A Response to Jonathan Freedland’s Latest Anti-Corbyn Tirade
I wrote the article below earlier in
the week in response to Jonathan Freedland’s propaganda
tract in The Guardian, ‘Many
Jews want Boris Johnson out. But how can we vote for Jeremy Corbyn?’ which falsely portrayed Freedland as an
equidistant opponent of both Corbyn and Johnson. During the past 4 years,
Freedland has devoted himself almost exclusively in one direction only – that of
Corbyn.
Freedland’s only objection to Boris Johnson
has been over Brexit, not his racism
about Black people having ‘water melon
smiles’. Freedland, a Zionist, is
quite prepared to countenance Israel using Gaza as a free fire zone and its ethnic
cleansing of Palestinians. Johnson is a Zionist so he is an entirely different
opponent.
On Tuesday the Guardian refused
to publish 2 letters from over 50 Jewish people in support of Corbyn yet they
had no hesitation in publishing
a letter today from 24 assorted reactionaries, racists and Uncle Toms (Trevor Philips
and Maajid Nawaz).
Joanne Lumley is a Green Party supporter. Jimmy Swales of Wikipedia is a well known
anti-Corbyn opponent. Fay Weldon is an Islamaphobe. But when needs must the Guardian
is prepared to ignore genuine racism. The 24’s excuse is that they’ve listened
to their Jewish friends and felt their ‘pain’.
What they haven’t done is listened to Jewish anti-racists
and anti-Zionists. Instead what they have done is lent a helping hand to Boris
Johnson and attacked the one party leader whose whole career is founded on
fighting racism.
Corbyn is to blame for allowing the ‘anti-Semitism’ crisis to fester
Of course Corbyn is, to a large extent, responsible
for what has happened. He allowed the
narrative about ‘anti-Semitism’ to develop instead of nipping it in the bud
early on.
When Freedland
and the Jewish
Chronicle, the Daily
Mail and the rest of the racist chorus began the anti-Semitism attacks back
in the summer of 2015, Corbyn should have made it clear that:
a. He condemned anti-Semitism unreservedly
b.
He condemned the weaponisation of anti-Semitism.
Instead
what he did was to deny that he was an anti-Semite. What he didn’t seem to understand was that
when supporters of Israel and Zionism attack you as ‘anti-Semitic’ then what
they mean is not hatred of or hostility to Jews as Jews but criticism of Israel.
There isn’t a single Palestine
solidarity activist in Britain who hasn’t been accused of ‘anti-Semitism’.
It is the stock-in-trade accusation of Israel’s supporters.
It is the stock-in-trade accusation of Israel’s supporters.
How do you
defend the murder of 220 unarmed Palestinian in Gaza in the past 18 months if
you don’t attack the messenger?
Supporters of Apartheid in South Africa used to do the same. Corbyn had no excuse for not knowing what was
happening.
Even this racist ex-Home Office Minister attacks Chris Williamson - the only Campaign Group MP with the guts to call out the fake 'antisemitism' campaign |
Instead Corbyn
apologised for Labour anti-Semitism and repeatedly promised to do better but he
didn’t question the assertion that Labour was plagued by anti-Semitism. Racism
is about actions, such as the deportation
of Black people by New Labour Ministers like Tony McNulty, not social media posts
about Rothschild banking.
The whole
nature of the fake anti-Semitism accusations was that however well he did he
would never satisfy his critics. The more Corbyn and Jennie Formby presided
over the expulsions, the more the attacks.
You could never get off the ‘anti-Semitism’ treadmill.
Tom Watson
vowed not to rest easy until all the anti-Semites in Labour were expelled. Why
did Corbyn not ask him if this applied to all racists and if so when he was
resigning? Tom Watson defended
racist Labour MP Phil Woolas and as Campaign Organiser in the Birmingham
Hodshrove by-election put out a leaflet:
‘Labour is on your side, the Lib Dems are on the side of
failed asylum seekers.’
Likewise
the notoriously anti-Gypsy
racist John Mann who is now our ‘anti-Semitism Czar’.
But instead
Corbyn sulked, temporised, promised and apologised to his accusers. At no time did
he seem to recognise that the attacks on him had to be state inspired. Instead
of talking about the real racism and asking why the Tories sit
with anti-Semites in the European Parliament and were the only Conservative
party to defend
Hungary’s anti-Semitic Prime Minister Orban. Corbyn should have made a speech
setting out why supporting Palestinians is not anti-Semitic and rejecting the
idea that Labour is an anti-Semitic party.
Corbyn instead
promised to do better. He adopted the
IHRA definition and then under pressure the
added examples and was criticised for taking so long. What he did was to enable
the witch hunt of anti-racists and socialists to be stepped up. The harder Corbyn tried to please the Zionists
the more vicious their attacks.
Close
comrades of mine in Brighton and Hove Labour Party have come under attack. One
has been expelled on the basis of calling on people to protest at Israel’s
influence on the British political system.
Something documented by Al Jazeera’s The Lobby.
According to Brighton Queens Park Secretary Sim Elliot, this post is 'antisemitic' - nowhere does it mention Jews just Israel - Israel is now a Jew apparently! |
Another,
Paddy O’Keefe, a long standing anti-racist and peace campaigner, has been
reported, by former Corbyn supporter Sim Elliot to Southern Region for asking
who is funding Ian Austen, the scab former Labour MP who is now supporting
the Tories.
Yet I don’t
blame Corbyn entirely. He has an adviser Seamus Milne, who is from the heart of
the British Establishment, the son of a BBC Director General. Milne went to
Winchester and Oxford before ending up as Associate Editor of The Guardian. He
is known as a Stalinist. However his abysmal performance as adviser, when he must
have known what is happening, suggests that MI5 might have a presence in Corbyn’s
entourage.
What is
clear now, if it wasn’t clear before, is that ‘anti-Semitism’ has become the
principle weapon of the British Establishment in the battle against Corbyn. This could not happen if British Jews had not
moved substantially to the Right in the past 60 years. Opposing the Zionist identity
of most Jews is not anti-Semitic anymore than supporting The
Satanic Verses which most Muslims opposed is anti-Muslim.
How strange it is that John Bercow's testimony about Corbyn's 'antisemitism' has been comprehensively ignored? |
And evidence
such as that of John Bercow, the Jewish former Speaker of the House of Commons who
said
that there isn’t a ‘whiff’ of anti-Semitism in Jeremy Corbyn is disregarded by
the Freedlands and their errand boys and girls at the BBC.
Below is my
article which was published today at Mondoweiss.
Tony
Greenstein
Twelve
years ago the late Georgina Henry, who began Comment is Free, suggested that I write for the Guardian’s new
blog. We met at the founding meeting of Independent Jewish Voices at
Hampstead Town Hall in February 2007 and discussed my first article, The Seamy Side of Solidarity, which
appeared two weeks later. I wrote it because of the growing support for a
genuine anti-Semite, Gilad Atzmon, which existed within the Palestine
solidarity movement.
Since that
time, and especially since Matt Seaton took over, Guardian Comment has moved away from the original concept of a
forum for genuine debate, certainly on Palestine. Zionist groups set up CIF Watch to wage a war against any such
debate on CIF. I was one of the first casualties. CIF Watch later changed their name to UK Media Watch because they had achieved their original aims.
No serious
editorial process could have approved Freedland’s article if it wasn’t for the
fat that he was a senior Guardian editor.
He plays fast and loose with facts, deliberately omits context and rests
his arguments on assertion alone.
Following
my original article we waged a
five year battle against those who argued that being Jewish and Zionist were synonymous
or that Israel was a racist state because it was a Jewish state. We argued that
Israel was a settler colonial state and its treatment of the Palestinians was
no different to how ‘Christian’ South Africa had treated its indigenous
population.
At the 2012
Conference of Palestine Solidarity
Campaign, a holocaust denier and supporter of Atzmon was expelled from PSC.
Following this Ali Abunimah of Electronic Intifada and over 20 Palestinian
activists, academics and leaders of BDS issued a statement Granting
No Quarter: A Call for the Disavowal of the Racism and Antisemitism of Gilad
Atzmon.
From that
time on the anti-Semitic element in the Palestine solidarity movement has been
miniscule compared to the number of anti-Semites and White Supremacists who
support the Zionist movement. Not once has Freedland condemned the growing
collaboration between supporters of Tommy Robinson, a self-declared Zionist and
large numbers of Zionist activists, including Paul Besser of Britain First. At the Al Quds demonstration in June these
activists later joined up with the Board of Deputies main demonstration in
Trafalgar Square.
In my article I issued a
warning. ‘Like the boy who cried wolf,
the charge of "anti-semitism" has been made so often against critics
of Zionism and the Israeli state that people now have difficulty recognising
the genuine article.’ This is
precisely what has happened. With his latest broadside against Corbyn Freedland
has drained ‘anti-Semitism’ of any meaning. Instead of a serious analysis of
anti-Semitism he has substituted a series of guilt-by-association anecdotes.
If Corbyn
were anti-Semitic then one would expect the Jewish former Speaker of the House
of Commons, John Bercow, to realise this yet Bercow stated, in an interview with
Alistair Campbell, that after 22 years knowing Corbyn ‘I've never detected so much as a whiff of anti-Semitism.’
Even
stranger are the views of Professor Geoffrey Alderman, a Zionist and historian
of the British Jewish community. Alderman is a longstanding Jewish Chronicle
and now Jewish Telegraph columnist. In the Spectator
Alderman
described how Corbyn ‘has an impressive record of supporting Jewish communal
initiatives’. He gives as
an example how in 1987 Corbyn led the campaign to save the cemetery of the West
London Synagogue from the developers, whom Margaret Hodge’s Islington Council
had sanctioned!
Freedland
gives three examples of Corbyn’s ‘anti-Semitism’. They have more holes than a
colander.
i.
The mural of ‘Jewish
bankers’. Contrary to Freedland’s
assertion just two out the six bankers were Jewish. None of them had hook
noses. Even neo-liberal Harry’s Place’s Lucy Lips admitted that ‘I’ve seen more obvious stereotypes of Jews deployed in antisemitic art.’ Back in
2012 it passed unnoticed. Corbyn was
defending freedom of speech not anti-Semitic art.
ii.
The incident concerning ‘English irony’ is even less
convincing. The two Zionists intent on disrupting a Palestinian speaker were
told by Corbyn that unlike someone
who wasn’t even born in Britain, they didn’t understand English irony. What has
that to do with anti-Semitism?
iii.
The third example alleges that Corbyn kept company with
Raed Salah, an Israeli Palestinian whom Theresa May was trying to deport. Freedland
alleges that Salah was ‘found
by a British tribunal
to have peddled the medieval and lethal myth of Jews feasting on the blood of
gentile children’. This is simply untrue.
Freedland ‘forgot’ to mention that the Upper Immigration Tribunal
overturned May’s deportation order precisely because it found that there was no
basis to the allegation of racism. What the Tribunal did find
was that
‘there is no reliable evidence of the appellant using words carrying a
reference to the blood libel save in the single passage in a sermon delivered
five years ago.’
Even in this disputed passage no
reference was made to Jews. (paragraph 78) In a passage cut out of a subsequent
article
for the Guardian Salah explained
that
‘I don't believe in the “blood
libel” against Jews and I reject it in its entirety. What I was really
referring to in my sermon was the killing of innocents in the name of religion,
including children, from the time of the Inquisition to as recently as Bosnia
and elsewhere in Europe whose governments support Israel's action’.
Freedland completely
omits the context which is that Raed Salah has been the recipient of horrific
violence and racism by the Israeli state. He has been gaoled on a trumped up
charge five years after the alleged incident, when not one Israeli has been
gaoled for anti-Arab racism.
Freedland refers
to last summer’s Panorama programme Is
Labour Anti-Semitic? which has been the subject of a record number of
complaints. Presented by John Ware, someone who considers Islamaphobia ‘rationale’,
it presented 7 victims of Labour ‘anti-Semitism’. It provided no names or background
information about the ‘victim’s, all of whom were officers of the Jewish Labour
Movement, a Zionist organisation which is affiliated to the World Zionist
Organisation. The WZO, according to Ha’aretz
has a ‘Land Theft Division’.
You
wouldn’t hang a cat on Freedland’s ‘evidence’ against Corbyn. It is a melange
of the trite and trivial. Guilt by
gossip. If this is the best Freedland can come up with after 4 years of
non-stop Corbyn bashing then it shows just how thin the gruel is.
Freedland’s
last sideswipe is at Chris Williamson’s ‘penchant
for egregious Jew-baiting’. Chris Williamson is a working class MP who has
physically swapped blows with neo-Nazis on a building site. I dare say
Freedland has never fought for anything other than a decent seat in a
restaurant.
There was a
time when ‘Jew baiter’ was reserved, not for anti-Zionists but for anti-Semites
who went beyond the call of duty. It wasn’t even used about Oswald Moseley and
his Blackshirts. It was used to describe pathological anti-Semites like Arthur Leese of the
Imperial Fascist League and Julius Streicher, editor
of Der Sturmer. By using this term
about a genuine anti-racist Freedland once again devalues the currency.
Freedland
rests his case on a dubious poll according
to which 87% of Jews believe that Corbyn is anti-Semitic. Even were this poll
is accurate is that the end of the matter?
Surely the first question to ask is why 87% of Jews believe this? Does
it have anything to do with the 5,497 articles that have appeared in 8 national
newspapers from 15 June 2015 to 31 March 2019 according to Bad News for Labour about
Labour ‘anti-Semitism’? Or the fact that
the broadcast media operates under the assumption that there is an
anti-Semitism problem in the Labour Party? But Freedland isn’t interested in
the ‘why’. What this poll is really
measuring is the effectiveness of the mass media’s propaganda.
‘Anti-Zionism is not the product of the
non-Jews. On the contrary, the Gentiles have always encouraged Zionism, hoping
that it would help to rid them of the Jews in their midst. Even today, in a
perverse way, a real anti-Semite must be a Zionist." (Jewish Chronicle
22.1.82.)
The people
who are cheering Jonathan Freedland on, the Daily Mail and the baiters of
George Soros are the genuine anti-Semites. Historically friends of Zionism such
as Arthur Balfour have also been the enemies of Jews. What Freedland is doing
is making ‘anti-Semitism’ into a form of cheap political abuse. As Brian Klug observed, “when anti-Semitism is everywhere, it is
nowhere. And when every anti-Zionist is an anti-Semite, we no longer know how
to recognize the real thing–the concept of anti-Semitism loses its
significance.”
No greater
service could be performed on behalf of those for whom anti-Semitism is not
opposition to Zionism but opposition to Jews as Jews.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please submit your comments below