An open letter to Henry Grunwald - British Board of Deputies

An open letter to Henry Grunwald - British Board of Deputies

As an ex Brit living in Israel for over 20 years, a member of BIG (the British Israel Group, trying valiantly to build bridges with its former community) - and traveling regularly to Britain meeting and speaking to Jewish communities both large and small, I am amazed at, forgive me, your smug self satisfying approach of one, who is the leader of the Jewish community in Britain through the Board of Deputies.

You state in other words, "hands off the British communities; we know what we are doing". Well sir, with the comments of many Jews in your communities spread around Britain in my ears, I suggest that you start to listen to what your communities are saying.

You state that "The Board works particularly closely with the Community Security Trust, a world-respected organization, monitoring and combating anti-Semitism, in dealing with threats to our community, and I have no hesitation in saying that we do so very effectively." If this statement is to be believed, then surely it would be reasonable to expect a somewhat smaller rate of anti Semitic incidents. Yet we read from reports of this same Community Security Trust that the number of incidents has increased dramatically year on year.

When the British government set up its committee to discuss the effectiveness of the financial aid (your members taxes) it was giving to the Palestinians, your Board's submission did not even meet the committee's guidelines for submissions and when I tried to discuss this matter with Neville Nagler, the author of the Board's submission, I was told he did not want to meet me. With your single submission (at that moment in time) from the Board of Deputies against submissions from over 33 anti Israel organizations, how did you hope to convince anyone? Only due to "hysterical comments" (your quote) made from Israel was some

balance brought to the proceedings of the government committee with an additional 14 submissions on a wide range of subjects. When I approached certain organizations in Britain to prepare submissions, I was told "No, we can't, the Board of Deputies is handling it."

You stated "Our community is best placed to decide on the most appropriate response in this country and, despite the sometimes hysterical comments made in Israel and America about Jewish life in Britain, our community continues to flourish". Deary me, Sir, just how many Jews live in Britain today and how many lived there just 25 years ago (a single generation) and that you call flourishing.

I would submit, that when there is a major offensive against Israel and Jews, as with the AUT vote, you are left with no choice but to get involved. What was your involvement in the publication of "Two Tribes" published by Evan Jeffries, Editor, ETC magazines www.etcmag.co.uk <http://www.etcmag.co.uk/> and given to all 6th formers which was so full of mis-information that following a campaign of "hysterical comments", the editor wrote to one of the "hysterical" writers from Israel;

"Thanks very much for your interest in this article. I have received a lot of comments, most of which have been very critical of the 'bias' it showed against Israel. This was never the intention, and I'm pleased you have seen that the article isn't just made up of bad points!

One thing interests me - I'm curious to know where you came across the article. It was written for a school magazine in Britain, and I've received responses to it from all over the world - this is most unusual. Could you point me to where you found it?

Many thanks for your email, and I'd like to assure you that I share your hope that the conflict will be resolved, and that people on all sides will start paying a bit more attention to human peace and lives."

All credit to the editor, he then published his apology together with some of the letters he had received. But where was the Board of Deputies?

The weekly anti-Jew and anti-Israel activities outside Marks and Spencers does not seem to bother the Board of Deputies, why is the reply to these Palestinian activities not taken up by the Board instead of being left to a group of Christians and Jews.

The NGO's in Britain are neither transparent, accountable or responsible for the millions donated by "well wishers". As Gerald Steinberg pointed out at a recent conference at Bar Ilan University "Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Christian Aid, Oxfam, Doctors without Borders and the Ford Foundation have over $ 1 billion at their disposal" "NGO's have initiated and invented words and terminology" "There is a need to attack the governments who sponsor these organizations". Where is the Board in these activities?

And so we come to the BBC! Where are the results of this "softly-softly approach"? We are seeing and hearing daily from the BBC, biased and distorted reporting to an increasing level. The BBC is the voice of sweet reason to itself and most Britons. On BBC discussion shows, like Question Time, defenders of Israel are inevitably outnumbered three or four to one, if they can be found at all. Even an innocuous observation that Israel is the Middle East's best functioning democracy is guaranteed to set off vicious hissing and jeering from the studio audience. What has been achieved by the Board?

As one of Israel's "hysterical" community points out "Most of us used to be strongly conditioned to the once legendary reliability of the BBC and can hardly believe it might have changed. We still love the talks, theatre and history on the BBC; the problem seems to lie mainly with the BBC News and the political commentaries, being a bit too politically biased for the largest and supposedly most impartial news organisation on earth.

The mounting criticism of the BBC News and political commentary in recent years have culminated in the harsh findings of the Hutton report in 2004, leading to the immediate resignation of the BBC's Chairman and Vice Chair. The continuing criticism reaches now a new peak, asking a once unthinkable question about a serious suspicion: could the BBC reporting malpractices have contributed to losses of innocent human lives? Is it possible that the BBC has in certain cases actually been an accomplice to terrorism?

After five civilians were killed and 48 wounded at the entrance of a Tel-Aviv disco on Friday night, 25 February 2005, the BBC's major report "A Family in Mourning" paid condolences to the family of - not any of the Israeli victims but the Palestinian killer, whom the BBC never even referred to as a murderer or a 'terrorist'. Many similar examples illustrate that for the BBC such adverse sympathy is common practice. The question arises: is this merely tactlessness, or can it be a degree of covert co-operation with the purpose of terrorism, which is: to achieve political goals by terrorizing a certain population while

gaining publicity and support of others? Surely this is complicity in murder?

You complain about a lack of information from the Israeli embassy. As Winston Churchill once said " Lies will get half way round the world before the truth starts to get out". Israel needs to check its facts before making statements and today, Israel's reaction time is much faster. There is a greater awareness of the need to get information out quickly but it must be accurate. Today you cannot afford to be "found out"

My concern is that the Board of Deputies is out of touch and not listening to its constituent members or the voices of the ex Brits in Israel. Thank you, hopefully, for reading this letter.

Stuart Palmer

BIG (British Israel Group)

Haifa

Tel 04 8257805

Mob 050 6872288