Coleslaw with a pinch of Polonium: Bad taste at the Guardian

Petra Marquadt-Bigman..
The Warped Mirror..
05 August '12..



Under the memorable headline “Making Cole-slaw of history,” Martin Kramer documented some years ago just how hilarious it is that Juan Cole calls his blog “Informed Comment” (and for “Cole-slaw”-fans, there is in fact a rich archive of additional helpings). However, it’s apparently no joke that Cole, who is the Richard P. Mitchell Collegiate Professor of History at the University of Michigan, encourages the readers of his blog to send him money because “Informed Comment is made possible by your support.”

In any case, it’s arguably hardly surprising that editors at the Guardian are fans of Juan Cole, and when the professor recently vented his displeasure at Mitt Romney’s visit in Israel, the Guardian secured Cole’s “kind permission” to cross-post the piece on its Comment is Free (CiF) site.

The Guardian made a minor change to Cole’s original title – which read on CiF: “Ten reasons Mitt Romney’s Israel visit is in bad taste” – and added a sub-title: “The Republican presidential hopeful is holding a fundraiser and playing war enabler in Israel – it’s wrong on so many levels.”

The astonishing claim that Romney was “playing war enabler in Israel” is taken from Cole’s reason #7, which reads in part:

Levick - Mya Guarnieri laments possible demise of flotilla stunt

Quotes activist who blames “Zionist tentacles”

Adam Levick
CiF Watch
03 July '11


You almost have to feel sorry for Mya Guarnieri, the occasional CiF contributor.

No, not really. But, the latest dispatch on the flotilla debacle, published in Maan, Organizers: Gaza flotilla era may be over“, July 3rd, from the activist journalist who intended to “cover” the flotilla, seems to express a palpable sense of powerlessness over Israel’s successful efforts – by use of legal, diplomatic, and other means – to prevent the Hamas affiliated publicity stunt from ever getting started.

Guarnieri, who was clearly relishing the chance to Tweet from ‘The Audacity of Hope’, notes:

“Speaking to Maan late Friday in Athens, the flotilla organizers remarked that this year’s embattled effort to sail to Gaza likely spelled the end of the Freedom Flotilla movement…The act of sailing to Gaza is “a tactic,” one of them said. “Maybe it’s run its course.”

She then adds, evidently with a straight face:

“Passengers said the bureaucratic delays, physical blockages and threat of violence were “just a little taste” of the restrictions on freedom of movement faced by the 1.6 million Palestinians who live in Gaza.”

Of course, for some reasons, such “activists” fail to express similar empathy for the restrictions on the rights of women, gays, religious minorities, and political opponents (and the absence of basic civil liberties), imposed on “the 1.6 million Palestinians who live in Gaza” by the same Hamas movement behind the flotilla stunt.

(Read full "Mya Guarnieri laments possible demise of flotilla stunt...")

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

A story about peace and co-existence in Israel that Harriet Sherwood won’t report

Israelinurse
CiF Watch
25 May '11
Posted before Shabbat

http://cifwatch.com/2011/05/25/a-story-about-peace-and-co-existence-in-israel-that-harriet-sherwood-wont-report/

One of the problems with foreign correspondents in Israel is that they are, well…foreign. They don’t speak or read the local languages and are therefore dependent upon getting the news they pass on to their readers from often partisan sources with specific agendas. They therefore usually miss the little stories of everyday life which are important in presenting a realistic view of the entire tapestry of life here.

This is one such story – as reported in a local edition of the Hebrew newspaper Ma’ariv.

Taibeh Town Council is proud to present: Gan Yavne Square


A tribute to co-existence: after sanitation workers from the Gan Yavne regional council helped clean up the streets of Taibeh, it was decided in the Arab town to name the central square there after the Jewish town.


Staff from the local municipality in Gan Yavne recently answered the request of Taibeh Council and arrived to clean up various parts of the town. But they did not imagine that their little town would receive a special tribute from the Arab town: in Taibeh it was decided to change the name of the town’s central square and from now on to call it “Gan Yavne Square”.


Last Thursday Avi Mantsur, who manages the sanitation department in Gan Yavne, went with five of his maintenance and gardening workers to Taibeh. The garbage contractor in the town donated his street-sweeping machine and the team began to clean up the major roads of the Arab town.


As a result of the intensive work, the neglected town square changed its appearance. As a gesture of thanks for the help offered by the local council in Gan Yavne, the general manager of Taibeh Council Sami Talawi decided to call the square after the small town.


“This is an act of solidarity between local councils” said the head of Gan Yavne Council Aharon Dror yesterday (Monday). “The workers were not anxious at all, there was a great reception and it was very nice”.


Dror added “The aim was to bring hearts closer; especially at this time that is important to us all. In the end, we are all citizens of Israel”.


Manager of the department for town improvement in Taibeh Council, Taysir Masarwa, also commented on the special initiative saying “We enjoyed working together. They even said at the end that they would like to come here again. The help they gave us gives a feeling of partnership between the towns. It is rare that people just come and help like that, we need to tell them well done”.

Of course a story like this one will never find its way onto the pages of CiF even though it is right under Harriet Sherwood’s nose. The simple realities of daily co-existence just don’t fit the narrative of ‘the world’s leading liberal voice’.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Guardian-Left MP Jeremy Corbyn’s obsessive malevolence towards Israel

Adam Levick
CiF Watch
22 March '11

One of the more bizarre political dynamics regarding the obsession with Israel – the amount of public space devoted to dissecting every conceivable Israeli sin, real and (largely) imagined, holding the Jewish state to moral and political standards which no other nation is held to (certainly no other nation in the tyranny-laden Middle East) – is the moral inversion engaged by those who not only deny that this double standard exists, but who argue further that the inverse is true, that Israel is held to a lower level of accountability than other states.

Jeremy Corbyn’s contribution in CiF, March 21, concerning what he characterizes as the UK’s “suspicious” “rush to war” in Libya is nothing remarkable, but his pivot, further in the essay, from exploring this skepticism over the wisdom of Western military intervention in Libya to attacking Israel is indicative of the Guardian Left – in which nearly any issue in the region can devolve into fodder for the demonization of the Jewish state:

Corbyn (a Labour MP for Islington North) says:

“One can’t help but be struck by the rush to military involvement [in Libya] by politicians of all countries and all persuasions. The contrast with the western treatment of the rest of the region could not be more stark. The Palestinian people have lived with occupation for 60 years, well over 1,000 died in Gaza during Operation Cast Lead, settlements abound and Israel possesses nuclear weapons. I can’t remember anyone calling for a no-fly zone in Gaza in winter 2008-09 when phosphorous bombs were used against a largely unarmed and defenceless civilian population.”

First, regarding:

“Palestinians have lived with occupation for 60 years.”

At best, this is simply unintelligible. Israel took control of the West Bank after defeating four Arab armies in a defensive war in 1967 – 43 years ago – so its unclear what occupation Corbyn is referring to, unless of course he’s suggesting, as Hamas and other extremists do, that all of Israel (even within pre-1967 borders) is illegitimate and should be considered occupied territory.

(Read full "Guardian-Left MP Jeremy Corbyn’s obsessive malevolence towards Israel")

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

The Guardian Left, and “respectable” hate

Adam Levick
CiF Watch
06 March '11

In late January, during the height of the “Palestine Papers”, the Guardian went through their inbox of letter submissions and decided to publish one by Ted Honderich which morally sanctioned acts of terrorism by Palestinians against innocent Israeli men, women, and children.

Thus, the Guardian’s vast audience (over 30 million unique visitors per month) was implicitly informed – by their decision to post that particular brief polemic over the countless others which were submitted – that such acts of murder could, at the very least, reasonably be justified from a respectable liberal perspective.

The key words here are “respectable” and “liberal”, as the Guardian represents, in the view of the UK opinion elite and those who are influenced by, and abide by, such judgments, the gatekeepers of the liberal left journalistic establishment and, therefore, what their editors chose to publish (and not to publish) carries an enormous amount of influence and ideological weight.

This is the context by which today’s letter published in the Guardian (which Akus adeptly replied to earlier) by W. Williamson must be viewed.

Williamson – in responding to Nick Cohen’s essay “Our absurd obsession with Israel is laid bare” – posited the following:

[Israel] denies human rights and democratic choices in Gaza

To even have to fisk this charge gives it more credibility than it deserves, but since the Guardian deemed it worthy of such credibility, it must be noted how utterly fantastical such a sentence actually is. It evidently really does need reminding that Hamas is the governing authority in Gaza, that they are the power which denies Palestinians within their territory basic human rights, that they brutally expelled the only real opposition (Fatah) in a coup in 2007, and they – not Israel – has made the decision not to hold elections since.

(Read full "The Guardian Left, and “respectable” hate")

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page..

The Importance of Being Rosalind Levy

Adam Levick
CiF Watch
27 February '11

Back in November 2010, I wrote a post about the disproportionate number of anti-Israel letters published in the Guardian. Nothing much has changed on that front, of course, but a belated comment recently appeared on the defunct thread from a signatory of one of the letters mentioned in the article – a Ms. Rosalind Levy.

Rosalind Levy:

I am disappointed to see that you neither got my full name nor any of my affiliations : (Labour Party, Amnesty, Co-op, JFJFP, JBig).
I am furious to be described as anti Israeli, I am not. I am anti the current government in the same way that I am anti the current government of Zimbabwe. I am anti the shitty things that the administration does, particularly because as a jew it is assumed they are done in my name and I support them. David Beauvais has said it for me.

Had the (self-Googling?) Ms. Levy bothered to click upon the supplied link to the original letter as published in the Guardian she would have seen that her name appears there exactly in the format in which it was reproduced in the post: Ros Levy. Complaints should therefore be addressed either to the Guardian or to herself for signing it in that way.

As for Ms. Levy’s ‘affiliations’, they too were not mentioned in the original letter and to be frank, it really is just too tedious to waste time investigating the background of every one of the handful of members of such insignificant fringe groups as JfJfP, JBig and such like, particularly as the same names tend to crop up like mushrooms after the rain whenever a new one of these groups is launched. However, seeing as Ms. Levy herself has brought the subject into the public arena, let’s take a closer look at some of her objections.

The core argument she presents is the following:

“I am anti the current government in the same way that I am anti the current government of Zimbabwe.”

Leaving aside the repugnant and unserious comparison of Israel to Zimbabwe, that argument can of course only begin to hold water on the day that we see Ms. Levy’s signature on the launch of JfJfZ (Jews for Justice for Zimbabweans) or JBzg (Jews for boycotting Zimbabwean goods). Naturally, one doubts that the prefix ‘Jews for’ would make any impression whatsoever in campaigns relating to any subject other than Israel – maybe Ms. Levy should ask herself exactly why that should be the case.

In addition, Ms. Levy has been busy signing a plethora of anti-Israeli letters and petitions for several years – long before the current Israeli government came to office – and so her claim to be ‘anti the current government’ is obviously dishonest.

One also wonders whether Ms. Levy has used her affiliation to the discredited Amnesty International to try to get the subject of Zimbabwe discussed at least once at the UN Human Rights Council (I appreciate that it must be very difficult to find a time-slot in among all the relentless discussion of Israel, but even so…) or to get some much-needed balance in their reporting so that the number of reports and press releases might actually reflect the regions of the world with the greatest abuses of personal liberties and worst loss of life.

Likewise, Ms. Levy’s declared ‘affiliation’ to the Co-op could maybe prompt her to demand from that company that its bank cease to provide services to ‘Viva Palestina’ which, contrary to British law, has provided material and cash aid to a proscribed terrorist organization which targets Israel’s civilian population – a clear and evident war crime.

(Read full "The Importance of Being Rosalind Levy")

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Do Guardian reporters, who consistently demonstrate an egregious bias against Israel, truly believe what they’re saying is true?

Adam Levick
CiF Watch
26 December '10

A few weeks ago, Yaacov Lozowick linked to, and commented on, Israelinurse’s widely read 6 Month Overview of Harriet Sherwood’s articles in the Guardian.

Lozowick argued:

There’s no way [Sherwood] can be as biased as she is without knowing that’s what she is.

But then asked:

Yet is this truly so?

He then reflected on the broader question:

It’s a question I’ve been pondering for decades, and have never quite convinced myself either way: when [anti-Zionists] frame reality to reinforce their animosities, do they do so in bad faith (i.e do they know they’re lying or framing in a deceitful manner), or are they so carried away by their detestations that they lose track, and really begin to sincerely believe what they’re? This is not an easy question to answer.

I think this is a very interesting question, so, we’ll leave it to you. In addition to participating in the poll by clicking here, feel free to express your opinion in the comment section.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

A Movement of Hate, Pt. II

To read Part I, click here.


Robert Harris
Frontpagemag.com
11 May '10

The pro-Palestinian movement is profoundly undemocratic with regard to dissenting views. All contentious issues have at least two points of view. A level of reasoned discussion is often required to bring about a fair resolution to a given issue. While most of us can have strong reactions to the opinions of others when they are unpalatable, we still recognize they are entitled to have differing opinions. The need for free speech is meaningless if we all agree with each other, and it is a necessary characteristic of having a free, open society.

Today, in honor of Yom Yerushalayim, a very special video - Jerusalem Day: Reflections by Rabbi Yisrael Ariel

However, nowhere more so than with the Israeli-Palestinian debate does a genuine belligerence occur when there is a divergence of opinion away from the predominant pro-Palestinian narrative of the conflict. Whenever anyone endorses an opinion in the media or on the Internet that is even mildly critical of the Palestinians or mildly supportive of Israel they are typically subjected to extreme criticism. Palestinian sympathisers often use a variety of dishonest methods of argumentation. One common method of counter-argument largely avoids confronting the issue at hand. A pro-Israel article dealing with a particular topic is broadly dismissed but typically issues are cited that are beyond the scope of said article and as a consequence vitriolic scorn is often heaped upon it. Even lengthy articles can only deal with a limited number of topics in a limited number of words, and can only address a limited number of responses. Yet they are typically attacked to such an extent it comes across as an attempt, wherever possible, to discredit articles supporting Israel.

The Guardian newspaper has been for some time a notoriously biased publication when it comes to matters of the Middle East. Any article that doesn’t roundly condemn Israel is subjected to extreme prolific criticism below in the Comment is Free (CIF) Internet comment sections that is often very abusive in nature. Furthermore, rather than just criticising the content of the article, many comments can be extremely personal in nature. An author’s reputation can be put into disrepute by claiming he or she is a “holocaust denier,” under the control of “Zionist paymasters” etc. The moderators of the Comment is Free section often allow deeply anti-Semitic views to also be expressed. The criticism is very prolific, with comments sometimes numbering in the thousands. The Comment is Free section is an extreme example from a mainstream newspaper but this sort of activity is nonetheless very common.

It should be clear that this sort of behaviour represents an attempt to intimidate and essentially shout down any dissenting opinions. This does not only happen on the Internet. On discussion shows the same often occurs, and in mainstream publications few moderate articles on the conflict ever go unanswered (forcefully) in letters pages. From colloquial evidence, many that defend Israel are sometimes subjected to serious threats, which needs to be discussed openly.

(Read full article)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Setting the record straight on the Jews of Syria

Bataween
Point of No Return
02 February '10

Jews left Syria for the Americas, 'not for the embarrassment of Zionism next door'. Muslims 'saved' the Aleppo Codex. 'Riots never happened' against the Jews, but if they did the Israelis inflicted the same oppression on the 'innocent' Palestinians. Taking Syria's sorry treatment of its Jews as an example, Israelinurse bravely tackles some of the myths on the Guardian Comment is Free website where revisionism on the plight of Mizrahi Jews is rife. Read her piece on CiF watch :

"There is, of course, ample information both in print and on-line readily available for those who wish to inform themselves about the experiences of Mizrahi and Sephardi Jews. One useful publication which predates the electronic era is Sir Martin Gilbert’s atlas entitled ‘The Jews of Arab Lands – Their History in Maps’ from 1976, in which one can see at a glance exactly what befell the Jews of Syria, and those in other Arab countries, in stark contrast to the myths propagated above.

"In 1943 the Jewish population of Syria numbered some 29,770, in 1946 it had fallen to 18,000 and in 1974 there remained only 4,000 Jews there. In Kamishliye in June 1967, 57 Jews were murdered by a mob of anti-Jewish rioters. In Aleppo, where Jews had lived since biblical times, predating Islam by many centuries of course, the Great Synagogue was looted and prayer books burnt in the street on November 18th, 1945. On December 2nd, 1947, just days after the adoption of the UNSC resolution to establish the State of Israel, many Jews were killed in anti-Jewish riots; 150 Jewish homes, 50 shops, 18 Synagogues and 5 schools were set ablaze. Some Jews fled to the Yishuv after this incident, including the father of a friend of mine who describes himself as a ‘Halabi’ and recounts his night-time trek down the slopes of the Golan Heights carrying his precious oud. Others fared less well: in November 1950, 30 Syrian Jews were murdered at sea by Arab seamen paid to take them by boat to Israel.

(Read post in full)
.

Rights Against Safety

Yaacov Lozowick
Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations
28 January "10

My first post this morning favorably compared Jessica Montell of B'tselem with the rank antisemites who congregate at Mondoweiss, CiF and elsewhere. Well, here's some balance: a demonstration of the weakness in the thinking of Israel's radicals - in this case, Hamoked, Center for the Protection of the Individual.

Hamoked is not a very important organization, but it does have some presence. It's thesis is that Israel is unjust to Palestinian individuals and this must be corrected - so far, so reasonable. When you note that they have no problem criticizing the Supreme Court (High Court of Justice, HCJ, which I have recently mentioned as Bagatz) you begin to see that they're well off the mainstream. Israelis criticize the High Court sometimes, but carefully. The Left, rarely. The far Left, however, don't feel inhibited.

The reason I'm mentioning Hamoked is an e-mail they've sent out. It wasn't meant for me, but e-mails have the habit of washing up at strange shores. This one is an attempt to recruit a writer for their website. They've got eight lines of necessary qualifications, most of them just what you'd expect (English and Hebrew writing abilities, legal background, that sort of thing). Yet it's the first qualification which is telling:

מחויבות מוצקה לנושא זכויות אדם, לרבות במצבים של התנגשות בין זכויות אדם לצרכי ביטחון
High commitment to human rights, especially in cases of conflicts between human rights and security issues (needs).

(Read full post)
.

Guardian website contributor says that recalcitrant Israeli settlers should be “slaughtered” in latest example of a new phenomenon in Great Britain

Robin Shepherd
robinshepherdonline.com
12 January '10

One of the new realities of the internet age for the mainstream media is that the distinction between an opinion piece and the readers’ comments which come below it is increasingly blurred. This is all the more so for interactive sites such as the Guardian’s immensely popular Comment is free (Cif) site where regular “below the line” contributors are now as much a part of the overall experience as the commentary to which they are responding. Such contributors help create the kind of interactive community which has become the new holy grail of online news and comment services.

So, when it comes to the Guardian’s notoriously vicious stance against the state of Israel it is hardly suprising that the community that has been created draws from among the foulest and most bigoted of the Jewish state’s numerous opponents. As an example, consider the following comment by regular below-the-line contributor William Bapthorpe which was brought to my attention by the invaluable media watchdog service CiF Watch. Referring to the settlers, in a thread following an article by Nicholas Blincoe, he said:

“Sadly, there’s only one way to deal with these religiously motivated maniacs who think their superstitious beliefs trump international law. 1. We ask them to leave their squats, kindly. 2. If they don’t, we force them to [leave] at gunpoint. 3. If they still refuse, they must be slaughtered, every last man woman and child.” (My italics)

If this were simply an isolated incident it would not be worth remarking on. Every website attracts its share of oddballs. But CiF Watch, which was set up last year to monitor a Guardian online community that attracts more than 30 million visits a month, provides reams of this sort of thing suggesting that at the intersection between the technological innovations of the new media and an ideological edifice which makes a fetish of demonising the most important Jewish project of our time an entirely new phenomenon has now emerged in Great Britain.

(Read full article)
.