How many mistakes. How many bad choices. Event after event, year after year. Choosing to focus on fighting Israel. Over a century of Palestinian mistakes and still they seem unable to stop fighting and to start focusing on building something positive for themselves. Still choosing to drown in a swamp of hate. This is the true catastrophe
It’s actually quite astonishing that a leading news outlet like Financial Times is willing to parrot propaganda on Hamas’s putative move to the centre so clearly at odds with the truth that not even the group’s top officials are sticking to the talking points.
When you look past the verbal acrobatics – within a document designed merely to improve their public relations – you can’t escape the fact that when you support “armed resistance” whilst rejecting “any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea” you are, by definition, calling for the complete destruction of the Jewish state.
Here’s the latest installment in our ongoing series documenting BDS fails and exposing the spectacularly misleading media narrative on the alleged successes of the campaign to economically and socially isolate the Jewish state.
“I was then politely asked to leave the room by police and then asked to give my personal details. At one stage I was surrounded by seven heavily armed police. Then my friends Jonathan, Sharon and Mandy were all similarly led out.”
The Times of London headline – suggesting the existence of heretofore unseen Hamas peaceniks – is absurd. There are no “hawks and doves” within the movement, but only extremists who differ slightly in their willingness to tailor their message for Western audiences.
If the Guardian wants to encourage a fact-based, reasoned debate about the merits of Australia’s refusal to allow Tamimi into the country, the least they could do is avoid misleading readers by obfuscating the Palestinian activist’s well-documented record of intolerance and anti-Zionist extremism.
Those familiar with the Guardian’s decades-long history of institutional anti-Israel bias – which sometimes crosses the line into outright antisemitism – are understandably wary of suggestions that otherwise ideologically rigid far-left editors have changed course on matters of concern to British Jewry. But, it is our view that a modest editorial pivot concerning antisemitism is evident. Though it’s difficult to explain with any degree of certainty the reason for the slight shift, noting the radically different tones of two official Guardian editorials on the issue of antisemitism within five years of each other is instructive.
Israeli journalist Eylon Aslan-Levy provides a short but extremely effective response to those who ask why Israelis believe BDS is antisemitic.
Interviews filmed by the Jewish YouTube channel J-TV during Israeli Apartheid Week at London’s School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) reveals shocking examples of the pro-terror and antisemitic views held by some students.
Once again, the Indy fails to include information that would undercut their desired narrative about the UK debate over Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, mischaracterising sincere efforts to no-platform extremism as a cynical effort to stifle criticism of the Jewish state.
Whilst we commend Indy editors for removing the article, the fact that one of their Middle East correspondents respects and was willing to amplify the views of such an anti-Zionist extremist serves as a troubling reminder of institutional anti-Israel bias which informs so much of their coverage of the region.
Gilad Atzmon said “’Raus” as I left the room and then turned around to the Jewish students at the back and said “being chucked out for causing trouble, just like you lot were in Germany”.
Here are recent corrections prompted by UKMW to articles at the Guardian, Daily Mail and Independent.
Guardian journalists drive to work with the help of Israeli route-navigating technology (and soon in cars automated by Israeli technology), sit down to computers powered by Israeli designed chips, write articles they back up on Israeli invented flash drives and are increasingly protected by Israeli cybersecurity – but produce article after article about the “success” of BDS.
It’s quite telling that of all the political analysts the Indy journalist could have asked to comment, she chose a radical, anti-Zionist extremist who employs tropes about Zionism’s putative collusion with Nazism so vile they’d likely make Ken Livingstone blush.
“The BDS Movement Claimed Eight Victories in 2016. They Were All Actually Losses”.
Ilan Pappe’s talk was pure anti-Israel vitriol and falsehoods. His thesis was that Israel was founded by ‘settler colonialists’ and that the Jews righted the wrong done to them by the Nazis by committing another wrong, on the Palestinians (in his talk he repeated the phrase ‘settler colonialism’ 13 times).
Whilst nobody familiar with Banksy would be surprised by his use of imagery associated with classic antisemitism, it’s troubling that journalists who pride themselves on critically scrutinising every Israeli claim didn’t challenge the pro-Palestinian artist when he floated the risible claim that his latest project was benignly designed to promote dialogue.
The Guardian decision to publish Greenstein’s complimentary reference to Kaufman’s grotesque Nazi accusation may not itself be an act of antisemitism, but certainly represents another example of editorial decisions which have the effect of normalising such expressions of anti-Jewish racism.