New report and campaign: UK Lawyers for Israel cries wolf, and it has no credibility left. Of the 14 complaints it made about charities where we could find the outcome, the Charity Commission found nothing against the charity in 11. UKLFI showed its inhumanity when its chief executive suggested Israel's starvation of Gaza could help reduce obesity there. Now it keeps reporting the charities trying to feed and treat Palestinians in Gaza. Every complaint has to be answered, often by volunteers. Most then come to nothing. UKLFI's credibility is so bad, the press often buries who is behind the complaints. When the Charity Commission opened its case into MSF, none of the five reports we read put UKLFI in the headline. The Telegraph first named it in paragraph five. None of the reports on the MSF case we read told readers how UKLFI's earlier complaints had ended. Now look at UKLFI's ties to the Israeli occupation: - Its home page carries a thank-you from a "senior Israeli intelligence officer": "Thanks to your continuous efforts you have achieved the goal that the State of Israel was trying to get since 1997." The goal was a British aid charity for Palestinians, which UKLFI says lost its banking after UKLFI wrote to its banks. - On 6 May 2021 Israel's Foreign Ministry accused a Palestinian health provider of sending donors' money to the PFLP. The same day UKLFI sent the allegation to the provider's British funder, which stopped the funding that day. - A leaked Israeli Ministry of Justice note, reported by Middle East Eye, says the Turners who run UKLFI asked a senior ministry official for "assistance in finding or validating evidence that will help them" while a British aid charity was taking legal action against UKLFI. Jonathan Turner said he could not recall the meeting. - A month into Israel's total block on aid to Gaza, UKLFI's own charity hosted an official of COGAT, the Israeli Ministry of Defence unit that controls that aid, for a webinar called "Did Israel Starve Gaza Civilians?". - An Israeli minister says its legal director "successfully represents Israel". UKLFI says it is "not linked to the Israeli government". Its MSF dossier, sent to the Home Secretary "for consideration under the Terrorism Act", rests on staff "identified by the Israeli authorities". The Charity Commission has three inquiries open into charities over alleged links to Iran. It has not said whether a charity that gave Israel's Ministry of Defence its platform raises the same concern, and it keeps opening cases on UKLFI's complaints. It seems there is one standard for Iran and another for the Israeli occupation. We set out every complaint, every outcome and every link to the Israeli occupation, each with its source: newscord.org/editorials/uk-l… Also, in under a minute, you can ask for an update on the Charity Commission investigation into UKLFI, which launched last year: newscord.org/action/uklfi-ch…

Just in: IPSO has refused to investigate the Telegraph cartoon of Mothin Ali, the Green Party's Muslim deputy leader, grinning over a knife and fork at the severed head of Zack Polanski, its Jewish leader, who is drawn with a hooked nose. Nearly 1,200 of you complained. IPSO's reason: the cartoon is about two individuals, so only Mothin and Zack can complain. How racist the drawing is doesn't come into it. IPSO did not have to do this, and it has done the opposite before. IPSO's rules let it take up a complaint from people other than the person written about, when the breach is significant, and there is a substantial public interest in looking at it. In July 2023 it used that power. It ruled that Jeremy Clarkson's Sun column about the Duchess of Sussex was sexist, after complaints from two women's charities, the Fawcett Society and the WILDE Foundation. The Duchess did not complain. The Telegraph's editor, Chris Evans, chairs the committee that writes the Editors' Code, which is the rulebook IPSO enforces. The Telegraph is still selling prints of the cartoon today. IPSO's rule says it may take up a complaint like this, not that it must. So this was a choice. Picture a school. One boy draws two classmates, a Muslim boy and a Jewish boy. He gives the Jewish boy a hooked nose and puts his head on a plate, and draws the Muslim boy about to eat it. He pins the picture to the noticeboard and sells copies at the gate. A thousand pupils go to the head teacher. She tells them she can only act if the two boys in the picture come to her themselves. So the picture stays on the board, and every Muslim and Jewish child in the school walks past it each morning. The boy who drew it learns he can do it again. And the rulebook the head teacher is reading from was written by a committee his dad chairs. Nobody would say that head teacher is protecting the children. She is protecting the boy who drew it. That is what IPSO has done. It says it regulates the Telegraph, and it has just told nearly 1,200 people that a racist cartoon in a paper it regulates is not its business unless the two men drawn in it come and ask.