Policy Trust), while in the US groups like Combat Against Antisemitism, Shine a Light, and the Philos Project do they part to eradicate hatred.

So while acknowledging there is evidence of Leftist Antisemitism, it would be wrong to argue this is universal, or that all left wing politicians are, by definition antisemitic.

On the opposite side of the political spectrum both the UK and US have long and deep roots in both fascism and Nazism. In the UK early signs were visible with the British Fascisti in the 1920's then, from this grew  the antisemitic British Union of Fascists under the leadership of Oswald Mosley who achieved an active membership of 50,000; statistics that obscure a far larger public support that could have taken the party to government had there not been a war and/or Defence Regulation 18b.

Similarly in the US, the violent and virulently antisemitic Ku Klux Klan attained an estimated 8m members and secured a strong influence within the US government. Admittedly, in both countries the membership of fascist groups declined but, this writer would argue their ideological roots have persisted and are fundamentally embedded in the culture and social mores of both countries.

                           .   Ku Klux Klan parade in Washington D.C., 1926.

Even postwar we can see evidence of active far-right antisemitic engagement in the political system of both nations (in the UK there is an early postwar lineage going back to Mosley's Union Movement moving through to the BNP and NF and more recent Patriotic Alternative, New British Union and Britain First; and similarly in the US we see the far right continuation of antisemitism within large sections of the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers, as well as countless far right groups present in every state. Add to that a more violent and dangerous type of antisemitic hate group in the terrorist organisation, Atomwaffen.Division).

Quite clearly, we see how postwar fascist or Nazi groups were forced out from the traditional political ingroup to a seemingly unwelcome outgroup - it became no longer politically acceptable to espouse race hate, but let us also never forget that previous members of these far right groups did not lose their sympathy for virulent antisemitism, they simply learned to remain silent, or find a way to sanitise it. Indeed, we have seen how a number of extremist far right politicians sanitised their past by later appearing moderate and mainstream.

The first action these 'hidden' fascists chose was to show how the US and Europe had learned from the Nazis and become civilised continents where hatred of Jews was in the past.

One effect of this pastification of antisemitism is that if people say that there is antisemitism in the air today or that they themselves are victims of antisemitism, they must either be mistaken, over-sensitive, delusionary or worst of all dishonest. Those who complain about antisemitism, or fight against antisemitism, or even wish peacefully to study antisemitism, cannot be right since it is already established that antisemitism no longer exists except on the fringes of right-wing extremism. The secret agenda some people see behind the ‘charge’ of antisemitism is that of defending Israel against its critics. We are told that the charge of antisemitism is abused in order to defend the indefensible. In this way, antisemitism appears as a ploy designed by Zionists to let Israel get away with murder. 

One dodgy presumption behind this argument is that Israel cannot be defended openly, so that its defenders have to resort to underhand tactics.  Another is that criticism of Israel is not ‘as such’ antisemitic or more strongly that no criticism of Israel can under any circumstance ever be antisemitic. A moment’s thought should disabuse us of this prejudice. It’s a bit like saying that no criticism of, say, India or Zimbabwe can ever be racist. If we criticise governments in India and Zimbabwe for being authoritarian or for abusing human rights, there might indeed be nothing racist about such criticism. But if we were to say that Indians and Africans are incapable of ruling themselves, we would be right back at ingrained notions of the superiority of the white race or of European civilisation.  

We must therefore come to the dangerous conclusion these 'hidden modern-day fascists', both left and right, have a vested interest in denying any existence of  antisemitism, for to do so would assume some kind of personal responsibility. When the data showed a rise in violence against Jews they were forced (as we saw being done by Leftist Jew-haters) to obscure their hate agenda by redefining antisemitism and their first port of call to achieve this is always Israel. They do it by arguing anti-Zionism is not antisemitism. Put quite simply, the circle is then complete and both Left and Right are united in their hate.

What makes this disturbing in my mind is how elements within "our side" (ie Jews and our supporters) water down, or use sophistry or obfuscation to identify the genuine causes of antisemitism to suit their own political ends - and so,  the "right" blame the "left", or the "left" blame the *right", while, racists can blame it all on Muslims, thus preventing anything being done, so nothing changes, scapegoats keep being found and, as has happened for two thousand Jews continue to live in fear waiting with heads bowed for the next pogrom.

Political comment

If anything has become clear in the last two thousand years it is that an understanding of the 'oldest hate' will not come from a single explanation. Social scientists have worked for many years to do that and without success beyond a final realisation - there are many possible reasons.

When dealing with such a critical issue as the hatred of the Jewish people, there can be nothing more dangerous, more cruel and more heartless than to encourage reductionism. It excuses some of the offenders and people who perpetrate this reductionism protects those who are guilty, ignored or remain unidentified. 

It was Aristotle who said: “Not being of the same tribe is a cause of strife until they “breathe in sync” for just as a state does not develop from an accidental mob, so too it does not come together at an accidental time.”

Transparently antisemitism is one of the biggest 'strifes' society  has ever seen compounded by reductionists refusing to see the big picture and taking a deeply flawed 'blame a single bad guy' approach. In doing so they excuse hatred and harm those who fight to end antisemitism - and to those reductionists both left and right, I can only say one thing - for obscuring, justifying and minimising the hatred of the Jewish people, a plague on all your houses.

And the beat just goes on and on - how Jew-hate on campus goes unabated 50 years on

A BBC documentary has caught a considerable number of students on US campuses still celebrating the 7 October Hamas attacks on innocent civilians and chanting support for what they referred to as “the resistance”, and using the antisemitic comparison that Zionism is the same as Nazism.

The second episode of Speechless, recently broadcast as part of the BBC Storyville series examined how the war has reverberated across American universities, focusing on protests, encampments and, in particular the documentary centred on clashes between pro-Israel and pro-"Palestinian" students.

The documentary demonstrated how, in less than 24 hours of the 7 October attacks, a joint statement by Harvard student groups declared: “We… hold the Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence ... the apartheid regime is the only one to blame.”

Pro-Palestinian protest at Cornell University, as featured in Speechless: Part 2 – The Pendulum, with demonstrators holding anti-Zionism banners and Palestinian flags. Credit: BBC Storyville / Good Soup Productions

In footage from on campus demonstrations, activists were heard chanting: “Glory to the martyrs. Glory to the resistance. We will liberate the land. By any means necessary.”

In further footage in the documentary, one protester, addressed the rabble and asked: “Do you guys remember the photos of the bulldozer breaking through the Nazi border?” before describing 7 October as producing “joyful and powerful images”.

Another "student" tried to defend the use of Nazi imagery associated with the attacks, saying: “We are so horrible for showing a paraglider. What about their jets? Israeli jets have killed thousands and thousands of Palestinians, but that’s okay?”

At one point, the documentary showed how a message was distributed throughout the campus encampment advising students that a documentary crew was on site and telling them to “be wary of what you say” and describing the director as a “Zionist”.

The film later showed how the crew were prevented from accessing the illegal student encampment.

In the documentary a Jewish student who called herself "Maya", described being confronted by other students after she identified herself as a Zionist.

"The term “intifada” is debated within the film, with one student described it as “the breaking off of chains”, while another says the phrase “intifada revolution” constitutes “a genocidal chant”.

The documentary also highlighted the experiences of Jewish students on campus. One student says: “There is a defence of everyone’s rights but Jewish people’s rights,” while another added: “I’ve had much more difficulty being Jewish than I have trans.”

Bienstock, the director of the documentary who is Jewish, reflected on the reaction to 7 October, saying: “Watching 7 October described as ‘exhilarating’ was hard to process”. Indeed, when students at Cornell University learn Bienstock is Jewish, they brand her a Zionist without engaging with her to learn her views. Later, many of them shy away from her altogether. 

Regrettably in some ways, rather than centering on the Jewish experience of campus life, it argues that while antisemitism on campus is a genuine concern, it has become intertwined with wider ideological and political battles over free speech, protest and academic freedom - in effect minimising the Jewish student experience of hate, bullying, direct antisemitism and pro-Pally intimidation.

Political comment

About fifty years ago I returned to university, first as a student then later as an academic member of staff. Prior to my arrival, I would have described myself as largely Jewish in name only - I didn't attend shul and my knowledge of Jewish history and culture was little more than perfunctory, but that was all about to change.

This was the era of the rise of the far right in Britain and while they were never to achieve the success of the British Union of Fascists, they were extremely vocal and becoming increasingly popular. What I experienced in those early days at university stunned me and totally changed my life, because I knew to expect antisemitism from declared fascists, but what I had not expected was the bitterness and hatred of 'supposed' leftists and anti-racists.

At a national level, the National Union of Students (NUS) who were responsible for protecting student affairs at a national and local level had an across the board policy of 'no platform for Zionism', which effectively meant no Jewish student society could discuss issues about Israel of invite Zionist speakers. So when I fist approached my local Union president indicating a desire to set up a local Jewish society I was firmly advised that they thought it a bad idea, but if I chose to proceed, I would have to agree to uphold NUS policy.

Now I apologise to American readers for this somewhat long biographical titbit, but I use it to explain a key and extremely important point - In over 50 years and across the world nothing has changed - the oldest hate still festers in our colleges and universities unabated.

In the US, Students for Justice in Palestine continue to hold a large sway in student politics, including intimidating Jewish students unabated. Polls undertaken during the height of the campus protests showed 8% of the entire national student population had participated with 45% supporting them. In response, and in an attempt to protect our Jewish students a substantial number of law suits were filed in an effort to silence the pro-Palestine bullies but most have failed, arguing speech and slogans at the heart of the controversy are protected by the first amendment. But sadly the courts have failed to see the point. If you are Jewish and you need to walk from point A to point B and that means traversing an area filled with dozens, if not hundreds of students calling for a global Intifada, or the death of every Jew in Israel then you are not safe.

Fifty years ago I was told I would be physically hurt if I set up a Jewish society and it is still the same today.

We have failed to support our Jewish students and we continue to do so today - and more importantly, no-one seems to care. So my question is - what will it take for politicians to realise campus antisemitism is rampant and pretty words and investigative committees are no longer enough.

Iran - is this the beginning of the end, or the end of the beginning

A number of US and UK media outlets have argued the decision to go to war with Iran depended almost entirely on the assumption that a popular uprising by the people could lead to the elimination of the top leadership in Tehran.

From the information available here in the UK it would seem this assessment was provided by Israeli intelligence to Benjamin Netanyahu who then went on to convince President Trump their analysis was a certainty rather than a possible scenario. 

Based on this the Pentagon were advised by the President to prepare for war and military resources and personnel were advised to prepare for a brief military entanglement lasting only a few days rather than the prolonged campaign it has now become and with the Strait of Hormuz being closed leading to a dramatic increase. At the time of writing,  I am led to believe is priced for ordinary petrol (gas) in the US at about $4,10 (£3.10) a gallon while in the UK it is $9.35 (£7,05) anddiel being significantly more.

The core demise of this approach was that Israel assumed The Israeli judgement assumed the Iranian people, eager to be free of the Ayatollahs and  hopeful of then being able to enjoy Iran's riches would grab the chance presented by the assassination of Khamenei and the IRGC leadership.

It was a reasonable assumption based on earlier mass demonstrations by the Iranian people on the streets of Tehran, but what it ignored, or chose to dismiss was the large-scale crackdowns that followed and left thousands of protesters dead,  The hope from Israel and the US was that Iranians would continue taking  to the streets with greater confidence against the IRGC but instead they sheltered from dozens of devastating attacks on their cities..

The assumption made by US/ Israeli strategists was that, much as had happened in Syria under Assad, Hussein in Iraq, and Gaddafi in Libya, the remaining regime, facing a vacuum in decision-making, would have no option but to flee.

However, critics in NATO of the US/ Israeli approach are now arguing that while the majority of Iranians disagree with the regime on many issues, overall they do object a centralised and strict domestic form of governance, but do fear a national leaderless fragmentation of their country. External to Iran, many exiles have been drawn to the Shah of Iran/ Persia, Reza Pahlavi, but many within Iran see his family politically damaged because of his father's oppressive regime. What is more, is that without Pahlavi as a figure head there is no central figure to take over the 'political revolution' necessary to eradicate the Ayatollah leadership.

It also largely supports Iran’s regional policies, which provide it with influence, strengthen its international position, and enhance its negotiating leverage on nuclear, energy, and military matters. Persians also see themselves as the country’s true owners and are reluctant to share power or wealth with non-Persian groups in Iran.

Additionally. US and Israeli strategists assumed Kurds, Arabs, Baloch, Azeris, and Turkmen would view the regime’s weakness as a chance to replace it with a more liberal and open system that would allow them to secure rights through a new social contract and constitutional framework where they might gain equal participation in power and wealth.

However, the key failure in the US-Israeli plan is their determination to ignore historical evidence and, in particular how, in general minority groups in revolutions seldom try to overthrow ruling systems (admittedly there are tribal examples throughout Africa but, in broad terms most of these have produced short-term regimes that have themselves been overthrown. As a broad rule of thumb, minority ethnic grouos tend to view revolutions as the concern of the majority, so avoid  sacrificing their own members.

Of course, if the US/ Israeli coalition entered this war fuly cognisant of all the issues mentioned above then there can only be one conclusion and that is that both the US and Israel started this war with only one goal in mind - and that is the entire dismantling of the Iranian state. This would in many ways seem the most logical option and is consistent with the “Periphery Doctrine”, developed by David Ben-Gurion and advocates as its core principle the dividing of states and creating chaotic entities. Indeed it could be argued that, in some respects it would be the safest option for Israel as a divided and broken Iran would cease to be a future threat to the country and, from the US perspective a disjointed Iran would cease to be any kind of threat to the Strait of Hormuz.

Political comment

Wake up and smell the coffee - antisemitism is on the rise and our politicians are doing nothing

Since October 7th the world has seen a huge surge in antisemitism reminiscent  of Germany during the early stage of the Nazi regime. In response a number of political leaders across Europe and the United States have called for action to protect Jewish communities from race hate. However despite these efforts, where they exist, the statistics show that far from being a decline, there remains a significant problem.

Today's blog will explore some of these efforts and will argue the majority are fundamentally tokenistic and do little to reduce race crime.

There is nothing new about Situational Crime Prevention. It was originated by Ronald V. Clarke in the 1970s and became a broad policy approach led by the British Home Office Research Unit and exported in various forms abroad. The approach is underpinned by a core belief that offenders, particularly perpetrators of antisemitic crime act rationally, weighing risks (getting caught) against the satisfaction of upsetting or harming the victim.

                                               Ronald V. Clarke

With this theoretical underpinning of crime prevention against Jews as a base, let us dissect the actions taken by several countries and analyse its effectiveness, starting with the US and the efforts of President Trump 

United States

In the United States, President Donald Trump has enacted the following:

• Executive Order 14188 (2025): Shortly after his 2025 inauguration, President Trump issued a new executive order, “Additional Measures to Combat Antisemitism,” which vowed to vigorously use legal tools to prosecute and remove perpetrators of antisemitic harassment and violence.
• Federal Funding Pressure: The administration has indicated a willingness to withhold federal funds from universities, such as targetting funding for institutions like Columbia University over the way they handled campus protests.
• Targeting Campus Antisemitism: The administration launched investigations and lawsuits against institutions like Harvard, accusing them of allowing anti-Israel protesters to operate "with impunity" after the October 7, 2023 attacks by Hamas.
• Use of IHRA Definition: The Department of Education under Trump has applied the IHRA definition of antisemitism to include anti-Zionism and certain criticisms of Israel as actionable discrimination under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
• Immigration and Visa Controls: Executive actions in 2025 directed federal agencies to review foreign student visas, allowing for the potential deportation of students who "advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists and other threats," which the administration tied to campus antisemitism.

In essence these look like promising moves, albeit a little overstating the significance of campus antisemitism rather than looking at Jew-hate in the wider community. However this may be being unfair because it is action. So how have these approaches panned out in practice?

Well, in fairness, it is early days, but initial indicators from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) are not good. According to their research, antisemitic incidents in the US. reached record highs in 2024 and have continue to surge throughout the whole of 2025, driven by post-October 7, tensions. According to ADL data, 2024 saw 9,354 recorded incidents, with 2025 data showing a rising, more brazen trend, particularly in high-density areas, with a 21% rise in physical assaults reported.

Furthermore, by the end of 2025 over 30% of American Jews reported feeling unsafe in professional or social settings and 18% experienced direct physical or verbal threats. Meanwhile, on social media platforms 73% of American Jews experienced antisemitism online during 2025, specifically on platforms like Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok.

The evidence also shows little significant change in the number of hate crimes prosecuted and/ or convictions resulting in over 90% of American Jews feeling unsafe. Consequently and based on data available, early indications are that the Trump initiative isn't working or, if it is the change required to make America safe for Jews is happening too slowly.

United Kingdom

But before we start pillorying Trump for doing too little it would be worth comparing US efforts to address endemic antisemitism compared to other nations. Let us take the UK as an initial example. The UK has a long history of Jew hatred that goes back to Hugh of Lincoln in 1200 and the resulting Jewish expulsion in 1290. They did not return until  l 1656 during the Interregnum under Oliver Cromwell. Since then Jews were largely able to go about their daily business in peace, though antisemitic attacks continued.

It was only really after October 7th that attacks became more prevalent, though signs of antisemitic behaviour became more prevalent among the hard  Left when Corbyn became leader of Labour and the EHRC ruling against the party in 2020.

More recently, the Community Security Trust  "Antisemitic Incidents Report 2025", , showed 3,700 instances of anti-Jewish hate across the UK in 2025, the second highest annual total ever, and a 4% rise from the 3,556 antisemitic incidents in 2024, and second only to the 4,298 antisemitic incidents logged in 2023. CST recorded 1,662 antisemitic incidents in 2022, and 2,261 in 2021.

Broadly speaking UK government action against antisemitism appears to lie primarily with providing financial support to the Community Security Trust who have been allocated £28 million in 2025/26 through the Jewish Community Protective Security Grant. This includes additional emergency funding of £10 million. In addition, the government have prioritised interventions in the following areas: 

1. Security: Providing better support to ensure the safety and security of Jewish communities. 
2. Education: Tackling antisemitism in schools, colleges, and universities and ensuring that we raise children and young people who embrace people from all backgrounds and faiths.
3. Institutional Action: Tackling antisemitism in key institutions, particularly the NHS, and the culture, sport, and voluntary sectors.

In short, most would agree the UK government have done next to nothing to eradicate antisemitism but Starmer continues to spout meaningless soundbites to appease the Jewish community. Take for example his recent meetings with Birmingham university students who itemised some of the problems associated with being a student on campus. He listened but offered no suggestions as to how a Labour government might help bring change.

France

Meanwhile, in France, Antisemitism has surged dramatically since October 2023, following the Hamas-Israel conflict, with reported incidents increasing by nearly 400% in 2023 to 1,676, compared to 436 in 2022. This includes a spike in physical assaults, school incidents, and acts of vandalism. The sharp rise continues a trend, with 2024 maintaining similarly high levels of anti-Jewish acts.

In response, the government elevated the domestic security alert to the highest possible level (Vigipirate), increasing security around Jewish schools and places of worship. 

President Emmanuel Macron vowed that perpetrators would be punished, prompting a strong crackdown on vandalism and violent attacks. In 2024, the government recorded 9,400 racist crimes and incidents, with the interior ministry emphasizing "total commitment" to tracking down attackers of Jewish individuals and properties.

Noticeably in the immediate period after October 7th over 1,000 antisemitic crimes were recorded but within that same period (post-October 7, 2023), 486 (less than half) were arrested for antisemitic offences in France.

Sadly, most of Europe reveals the same picture with Germany in particular showing a disturbing number of antisemitic crime and a poor conviction rate.

Political comment

The data clearly demonstrates that throughout much of the 'free world' not enough is being done to reduce or even eliminate antisemitism and without a clear strategy to deal with the problem it will continue to grow and prosper - our children will be frightened in their schools, our teenager boys will fear muggings, or girls will be unsafe on our streets, as will our elderly. Going to synagogue will no longer a joy but will become a weekly and dangerous period in our lives.

We cannot allow this to continue.

- and there is an alternative way. All it needs is for government to be willing to invest in our Jewish communities.

In particular:

Legislation - enact a law where antisemitism is viewed as a hate crime and, if convicted in a court of law a perpretrator would receive a custodial sentence of no less than 12-months for a non-violent crime and no less than 5 years for a violent one. Children under 16 would receive a detention and training order of no less than 12 months, or juvenile detention centre in the US,

• A visible and active police presence in local Jewish communities. Demonstatrors attempting to enter Jewish communities or near synagogues will be subject Dispersion orders or Anti-|Social behaviour orders. Police currently have this authority already but must use them far more to protect local residents.
• Holocaust education to become a core part of the curriculum for all schhol children over 13 years of age.
• The USSA, local college student unions, or NUS should be denied authority to require student unions from preventing college/ university Jewish societies from discussing Zionism or Israeli issues. Any attempt to do would be deemed a denial of free speech.
• Any Imam or Muslim from a foreign country who calls for Jihad or globalising the intifada will be subject to immediate repatriation. If the perpetrator is a UK or US national they will face terrorism charges for inciting violence.
• Legislation should be prepared to stipulate Anti-Zionism is racism and that expression of such by a public servant is subject to disciplinary charges,

Now I would be the first to agree there are significant issues with many of these points, but they offer an initial discussion base that could ultimately lead to feeling safer and a substantial decline in race crime

Whatever we do, one thing is transparent - we must do more!

Remembering Sarah

Today (5th April) will mark  nine years since Sarah Halimi,  a 65 year old retired doctor and a French Jew was beaten and murdered then thrown off her balcony simply because she was Jewish.

Sarah was brutally murdered by her neighbor Kobili Traoré. Traore broke into her Paris apartment, stabbed her to death for approximately 50 minutes, and then threw her body from a third-story window.

Traoré, 27, while torturing Halimi was heard calling her a “dirty Jew”, reciting verses from the Quran, and shouting Alahu Akbar. After the murder, he shouted, “I have killed the sheitan,” meaning the devil or demonic spirit in Arabic. Local police were downstairs waiting for backup while the torture was taking place.

In an unfathomable decision in mid-April, France’s highest judicial body, the Court of Cassation, ruled that Traoré will not face trial due to his consumption of marijuana the night of the murder. The courts cited an article of the French criminal code which states that a person is not liable for a crime if they suffered from a psychological or neurological disorder that impaired their actions at the time it was committed. In a 2017 case, a person also under the influence was sentenced to prison for throwing their dog out a window.

Sarah should have received justice. Her killer should have faced the full weight of the law but this didn't happen

We will never forget.

Farage and Robinson - Are they really friends of Israel

Amongst my readership there are some who have identified themselves as being overtly Islamophobic. Amongst these people are some who support  the thoughts and actions of the likes of "Tommy Robinson", Nigel Farage as well as  significant elements within the Reform Party and view them as heroes and true supporters of both Jews and the State of Israel.

But is this true? Are these people friends of the Jewish community or are they riding on our backs as a tool to attack the Muslim community?

Today's blog will try to tackle some of these issues.

First, let's look in depth at some of the personalities involved, because it is quite clear that, for the most part they are all highly charismatic personalities, well experienced in using the media for their own political ends. Of course, it could be argued in this respect they are little different from any other politician, but it is how they use their skills and whether it creates a threat to the Jewish community.

So, let us analyse the history and ideology of the personalities.

1. Tommy Robinson (real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon)

Robinson first came to attention when he helped found the English Defence League (EDL) in June 2009. The EDL was set up originally as an amalgamation of football hooligan groups opposed to the presence of a small Salafi group called Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamah based in Luton, UK.As EDL beme more popular among the broad far right it expanded its remit to become a broadly ant-Muslim organisation, eventually with between 25,000 - 30,000 members and headed by Robinson. 

By the time he took the leadership of EDL, he was already an experienced political activist, having been a member of the UK British National Party (an organisation with significant Nazi roots and historical connections with infamous Nazis, including John Tyndall and Colin Jordan. The political scientist Chris Allen noted that the EDL shared much of the BNP's ideology, but that its "strategies and actions" were very different.

Robinson admits to his membership of the BNP, though has argued that he left in 2005 after a year because 'it was not for him'. However, his links to the far right did not end there - in 2012 he became vice chair of the British Freedom Party in 2012, headed by Paul Weston, a known antisemite and later, in 2019 Robinson became an active supporter of UKIP under the leadership of  Gerald Batten (a questionable character with considerable evidence of his antisemitic leanings).

                                                  Paul Weston

About the same time, he had a further fling with the far right by joining Patriotic Alternative led by Mark Collett, a known antisemite among the far-right community. PA itself is a political group known for its strong antisemitic leanings and clear links to the proscribed neo-Nazi terror group,, National Action.

Realising the risks of being associated with such an outfit, he quickly left and had a short fling with "For Britain", another short-lived far-right party headed by Anne-Marie Waters (an ex-Labour Party member turned neo-fascist) with links to a number of well known European antisemitic groups and individuals.

                               Anne Marie Waters

Robinson then calmed down for a while, only to reappear on a platform with Hitler look-alike, Alex Yerbury (yes, the one whose then girlfriend was a contestant in the far-right beauty pageant "Miss Auschwitz") of the National Support Detachment.

                                               Alex Yerbury

One of the greatest sources of confusion surrounding Robinson’s project is his claim to oppose antisemitism and his supposed support for Israel. For more than twenty years, Robinson has presented himself as a defender of Jews against Islam, invoking Israel's right to defend itself against jihadist opposition and framing his own street politics as part of that struggle.

Robinson’s alignment with Israel and Zionism can be best understood as a strategic adaptation to the historical defeats of British fascism. The 'new' approach responds to the question of how do you mobilise an authoritarian political campaign where openly Nazi symbolism and thought, including promoting antisemitic conspiracies  are heavily contested. In short, he has denied his inner antisemitic convictions by obscuring it under a shroud of supposed "Zionism" that is, in itself fundamentally baseless and only used  as an agent to attack Muslims.

If you think this is too harsh, remember this is a nan who remains an undischarged bankrupt, but according to Hope not Hate through lies and subterfuge today has access to over £3 million worth of funds.

2. Nigel Farage

                                                      Nigel Farage

While it would be wrong to accuse Nigel Farage of having links to the far right, he is no stranger to suggestions of him expressing antisemitic comments. For example:

Antisemitic Abuse: Multiple contemporaries have alleged Farage used antisemitic slurs, sang Nazi-themed songs, and made hateful comments, including stating "Hitler was right" and "Hitler should have gassed you all" to Jewish students.

Witness Accounts: Over 30 former classmates and teachers have come forward with accounts of racist or antisemitic behaviour by Farage, including accusations he led a group that harassed Jewish students.

Social Media: In a tweeted video message, Farage said the UK faced “cultural Marxism”, a term originating in a conspiracy theory based on a supposed plot against national governments, which is closely linked to the far right and antisemitism.

Mainstream media:  In a recent opinion piece for the Newsweek website, Farage talked about “unelected globalists shaping the public’s lives based on secret recommendations from the big banks”. Goldman Sachs was the only bank he mentioned by name, echoing another common theme from far-right antisemitism

Add to this his writing in a separate Newsweek column, Farage said Black Lives Matter was made up of radical socialists trying to destroy nationalism, “oftentimes funded by globalists”, another term linked to such ideas.

In response, the Community Security Trust, a charity that works for the safety of Jewish people in the UK, said in a statement: “This is not the first time that Nigel Farage has used language that evokes antisemitic conspiracy codewords ...". 

Andrew Percy the Conservative MP argued: “These conspiracy theories have real world and dangerous consequences and are without question antisemitic,” he said. “So now he is being put on notice. Farage needs to cut it out before he causes further harm by providing further fuel to racist antisemitic tropes and conspiracy theories.”

Other commentators include Catherine McKinnell the Labour MP who stated: “Talk of shadow cabals, Soros conspiracies and other nonsense has repeatedly been proven to find its roots in anti-Jewish racism. His choice of language, which echoes some of that circulating amongst the far-right online, is worrying and getting worse.”.

So when Farage says he supports the right of Israel to exist I am inclined to ask why. Is it because of a genuine belief that Israel has a right to exist and is the ancestral home of the Jewish people, or is it because he wants a United Kingdom that is both Judenrein and Judenfrei.

3. Elements of the Reform Party

Despite recently establishing the Jewish Reform Group there is substantial evidence of deep-rooted antisemitism within the party. More importantly there appears to be little heart amongst the political elite to tackle the issue and indeed, it is not beyond fantasy that some may endorse it.

• A Reform activist who had been campaigning ahead of the Gorton and Denton by-election was suspended over racist and antisemitic comments he made on social media.
• Another Reform candidate, Tony Mack, a psychotherapist and former black cab driver whose campaign literature promised to fix “woke ideology” and “discrimination against the people of Britain"  shared images of a well-known mural featuring antisemitic tropes. The mural depicts hook-nosed financiers counting money and playing a Monopoly-style board game on the backs of naked figures. The images of the mural shared by Mack was captioned: “If the people stand, the game is over.” When Mack posted the image on Twitter, he added the words: “Get up, stand up.” He also shared the image on Tiktok, writing that Reform was the only way to save Britain from the “globalist agenda”, 
• Or take Gary Farmer, chair of Brighton and Hove Reform Party who posted depictions of the Jewish Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero Ed Miliband as a vampire (the version of Ed Miliband as Nosferatu was quickly deleted after posting 
• What about two parliamentary candidates who previously shared on social media material defending Adolf Hitler, denying the Holocaust, promoting conspiracy theories about the Rothschild family and Jewish financier George Soros, denial of antisemitism, and comparisons of the state of Israel with Nazi Germany.
• Or the Tameside Campaign manager include one in which he stated he "would never touch a Jewish woman", and another that appeared to downplay the number of Jews murdered in the Holocaust. The latter was in response to a post by former UFC fighter Jake Shields, which claimed that the Holocaust’s death toll is "made up".

I could easily cite many more, but I will stop now for the sake of some kind of brevity.

Political comment

While I am no supporter of Nigel Farage, I think there are some problems accusing him of being an antisemite. In part this is because some of his actions go back to his school days. Now, if we are to accuse Mr Farage of wrongdoing because he sang old Nazi songs then, by that standard, we would also have to accuse Prince Harry, the Duke of Suffolk because he wore a Nazi uniform to a friend's fancy dress party back in 2005. Was the incident antisemitic? Or was it simply a tasteless and grossly inappropriate act by an immature 20 year old student? However, Farage's youthful outbursts must be contextualised alongside some of his later comments and writings. Taken as a whole it does lead to grave questions that need to be answered and, to date these have not been. With this in mind I feel the Jewish community needs to be extremely cautious before taking him under their wing.

Similarly with the Reform Party. While I acknowledge there are many genuine people in the party who support the Jewish community and are fully committed to Israel and its right to exist, I do feel there is extensive evidence to support the belief that antisemitism is endemic within the party and again, while this remains unresolved there is little reason to trust them. Just as Labour, Green and to a lesser extent Conservative parties have an unresolved problem with antisemitism, so too does Reform, perhaps more so.

The case of Tommy Robinson is much clearer. With a 20 year history of association and engagement with the far right across Europe and a blatant disregard for demands from Jewish community groups it is clear Robinson is only out to satisfy his own ends. His Zionism is non-existent and is only used to create further division between Jews and  Muslims. He is very far from a true friend and should be avoided at all costs