The Guardian’s failure to convey to readers the antisemitic nature of the anti-Netanyahu placard in Sydney is not in itself antisemitic. However we do believe it’s indicative of their continuing obfuscation of endemic antisemitism within the pro-Palestinian movement and, more broadly, representative of how media outlets can normalise antisemitism without setting out to do so.
An op-ed in the Guardian by George Browning (the former Anglican Bishop of Canberra and the President of the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network) concerning the Israeli prime minister’s visit to Australia is full of significant errors and distortions.
The journalist’s decision to quote Bouattia expressing her view that “blatant antisemitism should not be tolerated in our universities” without even mentioning the current row over her own use of antisemitic tropes is a classic example of how the Guardian can whitewash antisemitism even when putatively taking such hatred seriously.
CST’s new Antisemitic Incidents Report shows a record number of antisemitic incidents in the UK in 2016. According to CST, there were 1,309 antisemitic incidents nationwide during 2016, a 36 per cent increase from the previous year.
Trump’s ban on citizens of seven foreign countries from entering the US represents a completely different dynamic than what he’s trying to describe in the Palestinian territories. There’s no Israeli “ban” on Palestinians. There are checkpoints and other security measures erected to prevent terrorism on both sides of the green line, but tends of thousands of Palestinians pass into Israel each day to work, visit family and receive medical care.
We have got so used to these extreme critiques of settlements, that we forget the basis on which they rest – that for a Palestinian state to exist, there must be no Jews whatsoever within its territory. This assumption is often unchallenged, but when one analyses it, it is hard to characterise it as anything other racist.
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.
The fact that Rafsanjani was relatively more liberal than his contemporaries in Iran should not be used to cover up the uncomfortable truth – that anti-Israel hatred pervades all elements of the Iranian leadership, “moderates” and conservatives alike.
Written by Jonathan Hoffman. The original version of this post was published at Jewish News. Professor David Feldman is the Director of the Pears Institute for the Study of Antisemitism in London […]
Among those objecting to the government’s decision to adopt the Working Definition of Antisemitism were a group of anti-Zionists in the UK (such as Tony Greenstein) whose letter – accusing British Jews of falsely crying antisemitism to silence debate about Israel – appeared in the Guardian on Dec. 17th.
The wording of the Indy’s poll is extremely misleading, as it suggests that the mere criticism of Israel is defined as antisemitic by the WD. However, as the WD adopted by Theresa May makes perfectly clear, mere criticism of Israel is absolutely NOT considered antisemitic.
“International Law & the State of Israel: Legitimacy, Responsibility and Exceptionalism” is little more than the recycling of aged terrorist conflict-propaganda in an academic setting.
Indy op-ed on UK position that ‘Opposing Israel’s existence = antisemitism’ penned by guy opposed to Israel’s existence
Criticism of the Jewish state becomes antisemitic when it holds the state to a moral standard no other state is held to, and when it evokes historic antisemitic tropes and narratives – such as the view that Jews (individually or collectively) represent a uniquely malevolent force in the world, an “organic obstacle [to] peace and progress”.
This morning, multiple news outlets reported that the British government will adopt the Working Definition of Antisemitism. Downing Street said that the WD would assist “in efforts to fight hate crimes and incitement targeting Jews” and by ensuring that “culprits will not be able to get away with being antisemitic because the term is ill-defined, or because different organisations or bodies have different interpretations of it”.
Even if you are not convinced that the Zionism = Racism canard is not antisemitic in intent, it is undeniably antisemitic in effect, because such a characterization necessarily means that Jews (the overwhelming majority of whom are Zionists) support a racist ideology.
Today, the National Union of Students (NUS), the body representing seven million students in the UK, has its national conference. One Jewish delegate, Izzy Lenga, has written an article “Why I won`t be at tomorrow`s NUS NEC meeting”, in which she describes the hostile environment that Jewish students are facing on campus in general, and from student leadership in particular.
As readers of The London Magazine will learn in the latest issue of the publication, the American writer Ben Ehrenreich thinks “that the word ‘terrorism’ forms this very powerful narrative function in silencing Palestinian voices and giving the sole authority to Israelis.”
As the Jerusalem Post noted, the most recent FBI hate crime stats for 2015 showed that a shocking 53.3 percent of the religiously motivated hate crimes (or 664 incidents) were directed at Jews, who make up less than 2 percent of the population.
Cross posted from the blog of the Zionist Federation Prolific anti-Israel campaigner Ben White has announced the publication of his latest book: “The 2014 Gaza War: 21 Questions And Answers.” Given that […]
At times we take our collective memory of Guardian coverage of Israel for granted, so we’ve decided to provide a list of some egregious examples of bias and over the years – information helpful in contextualizing our ongoing analysis of the ‘liberal’ British newspaper.