after the two disruptions at the esf i am getting a bit sick of left meetings being stopped.

if you can't argue your corner with other progreesive people, get out of the ring.

lets hope that is the last of them–although i think not

> a bunch of part-sinister part-shabby Zionists
should it matter how they dress?

> Pretty much like the state they love so much (yet, interestingly, don’t choose to live
> in), these rabid lowlifes ignored all rules of decorum and decency, and flooded
> the hall with their bile
"rabid lowlifes" - sounds like bile to me too! If there was a fascist meeting going on, you'd "ignore all rules of decorum and decency", because the meeting itself you might think was ignoring decency in it's very existence.

You can't shout down people just for taking direct action like you or I might, or how they dress!

> breaking up public meetings was a favoured tool of the Nazis on their own sorry
> rise to power. The parallel could hardly have been more apt.
Hmm. Enough of trite and useless parallels, please.
Breaking up fascist public meetings was a favoured tool of the antifascists in this country after the Second World War, to stop their rise to power in the UK. From my understanding in Germany in the 30s, the Nazis actually used mostly democratic means to rise to power. According to a friend from a family most of whom didn't survive the Holocaust, Hitler said it was because opposition to the Nazis did not use confrontational strategies that it failed to stop his rise.

Plenty of accounts of anti-facists breaking up facist meetings too - London pre-WW2 for instance (see autobiographies of Trevor Grundy "Memoir Of A Fascist Childhood" or William Woodruff "Beyond Nab End")

The disruption is much more effective the way they describe it - don't wait for the Q+A

Is it a crime to attend a public meeting to expose a different view?
It seems that for you it is...
You may agree with them or not, but everyone is entitled to expose thei oppinions

Although I arrived late and left early I was present long enough to hear Gerald Kaufman MP call for a 2 state solution (now who else have I heard asking for this solution?) and name dropping that the only time he has met Sharron was when he stood next to him at Robert (mossad agent  http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12419168&method=full&siteid=50143 ) Maxwells funeral!

After the Second World War there was more than just breaking up meetings to prevent Mosley's fascist revival. A Jewish group called the "42 Group" or something like that, of British anti-fascist Jews that fought in the Second World War and/or the Israeli War of Independence against the genocidal attack on the Jews in Palestine by the Arab states (and incidently also against British fascists, who flocked to Palestine to fight the Jews), actually assasinated fascists in the 1950s in order to prevent their revival.

And the author of this report's effective suggestion that Jews should go to Israel if they like it so much is ludicrous, perhaps you should fuck off to Palestine see how much you like living up Arafat's arse there, or maybe to Syria to see the wonders of Arab socialist resistance to US imperialism, or to your beloved Cuba (those suggestions are in fact perhaps bad examples, because they apply to quite a large extent to people like you). Oh and its tinged with anti-semitism also.

I think its perfectly understandable that Jews, or "Zionists" (you are unclear on whether these evil Zionists are Jews or concerned anti-fascist anti-racist gentiles such as myself), should get angry about your extremist anti-Israel platforms, especially when you continually use inflammatory and derogatory rhetoric - "Zionist rabble", "Nazis", etc.

Oh and the Nazi allegation is blatantly anti-semitic by the way. Why is it that ISRAEL, the JEWISH state, is always compared to the Holocaust and Nazisism? This is nothing new by the way, British officials in 1948, somewhat anti-semitic ones and very anti-Israel ones, made similar ludicrous and anti-semitic comparisons to the Nazis. Why is China not continually attacked as a Nazi state? Russia? Egypt? The PA? Sudan? Morocco? Morocco has illegally occupied Western Sahara since 1975, refuses to negotiate over its status (has continually delayed the referendum that was agreed), and has setttled double the number of Moroccans than Israel has settled Jews.

Oh and holding anti-Jewish meetings was perhaps the most favourite 'tactic' of the Nazis...

How predictable that my article should a) be jumped on as anti-semitic and that b) flattering parallels should be disingenously cast into the ring comparing these thugs with genuine antifascists.

Let's take the first point. Two-thirds of the panel were Jewish, so how can my defending their right to speak be "anti-semitic". As Richard Kuper pointed out, Sharon and co use fears of antisemitism (while simultaneously fanning its flames) as a tool to frighten Jews into leaving their homelands for Israel. Their dream is of a world purified of Jews, of herding the entire dispora into a mono-ethnic Israel - shorn of its non-Jewish inhabitants (transfer, as it is "eupemistically" referred to). This, essentially, is antisemitism in action. So sorry if you can't handle this truth.

And the second point: to desccribe these people as anti-fascists, and to compare them to the courageous people who stand up against fascism and intolerance in this country, is a pure absurdity. The rabble who broke up Thurday's meeting have very much in common with people like the BNP, NF and their verminous ilk. Whether these people are Jewish, christian or just plain barmy, they have the same hatred of people who don't fit in with their narrow world view. Also, they call Jews who don't agree with them "self-haters" - exactly the term used by Nazi Germans to put down their opponents. I have been on numerous anti-fascist marches and actions, and I can't reacall seeing any of our cuddly but sartorially inept friends from Thursday night there. Wonder why.

Also, one poster's historically-challenged view of Hitler's rise to power is as laughable as it is obscene. Any school child can tell you that Hitler's bully boys were engaged by a whole plethora of anti-fascists (communists, socialists, Jewish groups, Edelweiss pirates) right from the start. Unfortunately, they won the streetfights, and - more importantly - had corporate power amd the establishment behind them. So do us all a big favour: go and read a little history, instead of regaling us with your ignorance.

The mainly Jewish anti-fascist group you talk of was called the 43 Group (simply because they couldn't be bothered arguing over the name and there were 43 people present in the room at the founding meeting!). They never assassinated anyone, though they did useful physical force and tear gas - in fact, they disbanded, job done, before the 50s as you mention. Some of them did go to fight for the foundation of Israel, against the British forces - anything else as you write, is in fact your interpretation.

However, 'cos I take issue here with some of what j writes, doesn't mean I condone her/his other attacks on "people like you". Some of the other stuff, however stands - myope's original parallelling the "Zionist rabble"'s tactics with the Nazis is at best unhelpful (why do you insist on using it, you should ask yourself). Good question about other nation's not being similarly labelled.

I of course do not think that the people who came to disrupt the meeting were anti-fascists or should be compared to them - by your (myope) focussing on that, you miss considering some of my points (though I do agree with much of what you say). I said earlier "mostly democratic means" - that of course, from the history books I have read, does not take into account the early street fights etc, but I was (perhaps simplistically) talking of later on, and the German State's (& mass of the population's) responses to the NSDAP (Nazi party) - it was the politicians' 'democratic' response's to the rise of the NSDAP that gave them actual political power in the end (& the establishment and corporate support you talk of).

Firstly, I think we were all well dressed.

Secondly we listed without interpution to the panel of self hating Jews.

Thirdly interuptions came only when the questions were censored.

You cannot say you believe in free speech and to be a forum for an alternative view and then seek to shut up anyone who disagrees with you.

So grow up.

Hiya "Shabby i think not"

1) So you put on your Sunday best to come along and heckle Mr Kaufman did you? And I didn't even notice. You must be so hurt....

2) "The panel of self-hating Jews". Eigentor (own-goal!) you racist shitforbrains. Even more so when we consider the following: Gerald Kaufman's contribution implicitly endorsed every Israeli PM bar Sharon - he even had a good word or three for Bibi Metanyahu (for fuck's sake). By deeming this "self-hating", you provide us with a pretty clear indication of the twilight demimonde that you and your fellow swamplife inhabit.

3) The interruptions only came at the end. That was your mistake, bonzo. Had you attempted to disrupt the meeting at the start, you might at least have gleaned a little moral integrity (and an early exit).

Finally, I don't see what gives you of all people the right to tell me to grow up. Morally, intellectually and ethically, you are stunted beyond redemption.

There seems to be a great increase in the number of Zionists organising specifically to disrupt peaceful meeting and protests as we see here and over the summer.

I hear there is likely to be another coach-load of extremists due to come-up from London to hound the M&S Picket "off the streets of Manchester".

I for one will be going down to show that we will not be intimidated by their tactica and the vile nonsense they shout - hope others will be willing to show solidarity with the people of Palestine and opposition to the apologists for Israel's present brutality.

They must not be allowed to behave like Israeli soldiers here in Manchester!

Notwithstanding the rather inflammatory language being used here (in both the original article and some of the follow-ups), I have to say that the depiction of events is pretty accurate.

The protestors (probably a safer term than "zionists" or whatever) certainly went beyond exercising their legitimate right to express a dissident opinion. I for one (and I doubt I was the only one) was physically jostled by a couple of these people on the way out. When I reacted, one of them asked whether I was looking for a fight. They were looking for aggro. With the police outside to protect them, they didn't have a great deal to lose either.

Instead of allowing myself to be provoked, I attempted to get one of these guys to have a civislied conversation. Waste of time. All he could do was rant and rave. "You're a Jew hater - why do you pick on Israel?" etc etc.

What is most startling here is that the purpose of the meeting was hardly extreme. I can safely say that virtually nobody present would like to see Israel "wiped from the map". The vast majority of people present would subscribe to the two-state solution, of Israel and Palestine living peacefully side-by-side. So why all the venom? Why the verbal and physical intimidation?

Answers much appreciated...

Hi, i didn't go to the meeting or hear about it, im just a 20 year old british man concerned with whats going on, i have read up on the history of palestine/israel and have to say my beliefs are very one sided... what the Israel forces did to the gaza airport was disgusting, i'm just sat at home wishing i could get involved, wishing i could go out their and help the people of palestine, i live close to Manchester and would definatly like to hear of any future meetings.
thank you.