Guardian

The Guardian and Telegraph – creating a ‘safe space’ for anti-Zionists?


British media reports on the ongoing antisemitism scandal plaguing the Labour Party have been largely unproblematic, and quite unsympathetic to those attempting to rationalize or defend expressions of anti-Jewish racism by party members.

However, the latest story, involving the suspension of former London Mayor Ken Livingstone for arguing that Adolf Hitler was a Zionist, inspired an official Guardian editorial on the row which indicate that editors do not understand – or aren’t willing to acknowledge – what the term “anti-Zionism” actually means. The editorial (‘The Guardian view on antisemitism: Stay vigilant on the left flank, April 28) included the following passages, which attempt to distinguish between legitimate criticism of Israel and antisemitism:

Most people committed to justice for the Palestinians are more than capable of distinguishing between opposition to the Israeli state and hatred of the Jews, but the placards sometimes seen on demos – equating a swastika with the star of David, for example – suggest that some campaigners don’t. The post-1967 occupation needs to be condemned, and it is not in and of itself illegitimate even to question the original creation of Israel. It is, however, never legitimate to discuss the conflict without taking seriously the rights and claims of the people on the Israeli as well as the Palestinian side.

Whilst nobody would accuse critics of the occupation of being antisemitic, the editorial defends those who ‘question the original creation of Israel’, a muddled characterization of the views of those who consider themselves anti-Zionist.  

Similarly, The Telegraph, in a recent article (Anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism: what’s the difference?, April 29) attempts to define “anti-Zionism” by a series of bullet points meant to provide an understanding of what the word “Zionism” means:

zionism

The Telegraph, as with the Guardian, strangely defines “anti-Zionism” through the prism of what the term meant prior to 1948, before the state actually existed.  

However, anti-Zionism does not represent opposition to the historical process by which Israel was created 68 years go, and it is not a theoretical discussion.  Rather, anti-Zionism today necessarily refers to opposition to the continued existence of the actual Jewish state within any borders – a position which the overwhelming majority of British Jews, and most Britons of all religions (per a recent YouGov poll), understandably consider a form of antisemitism

If either paper wants to create a ‘safe space’ for anti-Zionists, at the very least they can begin by being honest about what the term actually means today, and what the position would ultimately mean to millions of Jews in the existing Jewish state.

69 replies »

        • Mad Cow Miranda you are able to speak on behalf of your fellow members of the Axis of Arseholes?
          Or do you have the ability to read the mind of “I despise Israel” Bellend?

          Proves the old saying “Like minds think alike”

        • Reasonable question about anti-Semitism for an article centered on anti-Zionism? Now hold on, Boobie…. Are you telling they are one and the same?

          • Tut, tut – comparing a Jew to Nazis is VERY naughty behaviour, Edward. Best beware of posting anything else like that about me … because I might then report you to the CST and get your smears added to its tally of “online antisemitic abuse” offences.

          • Oh ok

            The FRA , the successor to EUMC

            ” We are not aware of any official definition of antisemitism.”

            ” We have never viewed the document as a valid definition of antisemitism”.

            ” The document has been pulled along with other NON OFFICIAL documents”.

            ” The Agency does not need to develop its own definition of antisemitism in order to research these issues” .

            ” The Agency has no mandate to develop its own definitions.”.

            When it was pointed out the The Agency had in 2008 published a document that contains definitions of homophobia and transphobia The Agency replied….

            ” The Agency has defined neither, but has used international standards of certain definitions, terms and concepts”.

          • Bellend you are either a blatant liar or as stupid as your pet idiot Margrain.
            When you claim “It was never, ever adopted by the EUMC.” Why is it written across the top of the Document “EUMC Working Definition of Antisemitism”?

              • Bellend you have not answered the question. More likely you are trying to avoid the answer, as once again the truth is inconvenient for anti-Semitic filth like you, your pet idiot Margrain and Mad Cow Miranda.

              • “Bit of a mystery isn’t it Gerald ?”
                No Bellend you are more likely to be a blatant liar, I doubt if even you could be as stupid as your pet idiot Margrain.

                  • Bellend who cares how it was born.
                    More important is that it was needed then and. even more so now, with the likes of you and your ilk polluting the internet with your anti-Semitism and your pathetic attempts to ‘justify’ it as anti-Zionism.

          • Bellend have you ‘adopted’ your pet idiot Margrain, or do you just give him his instructions via Twitter?

            “3 thoughts on “Are you, or have you ever been, an antizionist ?”
            Daniel Margrain

            April 20, 2016 at 10:33 pm
            Excellent post mate. Are you on twitter?

            Stephen Bellamy

            April 21, 2016 at 5:56 am
            @tir_tairngire “

        • “Knee-jerk hostility – as usual” – indeed, spittle-flecked hostility from you towards Jews is perfectly usual.

      • Definition no Definition EU NO EU New Europe Old Europe ALL of it is a bunch of Huey and you know WHY? When you are the target, and the words, phrases, variations, underlying pinnings most of us will FEEL it almost instantly without forming committees, talking to the Rav or going to the Internet We have Century upon Century of these being rubbed against our skin

        • I can relate to that. I am merely trying to keep Adam on the straight and narrow. If you have your conclusive feelings why do you need to resort to bullshit myths ? You know, we all have feelings.Why rely on the myth of an EUMC definition when you can simply say ” I feel this….” We can all respect feelings, and hopefully do, but bullshit myths are fair game for ridicule.

          • “bullshit myths are fair game for ridicule”
            Indeed they are Bellend, as are the people who continuously spew them out such as you, Mad Cow Miranda, and your pet idiot Margrain.

    • So, Stevie, you’re looking in the mirror, yes? Do you see a Dopey Dummy Dipshit? That’s the personification of Anti-Semitism. You’ve got to be Dopey enough to believe in 3000 year old conspiracy theories. You’ve got to be a big enough Dummy to think those conspiracy theories actually make sense. And the Dipshit part is a twofer. One is that you’re stupid enough to think that you’re so brilliant to believe in these 3000 year old conspiracy theories, and the other is that you, seriously, smell like feces. Not that you can sense smell by staring at the mirror. But that smell that follows you around all day? The one that warns other people of your presence? The odor wafting about your nostrils right now– part dead rat, part digested manure, and part fetid squalor– is actually coming from a leakage in the back of your pants.

      As with all anti-Semites, you’re going to want to get that checked, but you won’t. Because no one can make you.

  1. Double standards and triple backflips. That’s why the Western World is laughed at by Jews. For 3000 years, we have watched firsthand how Other People are easily confused into thinking their own bloodlust is, somehow, the Yids fault. Because Jesus and stuff like that.

    It’s as legitimate to complain about Israel’s existence as it is legitimate to complain about the United States’ existence. Complain all you want, you won’t change jack. It will be a waste of time and energies, and eventually, the person fighting the losing battle will have to either shut up or die killing us.

    Great stuff from a planet killing itself.

    • koufaxmitzvah,

      Don’t you think it’s kind of obnoxious for europeans of all peoples to claim they need a definition of antisemitism in order to notice it? For crying out loud, they fucking invented it, refined it, used it, and now claim they don’t know what the hell it is ! The ol’ shuck and jive routine lives on.

      • It used to be anti-Semites were proud of their behavior. The pogroms and Kristallnacht didn’t happen in a vacuum. But these days, anti-Semites deny being anti-Semites. It’s as if they have no pride being the dickless fucks they openly come out to be. Stevie shitstain doesn’t have a problem spouting his anti-Semitism. Stevie Shitstain’s problem is being labeled an anti-Semite. And, as you said, whatever THAT means.

        • The Stevies are proud of their behavior, it’s just when you call it what it is that they go scurrying for cover. They’ll tell you they are “just” anti-Zionists, but absolutely, definitely not antisemites, but can’t find the definition. I guess the dog ate it. It’s KK-Kooky.

          • The source in this particular case is a Jew poster on a website detailing how Western Media gives Israel the short end of the stick. How that explains your comment, I’m not really sure. It’s pretty obvious the anti-Semitic shit stains of the world have no answers to any of our questions except complete nonsense which they try to dress up as philosophical perspective so as to considers themselves as Deep or Introspective or even Worth the Energy.

            ‘Congrats, Stevie Shit Stain. You’re worth the energy to laugh at.

          • Stevie “I despise Israel” Bellend, when you write “Being labeled an antisemite is not a problem for me Bubba. I just consider the source.”
            Of course it isn’t a problem for you, apart from DESPISING Israel, it is not about the Palestinian people it is PESONAL

            Consider this 53% of the British people consider YOU an anti-Semite. And the source,

            According to a YouGov poll held on 29/04/16 in which 4,406 people were interviewed, with the results weighted to be representative of the GB population, came up with this result,
            “British people also draw a clear distinction between what does and does not count as anti-Semitism in the context of Israel. Most people (60%) think that criticising the Israeli government is not anti-Semitic, but the majority (53%) say that hating Israel and questioning its right to exist is anti-semitic.”

            I’ll repeat that for you “I despise Israel” Bellend, 53% (the Majority) of the British people say that “hating Israel is anti-Semitic”

            Now I’ll sit back and wait for you, or Mad Cow Miranda, or your pet idiot Margrain, maybe even sencar rush in and try to gloss over the result.

            • 1) Well I have never questioned Israel’s right to exist and that was an important part of the question.

              2) ” despise ” is not the same concept as ” hate “. Nice try though.

              So the question obviously is not about me.

              In any event me and a majority of the British public disagree on a great many things.

              Also is it not the case that a majority of Germans were ok with the Nazi treatment of the Jews ?

              • ” ” despise ” is not the same concept as ” hate “. ”

                Bellend ‘hate’ IS a synonym of ‘despise’
                So the majority of the British public are correct YOU are an anti-Semite.

                Poor try at changing the meaning of words in the English language. But as you constantly try, and fail, to change history, truth and logic not a surprise.

                • Gerald there is a simple way of testing whether two concepts are synonyms. Try substituting one for the other in various sentences and see how you get on. For example, given a choice between saying ” I hate cold weather”, and ” I despise cold weather” just about everyone would go for the former. If the concepts were the same it would be about 50/50 if the sample was large enough.

                  Most people would think ” I despise cold weather”, not as wrong but as ” odd”.

                  Glad to have been able to be of help.

                  • Bellend your pathetic attempt to distort the English language is almost as pathetic as the rubbish you post.
                    Hate is a synonym of Despise, full stop.

                    If you wish to carry on trying to change facts, feel free to do so.

                    • Bellend as you like to use examples.

                      Stephen Bellamy may not be a synonym for an anti-Semitic weasel or lying sack of shit, but everyone knows as soon as they read your posts or your pathetic website ‘BedWettersRuS’ they are one and the same thing.
                      But of course, unlike ‘hate’ and ‘despise’, they will not be listed in any reputable dictionary or thesaurus as synonyms.

                  • With apologies to Lewis Carroll.

                    “When I use a word,” Bellend said, “it means just what I choose it to mean.”

              • “despise ” is not the same concept as ” hate“ – so you OK with despising a whole country, one that is the homeland and refuge of the most persecuted nation in history?
                Thanks for laying out your stall, little shit.

  2. Another major point/issue is the wide spread ignorance about Jews in general and Jewish/Hebrew culture.

    The vast majority of people in Europe and the USA, never mind the Arabs have absolutely no idea about anything Jewish.

    Europeans who love to think of themselves as smart and educated and tolerant lack a basic understanding of European Jewish culture. This although Jews have been in Europe for nearly 2000 years. Mainstream EU understanding of Jewish culture is The Ghetto and The Holocaust. This is a very sad state of affairs and makes an informed and balanced discussion about antisemitism/antizionism impossible.

    As long as most people see Jews as some sort of historical side show at best, there will be no moving forward in things antisemitism. And that is also why bastards like Livingstone get a free ride for 40 years before they finally slip up.

    The fact that he quotes Lenni Brenner is scandalous in itself. It feeds into my point of utter historical ignorance of someone who probably thinks of himself as really well educated and aware of all sorts of things. Look where it took him! He ended up saying Adolf Hitler was a Zionist.

    • Even Niall Ferguson, supposedly an intelligent and educated man (well, OK, in actual fact he is an ignorant prat, but moving on …), has only just discovered how endemic antisemitism is in the mainstream left. Niall, I was aware of it 20 years ago. What were you doing at the time, absurd man?

      • Try Baroness Deech instead, from that same link:

        Before anyone reacts with the frequently voiced sentiment that criticism of Israel does not equate to anti-Semitism, let me hasten to agree but point out that the antagonists of the Jewish students are failing to make that distinction. “Zionist” has become a word of opprobrium, and all Jews are so labelled. Attacks on Jews rose with the occurrence of the Lebanon war, attacks on them—in this country and elsewhere—not attacks on Israelis or Israeli buildings. Once the equation is made between Zionism and Jews, anti-Semites feel free to attack all Jewish students without distinction. Protests start as attacks on Israel and conclude with threats to all Jews. Israel “apartheid weeks” have been held at Oxford, Cambridge and SOAS. To show just how demeaning this analogy is to the real victims of apartheid, one need only mention inter alia that 20 per cent of the students at Haifa University are Arabs and 11 universities have been established in the Occupied Territories since 1967.

        […]

        Academic freedom is the first target of tyrannies, and those who ignore attacks on academic pursuits are co-operating with tyranny. They must ask themselves why Jewish students and Israelis, alone in the world, are chosen as the targets. As my father sadly bore witness, as early as 1923 Vienna University was the focus of assaults on Jewish students and of curbs on Jewish professors and on the right to learn, followed by Warsaw University. Universities are like the canary in the mine when it comes to bad indications. British universities have to learn from the history of pusillanimity in the face of racism.

        or Lord Clinton-Davis:

        Criticism of Israel is perfectly all right. We can criticise any country. However, it is intellectually bankrupt for some academics to pillory Israel as they have done. Inevitably, Israeli academics critical of their Government are also assailed. Yet Israel remains virtually the only country in the Middle East where freedom of speech does not fall outside the law. These anti-Israeli academics are somewhat one-sided. They make no mention of the outrageous attacks by Sudan on the innocents of Darfur. They ignore China for the occupation of Tibet and the suppression of inconvenient adverse opinions by the Government. They turn a blind eye to the slaughter of Palestinians by Palestinians—Hamas and Fatah—going on at this very moment in Gaza. They also ignore the cruelties heaped on intellectuals in Syria, Egypt, Iran, Libya and Saudi Arabia and countless other crimes against humanity.

        The attitude of these academics is unfair and it cultivates extremism on both sides—a myopia which is wholly inconsistent with the standards that they supposedly support and which, in my view, is tantamount to the worst form of anti-Semitism.

  3. The Irish Times shows how to support Ken while claiming not to be being anti-Semitic.

    Somehow they overlook Hitler’s desire to exterminate all Jews, even after or if they leave Germany.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/criticising-israel-is-not-the-same-as-being-anti-jewish-1.2631721#.VybsZJvqyew

    Criticising Israel is not the same as being anti-Jewish
    Opposition to Israel must not be confused with the evil hatred of Jewish people
    Thee recent calls to expel former London mayor Ken Livingstone from the British Labour Party have created a worrying alliance between those who use accusations of anti-Semitism to silence critics of Israeland those who use them to attack supporters of the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn. The calls for his expulsion came after Livingstone said in a BBC interview that Hitler had supported Zionism “before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews”.

    The claim itself was clumsy but based on historical fact

    – Hitler originally sought to expel rather than exterminate European Jews. As part of this, he negotiated the Haavara Agreement with Zionist organisations which allowed some Jews to escape to Palestine with some of their property in return for Zionist opposition to the global boycott of German goods. This was hardly “support for Zionism”, but Livingstone’s critics went further with fellow Labour MPs accusing him of anti-Semitism

  4. The Irish Times must have supported De Valera who signed a book of condolences at the German Embassy after the death of Hitler. And of course The Daily Mail admired Hitler in the 1930’s before the war.