Guardian

Guardian suggests existence of Haredi-only Israeli hospitals


Since Paul Chadwick replaced Chris Elliott as the Guardian Readers’ Editor last year, erroneous claims – like the one which appeared in an Oct. 23rd article – are far less likely to be corrected.  So, we’re asking for your help in contacting the office of the Readers’ Editor to get a response to our query, which we emailed and tweeted over the last two days.

Here’s the claim in question, in article written by their culture reporter about Jerusalem (“‘This land is just dirt’: a rooftop view of Jerusalem”) which focused heavily on the influence of Haredi Jews, and on what the writer claimed was an increasingly ‘segregated’ city.

The Haredim have less and less need to go out of our own neighbourhoods,” she says, “and that creates more separation.”

In Jerusalem, they [haredim] have practically built their own city within a city. In order to cloister their way of life from the corruption of secular modern society, they have their own schools, shopping malls, sports clubs, parks and hospitals. 

Whilst we know of no haredi-only shopping malls or parks, the suggestion that there are haredi-only hospitals is just absurd, as anyone familiar with Israeli hospitals would surely know.  Whilst Bikur Cholim Hospital in Jerusalem treats a large number of Haredim (due to its close proximity to Haredi neighborhoods), like all Israeli hospitals, it treats all patients who come through its doors, regardless of religion. 

More broadly, with patients and healthcare professionals of all faiths and backgrounds mingling and working together, Israeli hospitals arguably represent the most successful model of Jewish-Muslim co-existence in the country.  (In a rare moment of lucidity, even the Guardian acknowledged this fact in a 2016 report by Kate Shuttleworth.)

We ask that you consider contacting the Guardian and politely asking editors to substantiate the claim.

Email them here: guardian.readers@theguardian.com

You can also retweet these two Tweets from UK Media Watch (one to the journalist and the other to the Readers’ Editor) embedded below:

Related Articles

Categories: Guardian

Tagged as: , ,

22 replies »

  1. The Guardian made quite a lot of a fuss about the fact that a Facebook algorithm mistranslated Arabic, leading to an arrest. They expressed surprise that the original post wasn’t read in the original language.

    So imagine my surprise when I read that some Guardian hack didn’t bother to check whether exclusive facilities for hareidim exist in Jerusalem and that the Guardian compounded that by being too cowardly or arrogant to correct the lies or heaven forfend, to apologise for their ‘errors’

    The double standards and the rank dishonesty of the Guardian are really unpleasant

  2. The Guardian has reverted to the bad old days of the vile Georgina Henry, when any lie about Israel would be eagerly accepted and published. Viner appears to be trying to mimic her old mentor by publishing this sort of nonsense about Israel at every opportunity.

  3. Shaar hazedek one of the largest hospitals in Jerusalem treats, Arabs, Jews, Christian, Druse, Haradi etc etc. Also their nurses and doctors are also from all ethnic groups! Some people may find this information absolutely amazing. These people read and listen to the garbage put out by the anti brigade!!!

  4. Golly gee Guardian, but wasn’t it the Great British Empire which brought the world the Divide and Conquer strategy that just happened to start all of the nonsense in that part of the World?

    There is nothing more pathetic than an Israel bashing, Jew hating British piece of hypocritical shit.

    I said Good Day, Sir. Good Day.

    • Nice rant koufaxmitzvah but wrong.
      It is not ‘Divide and Conquer’ it is ‘Divide and Rule’ from the Latin phrase “divide et impera” and used millennia before there was a British Empire (Great or otherwise), e.g. Rome versus the Macedonians, Caesar in the Gallic Wars, the Mongols used it to suppress Muslims, and lets not forget Flavius Josephus who mentions the tactic in his book “The Wars of the Jews”.

      • I’ll be honest that I don’t know much of Western Military History, but we here in America have used the term Divide and Conquer for how the post-WWI nation-state lines were drawn. Sort of like how the Monarchy fucked with the creation of Israel by granting an equal standing to all perspectives, i.e. sow seeds of chaos, get the hell out, and sell them weapons to kill each other.

        But like I said, Western Military Complex isn’t my cup of tea.

        • koufaxmitzvah,
          Divide and Conquer was the military strategy implemented by the North to win the Civil War.

          • I appreciate your knowledge of military history, Jeff, and will keep it in mind for the future. Although, to be honest, in the future, I will more than likely say the exact same thing.

          • If you could give me an example of Divide and Conquer strategy in the Civil War, that would help me understand how it’s a CW strategy. As far as I know, CW was a Scorched Earth tactic, in particular the burning down of Georgia.

            Thanks!

          • But what did they divide? I honestly don’t know what they were dividing since they were fighting to unite the country. Now, the Union did burn down the state of Georgia. That was a Scorched Earth policy. But dividing the South to conquer it (i.e. win by influencing enemies to fight each other) is hard to believe.

            This said, you look at nation building post-WWI, and there are many examples of the British Empire mixing warring tribes into the same boundaries not only to encourage them fighting each other but also so to sell them weapons. Israel would be living in peace right now if the Brits allowed more autonomy upon “the Natives” don’t you think?

            • Km,
              I have special knowledge of military history. We’re you being sarcastic. It was just something I remembered from school. I believe it was Ulysses S. Grant.

            • “Israel would be living in peace right now if the Brits allowed more autonomy upon “the Natives” ” – utter nonsense.