Oliver Kamm may be illegally smearing people behind their backs

September 2, 2021

by Martin Odoni

Following on from the Labour Right’s attempts to marginalise Young Labour, as detailed this week, it seems Oliver Kamm of The Times may be trying to reinforce the process. He is a pro-active Zionist, and has occasionally worked for the Jewish Chronicle.

A couple of days ago, Kamm put up an absolutely absurd and shameless Tweet, scaremongering in fantastically illogical terms that Young Labour aim to have a “second Holocaust” of the Jews.

Oliver Kamm using some of the most preposterous scaremongering logic-abuse yet seen in the ‘anti-Semitism’ witch-hunt

(Remember last year Jeremy Corbyn was expelled from the Labour Party for supposedly ‘scaring’ British Jews with his accurate claim that the degree of anti-Semitic activity in the party had been blown out of proportion? Funny how Keir Starmer will lash out at that, but when someone makes a claim about a new Holocaust, which is bound to scare Jews far more, Starmer keeps his mouth shut. The current Labour leader is an utter maggot.)

The reason Kamm’s accusation is clearly nonsense is that Young Labour does not urge the ‘abolition’ of Israel as such, but the division of it so that Palestinians have adequate land outwith the Zionist state, which as things stand will not allow them equal rights. There is no reason whatsoever why dividing the land can only be achieved by a Holocaust, and it is childishly silly to make such a suggestion. Indeed, one could well argue it would make such a Holocaust less likely, because it will give other races less incentive to be resentful of Israel’s behaviour, and therefore less incentive to behave violently towards Jews.

A Two-State Solution, I stress, is something I oppose, chiefly for geographic and demographic reasons. Israel is so small, and has so few natural resources or defences, that dividing it into two would result in two tiny countries that would both be under-resourced and vulnerable to invasion. As the United Nations’ original 1948 partition of the land demonstrated almost comically; –

The 1948 partition of Israel-Palestine by the United Nations

There is therefore a case for arguing that the Two-State-Solution has the potential to lead to disaster. (This is why I want a One-State-Solution with Israel reformed away from Zionism towards non-ethnic secularism, and Palestinians allowed to return home.) But it is ridiculous ‘telescopic logic’ to conclude from this that a Holocaust would be part of the division process, or that it is something a Two-State-Solution supporter would favour, or even that it would be a certainty to follow. The vast majority of Two-State-Solution supporters are likely unaware of the strategic difficulties it would lead to, and their position on the subject will therefore be an honest but not-very-informed one.

But whatever one’s views on the different solutions on the table, Kamm’s behaviour has now spilt over from the deranged to the downright sinister and poisonous; –

According to the chair of Young Labour, Jess Barnard, Kamm has been monitoring those on social media who have been offering her their support over the marginalisation of Young Labour. Anyone Kamm can find the work details for, he has been contacting their employers and making complaints against them as being “Holocaust supporters.” This is grotesque, toxic behaviour, a form of cowardly, and possibly illegal, bullying. He has a history of this kind of ‘net-stalking,’ one that suggests he is a very disturbed individual.

Ms Barnard has requested that anyone who has reason to believe that Kamm has been smearing them using this incredibly convoluted mal-logic should contact her immediately via Twitter direct message.

Zionists have always been ruthless and deceitful, and I have long suspected that they would happily slaughter new-born babies with their teeth if they thought it would help Israel survive another hour. But the real-world depths to which they are now sinking, including using ludicrous illogical arguments to ruin the lives and financial positions of even very young people in politics, suggest my suspicions are coming true. Theirs is an amoral fanaticism bordering on insanity.


4 Responses to “Oliver Kamm may be illegally smearing people behind their backs”

  1. Kamm is a prat The Haredi say the same about Israel they don’t believe in an Israel ?

  2. veddah Says:

    The concept of valuing a country is so morally reprehensible. Natural resources belong to all of humanity, not only to the people who live within a boundary called a “country*

    • Martin Odoni Says:

      That’s a separate argument, I’m afraid. Whether there *should* be countries or not is a much larger issue, and whether they *should* have ownership of resources within their boundaries is a fundamental discussion about how the world is organised.

      Unfortunately, the reality is that there *are* countries, and they *do* own the resources within their boundaries, whether we like it or not. I make no comment on whether I endorse or reject the system, but what I can say is that it is not something that will change any time soon. This is because the most powerful countries benefit from things the way they are – that’s why they’re powerful – and so they won’t agree to change the world order. And if they’re the most powerful countries, by definition no one can force them to change anything.

      To the very best of my understanding, the One-State-Solution is the best fit for Israel-Palestine within the world we live in, and we have to deal with the world we live in, not the world we would prefer to live in.

      Incidentally, consider that some of the worst damage done in the modern world stems from the West’s unquenchable thirst for energy sources, which it takes from places like the Middle East. Your argument suggests it’s just fine for them to do that, even if it leaves local economies in oil-rich regions impoverished. If we insist all resources of the planet are held in common, how do we regulate who gets what? By need? The West would claim they need much more than other countries because they are generally much more mechanised, so what is currently happening is therefore “fine”.

      I’m not disputing the principle, but this needs a lot of thought before it becomes feasible to implement, then a lot of political struggle before it will be allowed to be implemented.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: