The Monday Morning Guardian Israel Hate Page

The Guardian Israel hate page this morning – as my dear friend MargieinTelAviv affectionately calls it – features a veritable choice of Israel-bashing articles to sink one’s teeth into.


First, there’s an article by Peter Preston, former Guardian editor, which contains a breathtaking insight into the malice with which he views Israel.   

As for Egypt itself, transition seems a puny word. Goodbye to Mubarak, and decades of autocracy; hello to dawning democracy, to millions on the streets, to outbursts of mass anger that, these past few days, can see Israel’s embassy while soldiers struggle for control. Maybe democracy and violent protest aren’t obvious bedfellows, but this time there is a connection – because now the crowd can come out spontaneously to make its feelings clear.[emphasis added]

Lets unpack this last sentence for a second. Preston seems to be drawing together two somewhat disparate themes: democracy and violence; the suggestion being that the freedoms associated with democracy have allowed the “Egyptian street” to express their true feelings toward Israel. However, the idea of democracy is not about unleashing the inner animal so that anarchy reins – but allowing freedom of expression to flourish within the confines of the rule of law. What Preston does through a rhetorical play on words is contextualize and justify violence against Israelis in the name of democracy.  

If that’s not enough, Preston then goes on to upbraid Israel for its stubborn refusal to commit suicide by refusing to recognize the Palestinian unilateral declaration of statehood expected to take place at the UN later this month.  

Israel ought to be voting to recognise a Palestinian state too this week, coming to terms with change before change engulfs it. But is there any sign of such awareness in the bunkers of entrenched obliviousness? An Arab spring? Fear, rather, an Israeli winter.

The theme of unilateral declaration of statehood is then picked up by the perfidious Gerald Kaufman. Under the heading “Israel’s Choices” in the letters page, Israel is presented with one choice.

President Abbas is to be congratulated on persisting in applying for Palestinian statehood at the UN (Report, 9 September), despite all the pressure and blackmail trying to force him not to. The quartet has never done anything meaningful to give the Palestinians their independence. If the US uses its veto at the security council, this will prove the smug windbag Obama to be the puppet of Aipac. The hypocrisy of those countries which vote against or abstain at the general assembly will similarly be exposed. This brave Palestinian move will change the entire environment of the Middle East and tell the Israelis that they must negotiate meaningfully if they wish to be one of the states in a two-state solution.
Gerald Kaufman MP
Lab, Manchester Gorton

[Note how for good measure Kaufman breezily employs the rhetoric more commonly associated with Jewish conspiracy theorists Walt and Mearsheimer by stating that US support of Israel in the United Nations is the work of the US puppet master, AIPAC.]

Not to be outdone by Preston and Kaufman, Jerusalem correspondent, Harriet Sherwood adds her own two cents by posting an article suggesting that there is widespread approval for the support of a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state in Europe.

The majority of people in the UK, France and Germany want their governments to vote in favour of recognising a Palestinian state if a resolution is brought before the United Nations in the next few weeks, according to an opinion poll.

The basis for such a claim, we learn, is a poll conducted by YouGov on behalf of Avaaz.

The poll was conducted by YouGov on behalf of Avaaz, a global campaigning organisation that is conducting an online petition in support of a Palestinian state. It is planning to deliver more than 913,000 signatories backing what it describes as “this new opportunity for freedom” to the European parliament.

We do not know what questions were asked in this poll – all we are told is, by way of footnote, that the poll was conducted online with 2,552 respondents in the UK, 1,017 respondents in Germany and 1,011 in France. However if the track record of Avaaz polling is anything to go by, the results are not to be trusted.    

And Avaaz has an even more checkered background as Daniel Greenfield observes,

Avaaz [is] a left-wing organization conducting a pressure campaign for Palestinian statehood. Avaaz’s video lays the blame for the violence on Israel, compares Israel’s Foreign Minister to Ahmadinejad and presents the unilateral Hamas-Fatah state as a way to bring peace to the region. Viewers are not told that few things are more certain to bring violence than unilateral actions by a fanatical terrorist group whose covenant celebrates the genocide of the Jewish people.

Like its video, Avaaz is not what it seems. Unlike most organizations, Avaaz does not list its staff openly; instead it claims to practice “servant leadership” with staffers letting members decide what to do. Only when the tax returns for Avaaz are examined, does a clearer picture emerge of who is really in charge.

Avaaz’s tax returns mention only one paid employee, its president, Ricken Patel, who pulls down a six figure salary—not bad for a ‘servant’. Patel was also a co-founder of Res Publica, the organization that co-founded Avaaz.

The Chairman of the Board, Eli Pariser, is the president of which also co-founded Avaaz, and  along with Avaaz’s Secretary, Tom Pravda, is also on the advisory board of Res Publica. Patel and Pariser serve on the advisory board of J-Street, a Soros organization founded to undermine Jewish support for Israel.

What’s the difference between Res Publica and Avaaz? Avaaz looks like an international activist group, which is convenient when you want to appear to be a global movement, instead of a disguised branch of the same old American left-wing organizations.

Res Publica gets the majority of its funding from the Open Society Institute, which makes Avaaz another disguised George Soros project, just like J Street. The Economic Times hails Ricken Patel as “The Man Who Gives You Your Voice”, but it’s not “your” voice, it’s Soros’ voice.

And if the anti-Israel agitrop of Harriet Sherwood were not enough, there’s a Guardian editorial to top things off reveling in Israel’s regional isolation.

If post-revolutionary Egypt and an economically resurgent Turkey make common cause against their former common ally – and there is every indication that they will – Israel‘s isolation in the region will be profound.

In other words, just another day at the “world’s leading liberal voice”.

20 replies »

  1. This visceral hatred of the Jewish state is something that runs across all social classes and the entire political spectrum. This from an article by Peter Hitchens in which he actually seems to be defending Israel:

    “I believe this in spite of the fact that Israel has done, and continues to do, many wicked things.”

    With friends like this bastard, we really do not need enemies.

    Melanie Phillips at the JC:

    “Government ministers might be concerned to know quite how often I am now accosted by strangers in public places.

    These strangers are usually, although not always, Jews. They accost me on the Tube, at the theatre, in the supermarket, in restaurants and in the street.

    They all say the same thing: keep on saying it about Israel, keep on telling it as it is, don’t ever give up.

    What is happening to us? they murmur. It’s unbelievable, astonishing, terrifying. The bias, the hatred, the lies. Where is it all going to end? And an increasing number say there’s no longer any future for us Jews in Britain.

    Almost every few days brings fresh examples of the Israel Derangement Syndrome that so disturbs and frightens them. Last week, anti-Israel hooligans disrupted a Promenade concert where the Israel Philharmonic was playing, causing the BBC to abort its live broadcast.

    Last month, a St Andrews University student was convicted of racially abusing a Jewish postgraduate student over his support of Israel. And week in, week out, Israelis are blamed for defending themselves against mass murder.

    By now, it must be obvious to all but the most supine or hostile to Israel within the UK Jewish community that what is happening is an evil uniquely targeted at the Jewish people.

    For the demonisation of Israel is of a nature and type extended to no other country.”

    • Peter Hitchens, like almost all journalists, uses phrases like these as boiler plates. They say this in order to appear neutral and so that they don’t get accused of islamophobia.

      I still feel Peter Hitchens, unlike his brother who is nothing but a shit-stirrer, broadly “gets it”.

      • “They say this in order to appear neutral and so that they don’t get accused of islamophobia.”

        You know this how exactly?

  2. The usual masturbation of the Guardian’s editors seeing a good pogrom (in Guardian speak “the crowd makes their feelings clear spontaneously”).
    Gerald Kaufmann should be busy writing about the treatment of his OCD what forced him to to buy new TV sets and crystal bowls on the taxpayers expense.

    President Abbas is to be congratulated on persisting in applying for Palestinian statehood at the UN …

    A common thief congratulates the other – a natural occurence..

      • Strictly speaking he is Jewish, at least according to Jewish law. But, yes, he is in reality about as Jewish as your average anti-Semite. This about his brother:

        “Hitchens was raised nominally Christian, and went to Christian boarding schools but from an early age declined to participate in communal prayers. Later in life, Hitchens discovered that he was of partially Jewish ancestry. According to Hitchens, when his brother Peter took his fiancée to meet their maternal grandmother, Dodo, who was then in her 90s, Dodo said, “She’s Jewish, isn’t she?” and then announced: “Well, I’ve got something to tell you. So are you.” She said that her real surname was Levin, not Lynn, and that some of her ancestors had the family name Blumenthal, and were from Poland.[137] His great-great-grandfather was Nathan Blumenthal of Kempen, Prussia, who emigrated to Leicester. In Hitch-22, Hitchens detailed his Jewish ancestry: his matrilineal great-great-grandmother had converted to Judaism before marrying Nathan Blumenthal. According to Hitchens, in 1893, his maternal grandmother’s parents were married in England “according to the rites of the German and Polish Jews. My mother’s mother, whose birth name was Dorothy Levin, was born three years later, in 1896.”[138] Hitchens’ maternal grandfather converted to Judaism before marrying Dorothy Levin.”

        At the link above much more about his brother’s “anti-Zionism”.


        • Yes, PH may be all that and more, but he is now a practicing Christian and (he is in reality about as Jewish as your average anti-Semite most certainly does not come across as an anti-Semite.

          • “Yes, PH may be all that and more, but he is now a practicing Christian”

            You are welcome to him.

            “most certainly does not come across as an anti-Semite.”

            There are none so blind, etc.

          • It just struck me that you really are not aware that Jews are defined not just by religion. We are also a people. In fact, a very ancient people.

            • Spot on, Hoi Polloi.

              In fact, even for a religious (Orthodox) Jew, the religion gives the definition of Jewishness, but the definition itself doesn’t make religious observance a condition for Jewishness. It says religious conversion is the way for a non-Jew into the Jewish nation, but the other way is to be born to a Jewish mother (who in turn is Jewish either by being born to a Jewish mother herself, or by conversion).

              A Jew not observing Judaism is living sinfully in Orthodox Jewish eyes, but he’s still a Jew. Once born or converted, there’s no way for a Jew to turn into a non-Jew. So, much as I loathe Karl Marx’s socio-economic theory, I can’t go the easy way and say he wasn’t Jewish. I can say Marxism had nothing to do with true Judaism, or that it perverted some tenets of Judaism, but as far as Marx’s nationality goes, the matter isn’t open for me to dispute.

  3. Interesting that the journalist s of so called “liberal voice” are masturbating on pictures of a pogrom.
    That Gerald Kaufmann – the certified thief of the public coffers – congratulates to Abbas is perfectly natural.

  4. Here’s Harriet’s sting in the tail. She quotes from ynet, Bibi’s staunch enemy, just in case someone might think that the hostile crowds who broke down walls using their bare hands if nothing else was available actually had destruction in mind.

    “an unnamed Israeli security source quoted by the Ynet news website said reports of a near-lynching were exaggerated: “I have spoken to [Yonatan] and the reports do not exactly reflect reality.”

  5. A visiting rabbi to a US prison recounts how a long-term resident running the Christian bookshop stopped him. “Hey Rabbi, you’re my hero. When the bureau of Prison guys hears your name they shake. I love that!”

    He takes a look at the inmate and asks whether he is Jewish. “My mother was but I’m not”
    Before the sentence is out the Rabbi takes out his tefillin but the prisoner backs away and says,” I converted. I can’t do that anymore”, indicating the books around him.
    “Come on”, says the Rabbi, but the man refuses.
    “You’re a Jew and you will die a Jew, you know that don’t you?”
    The man nods, “I know.”

  6. The editorial was indeed ridiculous – but why do you class public support in Europe for a Palestinian state as being part of an “Israel hate” page??

  7. @pretzelberg
    “The editorial was indeed ridiculous – but why do you class public support in Europe for a Palestinian state as being part of an “Israel hate” page??”

    Are you just trying to be contrarian by making strawman arguments?

    • I was somewhat surprised by that non-response, i.e. coming from you. Playing to the crowd?

      You must know by now that I’m not here simply to be argumentative.

      So in what sense “contrarian by making strawman arguments”?
      And how about actually answering my question?

  8. In the box at the head of the article:
    “Turkish-Egyptian alliance: Israel faces regional isolation”

    Reminds me of the 1940 British cartoon (after Dunkirk): Churchill standing on the cliffs of Dover facing France, saying “Very well then: alone!”

    And we all know how that ended.