How many mosquito nets could Comic Relief provide if they didn’t fund War on Want’s anti-Zionist crusade?


Cross posted by our friend, Richard Millett

War On Want unveil their "Stop Arming Israel" campaign next to PSC last night.

War On Want unveil their “Stop Arming Israel” campaign next to PSC last night.

On annual Red Nose Day the BBC broadcasts an evening of entertainment interspersed with heart-breaking scenes from Africa and British hospitals and hospices all in the hope of encouraging people to donate to Comic Relief.

Red Nose Day is on March 15th but one has to wonder how much money Comic Relief wastes. It is an ongoing tragedy which I witnessed at first hand last night when War On Want appeared at the Israeli Apartheid Week event Voices from Palestine: Resisting Racism and Apartheid held at the University of London Union (ULU).

By April 2010, when I first wrote about War On Want’s anti-Israel activism, Comic Relief had already given War On Want approximately £1.7m. War On Want’s accounts now show that in 2011 Comic Relief gave War On Want yet another £303,391. I await the figures for 2012 and 2013.

From War On Want’s 2011 accounts:

wow

And here is War On Want’s “mock occupation of a London Waitrose” where activists singled out Israeli produce for boycotting.

So War On Want demands sanctions against Israel until Israel “complies with international law.” However, one of the demands of the BDS campaign is the return of so-called “Palestinian refugees” to Israel which, according to Haidar Eid, who spoke last night, amounts to some “seven million Palestinians”. This is thanks to the ridiculous UN definition of “Palestinian refugee”, which includes ALL the descendants of those Palestinians who, for various reasons, left Israel in 1947-1948.

A similar definition applied to myself would make me a Polish refugee (now where’s that key to my grandfather’s old home in Lodz?)

Obviously if such a “return” took place then Israel would cease to exist as it would quickly become another Muslim Arab state. Therefore, Israel can only comply with “international law”, as interpreted by War On Want, if it destroys itself. This is where Comic Relief’s money is going!

At last night’s event War On Want was represented by two employees; Natalie Idle (Activism and Outreach Officer) and Rafeef Ziadah.

Ziadah, a Canadian “Palestinian refugee” and War On Want’s Senior Campaigns Officer (Militarism and Security), is a long-time anti-Israel activist. Here she is at an Israel Apartheid Week event last year, before she worked for War On Want, sickeningly praising Islamic Jihad terrorist Khader Adnan. Five years earlier Adnan had been filmed urging others to become suicide bombers in order to murder innocent Israelis.

At last night’s event Ziadah called for a boycott of Tesco and Sainsbury’s due to their trade with Israel. She also unveiled War On Want’s new campaign for Britain to instigate a two-way arms ban against Israel; both selling arms to Israel and buying arms from Israel, which, she claimed, are “tested on Palestinian bodies and then used in Afghanistan.”

War On Want's Rafeef Ziadah, left, having fun with Jarar and Kopty at ULU last night.

War On Want’s Rafeef Ziadah, left, having fun with Jarar and Kopty at ULU last night.

I would like to have filmed Ziadah’s statements but we were told there was no filming or photography allowed by “unauthorised persons”. I was, therefore, limited to voice recording until early into the speeches when I felt a sudden nudge in my back from a Free Palestine T-Shirt wearing activist who suggested that I switch off my recorder or be removed.

Meanwhile, Haidar Eid, Associate Professor of Cultural Studies at Al-Aqsa University in Gaza, repeatedly referred to Gaza as the “largest concentration camp on earth”.

Abir Kopty, a Palestinian activist from Nazareth who has a Masters in Political Communication from City University, London, called for a “blacklist of settlers and soldiers” who should have their passports stamped “Denied Entry” to stop them traveling.

Yafa Jarrar, another Canadian “Palestinian refugee”, gave a long, dull account of her BDS activities at Carleton University in Ottowa of which she seemed very proud.

Ziadah finished by holding up “a rock from Haifa” which, she said, was as close to home as she could get as “a Palestinian refugee”. She said she hoped that herself, Eid, Kopty and Jarrar will all one day meet on Haifa’s beach without being oppressed by the “racist state of Israel”.

So why has Comic Relief funded War On Want’s sickening racist activism to the tune of some £2m (and counting) while millions of children have died from the likes of malaria? At least one million people die each year from malaria in Africa of which 70% are children under 5. Ziadah’s War On Want salary could easily help supply thousands more insecticide-treated mosquito nets which would save lives! Plus she also seems to work at SOAS anyway.

The British people need to know that their precious donations to Comic Relief are being wasted on the racist ideologies of activists in War On Want who organise invasions of British supermarkets, call for Tesco and Sainsbury’s to be boycotted and who work for the only Jewish state to simply disappear.

42 comments on “How many mosquito nets could Comic Relief provide if they didn’t fund War on Want’s anti-Zionist crusade?

  1. This is a reminder of why the definition of a charity in the UK must be tightened and an effective, toothed watchdog be put in place instead of the creaking Charity Commission. If people want to give to a political/ideological campaigning group they’re free to do so. But tax and other benefits should be confined to organisations which direct their energies to providing real and practical help.

    • The Charities Commission is happy to overlook so-called charities that say they support Palestinians, but actually finance weapons, used to attack Israeli civilians.

  2. I agree the Charity status is very much abused in UK and must be tightened. There are charities who are blatantly racist and yet are allowed to claim a charitable status. JNF is a case in point. It promotes ownership that are blatantly racist within Israel and yet collects money for land purchases in Israel that can than only be sold to Jewish Israelis.

    However, I do not find anything wrong with demanding that every state must comply with international law. Why should Israel have special dispensation to violate international law?

    • Rubbish! Get your facts right before spewing these incorrect and thoroughly dishonest allegations. If anyone is racist, it is Abbas who declared that no Jew will live on the West Bank, but didn’t Hitler say the same thing about Jews in Europe. You are ignorant or dishonest.

    • Tommy rot! You’re believing rubbish.

      Israel is the only state in the world under such rabid and malevolent scrutiny that any reality testing on the part of those like you who have the nerve to criticise her is beyond access.

      Go tell every ARAB/Muslim state to comply with international law as regards the treatment of its own people, and to stop routinely infringing their human rights, and READ MORE and from many sources rather than believing what you are told without checking it out. It is complex, I know, but nowhere is it written that you have to swallow it whole without thought.

      Unless, of course, it already falls on fertile ground

  3. Don’t make a donation. Support local charities where you can see where the money is going and for causes that seldom get any funding from anywhere. In my area where I live, a bloke and his wife take elderly residents of a local care home on picnics to parks and gardens. He does not get a single penny from anyone, but recently some of us have started chipping-in and it has made a huge difference. There are numerous volunteering organisations like this up and down the country, support them, instead of these international bloated charities that do nothing but advance the cause of political Left and their Islamist friends.

  4. June – I do not agree that our charities should be limited to our next door neighbors.
    Charity is sometimes needed in much more severe cases – where individuals or groups face severe hardship or oppression and invariably most of these are in far flung places. The Charities Commission need to ensure that charities are used to help deserving cases and are not racist in their allocation of help as JNF seems to be by its own charter.

    • habibi – I am not a big fan of the JNF, but by your definition, all of the charities (and there are thousands of them) that raise funds specifically for members of one community, nationality, religion or race are “racist”.

      • To me what happens on my doorstep worries me more than what happens hundreds of miles away. All the main UK charities support Hamas, are involved in ME politics and work (openly and surreptitiously) to destroy the Jewish state of Israel. I would not even donate them my spit. Not that I am a wealthy individual or that my not donating to these anti-liberal fascist charities will make any difference to them. But it does to me. UK is now a poor country with many locally deserving causes. Help your neighbourhood and the country will look after itself. UK government (rightly or wrongly) gives away millions in aid anyway. Ta.

      • Labenal, again, I must disagree with you.
        What is there objectionable in the JNF? You have observed, no doubt, that the agency has, with the formation of the state of Israel ceased purchasing lands, and the majority of those which it had held were transferred to the custody of Israel.
        There *are* no “racist” policies associated with it. It’s sole focus presently, is the planting of trees and beatification of deserts. Unless you can ascribe some racist motive to that, it defies all logic(for a detailed list of activities, see: http://www.jnf.co.uk)
        Israel Land Law(operated by the Israel Lands Administration) strictly forbids any discrimination based on ethnicity or race. It, and not the JNF, has a principle stake in over 82% of all the available lands in Israel.
        Recently, the JNF has been sponsoring interesting cooperation initiatives.
        I am sure you’ve noticed, this.
        Please don’t buy smears of a noble organization from people who are reflexively opposed to any Jewish presence, anywhere in Israel.

        • 101 – I haven’t “bought any smears” about the JNF. I did not agree with this smear at all. I have other gripes about this particular charity which are nothing to do with it being ‘racist’ (which it isn’t).

    • Talking about Charities Commission, read this. And there are hundreds of “charities” like this. CA is a toothless dog that cannot even investigate its own poo, unless you happen to be a small, non-terror supporting local charity that is, then they will come down on you like a ton of bricks even for not signing the accounts properly,

    • More dishonesty from Sakhan whose ignorance, dishonesty or both leaves one wondering where he/she gets their so-called facts. By the way, it is well known that many charities that purportedly support Palestinians are fronts for the purchase of weapons, but the Charities Commission looks the other way………

      • Indeed. The crucial point is what TV viewers think/want they are donating to.
        And I imagine that to be: children’s homes in the UK and starving kids the world over.

  5. Labenal – According to the Charities Commission they are – [When defining who can benefit, charity trustees must also have regard to other effects of discrimination legislation.]

  6. Excellent article. Richard.
    As well you know this lot don’t give a rat’s backside about the Palestinians or their getting a state. If they did they would be encouraging them to compromise and collaborate, but if that happened then they wouldn’t be needed, would they, and there’d be no-one for them to pity.

    I don’t give to Comic Relief unless I know exactly where my money is going, and I wouldn’t donate to this lot or to Oxsham because of their lunatic, overly-politicised attitudes.

  7. Can you not work out how to effectively record these meetings covertly? If they don’t know you are recording, then their thugs cannot threaten you with removal.

    I have a few other things to say about this lot, but fundamentally they do not give a shit about the Palestinian people. They just hate Israel.

    • As a follow-up to this: there are some covert cameras that can do a reasonably good job in poor light. You could use those and record the audio separately, and marry the two up once you get home.

  8. Richard Millett,
    Just remember, no filming, no photos, no taping, but make sure to support “anti-racism,” “anti-apartheid,” and oppose oppression and imperialism all in the name of censorship. Richard, I’m surprised those “supporters of human rights and democracy” didn’t take your pencil away.

  9. Your Polish example is unfortunate since of course you are entitled to residency, citizenship and nationality in Poland because of your Polish grandfather.

    As would your children, and your children’s children’s children’s children.

    This is perfectly normal for a nation whose people have experienced exile, as the Poles have, as the Irish have, as the Italians have – and as the Palestinians have.

    • The issue at hand, David, is the definition of the “Refugee”.
      For all intents and purposes, UNHCR, which first took charge of displaced persons in Poland and other areas in 1946, has successfully handled their cases, and all have been resettled(some 3.5 million Germans were forcibly transferred from E. Poland, notably Danzig and Silesia).
      No descendant today of this rather larger populace can claim refugee statusunlike the Palestinians(whose progeny generation after another still register as refugees).
      Repatriation is still at the discretion of the host country; Poland may refuse granting citizenship. But in any event, Poland could only settle its diaspora on Polish lands, not say, on territories it lost to the Ukraine or Lithuania, as again, the Palestinians are trying to do, by demanding that Israel be flooded with their expatriates from abroad.
      Lastly, in your long list of people who have experienced exile(not sure how Italians qualify, though), you seem to forget one, tiny, forlorn nation: the Jews.
      Israel was founded on the precept of absorbing the scattered members of that ancient people; it did so without any external help, and without UNRWA to label every single one of those successfully integrated into Israel, a “refugee”.
      Something to think about, I reckon.

      • the Palestinians are trying to do, by demanding that Israel be flooded with their expatriates from abroad.

        They are doing no such thing. And your use of “flooded” is reminiscent of the worse kind of anti-immigrant language. Bigoted anti-Zionists use the same word re. Jewish immigration to Palestine in the interwar years.

    • “Your Polish example is unfortunate since of course you are entitled to residency, citizenship and nationality in Poland because of your Polish grandfather.”

      If you consult some historical maps you may discover that Poland has moved around quite a bit. What constitutes Poland physically has changed.

      “This is perfectly normal for a nation whose people have experienced exile, as the Poles have, as the Irish have, as the Italians have – and as the Palestinians have.”

      Throwing the Palestinians into this mix (I notice you left the Jews out) is an ex-post facto argument, since there was never a nation nor a nationality, known to world as the Palestinians. Nor do Poles who’ve experienced exile have a right as Poles to emigrate to places where Poland no longer exists.

    • David,
      Really, so why is there a five star hotel ehrre karlovi vari’s synagogue used to stand?

  10. You’re very right: refugee status is irrelevant to the right of return, as the Polish (and the Italian and the Irish) cases show.

    You are right to point this out.

    They can have left for any reason whatsoever and will be welcomed back regardless.

    Look at the Irish example: anyone descended,at whatever remove, from a person born on the island of Ireland, North or South, is entitled to residency, citizenship and nationality.

    They may have engaged in armed struggle in the Irish civil war, or against the Free State, or the Northern state, or the Republic, without eliminating that right.

    They may now even as they collect their passport, desire and be members of organisations committed to the overthrow of the Irish state, without eliminating that right.

    Something to think about, I reckon.

    • David: ‘Something to think about, I reckon.’

      That you can exclude the Jewish people from your deserving list of exiled people, and choose three worthy Catholic examples – an ideology which has a visceral hostility to the Judaism (at least until the 1960s) and has contributed to a thousand years of persecution of the Jewish people while they were in exile on Europe’s dark continent. A progressive, forward thinking European you certainly aint, I reckon.

    • Yes, which is the prerogative of the State to decide.
      It was not coerced upon them, either by the Irish diaspora, or by any other body.
      Furthermore, not all states maintain jus sanguinis. Take the US, or France as examples.
      Being distinctly related to a US, or French citizen, does not entitle you to a citizenship.
      Italian nationality law is far more abstruse: Citizenship by kin, is not automatic, as you can see here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_nationality_law
      Ireland with its liberal legislation is in a minority.

  11. I’m not aware that any of the countries I have mentioned make exceptions for return based on religious affiliation or ethnicity.

    If they do of course that is terrible and any such discriminatory right of return laws should be abolished.

    I’m glad you agree that right of return laws that discriminate on the basis of religious affiliation or ethnicity should be abolished.

    • Sure, David. People who wish to return to lands ruled by their own people is just fine if those states want to have them be citizens. The requirement would be that those states want those people and that those states actually rule those areas. When and if (big if, considering the way they go about it) the Palestinians have their own state, they can decide just who and what a Palestinian is (since no nationality ever existed) and grant such persons citizenship. They’ve already decided who they won’t allow to live in such a state.

  12. The US and France are not nations whose people have, collectively, experienced exile.

    It is notable that those which have are keen to redeem their diaspora, for which purposes such nationality laws as the author seems to regard as unique to the Palestinians, are extremely useful and common.

    Perhaps when Israel matures as a democratic state it will come to terms with its past and recuperate the people it has held in exile.

    • Just google refugees and you’ll find millions of them all around the world.Many of them in Europe/ Yet if we are to belive people like you than the only one who left their home and can’t go back are the Palestinian.

  13. This is thanks to the ridiculous UN definition of “Palestinian refugee”, which includes ALL the descendants of those Palestinians who, for various reasons, left Israel in 1947-1948.

    Are you sure about that? Doesn’t the UN exclude those who have taken up citizenship in Israel, Jordan, the US or wherever else?

    Agree re. War On Want’s politicised slant on I/P, mind.

Comments are closed.