SCoJeC accuses SPSC of “strident support for bullying, intimidation, and racist stereotyping”. In fact, we oppose their never-ending attempts to conflate anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism, itself a dangerous and racist campaign to implicate all Jews in Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people, crimes on which these nauseating hypocrites are utterly silent. The intent is clear - to change the subject as far as possible from the crimes of the State of Israel, increasingly a “polecat State in world opinion” (Ronnie Kasrils). It is, frankly, rather sickening to hear the defenders of the mass murder of Palestinians in Gaza during Operation Cast Lead lying that they are the victims of a wholly invented assault, and these same supporters of Israel’s rigorous State-enforced ethnic residential segregation claim to be victims of racism when their support for crimes is challenged.

Israel is an apartheid state shielded by political Zionists against pressure for Palestinian human rightsThe Northern Region Jewish Chaplaincy is rushing to smear opponents of Israeli terrorism and ethnic cleansing as racist, hoping to build on the bizarre ruling handed down in Cupar Sheriff Court on Tuesday. During deliberations, Sheriff MacNair called US citizen Chanan Reitblat a ‘member of Israel’.

The press release by the Northern Region (i.e. Scottish) Jewish Chaplaincy claims that Chanan Reitblat was “attacked in his own bedroom…His property was abused…[and] he was subjected to serious harassment and humiliation, was jumped upon in his bed, and had his Jewish identity questioned and insulted”.

Ephraim Borowski, on behalf of SCoJeC (Scottish Council of Jewish Communities) denounced ”Donnachie’s thuggish behaviour...[as] racist action...bullying...and intimidation” and accused all those who deny the allegation that Donnachie was motivated by racism as themselves “racist...hid[ing] their racist stereotyping and violence behind facile lip-service to anti-racism.” (For a taste of Borowski’s previous history of unfounded accusations of racism, see examples here, here and here.) The issue of unfounded accusations of racism, however, is international.

The claim that Reitblat was attacked is manifestly untrue. Despite the evidence of inebriated behaviour in poor taste, for which Donnachie rightly apologised, no assault took place, no one was ever charged with assault and no evidence was presented in court that anyone attacked Reitblat. It didn’t happen. By “his Jewish identity”, Rabbi Wayland means his and Reitblat’s support for the State of Israel, a wholly political affiliation opposed by supporters of human rights, including many Jews, who distinguish sharply between the religion of Judaism and the project of dispossession that is the State of Israel.

The basic facts are these: Paul Donnachie and Reitblat knew each other well; the two had socialised extensively in St Andrews' smallest University hall, as part of a close friendship group, would eat together every day and had even attended a lecture on the "Economy of the Occupation" by Israeli economist and activist Shir Hever, organised by the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign. This despite Reitblat being on the extremist fringe of supporters of Israel, as evidenced by his courtroom statement that he considers Israel to encompass all the areas it conquered in 1948, 1967, and 1973, i.e. the whole of Palestine plus parts of Egypt, Syria and Lebanon.

Two St. Andrews University students, Paul Donnachie and Sam Colchester, at the end of a night out, having overindulged in ales, went to check on Matt Cunningham, their third drinking companion who had retired earlier in the evening, somewhat the worse for wear. Matt Cunningham shared room 3.14 in the John Burnet Hall of residence with Reitblat. Knocking on the door at 1.30am, the two requested entry and were invited in by Reitblat, whom the two students knew well.

While the two were checking up on their inebriated friend, Paul Donnachie saw the Israeli flag on the wall of the room shared by Reitblat and Cunningham and, as many opponents of Israeli crime would do, for a few pints had not broken his moral compass, pointed out that Israel is a terrorist state committing unspeakable crimes against the Palestinian people. For good measure, with a gesture apparently common among St Andrews undergraduates, Donnachie stuck his hand down his trousers and symbolically rubbed his hand on the Israeli flag, signalling his opposition to Israeli ethnic cleansing and the mass murder of Palestinians. The entire exchange and the besmirching of the “butcher’s apron” took around one and a half to two minutes from start to finish. No-one was attacked; no-one’s ‘Jewishness’ was remotely impugned.

Matt Cunningham was the only person present in the room during the altercation other than Reitblat, Paul and Sam. Matt testified under oath that what happened during those two minutes was boisterous but good natured; nothing that was said or done was malicious; comments were of a political nature and focussed on Israel; and that nothing was directed or targeted at Reitblat as an individual. In his opinion, the incident was not seen by any of those involved, including Reitblat, as being as serious as Reitblat would later claim, and that, in the context of what goes on frequently in student halls, this incident did not stand out. Reitblat admitted that he had sought advice from the head of the Jewish Society, spoken with his parents, and contacted the Dean of his home University (Yeshiva, New York). Matt’s testimony was that the incident had “been given retrospective gravity”. At the time Reitblat “talked about being annoyed at the property damage; not as a victim of a hate crime”.

Matt’s testimony stands directly against Reitblat's uncorroborated claim, accepted by Sheriff MacNair in a clear violation of Scottish legal norms, that Paul said to Reitblat, "You are a terrorist". It was clear to those who sat through the proceedings that Sheriff MacNair wanted to accept Reitblat’s accusation in court that Sam had said the same thing. However, given that Reitblat had admitted at the time of the incident that “Sam had done nothing in the room”, a fact known to the investigating police officers and firmly highlighted in court by the Assistant Warden of the halls of residence, MacNair was unable to disagree when Sam’s lawyer’s asserted that Reitblat’s testimony was not only uncorroborated, but clearly “unreliable and incredible”. For the uninitiated, that is lawyer-speak for “Reitblat has clearly lied either in court or in his earlier statements”. This will be one of the issues addressed in Paul Donnachie’s forthcoming appeal. Even the “unreliable and incredible” testimony of Reitblatt, however, never at any time included the claim that he was assaulted by Donnachie.

The following morning, Donnachie wrote a letter of apology to Reitblat for his bad taste, while reserving the right to condemn Israel’s crimes in future in a more appropriate fashion. He was not, however, to be charged and found guilty of bad taste and drunkenness – such charges would empty many of our universities – but with racism against an Israeli flag!

Reitblat testified that after the altercation he had felt violent and that, as an experienced wrestler, he could easily have beaten up both Donnachie and Sam. He told the Assistant Warden, “If they don’t shut up I’m going to kick their asses.”

What a difference a night makes. By the following morning, almost certainly egged on by Zionist comrades, Reitblat was claiming that he was unable to eat or sleep. He would later testify in court that he had had to get out of St Andrews in his fear of “Palestinian organisations linked to terrorist atrocities” and seek sanctuary in the Jewish Chaplaincy in Glasgow. He would claim he had been so traumatised that he almost failed important exams. All this trauma because someone touched his Israeli flag! Truly, this American citizen suffers from the familiar "Israel syndrome": simultaneously arrogant and prone to violence, whilst at the same time claiming to be terrified for his safety.

A Zionist political agenda is evident on the part of both SCoJeC and the Jewish Chaplaincy (whose moral guidance never includes condemnation of Israel burning hundreds of Palestinian civilians with white phosphorous). The Jewish Chaplaincy press statement is a political one: it “asserts the rights of students to express their…identification with the State of Israel” and continues, “We believe that Israel being singled out for demonization…goes beyond legitimate debate”. SCoJeC Board member Paul Morron is pleased that Sheriff MacNair “has ruled that because a Jewish person's identity is associated with Israel that criticism can, as in this case, constitute racialist aggravated behaviour."

The desire to inhibit and limit criticism of Israel couldn’t be clearer; SCoJeC and the Jewish Chaplaincy aim to put ever larger areas of condemnation of Israel "beyond legitimate debate" as "racialist aggravated behaviour". The potential effect is clear, when the Palestinian people are fighting for their existence, facing Israel’s ruthless programme of ethnic cleansing.

Opponents of Israel's brutal racist system will continue to “single out Israel” for its abuses of human rights and crimes against humanity, horrors meticulously documented across Palestine and over decades by, for example, the Goldstone Report. For many Zionists, for example, even noting that Israel is responsible for the killing of hundreds of Palestinian children is judged to be an “anti-Semitic” accusation. It’s not. It’s the well-attested truth. We will continue to promote this and other truths.

“Israel is an important part of my religious belief”, said Reitblat. “They attacked my beliefs.” Now, George Bush and Tony Blair are Christians, but their very public religiosity doesn’t wash away the blood of their victims or protect them from the contempt of millions. Against the likes of Bush, Blair, the pro-Buddhist junta in Burma, the Hindu chauvinist BJP in India, the brutal Saudi regime and its corrupt Ulema, and Zionist Jew Reitblat, a supporter of colonialism, ethnic cleansing and burning Palestinian civilians with white phosphorous, we can do no better than commend the words of the courageous American, Fr. Berrigan, "If they come for the innocent without walking over your body and mine, then a curse on our life and a curse on our religion." We honour all men and women who fight for justice, from either a secular or religious impulse, and damn all those who support oppression.

States are not people. Paul Donnachie explained to Sheriff MacNair in simple language his position that, "The citizens of a country cannot be held responsible for the actions of a state". Later, Sheriff MacNair gave his own ignorant opinion that, "The state of Israel is the land and its borders and the people in it... Saying that a state is terrorist says that everyone within the state is terrorist." All British citizens who opposed the aggressive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan should ponder on the idiotic and dangerous effusions of the Cupar Sheriff.

Far from SPSC promoting “racist stereotyping and violence behind facile lip-service to anti-racism”, we work tirelessly against Israeli criminality as endorsed by Borowski and Reitblat. Thankfully, public opinion is swinging strongly against Israeli violations of international law and the type of racist manifesto for Greater Israel promoted unchallenged in open court by Reitblat.

SCoJeC and the Jewish Chaplaincy accuse SPSC of “strident support for bullying, intimidation, and racist stereotyping”. In fact, we oppose their never-ending attempts to conflate anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism, itself a dangerous and racist campaign to implicate all Jews in Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people, crimes on which these nauseating hypocrites are utterly silent. The intent is clear - to change the subject as far as possible from the crimes of the State of Israel, increasingly a “polecat State in world opinion” in the words of Ronnie Kasrils. It is, frankly, rather sickening, to hear the defenders of the mass murder of Palestinians in Gaza during Operation Cast Lead lying that they are the victims of a wholly invented assault, and these same supporters of Israel’s rigorous State-enforced ethnic residential segregation claim to be victims of racism when their support for crimes is challenged.

(SPSC opposes all racism as disgusting, including Islamophobia and genuine examples of anti-Semitism.)

 

28 August 2011

The Palestinian Authority (PA) has stated its intention to apply for the United Nations' recognition of Palestine as an independent ‘state’ in September 2011. Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign reiterates our active solidarity with the Palestinian liberation struggle in the form of a campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions against the state of Israel (BDS), and in opposition to our government’s direct role and complicity in Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people.

The situation on the ground needs to be changed

 

We fully support the Palestinian people’s right to self determination which entails:

a. Ending Israel's occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in 1967;
b. Honouring the right of Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality by ending the Israeli system of legalized and institutionalized racial discrimination (which conforms to the UN definition of apartheid);
c. Respecting and enabling the implementation of the UN-sanctioned right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and lands from which they were expelled.

However;
- We do not believe that the Palestinian Authority bid for ‘statehood’ at the United Nations in its current form will lead to justice for the Palestinian people
- We note the concerns raised by Palestinian civil society organisations, such as those expressed by the Palestinian BDS National Committee and by Palestinian popular resistance activists, that the UN bid for ‘statehood’ endangers Palestinian rights
- We also note concerns raised by Palestinian civil society organisations and activists regarding the potential implications of ‘statehood’, as currently expressed, on Palestinian representation at the UN and other international bodies

Regardless of the outcome of the UN vote in September Scottish PSC will continue to mobilise in support of Palestinian self determination, and to campaign against the denial of Palestinian rights under Israel's continued illegal occupation, colonisation and apartheid policies.

Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign

Sheriff Charles MacNair: "Saying that a state is terrorist says that everyone within the state is terrorist."

In what justified shouts of "scandal" from the public gallery, Sheriff Charles MacNair found Paul Donnachie guilty of racially aggravated conduct today. Even the Daily Mail was shocked.

An anti-Semite?Sign the open letter of support and read previous reports here. SPSC statement here

The case centred on testimony from Paul's former friend, Jewish fellow student, Chanan Reitblat. Reitblat told the court that both Paul and his co-accused, Sam, had soiled his Israeli flag, following up with comments that "This flag is a terrorist symbol; Israel is a terrorist state; you are a terrorist". No other witness corroborated this statement by Reitblat.

Reitblatt stated in court his firm opposition to international law, his belief that there was no Israeli occupation of any part of Palestine, and his political commitment to Zionist Jews' right to control the entirety of Israel and Palestine, as well as parts of Syria and Egypt.

It's worth stressing - No other witness corroborated Reitblat's assertions; see notes below.

When asked by Procurator Fiscal Brian Robertson "do you see yourself as affiliated to Israel?", Reitblat replied, "Of course. Israel is a Jewish state... You cannot separate Israel from Jewishness... Israel is a state I feel affiliated to by religion."

Explaining that although he had never been to Israel, he believed "Israel is a land for Jews... The Jewish people have a right to self-determination. That is part of my religious belief."

The prosecution led 8 witnesses, only one of whom, Reitblat's room-mate Matt, provided any information pertinent to the racially aggravated conduct charge. He was the only person present in the room other than Reitblat, Paul and Sam.

Matt testified that what happened was boisterous but good natured; nothing that was said or done was malicious, and that nothing was directed or targeted at Reitblat as an individual. This testimony stands directly against Reitblat's assertion that they both said, "you are a terrorist".

Matt said that Reitblat was irritated by the incident but said that his level of annoyance seems to have increased over time. Reitblat had told him that he was annoyed that Sam had peed in his sink, and that Paul had soiled his flag. Reitblat denied in court that he had discussed this with Matt.

Reitblat also told the warden at the student halls of residence that Sam had done nothing. She said so when interviewed by police, and again in court on Monday.

Later, in his summing up, the solicitor for Paul's co-accussed, Sam Colchester, explained that Reitblat's evidence had been "unreliable and incredible". He went through a range of clear inconsistencies between what Reitblat had said in previous statements and what he now says. This went unchallenged. The sheriff declared a "NOT PROVEN" verdict in relation to Sam.

After the prosecution case had been made, Paul's lawyer argued that there was no case to answer; that the evidence led did not constitute a crime. He argued that soiling the Israeli flag, which Paul has openly admitted all along, was not a crime, and that there was no corroboration of Reitblat's accusation that they had said, "you are a terrorist", which was the only accusation pertinent to the racially aggravated conduct charge.

The sheriff seemed to ignore these arguments completely, stating that "his conduct had been directed toward the complainer purely because of his membership of a racial group".

The sheriff argued that it had been alleged by the complainer, Chanan Reitblat, that Paul had said, "This flag is a terrorist symbol; Israel is a terrorist state; you are a terrorist". He went on, "even if we assume that he didn't call him a terrorist, the other comments were directed at him because he is Jewish and has a link to Israel."

So the sheriff decided that there was a case to answer, so the defence case would have to be made.

Giving testimony, Paul explained that the defacing of flags was a time-honoured method of showing disaffection to the state, and explained that he had never called Reitbalt a terrorist, but that he had said Israel was a terrorist state.

"I'm not contending that my action toward the flag was commendable or dignified, but it was a political expression."

The sheriff made a very confused attempt to clarify what Paul meant when he referred to a state, and tried to conflate criticism of a state with criticism of the people within it. Paul made a clear distinction. He told the sheriff that "the citizens of a country cannot be held responsible for the actions of a state".

Sheriff MacNair explained that,"The state of Israel is the land and its borders and the people in it", and continued, "Saying that a state is terrorist says that everyone within the state is terrorist." He considered that what Paul did was "done because he [Reitblat] was a Jew and because of his association with Israel."

The sheriff then refused to allow Paul's lawyer to call the three expert witnesses to appear. Liz Elkind and Sarah Glynn, both leading members of of Scottish Jews for a Just Peace, and SPSC chair Mick Napier were going discuss the dangers of conflating Judaism with Zionism and Israel, the history of Zionist attempts to do so, and the concepts of Israel and Israeli nationality. The sheriff considered this irrelevant because there was nothing they could teach him that common sense wouldn't provide.

So the prosecution called 8 witnesses, and Paul's lawyer was only permitted to call Paul...

In his summing up, Paul's solicitor reminded the sheriff that there had been "no corroboration of the accusation that Paul had called Reitblat a terrorist". The sheriff had already explained to the court that Scots law requires corroboration; one witness is not enough.

Paul's lawyer explained that the defacing of the flag was an "act of political expression, as protected by article 10, which included physical acts. He discussed proportionality of the charge: "the Napier [SPSC5] case discussed the stigmatisation attached to the charge".

He said that "an affront to the flag, criticising the state of Israel, is not a criminal act in terms of Section 50A."

The sheriff responded: "Saying that a state is terrorist says that everyone within the state is terrorist. He doesn't distinguish between the state and the people."

The sheriff continued, "Mr Donnachie doesn't distinguish between the government of Israel and the state."

The expert witnesses may have been able to teach the sheriff something after all. Pity it was too late.

The sheriff then took less than 5 minutes to come to a decision.

In relation to Paul, he said that there was "only one issue of fact between them" [the statement, "you are a terrorist"].

"I hold that you said, that's a terrorist flag, Israel is a terrorist state, and you are a terrorist.

"Section 50A requires malice or ill will towards a person based on their membership of an ethnic group; which includes nationality and association with that group.

"It was malice and ill will because of his presumed membership of Israel."

The sheriff found Paul guilty of racially aggravated conduct, and deferred sentence until Sep 13th.

Paul, although shocked at the clear injustice, composed himself before facing the media. According to STV, 'Outside the court, Donnachie said he would appeal. He said: "This is a ridiculous conviction. I'm a member of anti-racism campaigns, and I am devastated that as someone who has fought against racism I have been tarnished in this way."'

It should be highlighted that Paul has been convicted on the uncorroborated evidence of one person. That person is an ultra-zionist, who in court refused to accept that Israel occupies the West Bank.

On top of this, grounds for appeal include (but are not restricted to) the sheriff's refusal to receive the devolution minute at the last diet (legal challenge over the competency of the charge); and his refusal to exercise discretion in allowing the defence to call witnesses this afternoon - witnesses who according to Paul's lawyer were clearly "cogent to the determination of the case."

Within the hour, St Andrews university had expelled Paul and suspended Sam for one year.

According to the Daily Mail:

"The judge had earlier refused defence solicitor Patrick Campbell to allow evidence from academic experts on whether the actions of Donnachie constituted an attack on the Israeli state as opposed to racism.

"Due to be called was Jewish politics lecturer Sarah Glynn who was close to tears as she left court and told Reitblat's family their actions were 'scandalous.'

"She said : 'As a Jews, you should be ashamed. This is devastating.'" [Actually said to Rabbi Wayland, "As a Jewish Rabbi, you should be ashamed." SPSC]

Paul, although shocked at the clear injustice, composed himself before facing the media. According to STV, 'Outside the court, Donnachie said he would appeal. He said: "This is a ridiculous conviction. I'm a member of anti-racism campaigns, and I am devastated that as someone who has fought against racism I have been tarnished in this way."'

He will win!

This account of trial is supplemented by an; an official SPSC statement


NOTES

Scots Law: Morton v HM Advocate 1938 J.C. 50 at 55.
"[B]y the law of Scotland, no person can be convicted of a crime or a statutory offence, except where the Legislature otherwise directs, unless there is evidence of at least two witnesses implicating the person accused with the commission of the crime or offence with which he is charged. This rule has proved an invaluable safeguard in the practice of our criminal Courts against unjust conviction, and it is a rule from which the Courts ought not to sanction any departure."
Scottish Law Commission; December 2010; Discussion Paper on Similar Fact Evidence and the Moorov Doctrine: 
www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/download_file/view/596/

Law Society of Scotland launches Corroboration Defence
The Scottish Human Rights Commission and the Law Society of Scotland have both come to the defence of corroboration.
President of the Law Society of Scotland, Cameron Ritchie said: "We feel the requirement for corroboration should remain. It is a vital safeguard of Scots law that ensures that people cannot be convicted on the word of just one person.
http://www.mcsporrans.com/Latest-News/entry/law-society-of-scotland-launches-corroboration-defence.html




 

 

SPSC statement on Cupar trial
24 August 2011

"Reitblatt stated in court his opposition to international law, his belief that there was no Israeli occupation of any part of Palestine, and his political commitment to Zionist Jews' right to control the entirety of Israel and Palestine, as well as parts of Syria and Egypt...Paul Donnachie, in his moving and principled evidence to the court, explained that his hostility to the Israeli flag was based on his anti-racist convictions, and anger at Israeli terrorism against the Palestinian people. Donnachie explained to Sheriff MacNair in simple language his position that 'the citizens of a country cannot be held responsible for the actions of a state'. When he had finished, Sheriff MacNair gave his own ludicrous opinion that, 'The state of Israel is the land and its borders and the people in it...Saying that a state is terrorist says that everyone within the state is terrorist.'"

Student Paul Donnachie was found guilty on Tuesday in Cupar Sheriff Court of ‘racially aggravated conduct’ after showing contempt for an Israeli flag on the wall of a two-bed student residence shared by his friend and an American Zionist ultra. The Sheriff took five minutes after the closing submissions to hand down his guilty verdict and called for a social enquiry report, often a signal to all concerned to expect a harsh, or even a custodial, sentence. Within the hour, Paul Donnachie received a letter of expulsion from St Andrews University. He will appear at Cupar Sheriff Court on Tuesday September 13th for sentencing.

To reach his politically-driven verdict, Sheriff Charles MacNair violated every canon of fairness and balance, and ended by making a brief but incomprehensible argument, basing his guilty verdict partly on his characterisation of US citizen Reitblatt as a ‘member of Israel’. Such bizarre formulations in open court were not the only signs that MacNair is unfit to dispense justice; he also overturned his own previous decision, delivered in open court, to hear the evidence of three expert witnesses called by the defence who could shed light on the origins, regularity, and frequent embarrassing failure of politically-motivated accusations of racism in Scotland against supporters of Palestinian rights. They would also have highlighted the dangers for Jews everywhere of the Court accepting Reitblatt’s claim that his religion, ‘Jewishness’ and Israel were inseparable. The outcome was that the defence was unable to call any witnesses other than the accused.

Academic witnesses including two leading members of Scottish Jews for a Just Peace and the chair of Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign were left in the witness room while Sheriff MacNair exhibited a glaring ignorance of the subjects the witnesses would have illuminated.

Reitblatt stated in court his opposition to international law, his belief that there was no Israeli occupation of any part of Palestine, and his political commitment to Zionist Jews' right to control the entirety of Israel and Palestine, as well as parts of Syria and Egypt. Reitblatt also claimed that the insult to the Israeli flag, a gift from his brother while serving in Israel's Occupation Forces, an army notorious for its human rights violations, had made him unable to sleep or eat for some days. Paul Donnachie, in his moving and principled evidence to the court, explained that his hostility to the Israeli flag was based on his anti-racist convictions, and anger at Israeli terrorism against the Palestinian people. Donnachie explained to Sheriff MacNair in simple language his position that "the citizens of a country cannot be held responsible for the actions of a state". When he had finished, Sheriff MacNair gave his own opinion that "The state of Israel is the land and its borders and the people in it...Saying that a state is terrorist says that everyone within the state is terrorist."

Sheriff MacNair claimed he "took no position on the rights and wrongs of the Israel-Palestine conflict", but stressed that he "was impressed by Reitblatt’s testimony". MacNair rejected, and seemed not to understand, Donnachie’s clear exposition of the difference between a state and a population. His description of Reitblatt, a Lithuanian-born American citizen who has never visited Israel/Palestine, as a "member of Israel" seemed to be a key part of his case in convicting Donnachie on a charge of racism towards the Lithuanian-born American.

MacNair dismissed the relevance of the legal precedent of the ‘SPSC 5’ trial in front of Sheriff Scott in Edinburgh Sheriff Court in 2010 which distinguished between hostility to the State of Israel and racism, on the grounds that the ‘offence’ was racist because it took place in a ‘private space’ rather than in public. The logic of Sheriff MacNair’s ruling would be that criticism of the State of Israel will be inhibited on numerous occasions within earshot of Zionist Jewish supporters of Israeli ethnic cleansing and apartheid on the grounds that they are ‘members of Israel’.

We call on supporters of Palestinian rights, anti-racists, and supporters of free speech to assemble outside Cupar Sheriff court on Tuesday September 13th at 9am to support Paul Donnachie. An injury to one is an injury to all.

Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign

Daily Mail gets it right

alquds2011Join this year's annual Al Quds Day Demonstration UK on Sunday 21 August 2011.

IHRC's annual Al Quds Day Demonstration, a march in support of the Palestinian people and their rights will take place this year on Sunday 21st August from Portland Place (assemble near BBC Radio) at 2pm to Trafalgar Square. This rally is crucial in giving a voice to the destitute people of Palestine who have been under occupation for over 63 years.

If you'd like to help with publicity for Al-Quds Day 2010 and need more information, please contact This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

For full information visit the IHRC website.

Events & Activities

Visit our eShop

Israel and Settler Society by Lorenzo Veracini

The struggle between Israel and the Palestinians is not unique -- whatever the news media may suggest. Lorenzo Veracini argues that the conflict is best understood in terms of colonialism. Like many other societies, Israel is a settler society. Looking in detail at the evolution of other colonial regimes -- apartheid South Africa, French Algeria and Australia -- Veracini presents a thoughtful interpretation of the dynamics of colonialism, offering a clear framework within which to understand the middle east crisis.

Mondoweiss

BDSmovement