Guardian

Harriet Sherwood Selective Outrage Watch: Hamas Edition


Today, the Guardian saw fit to publish an essay at CiF by Musa Abumarzuq, the deputy head of Hamas’s political bureau (Welcome Hamas’s reconciliation with Fatah, May 24), an organization which openly supports the murder of Israeli civilians, calls for the Jewish state’s complete annihilation, and cites, in their very founding charter, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion to “prove” that there is a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world.  

Indeed, Abumarzuq complained bitterly, in his post, that the U.S. President is opposed to his group’s terrorist acts.

If you recall, just last week a morally outraged Harriet Sherwood called the editor of the Jewish Chronicle, Stephen Pollard, to berate him over his paper’s decision to publish an essay by Geoffrey Alderman, which characterized the death of Hamas supporter Vittorio Arrigoni as a cause to celebrate – which begs the question: What are Sherwood’s thoughts over her employer’s decision to publish an official communique by an anti-Semitic, misogynistic, Islamist terrorist movement?

Is she equally as outraged at Guardian editor, Alan Rusbridger, and similarly berating him for giving license to a hateful and reactionary movement?  

Is she outraged at the thought that a spokesperson for the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood was given a platform to assert his inalienable right to engage in violence against innocent Israeli civilians?  

In Sherwood’s phone call to Pollard, she asked hysterically: “But you’re the editor! You must think it worth publishing’.

So, in the spirit of moral consistency, I wonder if Sherwood is on the phone with Rusbridger as we speak, demanding that he account for his decision to publish such insidious terrorist propaganda.  

If so, I sure hope she remembered to tape the conversation with her digital recorder.  

The object of Harriet Sherwood's outrage, Professor Geoffrey Alderman

A legitimate voice at Comment is Free

4 replies »

  1. Is she equally as outraged at Guardian editor, Alan Rusbridger, and similarly berating him for giving license to a hateful and reactionary movement?

    Yup, that’s a very good point.

  2. “..I wonder if Sherwood is on the phone with Rusbridger as we speak, demanding that he account for his decision to publish such insidious terrorist propaganda. ..”

    I shouldn’t hold your breath

  3. But what if one does not possess that moral consistency and is devoid of nuances of truth and fairness?