Following communication with UK Media Watch, editors at the Daily Mail corrected an article which stated, as if it were a fact, that Israeli soldiers killed an 11 year old Palestinian boy on the Gaza border.
In over 1200 words of text in Shlaim’s column, there isn’t even once sentence so much as suggesting even the possibility that some Palestinian actions since 1993 may have been injurious to the peace process, illustrating another example of the one-sided, distorted and agenda-driven commentary on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict that Guardian editors consistently promote.
Corbyn and his supporters – including those on the Guardian editorial board – wish to remain free to assert, in some form or another, that “Zionism is racism” and that “Israel has no right to exist” with moral impunity – a fact which explains why the overwhelming majority of British Jews will continue to see the current Labour Party (as well as the pages of the Guardian) as a “hostile environment” antithetical to their values.
In smearing Israel, Jonathan Sacks and – by association – most British Jews, Steve Bell has attempted to grant Jeremy Corbyn and his cult-like band of acolytes the ultimate political get-out-of-jail-free card the times – lifetime moral impunity for expressions of anti-Jewish racism.
Yesterday, the Labour Party adopted – at least for the time being – the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism with all its examples, though with a caveat which Labour Friends of Israel claimed […]
Despite a brief moral throat-clearing, in his Guardian op-ed, on the need to fight ‘real’ antisemitism, by impugning the motives of those calling for the full definition’s adoption, and using dog whistles about ‘Zionist power’ in the UK, Ash Sarkar appears to be as committed to fighting anti-Jewish racism within Labour as the party leader his publication so enthusiastically supports.
Let’s remember that Zionism is the simple recognition that Israel has a right to exist. Anti-Zionism is the belief that Israel doesn’t have a right to exist and shouldn’t exist. It’s not a theoretical discussion, but a radical campaign which seeks the destruction of an actually existing nation-state. Further, anti-Zionists such as Khalidi don’t say nation-states shouldn’t exist. They say that only the Jewish state shouldn’t exist.
British Jews, according to an op-ed endorsed by Sarah Helm, have too much power in Britain, and are using this power to subvert democracy with a well-coordinated smear campaign alleging that Jeremy Corbyn is antisemitic – a charge they know to be untrue.
The real ‘irony’ is that Corbyn’s own words vindicate the work of Millett, which is premised upon the understanding – based on sound empirical evidence and their first person reports over the years – that there’s a strong correlation between antisemitic and anti-Israel attitudes in the UK.
Yet, despite Hamas well-documented history of using such putatively ‘civilian’ structures for military uses, the Guardian largely ignored the IDF’s statement, and parroted Hamas claims the IDF targeted what was merely a cultural centre. In three articles, encompassing over 2500 words of text, the Guardian devoted a mere four sentences, and 173 words, to the Israeli position.
Here’s the latest installment in our ongoing series of posts documenting BDS fails.
Once again, the Guardian has denied readers the full story, omitting crucial details, failing to provide relevant context and erasing nuance – all of which helps advance the desired Guardian narrative, one which invariably imputes maximum Israeli malevolence to any dispute between the two parties.
Whilst it would be wrong to blindly accuse journalists and editors of being personally antisemitic, some within the top echelons of media group – though at times condemning antisemitism in the abstract – seem, much like Corbyn himself, to hold the values and concerns of the mainstream British Jewish community – united in the belief that Labour Party leader represents, as The JC phrased it, “an existential threat to Jewish life in the UK” – in utter contempt.
Are Guardian columnist Owen Jones’ views on Israel and Hamas shaped by “racism = prejudice + power”?
As long as they’re held hostage to the theory that powerlessness grants a degree of impunity against universal moral standards, such an intuitive causal relationship between Hamas’s actions and Gaza’s economic and political outcomes will continue to allude Owens and his fellow travelers within the Corbyn-left.
The Guardian’s Deborah Orr was widely mocked for her bizarre argument that the Shalit prisoner swap with Hamas demonstrated Israeli racism, and she was eventually forced to offer an ‘apology’ of sorts. Corbyn’s 2012 comments on Press TV mirror Orr’s, and provide another illustration of the truly warped thinking which animates many anti-Zionist activists in the UK.
The decision by the Indy editor to promote Noam Chomsky’s charge on Israel’s putative influence on the US political system, without informing readers of the academic’s record of unhinged commentary on Jews, Israel and a host of other international issues, is extremely worrying.
Daniel Barenboim, in his Guardian op-ed, follows in the Guardian tradition of expressing contempt for the state by claiming that its policies betray the country’s founding principles, whilst distorting both the policies and founding principles. His piece attacking the Jewish nation-state law grossly mischaracterises both the bill and the founding Zionist ideals (articulated in Israel’s Declaration of Independence) it is said to betray.
Indy publishes op-ed opposing antisemitism definition by leader of group that has promoted antisemitism
It’s disappointing that Indy editors chose to legitimise duplicitous rhetoric which has the effect of providing cover to those radical voices on the British and American left who claim to be anti-racists yet are openly hostile to the Jewish community.
The Guardian is not interested in articles that challenge their readers’ prejudices against Israel, especially such a counter-intuitive story which offers a glimpse at how Israeli humanitarian efforts has the potential to win some hearts and minds hearts in the hostile Arab world.
These headlines illustrate the failure of journalists and their editors to frame articles in a manner which focuses primarily on Hamas and Islamic Jihad violence and evokes sympathy for Israeli terror victims and the southern communities which are constantly on the receiving end of such attacks. The story they wish to tell demands that facts be molded to conform to the desired David vs Goliath narrative, operates from an assumption that Palestinians lack agency and that the only party in the conflict that matters is Israel. The facts may change, but the story remains the same.