General Antisemitism

Al Jazeera exposé of Israel lobby was Jew-baiting dressed up as an investigation.

In an op-ed at The Jewish Chronicle on Jan. 12th, Marcus Dysch (The JC’s political editor) scrutinized the second part of Al Jazeera’s investigation into the Israel lobby in Britain:

If you thought the first part of Al Jazeera’s supposed expose of Israeli lobbying in Britain was ridiculous, then the second, shown today, will leave you downright sickened.

The Qatari government-funded channel appears to have embarked on an exercise that is nothing more than straightforward Jew-baiting dressed up as an investigation.

This is trolling on an epic scale. When people talk about living in a post-truth age, this is it, broadcast on YouTube for all to see.

In one of today’s key scenes, Ella Rose – a former Union of Jewish Students president who now works as director of the Jewish Labour Movement – is shown moved to tears after repeated clashes with anti-Israel activists.

It is hard to see Ms Rose’s exploitation by “Robin Harrow”, the undercover reporter, as anything other than harassment.

Read the rest of his op-ed here.

60 replies »

  1. Ella seems like an embryonic Ruth Smeeth. Who was harrassing her ? Maybe we should ask her boss that well known paragon of veracity Jeremy ” ” preposterous liar ” Newmark, ha ha ha

    • “Jew baiting” is ther term used by the writer, Marcus Dysch, and he’s narrowly referring to the second part of the investigation which deals with Emma Rose – not the bit about Masot. You should read the entire op-ed.

            • You seem to have the problem with the headline using Jew Baiting as a term to describe the behavior. Shouldn’t you prove how it’s not rather than ask others to prove how it is? It doesn’t matter much to me either way. Al Jazeera seems to have an infatuation with Israel and her representatives, i.e. Jewish people. That’s my perspective.

      • … and while I feel sorry for Ella Rose (and have little time for the likes of Jackie Walker): anti-Semitism is a serious charge, and one that needs substantiation.
        It is rather weak of the author to – when faced with grave evidence concerning the Israeli diplomat – attempt to dismiss the whole episode as “harassment of Jews dressed up as entertainment”.

        The JC can do better.

  2. I did not watch the first part, but I did watch this second part online.

    Frankly the so called reporter was not carrying out an investigation but indulging in ‘leading’ questions to ensure he got the answer he wanted to fit in with his obviously pre-set agenda.
    Typical of the sort of muck raking, waste bin examining perversion of good investigative journalism that has got today’s media the bad name is deserves.

    • I am aware of that shocking court ruling, peter.

      But what does it have to do with the case in point, i.e. the Israeli diplomat?

    • In October 2007, the Evening Standard reported that Joan Ryan claimed £173,691 in expenses for the 2006/2007 tax year,[3] the highest for any MP. She was the second highest claimant in the 2005/2006 tax year.

      In May 2009, it was reported that Ryan had claimed more than £4,500 under the Additional Costs Allowance for work on a house she had designated as her second home.[4] In February 2010, based on an audit report looking into the United Kingdom parliamentary expenses scandal, Ryan was asked to repay £5,121 mortgage interest.[5]

      • “[a]t least 10 attempts have been made from computers in Parliament to remove information about [Ryan’s] expenses claims and a further 20 efforts to delete the information, some from her constituency of Enfield North, have also been recorded in Wikipedia’s logs.”[13] Entries on the present page’s edit history page indicate that similar edits to hide Ryan’s record continue to be made.[14] At least 10 attempts were made from computers inside the Houses of Parliament to remove information about Ryan’s expenses claims and a further 20 efforts to delete the information, some from her constituency of Enfield North, were also been recorded in Wikipedia’s logs. The efforts were successful and all mention of expenses claims were removed and instead replaced with a paragraph about edits to Wikipedia.

        During the 2015 general election, The Daily Telegraph returned to this issue. In Ryan’s case, the entire expenses section was deleted, including information on repairs and decorations on her home paid for out of her MP’s expenses; the edits were made while Ryan was not an MP, and she denied involvemen

            • Someone’s been on a bit of a keyboard rampage today haven’t they? Come on Stephen, you’re an action hero, with a tour of duty of the Jordan Valley under your belt and a keen smell for sniffing out Jewish conspiracies.

              But reading the Jewish Chronicle and posting Jew-baiting comments all day doesn’t really prove you can walk it like you talk it does it Stephen?

                • Stephen so you are now claiming “three tours of duty” in the Jordan Valley.

                  Where exactly in the Jordan Valley?
                  When did these “tours” take place?
                  Who, or what organisation, arranged these “tours”?

                    • Stephen it is not a question of ‘my luck’, it is a question of your lack of credibility.
                      It also further demonstrates your infantile habit of running into a room shouting out swear words then running away and hiding.

                      Try to grow up Stephen and behave like an adult for a change.

                    • Stephen as I am in a generous mood I will give you some advice.

                      Try to develop two things.
                      One a backbone, so you will stand by and substantiate your claims.
                      Two, at the top of your backbone, a brain so that you are intellectually capable of using logic, truth and reality to support your claims.
                      Frankly your lack of both is getting increasingly tiresome.

                    • Gerald yours is the classic mind set of the keyboard warrior. You actually think you are hurling real spears that are piercing real flesh. Tell me Gerald, how exactly do you think your little quasi poetic musings in any way impacts on my life ? Do you seriously think I am hurt or discomforted by your credibility assessments?

                    • Stephen is the ‘psycho-babble’ in your post supposed to achieve anything?
                      Other than one of your usual shoddy attempts to cover up for the facts that you are unable to substantiate any of the claims made in your posts, all they are is confirmation that you are indeed a stereotypical anti-Semite.
                      You expose yourself as having no credibility but worse you are a liar and a coward and bring shame upon any group or individual that has any connection with you.

                  • Here we go again, the twilight zone between truth and delusion:

                    “Groovy a total of nine months slaving under a blazing sun, ten hours a day, making mud bricks to rebuild Bedouin structures demolished by the IOF. What I would have given to be safe at home behind a keyboard”.

                    If you weren’t an unreconstructed European anti-Semite, I’d probably feel a bit sorry for you.

                    Go on Stephen, your turn.

                  • Kudos to Gerald and Groovy for having the patience to actually grace the off-topic troll with more than a second of their time.

        • Stephen if you must ‘copy and paste’ articles from Wikipedia in an attempt to carry out a hatchet job on someone, you really should check the sources it cites and stop being lazy.

          For example the article cited from The Independent at [13], which was published on 9th March 2012, includes this quote from an administrator at Wikipedia, “While one Wikipedia administrator observed that users appeared to have written the expenses material to deliberately portray Ryan in a negative light..”

          How prescient of a Wikipedia administrator to know that almost 5 years later you would attempt to do just that.
          It shows that the attempts by some (you) to dredge up half-truths, lies and fabrications and use this flimsiest of evidence to besmirch those they disagree with is not a new phenomenon.
          Indeed it is a throwback to the methods envisaged by George Orwell in his excellent book “1984”. It is sad that I have to remind you that “1984” was a novel and not a textbook to show you how to deal with those who you disagree with but are not intellectually capable of defeating in debate and political discussion.

  3. Al Jazeera finances and shills for Hizballah and other nasty terror organisations…These two racists rags the Guardian and the BBC are at the arse end of the gutter press…