Buchenwald Survivors Aboard the Illegal Immigrant Ship ‘Meteora’, Haifa, Israel. The British had stopped immigration (White Paper 1939 in British Parliament) into the Jewish Homeland which led directly to the murder of 6 millions of Jews by the Nazis. The British were thus involved also in the Holocaust – accomplices of the Nazis in the Holocaust. Now the British through this vote to recognize “Palestine” are setting up the Jews again and placing the Jews of the world in great danger.
EVEN THOUGH THIS REPORT BY “PALESTINE BRIEFING” IS HOSTILE TO ISRAEL THE TRUTH COMES OUT ABOUT “FRIENDS OF ISRAEL!
Analysis by a group (actually hostile to Israel) http://palestinebriefing.org/tag/lfpme/ contained vital information about the vote in Britain for a Palestinian Arab state
This shows that the Palestinian Arab Narrative has been sold skilfully and in a vacuum of leadership has become a major factor in Britain. It also shows very clearly that the “Labour Friends of Israel” and the “Conservative Friends of Israel” concept and practise is a complete fraud and has totally let down the Jews and Israel at the very moment when it counted. At that very critical moment the “Friends” either stayed away or if “Palestine Briefing” is to believed and I think they have to be THEY VOTED FOR THE PALESTINIAN JIHAD STATE
This therefore raises the issue that Maureen Lipman articulates…that the Labour Party is Antisemitic through and through. Maureen will vote for an alternative but in Britain she cannot find one. Note that the UKIP two members of Parliament Carswell and Reckless stayed away – they abstained on this vital issue concerning Jews and Israel
(Excerpts from “Palestine Briefing” article)
MPs voted in favour of the UK recognising Palestine by an unexpectedly large majority of 262 after a five-hour Commons debate called by Easington MP Grahame Morris. Commentators were quick to dismiss it as “merely an expression of Parliament’s view” that will not commit the Government because it was “only” a backbench debate.
But although the vote is not binding on the Government, it is clear that MPs have changed their views and it is only a matter of time before the Government will have to change its policies. And, although recognition is a minor issue and will not directly affect the lives of Palestinians, there is a good chance that this decisive vote will lead to stronger steps that will begin to put real pressure on the Israelis. The 274-12 vote came about because of a deep underlying shift in MPs’ attitudes to Israel, caused by their shock at the brutality of the Gaza war and their huge postbags of letters from constituents demanding action.
It emerges from the vote that:
◾Half the MPs listed as supporters of Labour Friends of Israel voted in favour of recognising Palestine despite last-minute pleas from senior Israeli politicians to vote against.
◾40 Conservative MPs – including some members of Conservative Friends of Israel – backed the recognition motion and the Conservative Home website reported that ‘support for Israel is slipping away’…
If the two ‘no’ tellers are included there were 195 Labour MPs voting for recognition – more than twice the current total of MPs who support Labour Friends of Palestine & the Middle East. While it has been Labour Party policy since 2011 to support the recognition of Palestine, first by the UN and now by the UK, there was no obligation on MPs to turn up for a backbench debate and the numbers were another indication of the rapid fall-off in uncritical support for Israel on the Labour benches. Coalition ministers were told to abstain, but Conservative and Liberal-Democrat MPs were free to vote as they liked.
The real surprise was the number of Conservatives who abstained because they were disillusioned by recent actions of the Israeli government. Typical was the distinguished chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee Sir Richard Ottaway who told the Commons that he had stood by Israel through thick and thin for 20 years but was outraged by the recent Israeli annexation of Palestinian land and “such is my anger over Israel’s behaviour in recent months that I will not oppose the motion”.
It was the highest ever attendance at a backbench debate (other than the European referendum debate which was whipped) and out of a total of 43 speeches, only six were from opponents of recognition, with the result that Conservative MPs who have previously been reluctant to express their support for the Palestinian case spoke with passion and eloquence, as though a gag had been removed.
In the event there were 195 Labour MPs supporting the motion, 40 Conservatives, 28 Liberal Democrats, nine Scottish and Welsh nationalists and four Northern Irish (2 SDLP, 1 Independent, 1 Alliance). The noes were six Conservatives, five Ulster Unionists and one Liberal Democrat. Other than the 140 MPs on the “payroll” vote of ministers and ministerial aides who are expected to abstain in backbench debates, the number of MPs who abstained or were absent was 220. Even if they had all voted ‘no’ (and a number have said they would have voted ‘yes’ but could not be there) opponents of recognition would still have had only 232 votes against the 278 votes in favour of recognition…
Baroness Warsi, who resigned from the Government in August in protest at the strongly pro-Israeli policy, said at the time that many of her ministerial colleagues and most of the officials in the Foreign Office agreed with her, but policy came from a small group at the top. There was a natural majority not only in the country, but also in Parliament and in the Foreign Office for the recognition of Palestine, but “you’ve a small group of politicians who are keeping a close grip on this and who are not allowing public opinion, ministerial views, parliamentary views and the views of the people who work in this system.”
An article in the New York Times gave an interesting insight into how Muslim immigration has played a big role in these opportunist Labour Politicians position towards the Jews of today.
His father, the prominent Marxist historian Ralph Miliband, arrived in Britain in 1940 on one of the last boats transporting Jewish refugees from Belgium. Mr. Miliband’s mother followed in 1947 having spent World War II living under an assumed name in Belgium while other family members perished in the Holocaust.
Last year that family story became a public issue when Mr. Miliband accused The Daily Mail of lying about his father after the newspaper used the headline “The man who hated Britain” for an article focusing on his left-wing beliefs.
According to those close to Mr. Miliband, he has taken a growing interest in his family history, and the visit to Israel was intended both to underscore his interest in the Middle East as a geopolitical issue and to show the public more about his family background.
In a subsequent speech in June to a party group called Labour Friends of Israel, Mr. Miliband described settlement building in the occupied territories as “a significant threat to a negotiated agreement,” and emphasized his support for a two-state solution. But he also recounted his visit in emotional terms and emphasized his attachment to Israel.
“I want you to know,” he concluded, “that if I become prime minister in less than a year’s time, I will be proud to do so as a friend of Israel, a Jew and, most of all, someone who feels so proud to be part of the community gathered here.”
With the visit and speech, Mr. Miliband seemed to be reaching out to the Jewish population, according to Mr. Pollard, one reason for the dismay felt by some at Mr. Miliband’s comments over Gaza.
Yet neither his family background nor Labour Party politics suggest that Mr. Miliband was ever likely to shrink from criticizing Israel when he disagreed with its government’s policies.
His mother, Marion Kozak, is a signatory of Jews for Justice for Palestinians, which describes itself as a network of Jews who are British or live in Britain and who “oppose Israeli policies that undermine the livelihoods, human, civil and political rights of the Palestinian people.”
Many Labour lawmakers worry about the plight of the Palestinians, and some represent constituencies with large Muslim populations, which could be crucial in the May general election.
Some, including Grahame Morris, a lawmaker who leads a group called Labour Friends of Palestine and the Middle East, want tougher policies against Israel.
Mr. Morris said he was “proud of Ed when he opposed Israel’s summer assault on Gaza,” but added that “there is still plenty of room for improvement” in policies and called for a “ban on trade and investment with illegal settlements in the Palestinian territories.”
Meanwhile, the junior partner in the current Conservative Party-led coalition government, the Liberal Democrats, has also been critical of Israel’s policy in Gaza.
“There is competition for Labour and Liberal Democrat voters on the center-left, and for Muslim votes, and both constituencies are much more sympathetic to the Palestinian cause,” said Toby Greene, research director for the British Israel Communications and Research Center, which aims to promote ties between Israel and Britain.
But, while there is political logic in hardening his rhetoric, Mr. Miliband may have used this tougher tone to keep internal divisions under control without actually toughening party policy against Israel.
Labour has consistently supported the principle of recognizing statehood for the Palestinians, and it was Mr. Morris — the backbench lawmaker — not Mr. Miliband who secured the recent nonbinding parliamentary resolution backing recognition of a Palestinian state.
Official pronouncements kept open the timing of recognition if Labour comes to power next year.
A version of this article appears in print on October 24, 2014, on page A14 of the New York edition with the headline: British Labour Chief, a Jew Who Criticizes Israel, Walks a Fi
Just a note of caution on the New York Times reference to Ralph Milliband, the father of Ed Milliband, present leader of Labour. They refer to him as a “Marxist”. This is certainly not accurate. There has been no Marxist Party in Britain for a century. This is the whole point of the present atrocious situation where a lying versión of history, hiding the role of the Nazi Hajj Amin el Husseini who was the founder of the Palesinian Arab concept, that is his role in the Holocaust. Those like Healy, Redgrave, Cliff, Grant, Pablo and Mendel were not Trotskyists in any way, and then there was the deathly role of Stalinism (The British CP) as well in the selling of this Big Lie of the “Palestinians” which has virtually liquidated left wing politics in Britain…In other words there is a vacuum of leadership, hence the serious quandary of people like Maureen Lipman!