Unwavering Opposition?

About time, too. Let this be the first of many long overdue legal actions to be brought by Jeremy Corbyn. Next up, Keir Starmer, who is calling him a liar by sticking to his ridiculous version of events in relation to Mishcon de Reya.

Starmer is also either lying about when he surrendered his certificate to practise, or he illegally gave paid legal advice without a licence. He is as bent as a nine quid note, and his recent, ill-formed musings on Israel and Palestine have nothing to do with getting the likes of the Board of Deputies to vote Labour, which they have not done in several decades.

Rather, they are part of a larger strategy to get the people who gave vast donations to the Conservative Party, for which they do at least vote, to cover their backs by giving the same to Labour even though they would rather die than lend it their electoral support. The party was healthily solvent when Starmer took over. It is now on the brink of bankruptcy.

Tzipi Hotovely stands in a continuous tradition, going all the way back to Theodor Herzl himself, according to which Jews who remained in the Diaspora once the Zionist State had been established were no longer Jews at all, although they might still be useful for financial and organisational purposes. Such thinking has been greatly emboldened by the fact that there have very recently come to be, for the first time ever, more Jews in Israel than in the rest of the world.

Hotovely is a hugely controversial politician in her own country, and not remotely in line with the thinking of the new Government that its electorate has chosen. She campaigns against miscegenation. She insults American Jews in crudely anti-Semitic terms. She wants to annex even Jordan and Syria, and to burn Arab cities, towns and villages to the ground. There would be rather a lot of Arab cities, towns and villages to burn if Israel were to annex Jordan and Syria. Ra'am, in particular, needs to examine why it supports continued representation to a P5 power by quite so egregious a leftover of the Netanyahu years.

Yet here in Britain, any criticism of Hotovely has effectively been criminalised, and will be so even more forcefully once the Statute Book was despoiled by the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act, which Labour will have no policy of repealing. In his pursuit, not of her supporters' votes, but purely of their money, Mishkeir is delighted to sacrifice, if only to mass abstention in the first instance, the votes of those British Jews who have indeed voted Labour in recent decades and especially at the last two General Elections.

In vastly larger numbers, Mishkeir is if anything even more delighted to lose, if only to mass abstention in the first instance, the votes of almost every other ethnic minority. Most of those have been staunchly Labour, and never more so than under the Leadership of the most anti-racist MP in living memory, which, when you think about it, must make him the most anti-racist MP ever.

They, we, look at the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and we see which side we look more like, the side that is clearly being violently oppressed and repressed. We have been here before. Today, it is one's attitude to the Palestinian struggle that is the litmus test of one's attitude to the specific phenomenon of white violence against people of colour throughout the world, including in Britain. Starmer fails that test.

It is wrong to tell Israelis to "go home" when the State of Israel was founded in the year that the Empire Windrush docked at Tilbury. The Oxford English Dictionary sufficiently defines anti-Semitism as, "Hostility to or prejudice against Jews." As a denial of BAME, migrant and refugee, and therefore working-class, experience, the IHRA Definition is redolent of the Windrush scandal and of the fire at Grenfell Tower.

In curtailing criticism of a foreign state, the IHRA Definition is incompatible with national sovereignty. The denial of the ancient indigenous Christian presence in the Holy Land, where it created modern Palestinian identity, contributes significantly to the worldwide persecution of Christians. The Palestinian Christians' ancestors predated the Israelite Conquest, they founded Jerusalem, and they became Christian when or before the Roman Empire did.

Starmer knows nothing of any of this. Blairites' venality is matched only by their anti-intellectualism, and the two are closely related. Starmer is typical of them in that he knows nothing about anything unless he has in some way been paid to learn it. He has no idea why it matters that Emad al-Swealmeen was born in Iraq. Or that Shamima Begum in fact went to Syria to join the side that we were stupidly supporting there.

But if it is anti-Semitism that you want, then Shamima's Law, which enables the Home Secretary to revoke the British citizenship of anyone who was merely eligible for another nationality, is to be made even worse by the removal of any requirement to give notice. Without even having to tell them, the Home Secretary will soon be able to revoke the citizenship of, for example, everyone who was Jewish within the terms of the Israeli Law of Return, which is in turn based on the Nuremberg Laws. Again, Starmer's Labour has no policy of repealing this.