General Antisemitism

CST: 2015 was third worst year for antisemitism in UK


CST’s Antisemitic Incidents Report 2015, published today, demonstrated that 2015 saw the “the third-highest annual total of antisemitic hate incidents in the UK” since such incidents have been recorded (in 1984). 

cst image

Interestingly, CST notes that while 2014’s record high of 1,179 incidents were largely “caused by antisemitic reactions to Israel’s war with Hamas, and “the second-highest total of 931 incidents came in 2009”, also a year when there was a war in Israel and Gaza, there was no similar ‘trigger event’ in 2015 to explain the high annual total.

You can read CST’s summary of their report, here.

The full PDF report is here. 

21 replies »

  1. So 43% of the perpetrators of anti-semitic attacks were South Asian, East or South East Asian, Arab or North African or Black.

    The 57% of Eurotrash anti-semitic attackers were motivated by dishonest news reports by the BBC, Der Guardian, Independent, Sky.

        • I know about the Balen Report, I remember the Supreme Court ruling on it.

          So basically you’re inferring – based on a report you haven’t seen and a piece of statistical research that doesn’t hazard reasons for its findings – that anti-Semitism in “Londonistan” (an offensive, xenophobic term) is actuated by media coverage that you disagree with.

          You might want to pad that thesis out with a few bar charts or something.

          • Why can’t people see the Balen report??? What is the BBC hiding?????? Unfavorable conclusion that the BBC is BIASED, UNFAIR, DISHONEST, PRO-APARTHEID PALESWINE???

            • Perhaps you’re right (although the fact that a document is kept confidential doesn’t necessarily mean it says those things: I’m not going to show you a copy of my annual appraisal from my employer, but I promise it doesn’t say I’m biased, unfair, dishonest and pro-apartheid). And I do agree that it should be released, whether under the Freedom of Information Act or otherwise. That’s transparency and democracy.

              But even if the Balen Report does say those things I think it’s a bit of a stretch to attribute violent anti-Semitism to biased media coverage without any empirical evidence?

        • @Edward –

          The Wiki link you give @ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balen_Report omits one very important detail. Allegations of BBC bias had been made by people on BOTH SIDES of the I/P conflict in the run-up to the Balen Report.

          Do you seriously suppose Malcolm Balen failed to examine complaints of anti-Palestinian bias in his inquiry? (See interview he gave to Haaretz @ http://www.haaretz.com/culture/leisure/bbc-s-mideast-maven-treads-bias-tightwire-1.123852 for strong indication he DID take these on board.)

          Given that you don’t have the faintest idea what Balen’s findings were, you are remarkably confident that they must have fully vindicated the pro-Israel complainers’ case. Perhaps you should consider this – that the report was kept under wraps because it found Palestinians to have been unfairly treated by the Beeb and too much bending-over-backwards to please the Israeli side. Just imagine what a storm THAT would have provoked!

          (PS: Suggest you read that Haaretz interview in full. I’m pretty certain your faith in Balen to have delivered the report you WISH he did will be somewhat shaken…)

          • “Perhaps you should consider this – that the report was kept under wraps because it found Palestinians to have been unfairly treated by the Beeb and too much bending-over-backwards to please the Israeli side” –
            you really are a moron.

  2. The moron, Edward, is also obviously unaware of the Glasgow Media Groups study headed by professor Greg Philo which concluded that the BBC is systematically biased in favour of the Israeli-Zionist position.