BBC One’s scandal-plagued dance show limps to a conclusion tonight

BBC One’s scandal-plagued dance show limps to a conclusion tonight: "It has been plagued by a race row, accusations of ageism and a crippling scheduling battle with The X Factor. But tonight Strictly Come Dancing will limp to a conclusion.

"

BBC to cut Jonathan Ross's pay (but he'll still get £2m)

BBC to cut Jonathan Ross's pay (but he'll still get £2m): "
Jonathan Ross could have his £6million annual salary slashed by two-thirds as he enters talks with the BBC over his contract."

Jonathan Ross offers to take 50 per cent pay cut to stay at the BBC

Jonathan Ross offers to take 50 per cent pay cut to stay at the BBC: "Jonathan Ross has offered to take a pay cut of 50 per cent to stay at the BBC, which would reduce his salary to £3 million a year."

BBC apologises for asking: 'Should homosexuals face execution'

BBC apologises for asking: 'Should homosexuals face execution': "A BBC manager has apologised for a web discussion question which asked:
''Should homosexuals face execution?''"

Rage Against The Machine swear on BBC Radio 5 live

Rage Against The Machine swear on BBC Radio 5 live: "Rage Against The Machine swore during a live performance of their song Killing
In The Name on Radio 5 live."

English get Welsh TV after Freeview changeover (and the reception is furious)

English get Welsh TV after Freeview changeover (and the reception is furious): "
Homes as far as 90 miles from Wales are getting Welsh-language service S4C instead of Channel 4 and English-language BBC Wales instead of BBC1."

The Ultimate Betrayal

The Ultimate Betrayal: "

If you wanted a prime example of the Palestinian propaganda machine’s belligerent self-pity in full flow and of the Guardian’s complete commitment to lying by omission by privileging one side of the story only in order to underpin its inveterate demonisation of Israel, you need look no further than Harriet Sherwood’s “Childhood in Ruins”

Of course Gaza children are traumatised and that trauma is none of their own making, but neither is it only of Israel’s. Yet nowhere in this execrable compendium of omissions is there any attempt to make this clear. On the contrary, Harriet Sherwood refers more than once to John Ging, who works for UNRWA and can therefore hardly said to be unbiased (see here for his significant omissions about alleged IDF culpability in the UN school incident during Cast Lead, and here for a more balanced and contextualised account of the incident) and yet nowhere does Sherwood make clear that the school was later found to have been used by Hamas to fire on the IDF from among the civilians sheltering there.

In her one-sided account, Sherwood spares us nothing about the desperate plight of Palestinian children, and desperate it is. Again, however, there is no attempt to give us the context of this, rather the article heaps all blame and opprobrium upon Israel, reserving none at all for Hamas which is on record as deliberately using those children to be human shields. (See here also).

To read Sherwood, it is as if Cast Lead and its results for these children arrived out of the blue and from nothing Hamas did. Nowhere, for example, are mentioned the eight years of shelling from Gaza endured by the families of Sderot and the effects of this on their children, for example. Nowhere is mentioned the Muslim on Muslim violence in Gaza, much of it witnessed first-hand by Palestinian children, and which, it is reasonable to argue, was as much responsible for their mental health problems as were the abuses of their human rights by their leaders or by anything the IDF did during Cast Lead itself.

Worse, Palestinian psychiatrists are roped in to be part of the anti-Israel propaganda machine. Of course to side with Hamas openly, rather than remain neutral as any ethical practitioner should, may be a vital prerequisite for their own safety, but they are not helping the situation. As professionals theirs should be voices of reason against the mindless violence rather than trying to find excuses for it without making any attempts to change it.

Sherwood does not hesitate to blame Israel for the potential for violence in Palestinian children. Of course she ignores the psychological damage resulting from witnessing first hand the Muslim on Muslim violence, particularly after Cast Lead, which I refer to above, and equally carefully avoids any mention of the indoctrination by Hamas of even the very young to aspire to suicide terror (and see also here and here ).

Most human beings are afraid of death and few willingly embrace it. Children do not have a sense of the “foreverness” of death and are likely to be afraid of it. Research by Itamar Marcus points up that Hamas deliberately sets out to eradicate children’s fear of death by initially making a game out of it.

Thus, at six to nine years of age, Hamas will encourage children at its schools and summer camps to play games which “normalise” violent death: Marcus tells us that Palestinian children play the “Shahid Game,” in which children act out a Shahid’s funeral. An interesting note on this game: the children argue who will have the honour of playing the dead child. “I am younger than you. I should be the one to die!” is the 6-year-old’s assertion. Even at this young age, they have already internalized the message that the honourable role is that of the Shahid.

At ages ten to thirteen, many of these children are already actively expressing a wish to die. Marcus describes how in July 2002, two articulate 11-year-old girls were interviewed in the studio of official Palestinian Authority TV. Among other topics, they spoke of their personal yearning to achieve death through Shahada – Death for Allah – and of a similar desire they said exists in “every Palestinian child.” It is striking and horrifying that their desire for death was expressed as a personal goal, not related to the conflict with Israel, having been convinced that dying for Allah is preferable to life. Their goal in living is not to experience a good life, but to achieve the proper death – Shahada.

These children are groomed and ready for their handlers to send them out on “martyrdom” missions by the time they reach fourteen to seventeen years of age. Marcus quotes from an article in the New York Times of 25^th April 2002, that three 14-year old boys set out to attack an Israeli village, hoping to be killed. They left farewell letters which included phrases from the TV clip “Farewell Letter” which was broadcast hundreds of times on PA TV: “The child Yussouf Zaakut wrote: ’…Don’t cry for me. Bury me with my brothers and with the Shahids…’”

Sherwood’s and the Guardian’s show of concern for Palestinian children, whilst ignoring the harm done to their psyches by the very people they and their parents should be able to trust, rings very hollow indeed given the foregoing. However this is the Guardian where facts are distorted routinely to service the Guardian World View that Israel alone is the unique evil in the world and Hamas and its fellow travellers (which include its supporters on “Comment is Free”), who have such a reprehensible attitude to the safety of Palestinian children, are portrayed as the victims and are therefore foolishly and misguidedly absolved from all guilt and blame for their evil deeds.

Tagged: Antisemitism, Comment is Free, Guardian

"

Can we stop being so polite about anti-Semitism?

Can we stop being so polite about anti-Semitism?: "

This is a cross post by Professor Gil Troy from the Jerusalem Post Blogs

On Wednesday, 490 parliamentarians, diplomats, government officials, activists, academics, community leaders and clerics from 50 countries gathered at the Knesset for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ two-day Global Forum against Anti-Semitism.

While unhappy about missing two days of Hanukkah vacation with my kids, having attended two previous Forums I know I am going to enjoy myself. I will meet interesting, insightful idealists, both Jewish and non-Jewish, who care about fighting injustice. I will reunite with friends from the earlier conferences. We will eat lavish dinners, listen to compelling presentations, and hopefully make useful suggestions. Still, I will feel guilty. Fighting anti-Semitism should neither be so much fun nor so routine.

I understand that an event hosting dignitaries must be elegant, and the Foreign Ministry under the leadership of Aviva Raz-Shechter and her under-funded Department for Combating Anti-Semitism do a great job hosting. But as we politely follow academic and diplomatic protocols at our sessions and cocktails, I will occasionally think of a beheaded Daniel Pearl, a tortured Ilan Halimi, rotting in their graves.

Daniel Pearl, a 39-year-old, Stanford educated Wall Street Journal reporter, was kidnapped and slaughtered, his head cut off and his body hacked into ten pieces by Islamists in Pakistan in February 2002. Ilan Halimi, a 23-year-old French salesman, was kidnapped in January 2006 by an anti-Semitic gang, tortured for three weeks, then dumped with burns on 80 percent of his body, which he did not survive. I will also remember the hundreds of Israelis murdered by Palestinian suicide bombers perverted by the torrent of harsh anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli images emanating from Palestinian mosques, Palestinian leaders and the Arab media. And I will recall Elie Wiesel’s teaching during the Palestinian terror wave that sometimes, the most rational response to evil is anger.

Anger is the active ingredient in the success of movements, be it Civil Rights, feminism, gay liberation, anti-Communism, Soviet Jewry or Zionism itself. When successfully channeled, anger can put oppressors and moral slobs on the defensive, adjust common language patterns, heighten people’s sensitivities and change history.

For starters, we should shake up and wake up the Jewish community, teaching that fighting the New Anti-Semitism requires going beyond business as usual. The Jewish world has been stymied because too many feel guilty about the false charge that Jews squelch criticism of Israel by crying “anti-Semitism.” This charge is particularly ludicrous considering the intense criticism leveled against Israel in Israel, the Jewish world and the world over, along with the stunning lack of self-criticism within the Arab world. One rarely hears criticism of the lack of Arab or Muslim self-criticism while Jews and Israelis are constantly criticizing themselves, while also criticizing themselves and being criticized for not being critical enough.

The New Anti-Semites go far beyond reasonable criticism of Israel. The BDS (boycott, divestment, sanctions) movement is guilty of Exclusivity - meaning singling Israel out – and Essentialism – meaning attacking Israel’s existence, not Israeli policy. Both are marks of bigotry. Nevertheless, recently the Board of the San Francisco Jewish Federation could not bring itself to approve this resolution:

The S.F. Jewish Federation will not support events or organizations that defame Israel. Nor will it support organizations that partner in their events with individuals or groups that call for boycotts, divestment or sanctions (BDS) against Israel.”

In fairness, the Board condemned the BDS movement (what the Toronto Federation has rechristened the blacklist, demonize and slander movement), but this clearer resolution failed.

Nevertheless, this resolution should be tabled at every major Jewish organization as part of a broad campaign repudiating BDS. And we should be clear. This is not a “Free speech” question or an attempt to muzzle debate over Israel. The resolution opposes subsidized speech, using Jewish community dollars, which like all charitable funds are sacred, to finance harsh blacklist proponents attending Jewish film festivals or mounting borderline-anti-Semitic plays.

Second, the fight against anti-Semitism, against blacklisting and for Israel begins at home, in the homeland. Israelis can be the most effective ambassadors in the fight against BDS - this fight for survival should transcend most political divisions and harness the kind of ingenuity Israelis bring to more conventional battlefields. Israelis must understand that, despite their “Start-up Nation” Hi Tech inventiveness, if the European Union boycotts Israel, the economic impact would be devastating. The threat is real - but is dismissed and usually seen, unfortunately, through a left-right prism.

Moreover, Israeli critics of Israeli policy must understand that in an age of instant communication, what they say “within the family,” echoes throughout the world. Israel’s harshest critics quote Israelis incessantly. No Israelis should be forced to change their politics, no matter what opponents would choose to do. But ALL Israelis should watch their language, understanding that false Nazi/Apartheid/Racism analogies feed Israel’s enemies, who wish to exterminate the state. There is a rich bank of historical analogies and words Israeli critics can use to criticize Israel. They must learn how harmful the Nazi and Apartheid analogies are and how they are used against Israel’s right to exist.

Third, we need a “Let Israel Live” anti-BDS campaign, built on the style of the Soviet Jewry movement, mounting a legal but in-your-face grassroots attempt to delegitimize Israel’s delegitimizers. We should shout down Iranian diplomats for representing a country with genocidal designs on Israel. We must confront Saudi, Egyptian and Palestinian diplomats when their official news organs spread harsh anti-Semitic caricatures. We should put left-wing BDSers on the defensive, showing how Essentialism and Exclusivity perpetuate prejudice, particularly traditional anti-Semitic patterns.

Last week, in Ottawa, during a break in testimony at the hearings of the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism, I confronted some pro-boycott union officials. I asked why they attacked what one of their resolutions called (ungrammatically) “the apartheid nature of the Israel state” rather than making specific criticisms of Israeli labor policy in the territories, as the union president had done during testimony. One of the activists admitted they were distancing themselves from the apartheid formulation because “it wasn’t effective.” Not “effective” means generating too much pushback.

Pushing back isn’t polite and it isn’t always nice. For all our justifiable anger, it should be channeled strategically, constructively. And, yes, when necessary, we should put on suits, eat nice meals, and build coalitions with dignitaries. But while networking, let’s remember the ugly realities that demand fixing not because “the Jews” demand it but because justice does.

__________

Gil Troy is Professor of History at McGill University on leave in Jerusalem. He is the author of Why I Am a Zionist: Israel, Jewish Identity and the Challenges of Today. His latest bookThe Reagan Revolution: A Very Short Introduction, was recently published by Oxford University Press.

Tagged: Antisemitism, Gil Troy, Global Forum Against Anti-Semitism

"

Ireland, Ireland

Ireland, Ireland: "The BBC gave the Irish sex abuse cases top billing

They even made a Vatican-driven reorganisation of the Irish Catholic Church the main item on Radio Four news a fortnight later.

Yesterday the resignation of a bishop made the PM news, with interviews and a correspondent report. Three online news items.

You'd almost think Ireland hadn't been an independent nation for the past 90-odd years.

Yet coverage of the Irish budget, which made such a contrast to Alistair Darling's earlier statement, was almost non-existent.

Most odd.

Admittedly Darling's budget was the same day. But the Irish budget was important in that it was an attempt to shore up an economy which was over-borrowed, with collapsing tax revenues, a massive deficit, banks that survived by the skin of the taxpayer's teeth and questions over the government's credit-worthiness.

Not too far away from what we see in the UK, in fact. Obvious parallels begging to be drawn, yet Robert Peston, Stephanie Flanders and the BBC News editors heroically denied themselves.

Can't imagine why the two topics should get such differing treatment. Can you?

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

BRUSSELS THIEVES "ADOPT" A NEW BUDGET

BRUSSELS THIEVES "ADOPT" A NEW BUDGET: "The European Parliament, not content with awarding themselves a thieving pay rise of 20% at a time when most lesser mortals are lucky to have a job at all, has now also decided to increase the EU's budget as a whole by 6% a year to a staggering 122bn euros. The UK's contribution to the total is also going up massively - thanks to a sell-out by Tony Blair in 2005 - by an horrific 60% (to 7.2bn euros). Bearing in mid that the EU has failed to file satisfactory accounts for more than a decade this is larceny on a massive scale from the British tax-payer. Our money, your money is being used like water to fund the most bloated and unnecessary bureaucracy in the world.

How does the BBC report this ratcheting up of the EU's self-aggrandisement? Are they worried at all, do they think it's a subject for investigation? Does it occur to them that a time of recession, these kleptocrats should be exercising restraint? Not at all. To the BBC, their friends in Brussels have merely 'adopted' a bigger budget. Just like that.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

A LIGHT GOES OUT AT THE BBC...

A LIGHT GOES OUT AT THE BBC...: "Sorry to see Sir Terry Wogan broadcast his final early morning show. I think he was one of the few stars left in the BBC crown and when Chris Evans take his place in January I shall not be listening. Sir Terry's genial charm, lack of vulgarity and common decency will be missed by many people and he leaves the BBC looking a poorer place.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

CLIMATECON CLIMAX APPROACHES...

CLIMATECON CLIMAX APPROACHES...: "Anyone catch the BBC lead item on Today this morning at 8.10am? In a marvellous example of what the BBC sees as balance, we had Roger Harribin and Lord Stern discussing the chances of a 'positive outcome' for those 'developing nations.' The very idea that these third world kleptocracies are out to get as much of our financial resources as possible is never discussed. The images of Chavez and Mugabe thundering attack and attack on the free market economy is quietly ditched and replaced with pics of those oh-so-cuddly Polar bears. The BBC narrative is all about whether or not this collective of socialists and eco-loons can 'do the deal' and so irreparably damage our future. But hey, you can trust the BBC to provide all shades of opinion on this one, can't you?

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

Ross offers to take 50% BBC pay cut

Ross offers to take 50% BBC pay cut: "Jonathan Ross is said to have offered to accept a 50% pay cut - which would slash his annual salary by £3 million.

"

Trafigura accepts £25,000 damages from BBC over waste dumping allegations

Trafigura accepts £25,000 damages from BBC over waste dumping allegations: "The oil-trading company Trafigura accepted £25,000 libel damages and an apology today over a BBC Newsnight claim that its actions had caused deaths, miscarriages, serious injuries and long-term sickness."

BBC treats religion like 'rare species' to be studied by Attenborough, says Church

BBC treats religion like 'rare species' to be studied by Attenborough, says Church: "The BBC risks treating religion like a 'rare species' to be studied by David
Attenborough, according to the Church of England."

BBC apologises for asking 'should homosexuals face execution'

BBC apologises for asking 'should homosexuals face execution': "A BBC manager has apologised for a web discussion question which asked:
''Should homosexuals face execution?''"

Arresting Politicians – British Hypocrisy

Arresting Politicians – British Hypocrisy: "

This is a cross post from ModernityBlog

The media is full of stories concerning Tzipi Livni and a potential arrest warrant issued against her in the British courts.

That is, I think, a little bit unusual?

I can’t remember of any other nationality, or nation, being subject to these ad hoc arrest warrants, from British courts.

Even when General Pinochet, the murdering ex-dictator of Chile, was in Britain, he was only held under house arrest on a Spanish warrant, not a British one.

Further if we think of the variety and intensity of dictators, potentates and other assorted politicians who have graced Britain with their presence in the past 30 years it is hard to remember which of them were subject to warrants issued by British courts, or even the threat of arrest.

Was Vladimir Putin indicted for Russian barbarism in Chechnya ? Certainly not.

Was Robert Mugabe chastised for brutalising, starving and murdering Zimbabweans? No, not really.

Were King Fahd or his successor, King Abdullah II ever prosecuted for having the worst human rights record in the Middle East? Not at all.

You could go through the list of state visits from 1955 onwards and find any number of rogues, villains and the culpable, but what is surprising is that no one in Britain has seen fit to even **attempt** to acquire a warrant or two in the British courts, except when it comes to Israelis.

Moreover there are people in Britain who consider that Tony Blair is a war criminal for his advocacy of the invasion of Iraq and the subsequent bloodshed which ensued.

But as far as I know, not one single Brit has taken the trouble to apply for warrant arresting Tony Blair, even though some of them consider him a war criminal, which seems to suggest that their indignation is rather selective.

I can only suppose that if Tony Blair were an Israeli that there would be a stampede to the Law Courts, pleading for an arrest warrant at great haste.

Yet none of the political windbags that attack Blair would even dare to venture near the Law Courts where he is concerned, or they would have long since done it.

My bet is none of this top twenty worst human rights offenders have anything to fear in visiting Britain, Amnesty reports:

Congo, Rwanda, Burundi, Algeria, Sierra Leone, Egypt, North Korea, Sudan, Indonesia, Yugoslavia, Pakistan, China, Libya, Burma, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Yemen, Chad and Congo (Republic).

However, should their leaders decide to visit Britain then, no matter how much blood is dripping from their fingers, they will probably receive a warm welcome in Blighty, and be patted on the back in true imperial fashion.

As long as they are not Israelis.

Countries may come and go, but there is one constant in history, good old British hypocrisy.

Tagged: Antisemitism, Comment is Free, Guardian

"

British viewers watching more TV, according to Ofcom

British viewers watching more TV, according to Ofcom: "The UK has seen the highest increase in television watching among a group of
western countries, according to a survey published by Ofcom."

Jonathan Ross 'offers £3m pay cut'

Jonathan Ross 'offers £3m pay cut': "TV presenter has offered to accept a 50 per cent pay cut on his new contract."

Has the BBC Gone Mad?

Has the BBC Gone Mad?: "Has the BBC Gone Mad?(What do they mean, 'gone'?)
Should the BBC Face Execution? Should HYS be banned?
So many questions, so little time.

Warning. May contain words alluding to homosexuality.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

CRU "FALSIFIED RUSSIA RECORDS"

CRU "FALSIFIED RUSSIA RECORDS": "On the web, it's everywhere. The Russian Institute of Economic Analysis yesterday released a report suggesting that the 'climate change' mob at East Anglia's CRU deliberately and massively rigged Russian climate records, ignoring stations covering 40% of the landmass and choosing only those sites which showed evidence of warming. On the BBC, it's nowhere. Step by step, the 'climate change' scam is disintegrating. But you won't hear about it on the BBC.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

How BBC took some convincing that Led Zeppelin were not a lead balloon

How BBC took some convincing that Led Zeppelin were not a lead balloon: "“Unconvincing . . . derivative . . . distortion.” They went on to become the world’s greatest heavy rock band. But even Led Zeppelin were once forced to audition X Factor-style to win a coveted spot on the BBC.

"

BBC condemned for hosting web debate on execution for gays in Uganda

BBC condemned for hosting web debate on execution for gays in Uganda: "MPs have criticised the BBC for hosting an online debate asking whether homosexuals should be executed.

"

Come again? Half of all TV shows in Britain are repeats

Come again? Half of all TV shows in Britain are repeats: "
Last year, 45 per cent of total TV hours were taken up with repeated shows."

“The mind of the bigot is like the pupil of the eye; the more light you pour upon it the more it will contract” (Oliver Wendell Holmes)

“The mind of the bigot is like the pupil of the eye; the more light you pour upon it the more it will contract” (Oliver Wendell Holmes): "

This is a guest post by Mitnaged

We read often, and it is part of the lived experience of those who monitor sites like Comment is Free, that certain hate-filled commenters are attracted there because CiF offers such excellent facilitative qualities for them to spout their barely-concealed Jew-hatred under the guise of the antizionism they argue that it is.

AKUS has addressed elsewhere the role of the internet in initiating, exacerbating and maintaining such hatred. I would like to touch on another aspect of this phenomenon:

The internet is as capable of presenting alternative viewpoints to undermine those which incite hatred as it is of underscoring that hatred. Why might it be that these alternatives cause so much psychological and cognitive discomfort to the haters that they are incapable of taking any of them on board, and indeed they result in a backlash of yet more hatred as the haters cling on to the distorted ideas even in the face of proof that their belief in them is misplaced?

“I’ve made up my mind – don’t confuse me with the facts”

The basic idea behind cognitive dissonance theory is that people do not like to have dissonant cognitions. In fact, many people argue that the desire to have consonant cognitions is as strong as our basic desires for food and shelter. As a result, when someone does experience two or more dissonant cognitions (or conflicting thoughts), they will attempt to do away with the dissonance. This, I believe, underlines what I perceive to be the mindless hatred which is displayed on CiF.

The above statement may well reflect the being-in-the-world of such Israel-/Jew-haters. Their psychological comfort depends upon their being able to believe that what they think is true. They tend not to question what they are told if it resonates with what they think, and they are incapable of reality-testing their beliefs because if these are found to be in error then it will have to result in a radical change in their whole self-concept and their being-in-the-world.

Phil Barker tells us that Leon Festinger published a theory of cognitive dissonance in 1957. It begins with the notion that cognitions can pertain to any variety of thoughts, values, facts, or emotions. For instance, the fact that I like watching soaps is a cognition as is the fact that I am a man. People have countless cognitions in their heads.

Most cognitions are unrelated. For instance, the two cognitions mentioned before (that I am a man and that I like watching soaps) are unrelated. Some cognitions, however, are related and are “consonant,” meaning that they go together.

However, sometimes we have cognitions that are related, but may be opposites. For instance, a person might like ice cream, but might also be trying to lose weight. These two thoughts are problematic — if this person eats ice cream, then s/he may gain weight, and if s/he really wants to lose weight then s/he cannot eat ice cream. These types of cognitions are referred to as “dissonant.”

Cognitive dissonance results from the inability to hold in consciousness two ideas which are perceived to be in conflict with each other – in this case let’s argue that such a dissonant thought might be that (a) Palestinians have been wronged and their resorting to terrorism is therefore justified but that (b) Palestinian terrorism damages Palestinians at least as much as does Israeli reaction to it. To have to hold these thoughts and admit to them results in great psychological discomfort, particularly if the holder of them has publicly stated in all or nothing terms that s/he takes the side of one party or the other. In such cases the emotional discomfort which results may well lead to yet more emphasis of the one-sided and distorted viewpoints in an attempt to achieve consonance (albeit consonance which is based on false premises) and emotional comfort.

“I believe it and many others do too”

Further to complicate this already murky state of affairs, we have the notion that people who feel increasingly threatened by the cognitive dissonance which results from the challenges to their world view tend to band together with others who believe likewise, in order to try to achieve consonance from the validation of their views. In other words, it seems as if there is some sort of safety in numbers for such people – that they lack the courage of their convictions if challenged unless they can belong to or refer to such a peer group.

On CiF, for example, we get posters such as Papalagi who until recently would regularly quote Ilan Pappe as a reputable historian although Pappe’s work had been soundly trashed by more reputable historians such as Benny Morris and also by Ephraim Karsh. The reiterative nature of Papalagi’s posts in this vein are not unique – other CiF “favourites” continue to bang on the same old drum regardless of the increasing weight of evidence against their arguments but I would wager that the posts in reply to Papalagi, which painstakingly point out Pappe’s shortcomings as an historian, increase Papalagi’s cognitive dissonance.

A more mature person might be able to cope with the emotional discomfort caused by this threat to his world view arising from hard evidence. A more mature person might perhaps enter into further debate or even climb down from his original position in the face of that evidence. Papalagi, however, does not evidence this strength of character and, like many Israel-hating CiF regulars, his apparently unshakeable belief becomes apparent – that if he continues the reiteration, often in the same wording again and again, its content will suddenly become acceptable and Papalagi’s (and Pappe’s) detractors will vanish (and of course they do in some cases, not because they disagree with Papalagi, but because their posting rights are pulled, often unreasonably and without explanation). That CiF detractors become stronger – such as via the setting up of CiFWatch – in the face of such immature “debate” seems not to register at all, however.

The causes of Jew- and Israel-hatred are many and varied and are beyond the scope of this article, but I believe that the Israel haters/anti-Jewish racists on CiF hold in common this inability to tolerate the cognitive dissonance resulting from being presented with provable facts which are at variance with their beliefs, and the immense discomfort which results from this causes them to hate those whom they perceive to be responsible for it, and to act out that hatred towards them in print, rather than sit with and explore the discomfort.

The haters’ critical faculties, by which they might examine erroneous viewpoints shored up by questionable evidence, are often but not invariably bypassed in the pursuit of emotional comfort, or the venting of the built-up feelings of hatred which, being immature, they cannot contain. This venting aspect of an attempt to achieve consonance by “I’ve made up my mind so don’t confuse me with facts” is excellently evidenced in the YouTube video of the interview with the egregious John Sullivan.

Note how Sullivan clings to his hatred like a drowning man to a life raft and how this escalates to the point that it distorts his perception of the good wishes for Christmas from his Jewish interviewer at the close of the interview at 3:51 minutes, and prevents him from doing the decent, mature thing by ignoring the good wishes if he feels unable to respond in kind.

On the other hand, and in the same video at 1.41 minutes onwards, John Beynon, when asked how he could countenance the use of his church by supporters of Islamist terror whilst at the same time condemning the killing in the Middle East, admits that the interviewer may have a point. We can see here how the more mature person might deal with cognitive dissonance, without necessarily abandoning his point of view and without seeming hate-filled. Beynon might be a useful role model for the anti-Israel posters on CiF.

The apparent imperviousness to reasoned argument which is very evident on CiF may be best explained as a sort of doublethink – a concept promoted by George Orwell (1949) in his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. Doublethink was set out there, on p.32 of the Martin Secker & Warburg Ltd, London edition as:

“..The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them….To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies — all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth..” (Emphasis added).

And also as the following, which reflects the mindset of many CiF authors and the worldview of CiF itself:

“..To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself — that was the ultimate subtlety; consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word ‘doublethink’ involved the use of doublethink…”

Tagged: Antisemitism, Comment is Free, Guardian, Guest Post

"

Chris Evans apologises after George Michael swears on BBC Radio 2

Chris Evans apologises after George Michael swears on BBC Radio 2: "Chris Evans was forced to apologise to Radio 2 listeners after guest George
Michael swore on his BBC drivetime show."

BBC causes storm by asking if gay people should face execution

BBC causes storm by asking if gay people should face execution: "The BBC has provoked controversy by organising an online debate on its news
website which asked: 'Should homosexuals face execution?'"

Verdict first, evidence nowhere

Verdict first, evidence nowhere: "

I have only just caught up with John Rentoul’s excellent ‘Iraq inquiry rebuttal’ blog, which I recommend as essential reading to help combat the hallucinatory distortions now taking place almost every day in the media reporting of the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war. For me, it’s a case of déjà vu all over again. During the Hutton inquiry into the death of the WMD expert Dr David Kelly, I read, watched and listened in disbelief as the coverage of that inquiry systematically wrenched and distorted the evidence to fit the prior conclusion by the media that ‘Blair lied and people, including Dr Kelly, died as a result’.

The actual evidence didn’t lay a glove on Blair who was therefore always likely to be exonerated, as I observed in an article for the Spectator before its conclusions were published. People reacted to this article with astonishment. How ridiculous to say this, they scoffed, when the evidence had been conclusive that Blair was guilty as charged. Hutton was a wise, robust and independent- minded character who, on the basis of the media reports of the evidence, would undoubtedly find against Blair

"

Euro-Leftism, Roaches and the War Against Israel

Euro-Leftism, Roaches and the War Against Israel: "

This is a guest post by Tom Wonacott

European leftism, well represented in the media, academia and political organizations, has promoted hatred, intolerance and antisemitism in Europe in a malicious and dishonest campaign to cast blame on Israel for the consequences of the Israel-Palestinian (I/P) conflict. During Operation Cast Lead, for example, the European Jewish community was subjected to “a wave of reprisal attacks” which amounted to “collective punishment” for Israel’s war policies. The European left (Euro-left) is motivated by improving frayed relations between the West and Muslim-majority countries because of the prolonged and divisive war.

INTRODUCTION

Euro-leftism is dominated by a quest for world peace and a guilt associated with Western interference in the developing world. Today’s Euro-left seeks peaceful coexistence between all the world’s peoples, and this world view is defined by multiculturalism, cultural and moral relativism, a respect for other peoples and cultures, and the belief that democracy cannot be forced on third world countries. For these reasons, human rights, which once stood as a hallmark of the left, are often sacrificed for the sake of peaceful coexistence. The driving force behind the philosophy of the Euro-left, however, is demonization of the US and Israel which they view as the biggest threats and obstacles to world peace. Many on the Euro-left have a “contradictory” obsession with the US and Israel, almost to the point of exclusion of other world events such as the wars in the Congo and Sri Lanka. In practice, Euro-leftism is a policy of appeasement in the quest for a world based on tolerance and peaceful coexistence.

Where support for Israel is very strong, such as in the U.S. and Canada, the Euro-leftist movement represents the “far” or “fringe” left in society. However, much of this article is devoted to the Euro-left where support for the Palestinian cause is much stronger.

THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT AND THE ARABS

A poll conducted in Europe in 2003 indicated that nearly 60% of Europeans believe that Israel is the biggest threat to world peace. The president of the European Commission at the time, Roman Prodi, said the results “may indicate a deeper, more general prejudice against the Jewish world, our repugnance is even more radical”. In fact, Europe has a long history of antisemitism which culminated in the Holocaust, and the murder of 6,000,000 Jews. Antisemitism in Europe has been primarily associated with right wing hate (Nazi Germany) and Christian persecution. Hate directed at Jews is still very much a part of the European culture. Jonathon Freedland wrote in the Guardian recently “I knew the day of Holocaust ‘debate’ would come. Just not in my lifetime”:

“……As for Latvia, no one can claim not to know that the Tories’ new allies are prime movers behind the annual parades which celebrate the Latvian legion of the Waffen-SS – a band of brothers that included men who roamed the country gunning down Jewish men, women and children in their tens of thousands……… where is the outrage? Where is the revulsion at David Cameron becoming partners with men who cheer those who fought for Hitler and against Churchill? The Guardian, the Observer, the New Statesman and now the Jewish Chronicle have been shining a light in this dark corner…..” [emphasis added]

Today, however, antisemitism is increasingly rooted in the Euro-left. Ironically, the Guardian may, themselves, be drumming up hatred of Jews because of their relentlessly negative coverage of Israel. One wonders what motivates the Guardian against David Cameron and the Conservative Party; concern for the Jewish community in Europe, or political posturing? Right wing hate should be condemned in the strongest fashion – but not for political expediency. But why would the Euro-left, which is obsessed with countering racism and hate, be willing to encourage antisemitism in their campaign against Israel?

The Euro-left considers the Israel-Palestinian conflict a grave threat to world peace (one manifestation being Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons). According to Diana Muir:

“……A couple of years ago the French Ambassador at the Court of St. James, Daniel Bernard, told his companions at a London dinner party that Israel is a “shitty little country,” “Why,” he asked, “should world be in danger of World the War Three because of those people?”

The Euro-left holds Israel responsible for the consequences of the I/P conflict. Although there is little doubt that the 60 year war has been a tension point between the Islamic world and western civilization, the Euro-left also attributes a plague of world-wide Islamist terrorism to the unresolved conflict. Indeed, many fault the so-called unconditional support of the US for Israel for the attacks against America on September 11, 2001. Today, the Euro-left views the settlements as the biggest obstacle to peace, and a land grab by the Israeli government which forestalls peace in an effort to usurp Palestinian land.

While the West (with increasing desperation) tries to resolve the conflict and bring peace to the region, the Euro-left wing media has leveled an unrelenting barrage of criticism at Israel. The Guardian, in particular, has viciously attacked Israeli society in an attempt to apply international pressure to isolate Israel, and placate Muslims for the benefit of peace and peaceful coexistence between the West and the Islamic world. In their world view, the Palestinians are the victims who bear no responsibility because, among other reasons, the Euro-left views the establishment of Israel as a product of Western intervention (colonialism).

In retribution for the travesty of justice directed at the Arabs in 1948, nearly one million Jews have been expelled from the greater Middle East. Their only crime? They were Jews. The Euro-left’s silence on this issue is deafening. It’s a rare occasion, indeed, when a Euro-leftist even acknowledges this ongoing process, let alone condemns the Arabs for their “collective punishment” of Jews – because, to many on the Euro-left, this is justice.

OPERATION CAST LEAD AND ANTISEMITISM IN EUROPE

Operation Cast Lead received world-wide attention. During the three-week conflict, incidents of antisemitism spiked sharply in Europe, and indeed, world-wide. European Jews became the convenient targets of protesters as the IDF responded with “disproportionate” force to rockets launched by Hamas into Israel. According to Soeren Kern,

“……[a] second front to the conflict in the Gaza Strip has opened up in Europe, where a wave of reprisal attacks against Jewish targets is stoking fears of a wider resurgence of anti-Semitism on the continent………Much of the blame lies with Europe’s left wing mass media establishment………Thus European publics are being bombarded with round-the-clock, knee-jerk, anti-Israel political bigotry disguised as news coverage. By making such deception fashionable, European media are inciting anti-Semitism….”

In 2007, Dennis MacShane, a British Labour Parliament member, wrote about the rising fear in the British Jewish community in the following terms:

“Hatred of Jews has reached new heights in Europe and many points south and east of the old continent……..Our report showed a pattern of fear among a small number of British citizens — there are around 300,000 Jews in Britain………On campuses, militant anti-Jewish students fueled by Islamist or far-left hate seeking to prevent Jewish students from expressing their opinions. More worrisome was what we described as anti-Jewish discourse, a mood and tone whenever Jews are discussed, whether in the media, at universities, among the liberal media elite or at dinner parties of modish London. To express any support for Israel or any feeling for the right of a Jewish state to exist produces denunciation, even contempt……..”

According to the Institute for Global Jewish Affairs, “[d]uring Israel’s Operation Cast Lead ……anti-Semitic incidents in Britain increased eightfold to 220 compared to the same period a year earlier”.

And the Euro-left is clearly a part of the problem. In Spain, perhaps one of the most antisemitic countries in Europe, the blatant bias exhibited by Spanish academia and the media against Israel should be condemned, not encouraged by the head of a European country. Yet, Socialist Prime Minister, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, made an anti-Semitic slur about the Holocaust more characteristic of Ahmadinejad than a European Prime Minister:

“ ….Zapatero loosed a tirade of extreme anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic rhetoric that ended with the phrase: “Es que a veces hasta se entiende que haya gente que puede justificar el holocausto” which means: “At times one can even understand that there might be people who could justify the Holocaust.”…..”.

Zapatero surely understood the potential consequences to the small Jewish community in Spain with his remarkably insensitive outburst. Citing a study conducted by Two Connecticut professors which found a correlation between very harsh critics of Israel and antisemitism, Diana Muir wrote,

“…..In a survey of 5,000 Europeans in ten countries………… [a]nti-Semitism and anti-Zionism flourish among the few, but those few are over-represented in Europe’s newspapers, its universities, and its left-wing political parties…..”

One would have to be blind or willfully ignorant to be unaware of the hatred displayed by the Euro-left towards Israel – inspired and promoted by the left wing media, academics, and even the Prime Minister of Spain. No one can deny the influence of the Euro-leftist “elite” on the negative perception of Israel, and the consequences to the Jewish community which was held hostage to demonstrations, violence and intimidation during Operation Cast Lead.

THE JEWISH STATE

The goal of the Euro-left is simple: attack the foundation of the Jewish state, her Jewish people, her Jewish history and democracy, and provide an impetus for international actions against Israel including isolation and sanctions. Euro-leftist academia has been at the forefront of the fight to boycott Israel, promote the single state solution and present Israel as a racist, apartheid state. Besides the vile comparisons between Germany and Israel which are anti-Semitic to the core, the most damaging lie is the comparison of Israel with apartheid South Africa. Neve Gordon, Professor of Politics at Ben-Gurion University, is one such academic that has propagated this lie. In a “Time to Boycott Israel” published in the Guardian’s Comment is Free, Gordon wrote,

“…..Out of this population, 3.5 million Palestinians and almost half a million Jews live in the areas Israel occupied in 1967, and yet while these two groups live in the same area, they are subjected to totally different legal systems………The question that keeps me up at night, both as a parent and as a citizen, is how to ensure that my two children as well as the children of my Palestinian neighbours do not grow up in an apartheid regime……”

The Guardian has provided a convenient outlet for the Euro-left to promote hatred against Israeli society, and in the case of Mr. Gordon, against his own country. Just a cursory glance at the laws (apartheid legislation) which governed South Africa indicate that nothing like apartheid exists in Israel. Certainly, discrimination and racism are present in Israeli society (complicated by continuous war for the past 60 years), but Israeli Arabs have the right to vote, the right to an education, serve in the Knesset and so on. The comparison is false, but the lie is propagated to demonize the Jewish state. The Guardian, in particular, has depicted the Palestinians as the “victims” of a brutal racist state through a plethora of anti-Israel commentary. Don’t expect a change in this tactic anytime soon.

In addition, the Euro-left has relentlessly criticized the demographics of Israel, maintaining that a state founded on an ethnic or religious majority must be exclusivist or racist. Additionally, because there is only a small population of Jews world-wide, Jews must create laws to maintain their demographic majority. Ali Abudimah, a political activist who advocates a unitary state in Palestine, assaulted the “Jewish” state in a prototype article used by the Guardian to undermine the legitimacy of Israel, “Democracy: an existential threat?“,

“…..But whereas transforming a regime of institutionalised racism, or apartheid, into a democracy was viewed as a triumph for human rights and international law in South Africa and Northern Ireland, it is rejected out of hand in the Israeli case as a breach of what is essentially a sacred right to ethno-religious supremacy (euphemistically rendered as Israel’s “right to be a Jewish state”)……..”

Has Mr. Abudimah noticed that the West helped create Pakistan and Kosovo exclusively for Muslims? Also, is it any wonder that the initiation of the academic boycott against Israel began with an open letter to the Guardian?

CONCLUSION

The Euro-left has condemned Israel in every way possible – proclaimed in the name of Palestinian human rights – but this amounts to a farcical ploy couched in an agenda by the Euro-left wing media, academia and the political left to promote anger, intolerance and anti-Semitism in a bid to isolate the Jewish state internationally. Ironically, the Euro-left is motivated by peaceful coexistence with the non-democratic Islamic world which adheres to the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam – a document which promotes bigotry in the name of cultural relativism.

The Euro-left considers the fleeing of 750,000 Palestinian Arabs (during Israel’s war of independence) a debasement of the entire Arab population. However, the ongoing process (Yemen) of Arab retribution against Middle East Jews has not only been condoned in silence by the Euro-left, but the Euro-left has encouraged a policy of hatred and incitement against Jews amounting to a collective punishment of the Jewish community in Europe.

Left wing political activist and supporter of the one-state solution, Virginia Tilley, warns her fellow activists supporting a boycott of Israel:

“……….Don’t tolerate the slightest whiff of anti-Semitism in your own group or movement. Anti-Jewish racists are certainly out there, and they are attracted to these campaigns like roaches….”

Indeed.

Tagged: Antisemitism, Comment is Free, Guardian, Guest Post

"