General Antisemitism

Misleading Guardian report on UK government funding to help secure Jewish schools (Updated)


The Community Security Trust (CST) is an organization which provides physical security, training and advice for the protection of British Jews; assists victims of antisemitism and monitors antisemitic activities and incidents in the UK. 

CST recently noted that “the Guardian has chosen to mark Holocaust Memorial Day by attacking the funding provided by the government to pay for security guarding at Jewish state schools in England and Wales.”

A Guardian report by Rob Evans titled “Michael Grove criticized for awarding public funds to organization he advised“, Jan. 27, cited criticism by the group Spinwatch that “Michael Gove, the education secretary, awarded £2m of public money to an organisation that he promoted as an adviser for four years”.

As CST noted on their site, “The Guardian story is misleading as it suggests that the money provided by the Department for Education pays for CST to provide security at Jewish schools…[while] the funds are “merely administered by CST and distributed in full to the Jewish schools who then use it to employ their own security guards” (not from CST).  

CST added further:

“[CST] does not keep any of the grant money and there is no allowance made for CST’s staff time in administering the funds to each school. In the end the project actually costs CST money, the exact opposite of the impression given by the Guardian.  If the Guardian had contacted CST for comment before running the story, we could have explained all of this to them.”

Moreover, the funding from the UK Department of Education only accounts for a fraction of the total costs associated with the CST’s work to secure over 300 synagogues, over 120 Jewish schools, more than 1000 Jewish communal organisations and buildings; and nearly 1000 communal events, from antisemitic attacks and potential acts of terrorism.

Further, CST noted, “the overwhelming bulk of CST’s funding is provided by voluntary donations from the UK Jewish community”.

In 2010, there were 639 reported incidents of antisemitism in the UK, the second highest since the CST began keeping records in 1984, which included 58 incidents targeting Jewish schools, students, or teachers.

UPDATE 1: After a complaint from CST, the Guardian has now added a paragraph near the end of their article which reads:

“All the money is distributed by the trust to the schools which then employ the security guards. As the trust’s role is essentially administrative, none of the money is retained by the trust or pays for any of the trust’s work.”

However, the acknowledgement that the grant does not pay for CST’s work isn’t reflected in the headline or opening paragraph of the article, which have not been amended.

UPDATE 2: Harry’s Place has some fascinating information on the background of David Miller, the Spinwatch official who brought the complaint to the Guardian’s attention in the first place. Seems like the crusader for ethics and transparency has a soft spot for antisemites. (See here.) 

46 replies »

  1. I’d say the error is beside the point, i.e. why is this news anyway? The education minister assigns funding to support security at (in this case) Jewish schools! What a scandal!
    In journalism terms it’s not exactly Watergate, is it?

    And even if the funds were to go directly (as such) to the CST – so what?
    Look at the headline:
    Michael Gove criticised for awarding public funds to organisation he advised

    It’s not as if the CST are arms-dealers or the International Association of Vulture Investors and Sinister Offshore Corporations, is it?

    • Pretz,
      first, greetings.

      as for your comment, I agree.
      sadly for some these organisations seems like arms dealers.

      why is the guardian not trying to correct that?

    • Nice comment Pretz.

      In general we have to reflect on how the liberal-left, in the person of the G here, are allowing their hatred for Israel to generalise into a hatred for Jewish organisations and, eventually, any Jew who doesn’t explicity dsassociate themself from the “Zionist State”.

      This would be considered intolerably racist if applied to any other group, Turks, Pakistanis, etc. Jews are becoming fair game.

    • Me and you both know the same answer. Why ask me???
      Did you perhaps misunderstand my post? My point was that the Guardian article does not comprise newsworthy content.

      • Reading your occasional denial of the Guardian’s outright antisemitic nature I would say that you don’t know the answer at all.
        Or do you think that promoting Churchill’s Seven Jewish Children or publishing letters justifying Palestinian terrorism have nothing to do with the need for increased security for Jewish schools?

        • you don’t know the answer at all

          That’s just stupid – and you know it. I repeat: me and you both know the same answer.
          And why don’t you discuss my actual post?

          Perhaps you did misunderstand it and are simply not man enough to admit it.

        • ‘Reading your occasional denial of the Guardian’s outright antisemitic nature I would say that you don’t know the answer at all.’

          Idiot.

      • I agree with you about the non-news aspect.

        A very large part of the work of various government departments involves doling out public funds to non-governmental agencies who are supposed to put the money to good use in furthering civic or other social causes. Funding extra security for school children certainly comes under such headings.

        One should really ask why the Guardian devoted time and journalistic effort to this particular funding.

        Bearing in mind the Guardian’s political makeup and the kind of agenda it pushes, I think we can all make an educated guess.

    • Peter, this will always be a valid point regardless of the minority in question.

      It is sad that the guardian only ask these question when the minority I’m question is large enough to worth the effort….

      Sadly Jews are not so large a minority these days.

    • Well peterthehungarian events in France provides the answer! Worried that they weren’t British Jewish Children? Did you get pleasure from reading of the death of 4 & 5 year old children with their father?

      This is the explanation for you and the cretins that voted for your idious comments questioning the need for extra security for schools in contemporary Europe.

    • Jonathan, dearest, do your bosses know you spend an inordinate amount of office time – where you get a salary from council tax-payers’ money – at the Greater London Authority? I think they should be told.

  2. Is the Guardian antisemitic? One should say yes if virulent hatred of the Jewish state is today’s antisemitism.

    Jonathan Freedland, who still cherishes his Jewish identify, methinks, must find that inner strength to disengage himself from all these purveyors of contemporary antisemitism in England.

    If antisemitism is the Guardian’s future, then the Guardian has no future.

    That’s all.

  3. Open quote: Oh Dear. The Guardian is so intent on doing down Michael Gove that it has scored a spectacular own goal.

    In today’s paper, there’s a report that Gove, in his capacity as Secretary of State for Education, has awarded a £2m grant to the Community Security Trust, a charity that provides security to Britain’s Jewish communities. The reason this is a “story” is because Gove has been on the “advisory board” of CST since 2007. endquote

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyyoung/100133098/guardian-attacks-michael-gove-again-%e2%80%93-and-scores-spectacular-own-goal/

  4. And from a Telegraph reader – which more or less sums up the Guardian agenda:

    open quote: The sub-text to this is that the embittered, public school educated Marxists/Trotskyites who run the Guardian are entering the Far Right from the reverse direction. end quote

    • I like that other newspapers are picking up on this and exposing the Guardian’s agenda and substandard ‘journalism’.
      In general, it’s not a good sign when a newspaper itself becomes (repeatedly) the subject of media attention – it ususally shows that they are going down the drain fast!

  5. This latest hate-filled nastiness from the Guardian is perhaps a reflection of its desperation if the latest news about it is to be believed.

    A terminally wounded beast often lashes out.

  6. Am I the only one to think that the REAL scandal in this story is that, in the 21st Century, 70 years after WWII, Jewish state-schools in the United Kingdom REQUIRE extra physical security for the protection of their staff and pupils?

    Imagine if it were Roman Catholic schoolchildren, parents and teachers who routinely needed security guards, security cameras etc, to make sure they were not bombed, attacked, graffitied….Imagine most of the money for this extra security came from voluntary donations from the Church, and parents/teachers themselves…..I think British society would (quite rightly) be shocked and disgusted. When the government finally manned up and provided some money for this security (and if the government are running schools, I would venture that they have some responsibility to make sure they are safe places for kids to go and learn, rather than something out of Mad effing Max) I imagine that “liberal” newspapers would not be running articles forensically examining whether the minister involved was a catholic, which church he/she went to etc etc. They would be rather too busy spewing their disgust and disbelief that such measures were even necessary in a civilized society, that schoolchildren could actually be at physical risk because of their family’s faith background.

    So why the difference? Remember, these are British kids, in British state schools. There is no connection to any other country, or any international or geopolitical situation. Thus, any merely “anti-Zionist” leanings of a newspaper should be completely irrelevant here. We are not talking about Israel or Israelis or about anything whatsoever to do with the Middle East. One has to suspect, then, that the motivating emotion is antisemitism, a dislike or disgust for Jews qua Jews. Very very disturbing.

    • Katya you are not the only one. I believe that this whole state of affairs exemplifies the obsessive need for the Guardian to find something, anything, with which to beat Jews (note not Israel, which makes the Guardianistas’ insistance that they are anti-Zionist not antisemitic so much BS) and that Jews have become fair game in the UK for any evil attribution, from dual loyalty to exerting inordinate power because of the Guardian’s contribution to the antisemitic discourse.

      You are right that it IS disturbing, but oddly enough it’s good that at long last it can be proven that when we say that too often antiZionism in the Guardian is a threabare cloak for Jew-hatred, we are absolutely correct

    • Katya, remember the enmeshment and overidentification on the part of the Guardian with Islamism. Islam does not distinguish between “Israeli” and “Jew” as targets for hatred so the Guardian is reverting to type and joining forces with it to deny Jewish people in the UK the right to keep themselves and their children safe..

      I was dellighted to see the Guardian get a sound thrashing by the Telegraph for the lies it has told about the CST.

      • Serendipity

        I understand that Muslims (not all, before the deadheads get their hands on the keyboards, but those whose views are reported) are incredibly jealous that Jews have the CST.

        But these reported ones want someone else’s money – taxpayers’ – to set up such an organisation. I don’t know of any self-help attempts by Muslims to start one. I don’t either see anything like the threat to Muslims that there is to Jews and don’t see the necessity to protect people from figments of their imagination. I don’t think their schools face the same dangers. And the police to me seem to be very hot on the EDL.

        Where’s the thrashing?

        • Ariadne, it is the strong suit of official Islam in the UK to feel itself victimised even when it isn’t, and to manufacture ill-intent from non-Muslims even where there is none. Thus we have the egregious antisemite Bunglawala shrieking “Islamophobia!” whenever Muslim behaviour (note not Muslims nor even Islam) is criticised and the Muslim political lobby groups in the UK, MPACUK and MCB, yelling for an enquiry into what they call the anti-Muslim press. This stems from the pernicious envy of and hysterical reaction to anything which shows Islam not to be supreme.

          We know that any criticism of Islam’s conduct in the west is perceived by these people as “Islamophobia” and its repeated use has entered the discourse and become acceptable as an epithet whether it is true or not.

          Islam in the West is the leading driver of antisemitism there, so, yes, Jews need protection from that if even Jewish children cannot be schooled in safety and synagogues have to be guarded. That being the case, since successive UK governments have done little to prevent such a state of affairs, and far more to promote it whether wittingly or unwittingly, why should they not contribute towards taming the beast they have nourished and unleashed? There is nothing underhand about that. Those who criticise it do so because they cannot now ignore that Jewish organisations are in danger, mostly from Islam in the UK

          What is despicable is for the Guardian to insinuate, like the bottom feeding rag it is, that there is anything underhand in such funding. But what else can we expect from a paper which cannot distinguish between supposition or suspicion and hard fact and is too lazy to research properly before it rushes to condemn.

          • A tour de force, Serendipity!

            There;s very dark comedy in those certain Muslims banding together to do no good. And some are far too well “rewarded” for it.

  7. Yes, it is horrible that Jewish children in the UK need special security. The haters are still out there. And I’d say most British people have no truck with them

    But you make this generalisation about society:

    One has to suspect, then, that the motivating emotion is antisemitism, a dislike or disgust for Jews qua Jews.

    Oh, please.

      • Not justifiable, pretzel. The preceding sentences

        Thus, any merely “anti-Zionist” leanings of a newspaper should be completely irrelevant here. We are not talking about Israel or Israelis or about anything whatsoever to do with the Middle East.

        make it very clear what Katya is talking about: the “leanings” of a newspaper, not the entire society’s leanings.

        ,

    • What part of this whole nonsense about the CST in the Guardian do you not understand, pretzelberg?

      The Guardian has become so emboldened by the lack of real challenge (other than from the likes of CiF Watch) to its “antizionism” dressed in antisemitic wolf’s clothing that the mask has finally slipped. It is abhorrent that this seems not to matter to it, but that is becoming par for the course.

      No, please don’t reply! I don’t intend to get into a silly argument with you about what words mean when you should be looking at the connotative meanings as well. You either get it or you don’t. Since you have minimised the extent of the Guardian’s antisemitism here in the past, perhaps it’s asking too much for you to be able to read between the lines in this instance.

      The Guardian’s motivation always has been, I believe, antisemitism. What is different now is that it has let the mask of “civilised” behaviour slip.

  8. Have nothing about this type of private security until I recently saw how the acted with a homeless man trying to steal something to eat from a sainsburys. The homeless was thrown to the floor and his arm twisted while 4 of the jew security stand on top of him like worlds most wanted man. I also seen them running on the streets with their walki-talkies running around like they were SWAT following who knows who. When people other than police are given this type of power is always going to be abused even if is from people that thing they are just and god-loving. Now thing that this is semitism as usual if you want. You people always take every criticism as semitism when is not always the case.
    I think if the jew want security fine, but phone the police like everyone else, the rest of us cant create our own security forces even if we want to so why you? There are other people been abuse around you are not the only ones.

    • Maya why do you assume that the Security Guards at Sainsbury’s are Jewish?
      “4 of the jew security”
      Do you realise how disgusting and unacceptable that phrase is?

      When you have dealt with your appalling, and yes they are anti-semitic, attitudes you need to consider that nobody has the right to steal.
      There is no such thing as a ‘victim less’ crime. All of us, including those on poverty wages and social security benefits, have to pay higher prices to cover the costs of the actions of those who choose to steal.

      • No, I was not the one that steal, you wish so you can think Im personally involve but not. The guards at sainsburys downstairs are not jew, check upstairs youll see what I am talking about. And you dont pay higher prices from people that have to steal something in order to eat, specially when you consider how much food from those supermarkets goes to waste everyday without you even know it. And Im Dutch so what you people are trying to say? All I have said is about private security forces, whatever they can from, if you dont like it you people are making my point that every negative comment is racial. Maybe I should just want to hear hot beautiful and perfect you are? All my life I have like some people and not others but only for the actions they perform. And dont tell me dont generalize because you people also do it (“If you stole from the Muslims, you would have your hand cut off and need someone to type your post for you” and “Could anyone make a guess at “Maya”‘s mother tongue?” )