Wednesday 18 April 2018

The BBC's antisemitism problem vol ll

It is completely dispiriting to read comments all over the blogosphere stating that all the fuss and furore over Labour’s antisemitism problem will make little or no difference. Not to the party itself, not to the thousands of new members, not to the voters, not to anyone.
The media is already losing interest. The debate in the HoC has come and gone. Corbyn has “chuntered” and mumbled, has walked out of the debate during some of the most impassioned speeches, has been heckled, has refused to participate in the debate himself, has stymied a forthcoming meeting with the mainstream Jewish community by insisting that the Jewish antisemitism-denying faction is present to shield him from reality, and is sitting tight until the fuss dies down. Which it will.

The media bears a huge responsibility for this state of affairs. Although the debate was impressive and emotional, much of it was irrelevant. Certainly the speeches by the Jewish and non Jewish MPs who had been bullied and abused online, them and their families threatened with rape or murder were affecting. But the only speech that got to the nub was one that hardly anyone else has highlighted. So I’ll do it here.
Chris Green MP 18.37.33

"There is the frequent demonisation - the unique demonisation of the State of Israel, which happens only to the Jewish State. No other comparison happens wit any other country in the world. the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign represents a unique attack on Israel, and lends itself not just to anti Zionism but also to antisemitism. It is the attempted isolation of Israel through commerce, academia, and through culture. 
Isn’t it incredible, that we would seek to isolate Israel to stop businessmen and women, to stop academics and to stop artists and musicians working in and working with the State of Israel. Increasingly Jews in Europe are leaving for Israel; we must deal with antisemitism in Britain before British Jews fee they have to leave our land."

All the fuss about the washed-out has-been Ken Livingstone is a distraction.  Yes, chuck him out. Suspend him definitely. Get him sectioned. I don’t care. But deal with the BBC’s one-sided, anti-Israel reporting or you’ll never ever rid the Labour Party or the political left of antisemitism.


  1. Tomorrow we celebrate the 70th Anniversary of the Jewish State and we have so much to celebrate !! So many people owe their lives to Israeli advances in medicine and science and humanitarian work -Will highlight just one eg from the past that people forget. Israel saved the lives of thousands of Palestinian Arabs who lived in appalling conditions in Jerusalem under Jordanian rule until Israel liberated them in 1967.
    Enjoy and see how Israel continues to save lives all over the world.

    1. I doubt we'll see much celebrating on the BBC...

  2. During the height of the conflict in 2014 there was an article in my local paper containing all the now familiar slogans and platitudes condemning Israel. The following week, in the letters page there was an overwhelming support for the right of Israel to defend itself. The kind of people who write to local papers are probably not the same demographic as hardcore Corbynistas or Beeboids, but nevertheless I believe there is much more support for Israel than the MSM would have us believe

  3. The attitude to Israel is in my view the litmus test on anti-semitism. There really isn't that much to complain about Israel and much to celebrate. People who obsess about Israel are clearly driven by something other than concern for "Palestinian" Arabs, because if there obsession could be justified on rational grounds, they would be equally obsessive about China's occupation of Tibet, Australia's treatment of aborigines, Turkey's occupation of traditional Greek lands, India's occupation of Kashmir, Russia's occupation of Chechnya, Morocco's occupation of W. Sahara, and Chile's occupation of Bolivia's traditional access to the sea...but they're not. They only obsess about Israel.

    Clearly Corbyn and half the Labour Party do fail the litmus test as do most Liberal Democrats and many Conservatives.

  4. I see that the April 12th QT re anti-Semitism was dealt with here at the time, but I thought I'd add some observations on this thread.

    Freedland amazed me when he almost got to the crux of the issue re Labour by exploring the origins of anti-Semitism - of the left and far left within Labour - thereby contradicting Barry Gardner who, incredibly, appears to think that Corbyn is genuinely attempting to deal with the issue. I was impressed by Freedland's assertion that Israel is irrelevant to this aforementioned anti-Semitism. That really needs to be acknowledged by the left.

    However, in failing to mention Muslim hatred of Jews as
    a powerful influencing factor he demonstrated that he shares the ideological blindness of so many of his fellow lefties when it comes to radical Islam.

    He also claimed that Corbyn himself is not anti-Semitic. How would he know that?

    It's evident that Corbyn's obsession is to scratch and satisfy his far-left, pro-radical-Islam ideological itch; his mumbling and fumbling claim that Hezbollah and Hamas are not his "friends" was simply the lie of a cunning politician driven into a corner - in that instance by Cameron.

    But nobody is fooled - and certainly not the Jewish members of Labour.

    I suppose there is a faint hope that he will be shamed into action against anti-Semitism within his party. But I suspect that he is simply playing a waiting game - until such time as the far left and the Islamists have enough influence within the electorate to elevate him to power.

    What a prospect. I fear for the UK in the absence of anyone who can provide a strong alternative to Corbyn.

    1. Good analysis, TrueToo...and one has to add that Freedland is a very intelligent guy, well versed in history - and one with that background cannot fail to see what Sharia means for women, gays, Jews and other non-Muslims (and also historians, one might add, because they too will be unable to speak of things that are Haram). Tom Holland, the writer and historian, clearly gets it, so why doesn't Freedland? Because he chooses not to.

  5. Thanks for that response, Monkey Brains. I think Freedland chooses not to get it because he suffers from the delusion common to left-wingers - that the immigrant other, though needy, is essentially noble and good and will repay friendship and assistance with undying gratitude. The fact that Muslim immigrant others contain large numbers of terrorists and terrorist supporters within their ranks is either denied or ignored, as is rife Islamic anti-Semitism.

    No doubt Freedland, as a Jew, also feels compelled to embrace the other out of an awareness of the callous refusal of so many to offer refuge to Jews fleeing the

    I wanted to email him and so I braced myself and clicked on the Guardian but unfortunately could only find his Twitter account.

    Well, I guess I could condense what I want to tell him into Twitter's stingy character allowance:

    Don't be fooled, Mr. Freedland. The new Nazis are here, more are flooding in and, just like the old Nazis, they are obsessed with killing Jews and enslaving or killing everyone else who doesn't look and think like them.


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.