Reply #11: The EUMC definition isn't meant to entrap the BNP, it's meant to define anti-semitism.

[Taxloss]

The relevance of Lee Barnes' remark is hard to see in this case. Not everything a fascist says is anti-semitic, you know. The BNP has, in the past, attempted to court some extremist Zionist groups - they were rewarded with a frosty reaction to say the least, as well as an internal doctrinal row with their own "more traditional" anti-semitic elements. You appear to be under the impression that the British far right has put anti-semitism behind it - it has not. The existence of Israel is convenient to the BNP - it gives them somewhere to send the Jews. By courting Zionist groups, they are ham-fistedly attempting to triangulate what they see as growing anti-Muslim sentiment, and not getting very far. They've also been making overtures to right-wing Christian groups. And, indeed, everyone who they think will listen.

You have been physically attacked by leading members of the BNP? I urge you to pursue the case under British law.

Incidentally, unless you're working from two definitions of Zionism, how can you be both Zionist and anti-Zionist?

As for "another board", as I was telling someone else scant hours ago, you're behind the times, my account there was closed at my request several weeks ago.