Member of UK Jewish body resigns over failure to call out Israel on Gaza
An elected representative on the UK's largest Jewish body has resigned, saying it had 'failed to act morally and failed to represent the increasing diversity of opinion within the British Jewish community' amid growing horror at Israel's renewed assault on Gaza.
Daniel Grossman, one of 36 elected members of the Board of Deputies facing disciplinary proceedings over their criticism of Israel's actions in Gaza, told a meeting called by the board last weekend that he had 'no confidence in the leadership'.
Grossman, 21, a final-year student at Bristol University, was one of three dozen deputies who signed an open letter last month that said 'Israel's soul is being ripped out' by the war in Gaza and that their 'Jewish values compel us to stand up and to speak out'.
In response, the board, which consists of more than 300 deputies, opened a disciplinary procedure against all 36 and suspended two deputies. The board's efforts to shut down debate over the Israeli government's actions has prompted criticism and discomfort among a significant and growing proportion of British Jews.
Grossman told the Guardian: 'It's very simple: they are refusing to explicitly and publicly condemn Israel's genocidal assault in Gaza and to criticise the [Israeli] government for abandoning the hostages, who have been in captivity for far too long.
'Increasing numbers of people are recognising that Israel's actions in Gaza cannot be justified as purely self-defence. They seemingly want to declare a perpetual war against Palestinian civilians with the goal of ethnically cleansing them from the Gaza Strip.'
Grossman said that the past 19 months since Hamas's horrific attack on Israel on 7 October 2023 had 'definitely been a journey for me'. He grew up in a mainstream Jewish community, with strong emotional and familial connections with Israel, but it had become 'increasingly clear that the way the Israeli government is acting is not acceptable by any measure'.
The response to his resignation had been more supportive than he expected, he said. 'More people were sympathetic than I expected, and it has genuinely astonished me. Lots of these people may not feel able to speak out themselves, they might find it difficult with friends or family. But people have reached out to me.
'A huge shift is happening. The diversity of opinion in the Jewish community is becoming increasingly clear,' Grossman said, yet the board had tried to 'stifle dissent'.
Although younger Jews were more open to criticising the actions of the Israeli government, there was not a clear generational divide, he said. 'My 89-year-old grandmother, who was a refugee during the Holocaust, said I had done the right thing and she is proud of me for speaking up.'
Grossman said he was on the political left among British Jews, but added: 'This issue is touching people across the political spectrum. A lot of people are waking up.'
A spokesperson for the Board of Deputies said: 'Daniel's term as a deputy was due to end in a few weeks with him having been replaced by another representative from the Union of Jewish Students. We wish him well with his future endeavours.'
Its investigation into the 36 signatories to the open letter is expected to conclude in the next few weeks.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
18 minutes ago
- BBC News
Dating app scam victims told 'don't suffer in silence'
Students are being urged not to suffer in silence when targeted by scams on dating apps, as investigators see blackmail cases teams at Nationwide, the UK's biggest building society, said trusted friends could help potential victims avoid sending private or intimate images during new online relationships. Anyone who has been scammed should report cases to the authorities, they student in Cardiff told the BBC how a drink in the pub had alerted them to the risk of a friend being tricked by fraudsters using AI year, the National Crime Agency (NCA) put out its first ever all-school alert, warning teenagers about the dangers of sextortion. Blackmail warning Sextortion is when criminals pose as young people online, trick a victim into sending sexually explicit material, and then blackmail Burksys, head of fraud operations at Nationwide, said that scammers were "efficient and unrelenting". As a result, these kinds of scams were "commonplace" among on such crimes is difficult to gather, as they are recorded in different ways or are never reported at all. A survey by Nationwide suggested 28% of students asked had been scammed, and 50% of students worried about becoming a year, BBC News sent a Freedom of Information request to every police force in the UK, asking how many reported blackmail offences featured the word "sextortion" over the last 33 forces (out of a total of 45) who responded recorded almost 8,000 blackmail cases logged with a reference to sextortion in 2023. The same number of forces recorded just 23 in 2014. All the forces to respond were in England and Wales. 'You're talking to a bot' On a night out with friends, Emma Evans, a student in Cardiff, was chatting to one of them about his chats on dating suggested the group look through some of the conversations, but one "particularly attractive and particularly keen" match raised alarm bells."We looked at this chat and the thing that gave it away was that this person was saying the same words over and over again," Emma told BBC Radio 4's You and Yours."For example, he kept on saying how he wanted to find someone who is really passionate over and over again, and he wasn't really answering my friend's questions."The group pointed out to their friend that the language seemed to be the speech patterns of an AI chatbot. Talk to a friend Jim Winters, head of economic crime at Nationwide, urged people not to overshare images, particularly with someone they had never met."Blackmail is one of the hardest things to face and it's happening more often. It's not easy but if something doesn't feel right, speak up," he said. "It might be tempting in the moment to share information or photos but once shared, you will never have control over it again."He has the following tips:Look out for odd phrases in messages and conversations that do not relate to what you have writtenPut any profile photos into a search engine and see if they have been used elsewhere, and are stock imagesIf you are unsure about a situation, show the messages to someone else for a second opinion before things go too farAnyone who is being blackmailed should report their case to the authorities, for help and support"Talk to someone you trust, maybe a friend or family member. Don't suffer in silence," he said. Exploiting grief As well as targeting young people near the start of their lives, fraudsters have been stepping up their attempts to trick the friends and family of people who have exploit the grief of bereaved families by impersonating them online and charging mourners to see funeral livestreams that should be free, according to the Chartered Trading Standards Institute (CTSI) which supports businesses and local authorities' trading standards livestreams became more popular during lockdown, and have continued since for those who struggle to attend a funeral in contact mourners with bogus links to watch a funeral and demand payment, or set up fake donation pages on legitimate Hart, CTSI lead officer for doorstep crime, said: "This is a truly despicable scam – targeting people during one of the most emotionally difficult moments of their lives. "It's hard to imagine a more callous form of fraud. What's particularly upsetting is that victims often feel they can't report what's happened for fear of adding further stress to grieving families. "That silence is exactly what these criminals are counting on. We need people to stay vigilant, share warnings and report anything suspicious."
Daily Mail
23 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Fast-track suicide if you pay extra, discount deals for couples and you don't even have to be terminally ill: Inside Germany's morally queasy approach to assisted dying where business is booming for the pedlars of euthanasia
Last week, the UK's highest elected officials ruled on the most existential of questions: how we choose to die. At its third reading, the Assisted Dying Bill passed the Commons by a slim majority of 23 votes, and now its fate lies with the Lords, where it faces a bumpy ride before it becomes law. The upper chamber, for instance, will examine if a three-person panel of professionals (from law, psychiatry and social work) offers greater safety and oversight in approving a patient's application to die than a High Court judge, as was originally proposed. Peers will have at their disposal the grim cost-benefit analysis to the NHS in accelerating the deaths of the terminally ill, released last month under the cover of the local election results. According to the report, as many as 1,300 people are expected to apply to die in the first year, saving as much as £10million in medical bills. But can the health service cope with this demand, especially as NHS staff will be offered an opt-out from the ugly business of state-sponsored suicide? No doubt private health providers are already bending the ears of peers for a slice of the death industry pie. It would be tempting to allow private enterprise to take some of the strain, but I urge the Lords to look at how business seized the opportunity with morally queasy gusto in my native land, Germany, where some firms offer a 'fast track' service for people who can pay more and even special discounts to couples wishing to hasten their demise. Pictured: Pedestrians walk past the posters promoting the Assisted Dying bill at Westminster Underground station In Germany, anyone 18 or over can lawfully commit suicide with the help of a third party. Yes, anyone. There is no requirement for the person to be six months from death, nor is there any specification over having a life-limiting or debilitating illness (as in the UK Bill). A perfectly healthy university student can seek help to kill themselves for no better reason than they are fed up with life. Hannelore Kring, 83, is typical of Germany's liberal approach to assisted suicide. A recording of her death featured in a podcast by news broadcaster WDR and it is a spine-chilling reminder of how relaxed my countrymen are about dying. At an undertaker's, Frau Kring is accompanied by two 'death helpers' – a nurse and retired teacher – and sounds relieved her life will end in a matter of minutes. Dressed in black and with make-up, as if attending a party, she suggests a dance with the nurse. Indeed, she is not ill, she is as healthy as anyone in their 80s. She has run a second-hand men's boutique in Hamburg but feels life's no longer worth living. She's lonely, all her friends have died and the state of the world depresses her. The helpers ask if she really wants to go through with it. 'Absolutely!' she replies enthusiastically. The nurse hooks her up to an infusion of a lethal dose of narcotics – a 'suicide cocktail'. She merely has to turn a valve, letting the toxic chemicals enter her bloodstream, putting her to sleep for ever. It's important she takes the final step herself, otherwise the helpers could be charged with manslaughter. Assisted suicides like this have been fully legal in Germany since 2020, although legislation has been a generation in the making. After the Second World War the subject was largely taboo, in no small part due to revulsion at the Nazis' Aktion T4 programme, which entailed the 'mercy killing' of 300,000 disabled people. By the 1970s and 1980s, a push for more patient autonomy led to court decisions in 1984 and 1990 that ensured suffering, bed-ridden people had the right to stop treatments that prolonged their lives. With the 2009 Patient Directive Law, people could include such instructions in a living will if they became incapacitated. This gave legal protections to doctors offering assisted suicide. But then the public grew uneasy at what seemed a creeping commercialisation of the right to die. Healthcare is not free at the point of use in Germany, so the nation is more comfortable than the UK with private provision within the system. But only up to a point. Many were appalled in 2014 when a Berlin urologist Uwe-Christian Arnold revealed he had helped 'several hundred people' take their lives since the late 1990s for fees of up to €10,000. Christian groups accused him of undermining the sanctity of life. The German Medical Association threatened him with a €50,000 fine, saying doctors should prolong life, not give their patients lethal poisons. Arnold took them to court over the fine and won. Also in 2014, a right-to-die association in Hamburg caused uproar for offering fast-track assisted suicide consultations in exchange for higher membership fees. Its normal rate was €2,000, with a waiting time of a year, but it introduced a jump-the-queue service for €7,000. Other providers offered discounts for couples interested in dying together. These were grisly bargains that lead many to regard Germany as a Las Vegas of suicide, which was anathema to a country that saw itself as otherwise Christian and conservative. Church groups took to Berlin's streets as legislators sought to crack down on the industry. Arnold and others passionately defended their businesses. The 'death helpers' argued the issue was comparable to abortion: a ban would be unfair to the terminally ill, who shouldn't have to travel to places like Switzerland to end their lives with dignity. The debate ended with parliament banning 'commercial' assisted suicide under Chancellor Angela Merkel in 2015. Subsequently, only friends and relatives who received no money for their assistance could help someone end their life. Legal challenges were launched by right-to-die advocates and people suffering terminal illnesses. In a 2020 judgement, the Constitutional Court said the freedoms enshrined in the country's post-war constitution meant 'the decision to take one's own life must be respected by the state as an act of personal autonomy'. Those who had been put out of work by the previous ruling were free to ply their trade once again. Five years after that decision, it feels like we're back to the Wild West of pre-2015. Assisted suicide in Germany is an unregulated free-for-all. A slew of undertakers, lawyers and independent doctors are facilitating a rising toll of assisted deaths. Last year it was about 1,000, though no one is keeping exact figures. Likewise there's no central registry of providers. Nearly anyone can set up shop. The largest player in the business is the German Association for Humane Dying (DGHS), which charges €4,000 a suicide but offers a discounted €6,000 for couples. It says that of the 623 people for whom it arranged suicide last year (it forwards requests to independent teams of doctors and lawyers), 22 per cent were just 'fed up with life'. Two-thirds were female. DGHS spokesperson Wega Wetzel says: 'Women are more likely to be widowed and 'left over' than men. Women are more likely to plan and communicate, while men often choose 'hard' suicide methods such as hanging.' Equally worrying is the fact that nothing prevents young people from choosing the path of assisted suicide. The youngest case I heard of was a 21-year-old man. The only requirement spelled out by the court was that the person be 'freely responsible' for their decision. At least DGHS, to maintain its reputation, has doctors and lawyers screen applicants to ensure they understand what they're getting into, that they're not being coerced and that they do not show symptoms of mental illness or dementia. But nobody knows how many independent providers are making money with assisted suicide. Nobody knows how they are screening clients, particularly in the more affordable services where standards may be lower. A study last month in the British Medical Journal analysed 77 assisted suicides in Munich. It found that one patient's consultation with a clinic lasted 55 minutes and the death was booked for the next day. The assisting physician in another case was a relative of the patient. In a 2022 case, the suicidal person was judged of sound mind based on a five-year-old mental capacity evaluation. But there is still broad support for the right to die: 80 per cent of Germans feel it's appropriate for the critically ill. But just 30 per cent say it should be available to people with a long life ahead of them, and only 3 per cent for young people having a crisis. Ute Lewitzska, professor for suicide studies at Frankfurt University, sees a fundamental change in how we deal with growing old. 'Supply creates demand,' she says. 'The 2020 court decision didn't just open a crack in the door, it flung the door wide open – and we're not going to be able to close that door again.' The fear is a normalisation of assisted suicide. For some it's a humane way to end one's life; for others it's an easy solution to suffering that's being oversold. Dr Lukas Radbruch, director of palliative care at University Clinic Bonn, has worked with end-of-life patients for three decades. He says many more now ask about assisted suicide but 'so many people are not sufficiently informed. Or we have doubts about how voluntary their choice is. Or we realise they still want to live, even if they say they want to die.' Sometimes a suicidal person needs counselling, not the means to kill themselves. Where do you draw the line? Dr Radbruch asks. In 2023 the German parliament tried to hammer out rules to provide clearer guidance, but MPs couldn't reach a consensus. Like many in the West, Germany seems destined to grope its way through this ethical minefield with no transparent way forward that is satisfactory for all. I do not envy the task ahead for Britain's Lords. My country's experience offers a salutary lesson that for the Bill to become law, they must make black and white what is a painfully grey issue.
Daily Mail
23 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
'Defiant' Israelis show little sign of backing down against Iran - but as the country continues to pay the price for its resilience, its citizens ask 'We're doing the world's dirty work, so why can't you British give us some moral support?'
The building has not so much blown up as imploded. Thickets of metal protrude from what was once the roof of this apartment block. It's as if a vengeful god has reached down from the heavens and yanked out its steel entrails. Next to it a skyscraper stands scorched, its side mottled with soot. The asphalt on the street below is torn, gaping open like a wound. Nearby, a carpet of shattered glass glints in the morning light. I'm in Ramat Gan in central Tel Aviv, where an Iranian missile attack has just struck several residential buildings. Emergency services have cordoned off the impact site. Police warn curious onlookers to watch their step, as throngs of gathered Press push against the makeshift barriers. One cheeky TV crew tries to scoot around them and is gently pushed back. Just hours earlier, I was awoken in my hotel room by an air-raid siren sounding across the city. An automated Hebrew voice then wafted into my room: get to an air-raid shelter – fast. A couple of soft thuds later, I understood that the city had just been hit. Israel may indeed have mastery of Iran's skies. It may be deploying its air defences highly effectively. But Iranian missiles are nonetheless getting through, and they are striking the heart of Israel's premier city. One thing is clear to me: this war is far from over. Israelis understand this. And, for the moment, they are united behind their government. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu remains controversial (and loathed by many), but for now the consensus is that resolving the country's domestic politics can wait. It's time to deal with Iran – once and for all. The Israelis have had enough. And I don't blame them. I have studied the drama of the Islamic Republic of Iran's nuclear programme, and by extension the Iran-Israel conflict, for almost 20 years. Iran's war on Israel has been relentless. The mullahs declared a proxy war against the state of Israel in 1991. Ironically, this came after Israel had quietly sold them weapons during the eight-year Iran-Iraq war. Jerusalem was desperate to rekindle relations with the state it had been allies with under the Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, before he was ousted in the Islamic Revolution of 1979. It got a de facto declaration of war in response. Since then, the Iranians have expanded their malignant influence into Syria, Lebanon and Gaza to create what they call a 'ring of fire' around Israel – to scorch and burn the Jewish state at every opportunity. It's been effective. Even before the horrors of October 7, Iranian-backed proxies had killed and wounded thousands of Israelis. Shortly after I left the crash site, I spoke to Dr Meir Javedanfar, who teaches Iranian politics at Reichman University, on the Mail's weekly global news podcast, Apocalypse Now. Like so many Israelis, he looked tired, the result of sleep deprivation following repeated night-time missile attacks. Javedanfar was born in Tehran, and he explained proudly to me: 'Bar Mitzvah'd in Tehran, too!' Like so many others, including myself, he once thought that some type of reform could come to the Islamic Republic. But, like me, he saw that everyone who ever tried to bring reform was bypassed, imprisoned, tortured or killed. The Iranians have not let up against Israel, even for a moment. In a statement two days after October 7, Ayatollah Khamenei said that, while Iran was not involved in the Hamas massacre, the 'hands and forehead of its planners must be kissed'. Like so many Israelis, Javedanfar has had enough. 'From now on, Israel refuses to live with a regime that sponsors terror organisations who kill our civilians,' he told me. 'The Iranian regime wants Israel dead. It wants Israeli citizens dead. It denies the Holocaust. It is so depraved that it has Holocaust cartoon competitions. 'No Israeli government is willing to live with this any more. And so, on June 13 we acted – with amazing success, which was no surprise. Special operations are to Israel what watches are to Switzerland. Our expertise.' Make no mistake, the war is tough on the people here. As I walk through the streets, the normally bustling city is quiet, bereft of traffic. I stroll along the promenade on Frishman Beach. Normally I'd eat at Greko, a Greek restaurant overlooking the Mediterranean Sea. But it's boarded up. Matthew Morgenstern, Professor of Aramaic at Tel Aviv University, sets out what Israelis are facing now. 'Starting with Gulf War One in 1991, I've been through almost 35 years of wars here. But I've never experienced anything like this. Every single day, hundreds of people on the home front have lost their homes. 'It seems that they only need to get one missile through a day and the damage is done. I've been calling this 'Iranian Roulette' – will we be the ones to be hit this time?' The mullahs are hoping that these attacks will force the Israeli government into abandoning the fight. I'm sceptical. Throughout the day I trade messages and calls with a former defence official still in regular contact with the government and the security services. He sums up the mood here. 'The people of Israel are incredibly determined and defiant,' he tells me. 'Despite the awful price we are paying personally, physically, emotionally, there is still wall-to-wall support for this operation. Netanyahu is not a popular prime minister here. But after almost two years of fighting wars against Islamic death cults on seven fronts, all backed by Iran, the people of Israel are saying enough is enough.' I feel that sentiment all around me. It hangs in the air like the salt I smell drifting over from the Mediterranean Sea. Two events over the past week have hardened resolve yet further. The first is the killing of a seven-year-old Ukrainian girl, Nastya Buryk , and her family in an Iranian strike on the coastal town of Bat Yam. Nastya had come to Israel from Odesa for cancer treatment along with her grandmother Lena and two cousins, Konstantin, nine, and Ilya, 13, all of whom were killed alongside her. Her mother Maria is still beneath the rubble. The second is Thursday's missile attack on Soroka Hospital, in the southern city of Be'er Sheva, which serves the entire Negev region, not least the many Palestinians who go especially to be treated there. According to Israel's ministry of health, 71 people have been injured. The people are enraged. But they also know this cannot last for ever. And there is one question that naturally comes to the Israeli mind: will the Americans get involved? Well, the Israelis are certainly keen that they do. 'This is Trump's Churchillian moment,' the former Israeli defence official tells me. 'He has the opportunity, with a day or two's work, to strike at the heart of the worst and most destabilising regime since the end of the Second World War. 'You don't want the world's most dangerous weapons in the hands of the world's most dangerous regime. 'Israel has already done most of the work. Trump can and must finish the job.' Trump can indeed finish the job. As John Spencer, Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern Institute at West Point, told me on my podcast, the US has 'one of the quickest solutions to the remaining nuclear sites. The massive ordnance penetrator, the GBU-57 – a 30,000lb bunker-busting munition that can penetrate 200ft into concrete and reinforced steel.' Moreover, as Spencer also pointed out, it can only be deployed by the US B-2 bomber. 'This is really the only military solution, and only an American bomb dropped from an American plane can deliver it,' he said. But is it certain to destroy nuclear facilities buried deep in the mountains? And will Donald Trump sanction its use? So far the signs are mixed. Trump has been deploying the plural pronoun on social media, claiming 'we' – rather than Israel alone – have achieved extraordinary feats against the mullahs. Trump remains wary of war. But, clearly, the urge to claim credit for what is – so far – an extraordinary military operation is pressing on him. He's given the ayatollahs two weeks to make a deal. This is probably no surprise. If there's one thing Donald Trump enjoys more than making a deal, it's making a deal when the other side is so desperate he can put them over a barrel. He's betting that the mullahs, getting smashed up daily by Israel, need respite. He's betting that he can exploit this fact to demand terms so tough that Iran's path to a nuclear bomb is blocked, at least for now. But Iran's leadership also have a say. And they run a dictatorship, not a democracy. Concede too much and they risk emboldening enemies, not least their own people. For a regime built on projecting strength and fear, humiliation is fatal. If the mullahs refuse to fold, Trump may well decide to step in at the final moment and then take the credit. If the Israelis are defiant, they are also confused. In going after Iran's nuclear programme, they are doing the world a service. 'We are happy to take them out ourselves,' a friend told me as we drank smoothies in a cafe just off Dizengoff in central Tel Aviv. 'But why can't you just give us your moral support? We're doing this for everyone.' She's right. As German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently observed: 'This is the dirty work that Israel is doing for all of us.' And yet, it seems we struggle to acknowledge even that. From our own government we hear the usual cringeworthy calls for calm and 'de-escalation'. Don't they understand how ridiculous they sound? If Britain, with all its history and expertise and capabilities, has truly given up on trying to influence world events then it's better to just say nothing. Now is not the time to back down. The question is simple. What would we in Britain do if a country had for decades promised to wipe us off the face of the Earth? What would we do if that country paid for proxy groups to launch thousands of rockets over decades at our towns and cities – at our children? If it provided the funding and training for the biggest massacre of British people since the Second World War? What would we in Britain demand that our government do? The answer is unequivocal: bring that regime to an end. The Israelis are just trying to take out Iran's nuclear programme – to everyone's benefit.
