As journalists cover Holocaust commemoration events today in Jerusalem, the lofty rhetoric by world leaders, diplomats and intellectuals evoking the idea ‘never again’ – the moral imperative to never again allow Jew hatred to go unchallenged because we know now where this leads – will ring hollow if the principle of anti-antisemitism is not applied universally.
The Times article fails to note precisely why nearly 80,000 Jews left: the government’s imprisonment, torture and expulsion of Jews, anti-Jewish violence and other anti-Jewish policies that made it impossible for Jews to stay.
As we enter a new decade, we thought it would be fun to look back at some of our more interesting and impactful posts over the past ten years.
A Dec. 29th Guardian report on the brutal Monsey stabbings which targeted Chasidic Jews on Saturday included the following passage, noting comments by NYC mayor Bill De Blasio: De Blasio invoked the Crown […]
This is the fourth in a series of posts by CAMERA Arabic (part 1, part 2, part 3) showing how Arabic language news networks, including those affiliated with Western media outlets, frame […]
Before we provide our examples of Guardian articles, op-eds, cartoons and letters that covered for Jeremy Corbyn’s well documented record of aiding, abetting and, at times, personally engaging in antisemitism, let’s begin with some numbers:
Written by Tamar Sternthal A major media event has hit the biblical town of Bethlehem, Jesus’ birthplace, just days before Christmas: The secretive artist Banksy has produced a new exhibit depicting the […]
Here’s the latest installment in our ongoing series of posts documenting BDS fails
For an op-ed to suggest – in late 2019 – that the chrages of antisemitism against Corbyn were “manufactured”, after years of revelations attesting to his long and well-documented record of supporting anti-Semites who call for the mass murder of Jews, in the context of polls showing 87% of British Jewish believe he’s personally antisemitic, and in the midst of an EHRC investigation into whether the party has become institutionally antisemitic on his watch – is obscene.
As even Nicholas Watt, Guardian’s former chief political correspondent, once acknowledged: “quite often on the left the term right-wing is just used to mean ‘bad'”.
The Labour Party’s reluctant acceptance of the IHRA Working Definition of antisemitism in 2018 didn’t occur without a fight. There was one notable dissenter to the proposal to adopt, in full, the […]
Here are the endorsements by major British media outlets for tomorrow’s general election, and what they wrote about antisemitism in their editorials. The Guardian: Endorsement: Labour On antisemitism: [Corbyn’s] obdurate handling of […]
Videos such as these help explain why 87% of British Jews believe the leader of the Labour Party is personally antisemitic, and why many of them would view his arrival at 10 Downing Street as nothing less than an existential threat to their community.
The writings of Slavoj Žižek, a defender of Lenin and foe of liberal democracy who who has attributed the attacks of 9/11 to the “antagonisms of global capitalism”, have all the markings of a socialist revolutionary intellectual trying desperately to stay relevant in an age which has rejected such historically lethal ideologies. Unsurprisingly, the Corbyn-Milne brand of neo-Marxist politics he embraces also seems intent on at least trying to hide one central component of his core beliefs – an innate hostility to Jews and Israel.
Of course, beyond ‘merely’ his hatred of Israel, the overwhelming majority of British Jews (87%) believe that Corbyn is personally antisemitic, which renders Rifkind’s suggestion, towards the end of her op-ed, that it’s the responsibility of the Jewish community to reach out to and reconcile with Labour a moral inversion of the highest order.
Editors at the Independent upheld our complaint that an op-ed by Robert Fisk included a baseless smear of the group UN Watch, and revised the relevant passage accordingly. However, another false claim in the piece has yet to be corrected.
Alashqar’s article was written with the sole objective of vilifying Israel by amplifying Hamas talking points. Every action or hardship is Israel’s fault no matter what the truth states. Mr Alashqar – alongside so many others – can continue to blame Israel and indemnify Gazans, but this only serves to make peace an ever more distant dream for both Israelis and Palestinians.
Though we should be careful not to overstate the political commonality between the two politicians, both Sanders and Corbyn certainly do seem to share the astonishingly dense and self-serving view that since those on the left are, by definition, anti-racist, those who identify as such should – regardless of what they actually say or do – often be granted moral impunity against charges of antisemitism.
Whatever Shenker’s motivations, his failure to seriously explore the tsunami of anti-Jewish racism in the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn represents a stunning journalistic abdication.
As is often the case when reporting on anti-Israel NGOs, the Guardian article reads more like a HRW press release than anything resembling professional journalism.