Archive for the ‘FALSE CHARGES OF ANTI-SEMITISM’ Tag

JOHN CHUCKMAN COMMENT: A HEAVY DOSE OF SARCASM, WELL EARNED, FOR BRITAIN’S GUARDIAN NEWSPAPER   Leave a comment

John Chuckman

EXPANSION OF A COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE UNZ REVIEW

 

“The New Russian Government, A much-needed evolution but not a revolution”

___________________

Response to a comment which referred to the Guardian newspaper as very “left wing”

The Guardian is a terrible newspaper nowadays.

But it is not accurate to describe it as “left wing,” not at all.

Using that description is playing the Guardian’s own game.

The newspaper uses a great deal of window dressing that makes it appear “leftish” and progressive, features and filler material about minorities and women and the unfortunate. I suppose it’s intended to connect with the newspaper’s historic past and to provide a kind of sugar coating for what it truly advocates.

The Guardian’s heart and soul are pretty close to Tory in spirit. That is revealed through its choice of news stories covered, the slant given the stories, its editorials, the various public figures given regular favorable publicity, and even its highly-controlled and restrictive comment policies. Liberals don’t censor. The Guardian does, heavily.

It virtually led the howling mob attacking Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn, and it used some really underhanded techniques, like running little human-interest items about British Jews who were afraid and were going to leave Britain to take up residence somewhere else. It did this several times in the course of its campaign. Once, the person’s destination was even Germany. Of course, any Jewish person who had anything unpleasant to say about Corbyn was given space to say it.

The paper raised no objections to direct interference in British domestic politics by several Israeli politicians, including Netanyahu, who chimed in on Corbyn and anti-Semitism, and he was even mistaken in the facts he cited.

The Guardian is staunchly pro-Israel and pro-American empire, the two, of course, being tightly associated.

The Guardian has supported all of America’s bloody Neocon Wars and coups. It never raises any doubts or questions about matters like the externally-induced horrors in Syria. President Assad is always treated with disdain. Syria, in the Guardian’s manufactured reality, uses poison gas against its own people and deserves cruise missile attacks.

It has no problem with America’s torrent of invective and threats and sanctions against Iran, a country which has done in fact nothing wrong. It has no problem with severe war-like sanctions being used against tens of millions of innocent people to cause starvation and to deprive them of medications, vicious actions taken by the United States against Iran and Venezuela.

It despises Putin and Russia. It literally sometimes prints gutter-quality literature on those topics. It stands shoulder-to-shoulder with those who insist Putin has virtually invaded Ukraine and seized Crimea. And of course, he or his henchmen shot down Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 over Ukraine, even though the Prime Minister of Malaysia says that is not the case.

It has no problem with NATO, closely under American direction, running tanks up against the Russian border, sending risky, intrusive spy flights towards Russian airspace, doing armed cruises on the Black Sea, and carrying on with large-scale practice sea battles in the Baltic.

As far as The Guardian is concerned, the Salisbury Skripal Affair with Putin directly responsible for it – that indigestible mass of Theresa May accusations containing not a single proven fact – is a settled matter of history. It occasionally makes an effort to warm up the kettle, burning new bits flogged by security service outlets.

The Guardian played a sizable role in building up the public-relations image of that good friend of Netanyahu’s, the tyrant Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. He was to be a dynamic and progressive new force in the Middle East. It even used chirpy little features about a few upper-class women being allowed to drive now to emphasize his fine qualities between executions, kidnappings, and launching wars.

It has attacked and lied about Julian Assange, one of the truest heroes of our time and a great investigative reporter/editor. But you see, Assange’s work works against America’s appalling injustices, and that just isn’t allowed. And it worked against candidate Hillary Clinton, world’s leading purveyor of Russophobia, killer of Libyans and Syrians as Secretary of State, and a favorite of Guardian editors.

I could cite many examples of how dreadful the Guardian has become, but here is my favorite:

https://chuckmanwordsincomments.wordpress.com/2018/05/21/john-chuckman-comment-absurd-lengths-to-which-our-press-goes-to-attack-russia-britains-guardian-holds-hate-russia-day-today-some-of-its-stuff-is-so-ham-fisted-it-reads-like-1959-

JOHN CHUCKMAN COMMENT: A BRITISH PAPER ACTUALLY RUNS A COLUMN DEFENDING JEREMY CORBYN (I CAN’T IMAGINE WHAT CAME OVER THEM) FROM THE CALUMNIES OF A SPECIAL INTEREST LOBBY – THE IMMENSELY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CRITICISM OF ISRAEL AND ANTI-SEMITISM – OUR WESTERN VALUES   Leave a comment

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE BY ASH SARKAR IN THE INDEPENDENT

 

“Israel-Palestine is not an equal conflict – for that reason we can’t let people like Corbyn be tarnished as terrorist sympathisers”  

 “A clash between a nation-state with a defence budget of $18.6 billion and a politically, geographically and militarily fragmented people who’ve been under occupation for the past 70 years is in no way a battle between equivalent powers.”

 

Well said indeed.

And embedded in that thought is the indisputable reason why it is an absurdity to conflate criticism of Israel with “anti-Semitism,” even though Israel and Israel lobby groups in a number of countries constantly push for laws doing just that.

Israel is a state (and moreover, a highly militaristic state out of all proportion to its size) and it is right to criticize states when they abuse their power.

Israel has often abused its power and behaved in lawless fashion. Saying that has absolutely nothing to do with prejudice against the Jewish religion or Jewish people.

Indeed, the vast majority of Jews do not even live in Israel.

Where do we put ourselves in the West, with our traditions of human and democratic rights, if we are not allowed – whether by social pressure or unfair laws – to criticize abuse and lawlessness by a heavily-armed state?

In an absurd and dangerous position.

I think Israel only pushes for such things because its own situation is so confused and contradictory. It claims to be a democracy but only one kind of people can become citizens. It claims to want peace but it has attacked every neighbor that it has, some several times. It claims to embrace Western traditions of human rights but it holds something like five million people in subjugation with no rights and no hopes.

Anyone who is not willfully blind can see that the men running Israel are driven by the desire for aggressive expansion. And how do we speak of that kind of activity in our history texts when discussing the many empires and aggressors and conquerors and dictators of the past?

And of course, the same logic holds for displaying sympathy or understanding for the Palestinians, as Jeremy Corbyn has done. It has nothing to do with disliking Jewish people. It has everything to do with someone’s having a sense of social justice, or a conscience if you will, and being confronted by abuse and brutality. And in the case of Gaza especially, the abuse has been on a monumental scale, as bad or worse than that of the Rohingya people by Myanmar, behavior which is universally condemned.

And there are many more reasons for not allowing people to tarnish Corbyn.

One important one is not permitting foreign states to interfere in your country’s politics. Russia is accused of doing this regularly now, and without evidence. Lack of evidence doesn’t stop our newspapers from prattling on about it almost daily.

But Israel does do exactly that, interfere in your country’s politics, and on an ongoing basis, and you need no proof beyond events reported in the newspapers and on your television. But you won’t find a word of prattle about it.

Good God, Israel’s Prime Minister, without even understanding what he was talking about, publicly condemned a British national leader over a misrepresented picture. In the courts, that’s called slander, and it has no place in the relationships between countries.