Palestine Telegraph: Vote Ken Livingstone. UPDATED… now also backed by the formerly Anti-Livingstone Jews
While more and more senior Labour backers express their horror at the prospect of Ken Livingstone’s victory in the forthcoming mayoral elections – Lord Winston is the latest – extremists and hatemongers have come out in force for the man.
Here’s Jeremy “Inquiry into Jewish Influence” Corbyn in the Morning Star– the Stalinist rag – and the antisemitic and conspiracist Palestine Telegraph urging extremists to “get the vote out for Ken”.
- Praising Gilad Atzmon’s “courageous” new book and ludicrously comparing Atzmon to Salman Rushdie.
- Publishing an antisemitic video by former KKK grand wizard David Duke. This proved too much even for Jenny Tonge, who resigned as a patron of the Palestine Telegraph.
- Publishing a ridiculous story about Israelis stealing organs in Haiti after the earthquake.
- More organ theft poison pieces on Ukraine and Israel.
- Running an article claiming that World Wars 1 and 2 were both Jewish plots.
- Promotion of Holocaust denier Fredrick Toben.
- Running a piece by the racist Khalid “Kikes” Amayreh where he argues the USA is far more evil than Osama Bin Laden.
- Marking Holocaust Memorial Day by publishing a revolting Israelis-are-Nazis screed by Gilad Atzmon.
- Threatening legal action against “Nothing British About the BNP” when it criticised Habeeb for his role in inviting the fascist Jobbik MEP Krisztina Morvai to a London conference of the PRC.
- Publishing another Israelis-are-Nazis slur and an absurd terrorism denialpiece by Mahboob Khawaja.
No wonder Khawaja engages in terrorism denial: his own son, Mohammed Momin Khawaja, was convictedin 2009 of taking part in the UK fertiliser bomb plot.
So, an obvious outlet for Jeremy Corbyn MP: a man wholly unchallenged by the Labour Party, who will not speak out against his hateful politics and alliances.
Meanwhile, the clowns of iEngage, who managed shamefully to undermine the proposed (but now moribund) Parliamentary Committee on Islamophobia by attempting to get themselves appointed to the secretariat, despite their links to extremist Islamist political parties and record of incitement against Muslim liberals, have produced a website: GetOutAndVote.info.
Its top story directs Muslim voters to Owen Jones’ attack on Ken Livingstone’s critics.
They have also produced a video featuring the hate preacher, Haitham al Haddad:
That’s the Ken Livingstone fan base, folks!
UPDATE
Of course, it goes without saying… the formerly anti-Livingstone Jewish Labour activists have now backed this wanker.
With our eyes open and breathing deeply maybe with a sigh or two, the time has come to endorse Ken Livingstone for Mayor of London…Andrew Gilbert, Neil Nerva, Judith Bara, Jem Stein and Rabbi Danny Rich (all in a personal capacity)
Why have they done this?
Simple. Because they think – probably correctly – that Ken Livingstone will win this election. If they don’t say this, then there will be no Jews at all who can talk to the Mayor of London about issues such as community safety, and the like.
So, a little bit like the leaders of the Iranian Jewish Community, they have at last pledged loyalty.
When Ken Livingstone wins this election, London will have taken a step closer to Malmo.
Comments
| 26 April 2012, 9:38 am |
That’s the Ken Livingstone fan base, folks!
You forgot to add M. Ezra and G. MacMillan.
| 26 April 2012, 10:16 am |
Which is why it is essential that those of us who don’t want this sort of fascistic sub-culture and sectarian politics to spread in the UK even further than it has vote to ensure Ken does not get in.
I really fear for our country if this sort of politics succeeds. Forget pasty taxes and the rest. Fundamental issues about free speech / taking a stand for equality for women and gays and against anti-semitism etc are far more important.
| 26 April 2012, 10:17 am |
Can’t wait for Michael Ezra’s demented deflections excusing his revolting choice and his siding with this kind of human scum. His continuous and very vocal KL-endorsement on Facebook, Twitter, HP and real life, has become so pathetic and desperate, he is fair game, as far as I’m concerned: Michael Ezra, you’re a fucking disgrace!
| 26 April 2012, 10:35 am |
Although I wholeheartedly support this post I am not 100% sure about putting “inquiry into Jewish influence” in quotes. But – perhaps I’ve just been lib-conned.
| 26 April 2012, 10:39 am |
Read the underlying post. It is very clear what Corbyn was backing, and he is now trying to weasel out of it.
| 26 April 2012, 10:43 am |
No worries. Livingstone doesn’t actually believe that Israelis harvested organs in Haiti. Similarly, Livingstone himself would never, ever smash a window at a synagogue or make a casual insult towards someone wearing a yarmulke (ed. actually maybe he would do this second thing).
Livingstone just actively seeks support among those who do. And the trains will run on time.
| 26 April 2012, 10:55 am |
What’s interesting, as an academic that travels to Europe occasionally for conferences, is how effective Germany’s final solution was. There just are very few Jews left at any of the European universities in countries where the Nazis succeeded. So how sad it is to see such an explicit partnership between Islam and the Left, across Europe, to make the rest of the continent uncomfortable for Jews *while* simultaneously attempting to delegitimize the Jewish homeland. It is so tragic, unjust, and heartbreaking that really its becoming almost impossible to continue paying attention. At least as an American, I can say to myself, “It couldn’t happen here” but who knows…
| 26 April 2012, 11:27 am |
“When Ken Livingstone wins this election, Britain will have taken a step closer to Malmo.”
No, Britain won’t be. London will. Stop trying to drag the rest of the country into this, nobody outside that primitive, backward dump has a vote in this election, so stop trying to smear the British with London’s failings.
| 26 April 2012, 11:45 am |
And the trains will run on time.
But of course. This is crucial.
| 26 April 2012, 11:47 am |
Those signatories have never been anti-Livingstone in the sense of advocating not voting for him.
In the contrary, it appears from what Livingstone said at the London Jewish Forum meeting on Tuesday that it was “Neil” who wrote the letter to Ed Miliband urging him to take action to ensure that Livingstone was helped to de-toxify himself because he could still be presented as a candidate with so much to offer the Jewish community.
I presume the Neil in question is Neil Nerva. None of them played any part in leaking the letter to the Jewish community which played such a part in revealing Livingstone’s Jews=zionists=Israelis=bad news attitudes, and his dismissive attitude towards Jewish community concerns about him.
If they’d had their way, Livingstone would have agreed to present his propaganda view of himself as a friend to the Jewish community without any account of that meeting (subject to “Chatham House rules”=secrecy having seen the light of day. They were appalled when Martin Bright let the cat out of the bag in the Jewish Chronicle.
They reveal themselves now to be machine politicians playing machine politics whilst convincing themselves that it’s for the benefit of the Jewish community.
Who can take their urging seriously? Maybe a few of the Labour-voting faithful who want to feel better about voting for Livingstone?
Andrew Gilbert is a former chair of the Reform Synagogues of Great Britain. I’m an orthodox Jew, but I’m glad for their sake that he’s no longer in that position. As for Rabbi Rich of the Liberal Jewish movement, I wonder if other Liberal Jews will feel as I do that this shabby and unprincipled but if machine politics besmirches the standing of the Liberal Jewish rabbinate?
I salute Jonathan Freedland, whom I’ve so often mocked and criticized before, most of all for his 2008 advocacy of voting for Livingstone, for being willing to act with integrity and refuse to vote for Livingstone 2012 on the basis of what he heard at the same meeting as these betrayers of Labour’s ideals.
| 26 April 2012, 11:55 am |
As Shmoo-EL says at 10.43.
Maybe it requires Livingstone’s re-election for more people to make the connection between his soft racism and sexism – fantasising about rich jews who won’t vote for him, rich gays having their penises cut off – and the hard racism and sexism of the people that his calculated bigotry is designed to appeal to.
Maybe it requires Livingstone’s re-election for more people to make the connection between his soft racism and sexism – fantasising about rich jews who won’t vote for him, rich gays having their penises cut off – and the hard racism and sexism of the people that his calculated bigotry is designed to appeal to.
Livingstone and Galloway are opportunistic organisms that have evolved to live and breath in polluted waters where there is a niche for creatures with their obvious drawbacks when it comes to normal political life – egomania, alcoholism etc.
Regarding the labour party. Should they expel racists? Or is that a step too far in terms of curtailing free speech? It is sad that labour is still a tainted organisation but I don’t know if expelling the likes of Livingstone and Corbyn is a simple choice.
| 26 April 2012, 11:57 am |
I am still hoping that the bookies are right.
Current odds being BJ 1.25 KL 3.75 (4/1 on and 11/4 in old money) so you could put a small wager on the latter which would at least allow you to drown your sorrows.
(Before the alcohol ban comes into force — haha, only kidding! Fortunately London is too big to turn into Malmo. E1 and E2 however…)
Current odds being BJ 1.25 KL 3.75 (4/1 on and 11/4 in old money) so you could put a small wager on the latter which would at least allow you to drown your sorrows.
(Before the alcohol ban comes into force — haha, only kidding! Fortunately London is too big to turn into Malmo. E1 and E2 however…)
| 26 April 2012, 11:59 am |
@ Shmoo-El
I don’t have an extensive knowledge of academic life in Europe, but I looked up a few figures concerning Jews in Holland,
Before the War, there were approx. 140.000 Jews in Holland in a general population of about 8.7 million. That’s very roughly 1.6%. Most of them were very poor people (well, at least my family was) and few of them would have gone to University.
In 2012 there are about 52,000 Dutch Jews and about 9,000 Israelis living in Holland. That’s, very roughly, 0.4% or about one quarter of the proportion before the War. Yes, quite a difference.
But do you think that the untrained observer would really notice the difference between 1.6% before the war and 0.4% after the war of the academic crowd being Jewish?
It may be that Jewish people (who traditionally revere all forms of learning) are disproportionally represented at American universities which colours your observation. Yes, a lot of Jews in Europe were murdered, but there’s still a lot left – and they were never all that large a percentage in any European country before the war,
| 26 April 2012, 12:28 pm |
Danny Rich is a self-promoting little prick.
This is the guy who shares a platform with Israel hater Deborah Falk. This is the guy who is “too busy” to discuss war in Gaza. This is the guy who constantly attacks and undermines Israel.
He has helped make LIberal Judaism a joke…. a great pity because is could have much to offer.
Every time I see his fat face I feel physically ill. A gift to anti-Semites everywhere.
| 26 April 2012, 12:30 pm |
Just looking,
One day you might pluck up courage to put your name to your cowardly attack on me.
| 26 April 2012, 12:33 pm |
jan:
It may be that Jewish people (who traditionally revere all forms of learning) are disproportionally represented at American universities which colours your observation
This may be true. I don’t know much about academic life in Europe either to be honest, my comment was clearly anecdotal. But my understanding is that Jews were disproportionately represented at German and Eastern European Universities before WW2. When I go to these places now, there are none. It is sad that the Nazis “won” in this respect.
The fact that Jews are currently over represented in the US may be because many survivors moved here, and generally, the US has given more opportunities to Jews in terms of upward mobility. There are probably lots of other more interesting reasons. (On the other hand, even elite American universities had Jewish quotas until the 50s or so.)
| 26 April 2012, 12:41 pm |
There are a very few robustly Zionist Liberal rabbis, but Liberal Judaism overall is hamstrung by the likes of Danny Rich and the egregious David Goldberg. The kindest thing you can say is that they are clueless – a sad position for “teachers” to be in.
| 26 April 2012, 12:46 pm |
But of course. This is crucial.
Not ALL of them, only the Jubilee Line! Apparently, it whizzed Ezra into the West End in a nanosecond when Ken was mayor. The very moment Boris was voted in, it ground to a halt and hasn’t worked properly since.
| 26 April 2012, 12:51 pm |
Michael Ezra, what for? Because you call me a coward? You can call me anything you like. Besides, it’s much more fun this way. Just think of me as the prototype St John’s Wood High street/ Belsize Park/ Hampstead kinda guy who speaks for everybody when he insults you!
And, don’t play the victim, you attack people all the fucking time, both in the real and the virtual world, and for much less valid reasons, such as swearing or reading fiction.
And, don’t play the victim, you attack people all the fucking time, both in the real and the virtual world, and for much less valid reasons, such as swearing or reading fiction.
| 26 April 2012, 12:53 pm |
Shmoo-El
26 April 2012, 10:55 am
26 April 2012, 10:55 am
My fear is that, such Jewish academics as there may be in countries formerly occupied by the Nazis (and that would include France, would it no?), are the likes of Shlomo “the Invention of the Jewish People” Sand.
| 26 April 2012, 12:57 pm |
And the trains will run on time.
No apparently it is not the Jubilee line which is key, but the 210 bus. This declaration is the most depressingly barrel scraping exercise I have ever read.
It was Ken, who invested in Simcha in the Square.. We credit Ken for his refusal to sit on a platform with the BNP candidate..On Israel, Ken’s comments are not always beyond the pale…
It was Ken, who invested in Simcha in the Square.. We credit Ken for his refusal to sit on a platform with the BNP candidate..On Israel, Ken’s comments are not always beyond the pale…
Whoopee.
| 26 April 2012, 1:13 pm |
just looking,
I suspect I know a lot more people in “St John’s Wood High street/ Belsize Park/ Hampstead” than you will ever know. And when you insult me, you certainly don’t speak for everyone.
| 26 April 2012, 1:18 pm |
Oh, and I have never insulted people for reading fiction, never in the real world, or in the virtual world. It would be a bit odd of me to do so as those that know me are aware that I have been reading a reasonable amount of fiction of late.
| 26 April 2012, 1:24 pm |
“I suspect I know a lot more people in “St John’s Wood High street/ Belsize Park/ Hampstead” than you will ever know.”
There you go.
Mr Ezra just can’t help himself, can he?
| 26 April 2012, 1:26 pm |
Aww, you are so delusional, it’d be almost endearing if it weren’t so tragic.
You go around announcing loudly and proudly your allegiance to Red Ken, while at the same time preaching about the ‘evils’ of communism. You treat people with with contempt and condescension while demanding respect and acceptance. No matter how many people you know, nobody takes you seriously anymore.
You’ve crossed the rubicon mate!
You go around announcing loudly and proudly your allegiance to Red Ken, while at the same time preaching about the ‘evils’ of communism. You treat people with with contempt and condescension while demanding respect and acceptance. No matter how many people you know, nobody takes you seriously anymore.
You’ve crossed the rubicon mate!
| 26 April 2012, 1:29 pm |
just looking,
I am certainly right to treat you with contempt, as you are clearly a moron.
| 26 April 2012, 1:36 pm |
Tom Watson has told Labour voters to ‘hold their noses, vote for Ken’:
| 26 April 2012, 1:46 pm |
@ Lynne T
The Jewish academics I know who live in Europe are mainly people who see themselves either as Europeans who happen to have Jewish ancestors (i.e. they see themselves as members of the human race) or as part of a Yiddish culture (i.e. not Israeli, but part of a typically European mish-mash/mish-mosh). They don’t reject Israel, they don’t adore Israel. Personally, as a (mainly) Ashekenazi Jew, I find Israelis weird. Not bad, not good, just a little bit different.
| 26 April 2012, 1:56 pm |
Yeah, well maybe Gilbert and his three cosignatories aren’t at all confident that Livingstone’s going to win, but are responding to the three line whip from Labour’s election attack dog Tom
Watson to put the message out to their own side to Hold Your Nose & vote for Livingstone.
Watson to put the message out to their own side to Hold Your Nose & vote for Livingstone.
According to this blog, this is all about a panic response from so many Labour voters refusing to endorse Livingstone.
Four signatories isn’t much for that sort of letter, is it? My understanding is that six people signed the original letter. Though I’m still expecting an AsAJew Luvvies for Ken to appear prominently any day now.
| 26 April 2012, 2:05 pm |
“This blog” being Paul Staines. Nuff said.
Can we put a stop to this overblown stuff about Jewish Labour people who vote for Ken being in some way “disloyal”? You will be calling them “kapos” next, no doubt…….
They have made their choice, you have made yours. Whatever the result in a week’s time, we will all have to live with it.
| 26 April 2012, 2:11 pm |
amie,
Imagining your last paragraph to be a parody, I read the article linked to. There I saw those were the actual words used, and the rest of the article is depressing, as you say.
We are sure that Ken will sort the 210 bus out.
And you’ll be under it, mates.
| 26 April 2012, 2:11 pm |
cjcjc – I am still hoping that the bookies are right.
Me too. Apparently Boris went to 1/3 briefly, but this attracted enough cash for the major bookmakers to move him back towards 1/4. A good opinion poll is needed to reassure; but the % error from a 1000/2000 sample is close to the perceived difference between the two.
Definitely not sleeping well.
Definitely not sleeping well.
| 26 April 2012, 2:13 pm |
DL, I don’t think they should be insulted in personal terms. But I think that they, and others like them, are directly complicit in legitimising antisemitism.
| 26 April 2012, 2:15 pm |
“Can we put a stop to this overblown stuff about Jewish Labour people who vote for Ken being in some way “disloyal”?”
Jews who vote for politicians who have a history of casual antisemitism and explicit support for vicious antisemitic racists are not “disloyal”. They are merely tragic and pathetic characters. Although in a sense, I think any Liberal who votes for Ken is being disloyal. Disloyal to the idea of zero-tolerance for racism that I have always associated with Liberalism.
“You will be calling them “kapos” next, no doubt…….”
Ah the pre-cog accusation. I love that one.
| 26 April 2012, 2:21 pm |
I don’t think they should be insulted in personal terms. But I think that they, and others like them, are directly complicit in legitimising antisemitism.
That’s rather charitable, to the point of being contradictory. Guilty of promoting racism, but not worthy of insult. You Brits and your politeness! It will be the death of you! (Hopefully not literally.)
On the other hand, a polite English gentlemen like Michael Ezra thinks “morons” are worthy of insult. For an outsider, cultural norms are so difficult to grasp sometimes.
| 26 April 2012, 2:24 pm |
Poor Britain
| 26 April 2012, 2:35 pm |
I don’t see what Danny Rich is hoping to achieve, anyway. Does anyone know how the Chief Rabbi intends to vote, or the Bishop of London, or the Archbishop of Westminster. Probably not, because they’ve had the sense not to get involved, in public at least. It’s not their job.
I can understand that they might make a statement if they felt that either candidate constitutes a danger to the community, but having decided (possibly prematurely) that KL isn’t a threat, Danny Rich would have been better advised to say “vote for whoever you want”, rather than “Back Ken”.
| 26 April 2012, 3:55 pm |
Ho ho ho!
Trust iEngage to get their gallabiyah tucked into their underpants as they leave the toilet… Haddad: what a find for the “democratic face” of Islamist clerical fascism.
| 26 April 2012, 4:01 pm |
Actually kapos has already been pulled out before this thread and zero tolerance to racism would mean neither of the two get a vote too.
| 26 April 2012, 4:12 pm |
Completely agree with DL’s comment here.
Seriously, the tribalism and sectarianism at this blog are appalling. I thought you guys weren’t Arabs…
:D :D
| 26 April 2012, 4:13 pm |
According to this afternoon’s Evening Standard, Boris Johnson has now widened his poll lead over Livingstone to eight points, and would win 54 to 46 in the second round.
At the London Jewish Forum meeting on Tuesday, Livingstone somewhat reluctantly said he would release accountant-certified full information about his earnings and tax payments. He apparently repeated that promise to the Evening Standard.
We’re still being told that the release of the information is “imminent”.
| 26 April 2012, 4:21 pm |
The poll is only a week away.
I would bet that he will not release any further tax details.
Another stalling tactic and yet another lie.
I would bet that he will not release any further tax details.
Another stalling tactic and yet another lie.
| 26 April 2012, 4:35 pm |
RE: I am certainly right to treat you with contempt, as you are clearly a moron.
Schmezra is today’s Pot.Kettle.Black winner.
Oh, and he does speak for me.
| 26 April 2012, 5:36 pm |
Whatever ME, as I said before, you can call me anything you like, I couldn’t care less.
Thanks vildechaye.
| 26 April 2012, 6:09 pm |
That’s great. Anyway, I had better go, I have some of the St. John’s Wood types to meet.
| 26 April 2012, 6:13 pm |
Galloway in the Evening Standard claims to have a good, close relationship with Livingstone but thinks Boris has run a “more vivid” campaign, and that if he were a betting man he’d be betting on Boris to win. Galloway says that if Livingstone wants to win, he should come out as the hard leftie he really is, put two fingers up to the tax critics, and go for his core vote– including the 750,000 Muslims he thinks are part of it.
Seems to me he’s more honest about Livingstone than the five Jewish Labour loyalists who churned out today’s letter urging London’s Jewish Labour supporters to hold their nose and vote for him. And they couldn’t even get all the original signatories to sign today’s letter.
Two cheers for Adam Langleben who refused to allow himself to be co-opted to try and get more Jews to vote for Livingstone. Thought he will be voting for him himself.
| 26 April 2012, 6:32 pm |
those that know me are aware that I have been reading a reasonable amount of fiction of late.
You’ve been writing a fair bit, too.
| 26 April 2012, 7:04 pm |
The poll is only a week away.
I would bet that he will not release any further tax details.
Another stalling tactic and yet another lie.
names meanings
I would bet that he will not release any further tax details.
Another stalling tactic and yet another lie.
names meanings
| 26 April 2012, 7:05 pm |
Tower Hamlets and the postal votes
| 26 April 2012, 7:11 pm |
Milliband on 5Live this morning.
Campbell: “What do you think of Ken Livingstone sayng that he couldn’t see rich Jews voting for him.
Millipede: “He didn’t say that. It was a private party”
Move on. It was all a dream.
| 26 April 2012, 7:28 pm |
Campbell: “What do you think of Ken Livingstone sayng that he couldn’t see rich Jews voting for him.
Millipede: “He didn’t say that. It was a private party”
i.e. “He did say that, but no one was meant to find out. And I am a liar.”
| 26 April 2012, 7:29 pm |
So Livingstone’s mates are trying to rig the vote. I wonder how Michael Ezra will try and spin this.
| 26 April 2012, 7:36 pm |
Won’t it be a bit incongurous to turn London into a Bacon For Islam?
| 26 April 2012, 7:40 pm |
Lamia
Vote early, vote often!
| 26 April 2012, 8:25 pm |
A piece on Livingstone at a meeting with Jews recentlyhttp://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/ken-livingstone-tries-and-not-entirely-succeeds-to-make-up-with-london-s-jews-1.426695
Won’t say that he wouldn’t welcome Qaradawi again. He simply says its unlikely he would come again.
| 26 April 2012, 8:37 pm |
I wonder how Michael Ezra will try and spin this.
“Some Londoners, it appears, are willing to break the law in order to see Ken Livingstone elected. But they should not be condemned. Clearly they have resorted to this behaviour in their desperation over the decline of public transport in London during Boris Johnson’s tenure as Mayor.
Say whatever you will about Ken, at least he’ll make the trains run on time.”
| 26 April 2012, 8:54 pm |
Instead of posting comments here , pick up some Boris leaflets and hit the streets . Anything to keep that leper out .
| 26 April 2012, 8:56 pm |
The people who post and comment here are about as vile a cluster of individuals as you’re ever likely to meet. I’m routing for Livingstone almost purely because it’ll upset you nasty fuckers.
| 26 April 2012, 9:18 pm |
The people who post and comment here are about as vile a cluster of individuals as you’re ever likely to meet.
Possibly, but at least we exist, unlike a lot of Ken’s ‘voters’.
I’m routing for Livingstone almost purely because it’ll upset you nasty fuckers.
I doubt if you have any say in the matter. You”ve quite possibly already voted for Ken Livingstone in Tower Hamlets whether you know it or not.
| 26 April 2012, 9:22 pm |
Switch it Up
The people who post and comment here are about as vile a cluster of individuals as you’re ever likely to meet.
I think you’re mistaken. Some of the people Livingstone exchanges body warmth with, are a lot more vile.
| 26 April 2012, 9:27 pm |
jan frank, Shmoo-El
The population of Jews in Europe in 1933 was 9.5 million, 60% of the World total.
Central Europe (Germany, Austria Hungary and Czechoslovakia had 1.6 million with 565.000 in Germany).
However there were 6.7 Million in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union.
The cultural dislocation and subsequent denial and wipeover of the cultural contribution that Jewish people made to Poland and Romania, Lithuania, Latvia and the Western Soviet Union is truly astonishing, truly heartbreaking even more so when the scale of the tragedy there is so rarely fully acknowledged (not least because of their active collaboration with the Nazis extermination plans even exceeding their wildest estimates).
Jews were not the small minority in Eastern Europe that they were in Western and Central Europe.
They were 5% of the region’s population 7.6% of the Lithuanian population and nearly 10% of the population of Poland.
By 1950 the Jewish population of Poland was 45,000 and even this did not prevent further pogroms.
The Germans may have conceived the plan of extermination (although it appears Lithuania achieved it before Wansee) but it could not have succeeded even in conquered territories without some seriously efficient collaboration by many nationals of Eastern Europe, most of whom have escaped punishment or even censure.
This great Eastern European crime of collaboration in the Holocaust we must also never forget.
| 26 April 2012, 9:50 pm |
Perhaps Livingstone also converted to Islam so that he can hate Jews legally?
| 26 April 2012, 10:09 pm |
Very interesting and worthwhile comment, metta.
| 26 April 2012, 10:21 pm |
The people who post and comment here are about as vile a cluster of individuals as you’re ever likely to meet.
Says someone posting and commenting here
I’m routing for Livingstone
Routing what for Livingstone?
| 26 April 2012, 11:09 pm |
i’m hoping KL is routed
| 26 April 2012, 11:44 pm |
| 26 April 2012, 11:54 pm |
Harvey @ 26 April 2012, 8:54 pm
“pick up some Boris leaflets”
You mean you’ve seen some?
I’ve seen precisely none.
| 27 April 2012, 12:51 am |
At least two young British Jews were murdered in Israel since the Hamas campaigns of bombing buses and stabbing lone Jews took off.
Shmuel Mett, a Mir Yeshiva student about to be married, was stabbed to death walking through the Old City back to his Yeshiva in Jerusalem circa 2007.
Yoni Jesner, a promising 19 year old university student spending the summer on a Bnei Akiva youth movement visit was murdered in a bus bombing in Tel-Aviv.
Many London Jews knew one or both of these young men personally. Bnei Akiva is the largest and most popular youth movement of the mainstream Orthodox and Yoni Jesner was a well loved young leader in the movement. Shmuel Mett was the son of a former teacher at the Hasmonean High School, and studied at the Mir Yeshiva, which is the most revered and prestigious of the great Charedi Yeshivas in Israel, where many strictly Orthodox and mainstream orthodox young men from London choose to spend a period of study.
At the meeting with the London Jewish Forum on Tuesday, Livingstone was repeatedly asked about his embrace of Qaradawi, the Muslim Brotherhood’s hate preacher who advocates suicide bombings and murders of Jews in Israel as a religious obligation. He said he disagreed with Qaradawi on supporting suicide bombings.
But look at what he said when repeatedly pressed to give an assurance that he would not be inviting Qaradawi to London again if elected Mayor:
| 27 April 2012, 2:58 am |
I’ve now posted my take on the London Jewish Forum meeting with Livingstone here. I’ve embedded clips of the chairman’s introduction, described to me by someone else who was there as a Party Election Broadcast on Behalf of Ken Livingstone, Friend to the Jewish Community. The main clip is the section of the meeting where Livingstone fielded questions about concerns about what some audience members regard as the anti-semitic overtones in his past comments and his support for Press TV and Qaradawi.
By way of contrast, to those who feel ready to take a look, there’s also a clip of Boris Johnson answering questions from the Jewish community audience at the equivalent meeting a week earlier.
Fascinating to compare the body language in the two clips, as well as the content and style.
| 27 April 2012, 3:00 am |
I really do despair of the people who wrote that letter endorsing Ken.
For God’s sake, stop thinking like frightened little Jews, scared stiff you won’t have access if Ken is elected and start thinking like the progressive, Labour Party members you are supposed to be.
On the point of principle, people who pander to anti-semitic stereotypes and give succour to homophobes and misogynists shouldn’t be in the Labour Party, let alone be the bloody candidate for the capital. Playing off communities against each other is not progressive and it’s not Left either.
And on the tactical point, how the hell do they expect – post-Bradford West – that a Ken victory is going to be interpreted INSIDE the Labour Party. We are going to nhear no end of analysis that communatist politics is the way forward as we walk like lemmings into electoral disaster.
It’s preceisely because it’s getting closer that anything that assists in pushing Ken over the top is so dangerous now.
I understand the Labour right or wrong mentality. But it means Labour principles right or wrong, not Labour candidates.
| 27 April 2012, 3:01 am |
The people who post and comment here are about as vile a cluster of individuals as you’re ever likely to meet.
I wonder what it is the electrifying Mr or Ms Switch It Up feels is so incomparably vile about the posters and commenters on HP.
I think we should be told. It is after all the watchword of Harry’s Place.
| 27 April 2012, 3:54 am |
I understand the Labour right or wrong mentality. But it means Labour principles right or wrong, not Labour candidates.
Absolutely right Phil. I fear for the Labour Party and for mainstream politics generally if Livingstone wins. What he does about bus and train fares is nothing to the message it would send to all kinds of extremists. And I wouldn’t rule him out winning at all. It looks like some of his supporters have been working busily to fix it so he does.
| 27 April 2012, 6:33 am |
I am outraged at the short sharp thrift Mr. Michael Ezra has received in the above comments. Michael is known for his careful, thoughtful and well researched pieces. He is a beacon of kindness, a champion of the poor London commuter…. (continues. p.97)
| 27 April 2012, 6:37 am |
Shmoo-El, yes it can happen here, and I fully expect it to. Maybe not tomorrow, but I have no doubt it will happen.
| 27 April 2012, 6:45 am |
“It’s only Jewish Londoners who ask me about Qaradawi. No-one else ever mentions him.”
Judy – that quote from KL (was that included in your clip – I didn’t watch the whole thing?) was the bit that most stood out for me in your post. I find it hard to believe that is true – and if it is true – so what – how does it affect the issues at stake?
| 27 April 2012, 7:09 am |
Judy
I second Sarah’s request – I can’t seem to find the clip.
I second Sarah’s request – I can’t seem to find the clip.
| 27 April 2012, 7:43 am |
Yes, he really did say it. I’ll have to re-listen to the clip. But even if it isn’t on it, the Barnet Bugle recorded the whole event and put it up on their open Vimeo site, so it will be on their whole-event clip. I promise to track it down for you.
It was in the context that he was saying other Londoners than Jews are asking him about things like fares and housing in this campaign, and it’s only Jewish Londoners who keep going on about Qaradawi.
It was in the context that he was saying other Londoners than Jews are asking him about things like fares and housing in this campaign, and it’s only Jewish Londoners who keep going on about Qaradawi.
He’s totally impervious to those concerns. And I think he’s lying about only Jews amongst Londoners asking about Qaradawi. In the same way, he gave the strong impression at the meeting that Moody’s backed his case for cutting fares.
But as far as I know, Moody’s report identifies a huge chunk of the “surplus” as being earmarked for Piccadilly line improvements and also points out that spending reserves in the way Livingstone wants to will lead to a lowering of TfL’s credit rating, so their credit costs will rise–leading to deficits and fare or Council Tax hikes.
| 27 April 2012, 7:47 am |
Just to clarify – I wasn’t questioning the authenticity of the quote, just very surprised that KL has *only* been questioned by Jewish Londoners about this. I see the quote as a (comparatively) subtle visible sign of the attitude that complaints about antisemitism are manufactured, opportunistic or, at best, symptoms of neurotic oversensitivity.
There is a more than usually crappy comment about this over on SU (Vincent Doherty #11)I don’t know if anyone who hasn’t been banned might like to respond? To be fair – Vanya (#8) might do so.
| 27 April 2012, 7:47 am |
[My comment crossed with yours Judy - thanks]
| 27 April 2012, 7:53 am |
OK – found it. He doesn’t actually say:
It’s only Jewish Londoners who ask me about Qaradawi. No-one else ever mentions him.”
It’s only Jewish Londoners who ask me about Qaradawi. No-one else ever mentions him.”
That is what he says at the end of the clip (around 18 mins onwards) about Israel not Qaradawi – the only time he is ever asked about Israel is when he meets London Jews…
On Qaradawi he does say (around 12 minutes in and onwards):
He’s banned from coming to Britain…he’s 89 years old….why are you worrying about (my) ever meeting Qaradawi… why is this such an obsessive point?…..
He’s banned from coming to Britain…he’s 89 years old….why are you worrying about (my) ever meeting Qaradawi… why is this such an obsessive point?…..
So Judy was not entirely accurate. But the clip is worth viewing/listening to – the bit about the Reuben brothers in particular was very interesting – not even a hint of an apology.
Oh, and by the way, anyone but Ken.
| 27 April 2012, 7:57 am |
I believe the positions taken by JLC and the LJF are far more politically sensible than those advocated by, for example, a Spare Rib relic.
| 27 April 2012, 8:00 am |
the bit about the Reuben brothers in particular was very interesting – not even a hint of an apology.
The really striking thing about Livingstone’s comments on both the Rubens Brothers and Finegold was that his explanations implied they were perfectly reasonable comments to make about each of them, because in his eyes, they were wrong ‘uns. That in his eyes justifies making comments with antisemitic connotations which he refuses to recognise as having such connotations, but which he doesn’t usually make about non-Jews. Though he does rather have a habit of condemning attacks on himself as being Nazi-like.
| 27 April 2012, 8:07 am |
I do think it’s important that anything presented as a quote should be absolutely accurate – but – Michael – please
| 27 April 2012, 8:20 am |
That schmezra continues to be an above-line poster here is astonishing.
| 27 April 2012, 8:20 am |
Sarah, I would not have bothered commenting on this post in the first place had not 2 out of the first 3 comments referenced me. Notably, I did not see you complaining about the third comment in this thread. I also do not see what is so wrong with me defending the JLC and the LJF against the repeated attacks on it from some in these comments boxes.
| 27 April 2012, 8:42 am |
Isn’t a significant aspect of he letter that it clearly disproves the lie that was put about that the reps had gone into the meeting with Livingstone intending it to fail.
By the way didn’t you just love that really plaintive bit in the “Now we say vote for Ken” piece about how they wish he’d quoted from the Hebrew prophets as well as the Koran -fuckwits!
Probably just forgot, Rabbi Danny – just forgot – er, mere slip of the mind.
| 27 April 2012, 8:44 am |
Although that was a nasty comment it didn’t fall into the same territory as ‘kapo’ which I did delete in an earlier thread. I thought calling someone a ‘Spare Rib relic’ was a bit much.
| 27 April 2012, 8:54 am |
Sarah, I said “Spare Rib relic” and not “Spare Rib relic.” The difference is important. Are you familiar with Spare Rib and notably some of the articles it published in 1982-1983?
| 27 April 2012, 9:02 am |
I believe the positions taken by JLC and the LJF are far more politically sensible than those advocated by, for example, a Spare Rib relic.
How curious. As far as I’m aware no one on HP or any other blog I’ve come across who’s written about or commented on Livingstone 2012, the LJF or the LJC was ever a collective member, associate, representative or employee of Spare Rib, or wrote any article or letter published in Spare Rib.
| 27 April 2012, 9:17 am |
“And I think he’s lying about only Jews amongst Londoners asking about Qaradawi.”
He is lying again, of course.
Gay Londoners are also continuing to ask about him for a start.
He just can’t help lying.
| 27 April 2012, 9:31 am |
Thanks, Judy, for your observation about Spare Rib. Until I saw that, I’d been Googling in vain to make sense of Michael Ezra’s last comment.
| 27 April 2012, 9:33 am |
Well, that is interesting. The links between Spare Rib and Feminist Review might be a figment of my imagination. And when I look at, for example, Feminist Review, No. 4 (1980) and Spare Rib, September, 1984, I must be seeing things.
| 27 April 2012, 9:56 am |
I am familiar with Spare Rib – ok, if you were just talking about antisemitism/antizionism associated with SR then I take it back. I thought it was just a jibe.
| 27 April 2012, 10:06 am |
Sarah,
Yes, I was. I did capitalise the initial letters and utilise italics which would be standard for commenting on a title of a publication. I do accept however that it was somewhat obscure and you might not have seen it that way.
| 27 April 2012, 10:07 am |
This still makes no sense. Where does the “relic” come into this?
| 27 April 2012, 10:17 am |
rel·ic [rel-ik]
noun
1. a surviving memorial of something past.
| 27 April 2012, 10:23 am |
“1. a surviving memorial of something past.”
Or
“2. from the vaults”
| 27 April 2012, 10:24 am |
Thank you, Michael. That’s completely unhelpful. I know what the word means. I just don’t know what its referent is.
| 27 April 2012, 10:31 am |
The 210 bus route exercises some of London’s most orthodox Jewish community, because it’s the nearest thing to a direct connection between Stamford Hill and Golders Green, the two largest centres of Charedi Jews in London. Only so far, it involves having to get off the bus and change at Finsbury Park Station.
Judy, that means he went to that meeting with members of the Jewish Community with that quip already lined-up. It was no off-the-cuff remark but something he had already decided would be a riposte to those Jews. How much more sick can Livingstone get?
| 27 April 2012, 10:31 am |
I believe Judy used to be involved with Spare Rib, Kolya.
| 27 April 2012, 10:36 am |
Kolya,
It is a long story. I might write about in detail some day. But if you are really interested, perhaps you should spend some time here:
The Women’s Library
London Metropolitan University
25 Old Castle Street
Aldgate
London
E1 7NT
London Metropolitan University
25 Old Castle Street
Aldgate
London
E1 7NT
They have some wonderful material.
| 27 April 2012, 10:38 am |
the only time he is ever asked about Israel is when he meets London Jews
Yeah? I’ll call him a liar on that one. Is he telling us that not a single one of his Muslim constituency ever ask him about Israel? Or, is his snide get-out that they ask him about “Palestine”.
Maybe its not acceptable that London Jews should be concerned about their family in Israel because what Ken thinks about Israel also reflects on what Ken will think of Jews who are Zionists. If Ken hates Israel then Ken can’t have much time for a Jew who supports Israel. If Ken were asked for funding for a Jewish charity, school or housing project then I wonder if his criteria is going to be whether they are in any way supportive of Israel.
The more Ken is exposed here the more I think of him more as a Nazi than I do as a Marxist/Leninist/Socialist/Extreme Left (delete/circle as necessary).
| 27 April 2012, 10:40 am |
… and I guess its only his Muslim Constituency who ever bother to ask him about Pakistan, Kashmir and the Palestinians.
Its only Gay people who ask him about his attitudes to gay people and only train-spotters who ask him about new rolling-stock.
Toys R Us don’t sell fresh fish!
| 27 April 2012, 10:44 am |
Thank you, Sarah.
Although my thinking has evolved a little since those days, I used to read Spare Rib avidly for a number of years.
| 27 April 2012, 10:47 am |
The issues between 1982 and 1984 were most interesting wouldn’t you say Kolya?
| 27 April 2012, 10:54 am |
Yes – I in fact used to read Spare Rib in the early 80s, though I’m sure anything to do with Israel would just have washed over me. I do have some hazy memory though, oddly, of complaints about the casual use of a Star of David.
| 27 April 2012, 10:54 am |
I believe Judy used to be involved with Spare Rib, Kolya.
I was never involved with Spare Rib, and given its record of publishing antisemitic antizionist articles and refusing to publish any Jewish feminist unless she declared herself an antizionist, I very greatly resent any suggestion that I was.
I played a major role amongst a large group of British Jewish feminists who organized to protest against these actions.
Calling any member of such a group a “Spare Rib relic” is like calling a former member of the Anti-Nazi League a “National Front relic”.
Calling any member of such a group a “Spare Rib relic” is like calling a former member of the Anti-Nazi League a “National Front relic”.
| 27 April 2012, 10:57 am |
Michael, at the risk of sounding pompous, I wish you didn’t use the same tone towards people who insult you gratuitously, and those who have substantive passionate disagreements with you.
I, for one, would be interested in the “long story”, if you ever do write about it.
| 27 April 2012, 10:57 am |
I’m very sorry – I really did have this idea you were involved in it – I have only recently picked up on this problem with SR and Zionism, and it really would not have been something I’d have been alert to as a teenager.
| 27 April 2012, 11:09 am |
Oy vey!
I didn’t think you had a connection with Spare Rib, Judy. That’s why I found Michael’s comment puzzling (to say nothing of its rudeness).
My interest in the magazine coincided with my early exploration of feminist ideas, before I became attuned to the central role they ascribed to anti-Zionism.
| 27 April 2012, 11:23 am |
I don’t know what “Spare Rib’ was publishing 30 years ago but I find it quite entertaining that Mr Ezra seems to think it reasonable grounds for criticism, whereas what Livingstone says and believestoday is apparently irrelevant or at least pales into insignificance when compared with the fortunes of the Jubilee Line .
| 27 April 2012, 11:31 am |
Kolya,
I apologise if I came across as rude. It was not intentional. What went on in the feminist movement, particularly in the 1970s-1980s, is quite fascinating. The anti-Zionism that was exhibited was symptomatic of some of the wider issues with which the movement struggled. Notably, as I see it, the problems stem from identity politics, or as some fashionably refer to it, “idpol.” Some of these are discussed and explained in a clear cut way in the following book which I would recommend:
Daphne Patai and Norettta Koertge, Professing Feminism: education and indoctrination in women’s studies, (Lexington Books, 2003).
I would also recommend the following:
Christina Hoff Sommers, Who Stole Feminism? How Women Have Betrayed Women, (Touchstone, 1995).
Any detailed look at the extremes of the feminist movement will see heterosexual women deemed to be untrustworthy because they were “sleeping with the enemy.” Lesbians demanded leadership within the women’s movement because they were “most oppressed women” and as Ronald Radosh mentions in his memoirs (Commies: A Journey Through the Old Left, the New Left and the Leftover Left, [Encounter Books, 2001], pp117-118) you had lesbian women attending classes brandishing baseball bats to protect themselves from the heterosexual women. There is masses of this sort of thing and I do not believe it is as widely known as it should be.
| 27 April 2012, 11:50 am |
Judy forgets mention what sort of thing that was published in something with which she was very much associated. Perhaps Judy would like to discuss good reasons for publishing the work of Nira Yuval-Davis.
This is a women whose work and opinions were discussed by Jenny Bourne (“Homelands of the mind: Jewish feminism and identity politics,” Race & Class, Vol. XXIX, No. 1, p.10)
Going further than the ‘non-Zionists’ who criticized Israel merely for its racist dispossession of the Palestinians, [Yuval-Davis] pointed out that its Zionist founders had actually shared with arch anti-Semites racist assumptions about the irreconcilability of Jew and gentile, and that Israel now played a role in the Third World which put it on the side of imperialist oppression.
It is amazing what sort of things there are in the vaults.
| 27 April 2012, 12:01 pm |
Yes indeed.
Don’t worry about what Livingstone and his pals say and believetoday — look over here at what some obscure rag published 30 years ago.
| 27 April 2012, 12:07 pm |
Ezra
EZRA!
yes, you boy! Have you forgotten your schoolboy days? Eh? EZRA!!!
| 27 April 2012, 12:08 pm |
I wish you didn’t use the same tone towards people who insult you gratuitously, and those who have substantive passionate disagreements with you.
Judy does not appear to have engaged with Michael Ezra at all on this thread, let alone insult or even have had a disagreement with him. She merely expressed views and standpoints he dislikes. He finds this cause enough to direct a spiteful attack on her couched in demeaning terms. Ugh.
What with Israelinurse, me and now Judy, he does seem to harbour a certain rancour towards women older than, say, Laurie Penny, which the deployment of the word relic reflects.
| 27 April 2012, 12:09 pm |
“It’s only Jewish Londoners who ask me about Qaradawi. No-one else ever mentions him.”
Livingstone is lying. He was asked about this in a radio interview less than a month ago – and also about his paid work for a regime which hangs gay people.
@ Kolya
Michael Ezra is not insulted gratuitously.
He’s insulted because he treats almost everyone, unprovoked, with a smug, self-regarding condescension.
He also has such a massive ego that he also can’t admit a mistake. So if he’s mistakenly linked Judy to Spare Rib, don’t expect him to show any grace about it.
And finally, he’s a supporter of Ken Livingstone, a Jew-baiter in the here and now, not just in the early 1980s. He deserves everything that gets thrown at him.
| 27 April 2012, 12:17 pm |
Michael Ezra won’t get the thing he deserves being thrown at him:
he is a legal thief, stealing the lives of working people and making money from it too, through the process of capitalist exploitation and surplus value — making damn sure he rubbishes anyone who points out he is a grubby parasite like the rest of the Hedge Fund Gurus and capitalists of the capitalist system he supports.
| 27 April 2012, 12:34 pm |
Any chance of getting back on the topic – which is not Michael Ezra?
| 27 April 2012, 12:45 pm |
As someone who is anxious about both the soul and the fortunes of the Labour Party (though not fanatically so) – I really liked this piece:
| 27 April 2012, 1:07 pm |
“…he does seem to harbour a certain rancour to woman older than, say, Laurie Penny.”
I guess the fact that in the comments boxes of this blog I have praised women such as Linda Grant, Julie Burchill and above, even in this thread, have positively recommended books by not so young woman authors is totally lost on some.
| 27 April 2012, 1:18 pm |
Any chance of getting back on the topic – which is not Michael Ezra?
It would help if the thread were not buckling under the weight of Ezra’s standard tactic of a bombardment of bibliography the relevance of which is obscure.
| 27 April 2012, 1:23 pm |
Missed your comment Alan but if you are looking in
Just go to local conservative party headquarters , pick up a handfull of Boris posters and go door to door as many as possible .
It all helps . Anything to keep that scroat livingstone out .
I think I labelled him a leper last night , either will do .
Just go to local conservative party headquarters , pick up a handfull of Boris posters and go door to door as many as possible .
It all helps . Anything to keep that scroat livingstone out .
I think I labelled him a leper last night , either will do .
| 27 April 2012, 1:27 pm |
Thanks Sarah. I strongly agree with the author’s conclusion:
…the idea that it is possible to line up behind individuals like Livingstone and Galloway for electoral advantage is testament to the level to which left-wing politics in Britain has sunk. If anything, a great deal more idealism would be very welcome.
Whether or not you support the Left, the unimaginative way the Labour party has responded to the Blair-Brown-Cameron transition, is a tragedy for British politics.
| 27 April 2012, 1:28 pm |
Hm, the only person who calls Michael Ezra a ‘Hedge Fund Guru’ (not followed by hysterical laughter) is Michael Ezra.
| 27 April 2012, 1:49 pm |
“… standard tactic of a bombardment of bibliography.”
How outragrous! Refernencing sources! One should never, ever type their source for any claim made.
| 27 April 2012, 1:50 pm |
Yes, Sarah, that is a very good piece (though, yes, I would still hold my nose and put my ‘X’ besides Ken if I had a vote next week)
In particular, the way some who should know better went barmy over Bradford West as a wonderful harbinger of hope for the left is one of the most depressing spectacles of recent times.
| 27 April 2012, 2:22 pm |
I have praised women such as Linda Grant
Oh yes I recall now- tweetsharing with LindaG that HP is such a pathetic blog..
| 27 April 2012, 2:34 pm |
I really do think it is time to stop the sniping at Michael Ezra. I think he is wrong to support KL; I also happen to think he is one of the most informed and informative writers on this blog; a man of considerable good manners; and undeserving of this level of personalised abuse.
As I wrote above, I do think that good political sense has absented itself from him on this one; and I do think his taste in journalists leaves something to be desired.
| 27 April 2012, 2:41 pm |
I agree completely.
| 27 April 2012, 3:05 pm |
Thank you Abu Faris.
| 27 April 2012, 5:43 pm |
I more or less agree with you Abu. I think Michael Ezra is the Noam Chomsky of HP. Probably intelligent. Very good at citing obscure (and relatively less relevant) sources when making an empirical claim. And internally coherent (to the point of dogmatism) when making a rational argument. But clearly wrong about everything. And immoral to boot. It’s an interesting type to be sure.
| 27 April 2012, 5:48 pm |
And I should add…both get very cranky and condescending when on the defensive!
| 27 April 2012, 5:57 pm |
I genuinely don’t get Michael Ezra here. For someone who illuminates us so much with archive material detailing the minutiae of the nutty far-Left over the decades, Michael of all people knows that Livingstone’s links with London Labour Briefing, Socialist Action, the WRP, Sinn Fein and all sorts of nutjobs should disqualify him from anything in British politics.
And that’s before we get to the crass comments about Jews, platforms for anti-Semites and homophobes, pandering to Islamists etc.
So come on Michael. Justify why you’re chucking out of the window the habits of a lifetime and convince me your not taking the mick.
| 27 April 2012, 6:00 pm |
And by the way, with people like Gilbert and Rabbi Rich, nothing surprises me . You’re in exalted company Michael.
| 27 April 2012, 6:14 pm |
Shmoo-El,
Perhaps we have a different view of morality and perhaps it is me who is moral and you who is immoral.
Phil,
Oh yes, I have some wonderful material on Ken Livingstone going back over thirty years. I have even used material from it to write posts for this blog. You could argue that it is precisely because I am familiar with so much material about Ken, that I am happy to vote for him. I do not get so worked up about, for example, Ken’s comments about the Reuben Brothers when I quoted him as saying of Rupert Murdoch, “He is an animal and we should put him on a boat and deport him.” I do not believe that he is now or ever has been an antisemite, and I alswo happen to think that he is better for London than Boris Johnson.
| 27 April 2012, 6:16 pm |
And I should add…both get very cranky and condescending when on the defensive!
He cannot bear to be contradicted and loses it when that happens.
Someone was abusive to Ezra in the third email. Ezra was abusive back. Fine, fair enough, no issue with that.
But when he responds gratuitously with calculated malice to an expression of views by Judy, who had not even engaged with him, let alone abused or disagreed directly, this is not a man of considerable good manners, pace Abu Faris: You would not have picked up on the spiteful and slightly menacing, innuendo in his so called trawl through the archives.
It was the same with Israelinurse. She disagreed with something he wrote and was hounded and traduced as a fabricator irrespective of the inappropriateness of the attack of the timing thereof. When I came to her defence, the spite spotlight switched to me. Good manners is not an avoidance of and horror of swearing.
| 27 April 2012, 6:24 pm |
Perhaps we have a different view of morality and perhaps it is me who is moral and you who is immoral.
Dude, that’s trippy. And what if this is all a dream, and when you go to sleep that’s reality!
| 27 April 2012, 6:25 pm |
Amie, I agree with you. There are people who are nice, and there are people who are good. There are people who are neither. (The rare few are both.)
| 27 April 2012, 6:30 pm |
My response to Judy was because she continually attacks the JLC and the LJF. I wonder whether amie fully supports these attacks by Judy and believes just because Judy has made these attacks that they should stand.
In my opinion – and it is my opinion – I feel that London’s Jewish communities are far better served by the JLC and and LJF than they are by someone with political background of Judy’s. And on that note, there has been no response from Judy on the rights or wrongs of being involved in a publication that published the works of Nira Yuval-Davis, a charge that cannot be levelled at Jeremy Nemark of the JLC or Adrian Cohen of the LFJ, two people which Judy seems to like attacking.
| 27 April 2012, 6:58 pm |
And on that note, there has been no response from Judy
Hard for you to understand, but some people have other things to do on Erev Shabbat like bake challaha and other preparations for receiving shabbat guests.
| 27 April 2012, 7:00 pm |
Given that Judy is of some flavour of Orthodox, I assume she disconnects from the Internet over shabbat.
~alec
| 27 April 2012, 7:13 pm |
The relevant message I sent was at 11.50am. One does not need to be an expert on the laws of halacha to know that shabbat is unlikely to commence anywhere near that early in the day on a Friday.
But in any event, perhaps Judy will respond tomorrow night after the stars are shining in the sky, or maybe Sunday morning. I shall watch out for it. I look forward to seeing a perfect explanation for being involved in a collective that published Yuval-Davis.
| 27 April 2012, 7:18 pm |
Yes, of course. She hangs around online until the last few minutes before sunset and, like you with comments about yourself, dwells on any and every slight against her to return, at the first opportunity, to run her opponents into the ground in a narcissisticrighteous fury.
~alec
| 27 April 2012, 7:21 pm |
One does not need to be an expert on the laws of halacha
you clearly are no expert on the timescale of challah baking.
“someone with political background of Judy’s. ”
No doubt you have trawled the archives to give all members of JLC and and LJF a clean bill of health all the way back to their barmitzvahs and beyond.
I am not interested in what your trawls have revealed and whether or not you have got the wrong end of the stick as far as your research on Judy is concerned. It is irrelevant 40 years on. 40 years ago I was a madrich in Betar. 30 years ago I was working alongside Desmond Tutu. 2 elections ago, I was voting for Livingstone and canvassing for my Labour MP. None of this would be a guide to where I stand today on Israeli, South African or UK politics.
| 27 April 2012, 7:25 pm |
Amie, would an egg-free challah be credible in your eyes?
~alec
| 27 April 2012, 7:33 pm |
The relevant message I sent was at 11.50am. One does not need to be an expert on the laws of halacha to know that shabbat is unlikely to commence anywhere near that early in the day on a Friday.
But one would have had to observe shabbat just once as a woman without servants to understand that preparations for shabbat start well before sundown.
I take it back. Michael Ezra is the Mitt Romney of HP. Painfully out of touch.
| 27 April 2012, 7:35 pm |
Alec, I have had my fond illusions shattered about what the sacred bread of shabbat should contain since speaking to the Persian woman who runs our local kosher deli. She tells me the bread they bless is a kind of flat bread which contains no egg. And I also found in the Budgens of Belsize park (where Ezra knows more people than anyone) a plaited loaf called with a Polish version of the word challah which claims to be from an authentic Polish recipe. So neither the plait nor the inclusion of egg is a Jewish invention it seems.
“She hangs around online until the last few minutes before sunset and, like you with comments about yourself, dwells on any and every slight against her to return, at the first opportunity, to run her opponents into the ground in a narcissistic righteous fury.”
Haha exactly. Ezra lives in a solipsistic cocoon where he imagines that responding to his comments are the priority of everyone’s lives so that the failure to do so is damning proof of guilt.
| 27 April 2012, 7:40 pm |
I am certainly familiar with the background of Adrian Cohen and Jeremy Newmark back to their student days, two people that have been attacked by Judy – and yes – I would be happy to give both of them very positive references on their backgrounds.
What I know about Judy’s politics today is that she spends her time criticising the Jewish Leadership Council, the London Jewish Forum, the Board of Deputies of British Jews, and Jewish “millionaires, billionaires.”
One wonders with what words some of the people on this blog would choose to denounce someone else who had spent so long slating mainstream Jewish communal bodies and leaders as Judy.
| 27 April 2012, 7:42 pm |
“One wonders with what words some of the people on this blog would choose to denounce someone else who had spent so long slating mainstream Jewish communal bodies”
Jewish?
| 27 April 2012, 7:55 pm |
One wonders with what words some of the people on this blog would choose to denounce someone else who had spent so long slating mainstream Jewish communal bodies”
Jewish?
Jewish?
Exactly, what could be more Jewish than that? In South Africa we used to refer to the SA Board of Deputies as the Board of Lupittes (yiddish for old rags) Even though my own mother in law used to work for them for 20 years as an office administrator.
| 27 April 2012, 8:01 pm |
So it is perfectly acceptable for Judy to criticise the Board of Deputies of British Jews, the London Jewish Forum, the Jewish Leadership Council and the leaders associated with these organisations because “what could be more Jewish than that?”
Yet, at the same time, it is not acceptable for me to criticise Judy. Perhaps she is holy.
| 27 April 2012, 8:09 pm |
Given, Michael, your category error in declaring Judy to have been a Spare Ribber, I’ll take your latest assessment of her position with a pinch of melah. And there is a difference between criticism of stated positions, and personalized and calculated abuse which went far beyond any piece of coarse language.
Amie, as I recall plaited challah is a European Jewish tradition, with none amongst Mizrahim, so that’d make sense. As an egg allergist, I wouldn’t be able to handle the dough of never mind eat challah… maybe I could wear gloves whilst kneading.
~alec
| 27 April 2012, 8:21 pm |
RE: a man of considerable good manners; and undeserving of this level of personalised abuse.
Sorry to disagree with you AF, but are you talking about a different ME? The schmezra I am familiar with has shit manners and is a spiteful, pompous putz.
| 27 April 2012, 8:37 pm |
amie – while I agree with all your criticisms of Michael’s personal attacks on other contributors, and I profoundly disagree with his support for Ken Livingstone, I still think he should not be subjected to personal insults. It’s better all round to challenge his views and his style of debating (as you have been doing) without the invective that some people have been using.
Shmoo-El – equating Michael Ezra with Noam Chomsky, suggests a profound ignorance Chomsky’s vileness.
Phil – I conjecture that Michael’s present-day allegiances are the product of a visceral sense of loyalty to various people and groups, which he doesn’t try to justify even to himself. I think this is a flawed way of choosing one’s moral commitments, because it tends to degenerate into pure tribalism. Judy, by contrast, always presents the moral case for her criticism of the targets of her wrath.
For all that, I think that Michael Ezra’s participation in the debates at HP is on balance beneficial, and we should all try to play down the personal stuff, even though he himself seems to find it difficult to do so.
| 27 April 2012, 9:13 pm |
Kolya: I respect your opinion, but in the case of schmezra, i don’t agree.
| 27 April 2012, 9:23 pm |
Kolya,
Shmoo-El – equating Michael Ezra with Noam Chomsky, suggests a profound ignorance Chomsky’s vileness.
I’m talking about form, not content.
And when you say:
“I don’t think they should be insulted in personal terms. But I think that they, and others like them, are directly complicit in legitimising antisemitism.”
I think you are full of crap. And you know it. Any person that is “directly complicit in legitimizing” any kind of racism, as you accuse Michael Ezra of doing, is worthy of insult, contempt, ridicule, blacklisting…you name it. Even if he is wearing a monocle and top-hat.
| 27 April 2012, 9:51 pm |
Shmoo-El
If I’m full of crap, please believe me that I do not know it. I can’t imagine what theory you have for my saying stuff I know to be crap.
As for Michael Ezra’s support for Livingstone legitimising antisemitism, I believe that to be true. I also believe that my saying that is not a personal insult, it’s voicing an opinion about the consequences of his political stance. The reason I’m not as vituperative in my condemnation as you are, is that the legitimisation of antisemitism is not what Michael intends. He’s very mistaken, not evil.
vildechaye
It’s a pleasure and an honour to be disagreed with in such a courteous way :).
| 27 April 2012, 10:03 pm |
Ok, Kolya. You don’t know you are full of crap. :)
| 27 April 2012, 10:13 pm |
I knew you could be reasoned with, Shmoo-El!
| 28 April 2012, 12:02 am |
Despite amie’s implication that Judy was baking challah and preparing for shabbat and hence that is a reason for her not responding since 11.50am, I note that Judy had time to use Twitterquite a bit today. Perhaps it is possible between plaiting challahs, there is time to read newspaper articles, send tweets, read the tweets from other people and retweet them, but not explain why she was involved in a collective that published Yuval-Davis. As amie puts it, I am “no expert on the timescale of challah baking.”
Shmoo-El chimed in “preparations for shabbat start well before sundown.” Obviously so, especially if those shabbat preparations require a certain amount of time spent using Twitter.
Kolya can provide conjectures about the positions I take and why I take them, but a conjecture is simply that, a conjecture. I certainly do justify at least to myself why I hold certain positions. For example it is not simply due to loyalty to people or organisations that I defend the actions of the JLC and the LJF, it is because I believe them to be very good organisations that have good staff and carry out good work. The LJF is, for example, fortunate to have Rabbi Avraham Pinter on its steering group, someone who is the head of the Jewish school, someone who fully understands the concerns of London’s Charedi community and someone voted, a few years ago, as the the eight most influential person on British Jewryby readers of the Jewish Chronicle. I know for whom he represents and how considered his opinions are, and that is more than I can say for Judy.
I note that Vildechaye continues to froth at the mouth.
| 28 April 2012, 1:44 am |
Michael
OK, my conjectures are only conjectures. But please back-off from having a go at Judy. Criticise her arguments to you heart’s content. But stop trying to discredit her. It’s uncalled for, ineffective, and unattractive.
| 28 April 2012, 7:18 am |
Kolya: Thanks for your thanks. And i see, by your last comment, that the penny is beginning to drop about schmezra, which is a good thing.
| 28 April 2012, 8:43 am |
Kolya,
You say that I should stop trying to discredit Judy, but that is precisely what she does to so many Jewish leaders and organisations. She denounces them as biased and unrepresentative. And this type of thing is not isolated.
Last month she was on the attack against Mick Davis, the chairman of the UJIA, in these terms: “whose contribution to Judaism seems primarily to consist of donations from the billions he makes as the major shareholder of a goldmining company.” She really does seem to like attacking the “millionaires, billionaires” in the Jewish community. Perhaps she should lay off. Had she checked the UJIA website she would have noted that Mick Davis, “played an active role in Jewish communal affairs in South Africa, serving on the executive of the Union of Orthodox Synagogues.” And being chairman of the UJIA involves more than writing checks.
In the comments box of the same post, she side swipes numerous leading people in the Jewish community. On the attack again against Mick Davis: “Davis is an arrogant billionaire used to getting his own way who is totally convinced he knows best and despises the views of the ordinary mainstream Jewish community.”
She denounces the Board of Deputies for being involved in a campaign that was “stupid and disastrous, as well as profoundly dishonest.” This type of thing is wonderful to the enemies of the Jewish community. As can be seen looking at the comment of April 09, 2012 at 01:22 PM, it is listed as being from “Jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com.” This is, in case you are not aware, a blog devoted to attacking Zionism and frequently also attacking Jewish communal bodies. The commentator wants to know what was dishonest about the Board of Deputies. (Indeed the blog owner, Mark Elf, seems to believe that everything about mainstream Jewish communal bodies is dishonest). Rather than ignoring the comment or deleting the comment from such people, Judy goes into full flight on the attack and provide ammunition:
It was dishonest because it amounted to a proxy funding of a profoundly anti-religious Trotskyist group to support the Board of Deputies’ aim of defending British Jews. It was dishonest because it was never formally announced– it emerged after being referred to by at least one journalist, and Jeremy Newmark, the key official responsible for this shabby debacke commented in an article reporting his view of the supposed triumph of using this tactic that they had “worked with” this group.It was dishonest because it was never put to the decision-making authority of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, where it would certainly have been voted down and the tactic of using a Trotskyist group as a proxy overwhelmingly condemned.Additionally, it was deeply dishonest because had the funding been known and owned up to at the launch of the major campaign by Engage which got its funding from the BoD, their credibility as a radical left group opposing the boycotters from the left would have been shot to shreds.I’m sure i could identify more ways in which it was profoundly dishonest, but that’s enough to be going on with.
No wonder the commentator from the anti-Zionist blog was appreciative enough of Judy’s efforts to send his thanks.
Her denouncing of Engage in those comments as Trotskyist or “soft-Trotskyist”, whatever the latter term means, is a ridiculous charge. I have never once seen a call by Engage for the workers to overthrow parliamentary democracy with a violent revolution.
But as far as you seem to be concerned, Judy is too precious, one must stop, “having a go” at her.
| 28 April 2012, 8:46 am |
I note “just looking” remains as cowardly as ever – not putting their name to their posts.
| 28 April 2012, 8:48 am |
well done Michael, good for you.
| 28 April 2012, 9:45 am |
Michael – must you be so childish and snippy all the time. People disagree with you – get over it, for fuck’s sake.
| 28 April 2012, 10:09 am |
I tend to agree that my judgment would be to delete any inquiries from the poison Elf as they are always in bad faith.
I find the attacks on Davis to be inordinate and resent still more deeply the slur against him by Ruth Deech purely on the basis that he is South African.
I find the attacks on Davis to be inordinate and resent still more deeply the slur against him by Ruth Deech purely on the basis that he is South African.
Unfortunately ammunition for jewssansfrontiers is abundantly available in the pubic domain in the savage infighting between all these vested interest organisations in the editorial and letter pages of the JC and Jewish news.
However, when it comes to giving ammunition, there is the matter of the White Phosphorus libel perpetuated by you on HP by your wretched animation. It was met with a torrent of disapprobation, but unfortunately because of the standard vanishing of the comments on HP, it now stands as a permanent blot on HP, without that balancing opposition of the comments, in the archives of HP. And as I have pointed out before, it was embedded in at least one other blog by a notorious anti Israel troll, with the gloating caption that its provenance was none other than HP.
| 28 April 2012, 10:45 am |
Michael
Your detailed comment at 28 April 2012, 8:43 am is very interesting. Thanks for that information.
I welcome the fact that it challenges Judy’s current arguments and tactics, rather than her personal integrity.
| 28 April 2012, 10:53 am |
Oh yes, it doesn’t matter too much about criticising Mick Davis because there is ammunition on him in letters pages of the JC, but heaven forbid someone mention “white phosphorus” and Israel as such information can never be found on the Internet.
I should say at this point, I am highly amused by this thread. It has provided me quite a lot of entertainment so far and I guess I still have to look forward to Judy’s return to commenting after she has eaten the challahs that she spent most of yesterday baking (between using Twitter). I wonder if she also made chullent.
| 28 April 2012, 10:55 am |
vildechaye
Thanks for your thanks for my thanks :).
I get frustrated when knowledgeable people who have lots to offer the rest of us waste their energies and our time on ad hominemfights.
Having said that, I have a lot of time for people who are prepared to marshal serious arguments, even if I strongly disagree with some of their opinions.
| 28 April 2012, 11:29 am |
mention “white phosphorus” and Israel as such information can never be found on the Internet.
You didn’t “mention” white phosphorus, you constructed a scenario which perpetuated a libel of Israel’s use of it.
note the sources which head the google results.
note the sources which head the google results.
| 28 April 2012, 12:37 pm |
Oh yes, claiming Israel used white phosophorus is a libel!
On this link is an official report from the State of Israel. In the report it is admitted that white phosphorus was used by the IDF in the operation in Gaza that occurred between late December 2008 and the middle of January 2009. Perhaps amie would like to complain to the State of Israel about their libel against their own army.
| 28 April 2012, 1:52 pm |
You perpetuate the libel further by citing this official Israeli report as supporting your position, with the misleading statement that they “admitted” using white phosphorus, thereby implying there was something illegal in this.
The Official report you link to, far from being “a libel against their own army” completely exonerates Israel from any illegal or improper use of white phosphorus.
This is a far cry from your falsely constructed scenario where your interrogator lays the groundwork by saying he is not happy with the use by Israel of white phosphorus and then repeatedly questions the interogatee saying you want to know why the Israeli army uses white phosphorus. You construct the responses of the interogatee so that she repeatedly stonewalls and fails to answer the question. The average jewsansfrontiersperson is not going to read the detailed, measured forensic findings of the Israeli state in this lengthy document. They are going to seize on your calculated insinuation that Israel did act illegally in the use of white phosphorus. And they have.
| 28 April 2012, 2:03 pm |
And in your hubris, you have placed your misbegotten animation on youtube as well.
| 28 April 2012, 2:14 pm |
So now it is not a libel to say that Israel used white phosphorus, it is a libel to suggest, “illegal or improper use of white phosphorus.”
It can be noted that at no point in the video is it ever stated that the use of white phosphorus was used in an illegal or improper fashion. As those that understand the video, which amie clearly doesn’t, the video is not really about white phosphorus. It sates quite clearly under the video, “What happens when one asks certain supporters of Israel a question for which they do not know the answer, not that there is no answer, just that they don’t know it.” And that is what this video is actually about: defenders of Israel who do not know their facts. Some of these defenders of Israel, I have realised, even go on television and make school child errors about citizenship and nation in relation to Israelis allowing anti-Zionists to exploit their errors.
| 28 April 2012, 3:42 pm |
“It can be noted that at no point in the video is it ever stated that the use of white phosphorus was used in an illegal or improper fashion.”
That is what is implied. You state you are not happy with Israel’s use of wp. You construct an interogatee who is refuses to answer the repeated question.
You manipulate a scenario where a natural inference is that her failure to answer implies guilt. You do not explain in the blurb that it is not that there is no answer but that that she doesn’t know the answer but refuses to admit she doesn’t know the answer.
In any event this scenario that “this is what happens when one asks certain supporters of Israel a question for which they do not know the answer, not that there is no answer, just that they don’t know it” is a wholly artificial construction of your own making.
The reflex conclusion which the jewsansfrontiersperson on the Clapham omnibus would reach with none of these tortuous subtleties, is that Israel used wp wrongfully.
You are responsible for creating that impression, and they have used it for that purpose.
Does Jeremy Newmark or other pillars of the mainstream Jewish establishment chuckle along with you about your clever little video? I doubt it, but if you assure me they do, that would be reason to doubt their judgment.
| 28 April 2012, 3:43 pm |
Correction: you do state that in the blurb, but I dismiss this for the reasons stated above.
| 28 April 2012, 3:45 pm |
Nowhere do you state that there is an innocent answer, the implication being that the correct answer is unfavourable. That you thought then and that you still think the correct answer is unfavourable is evident from your misreading or misrepresentation of the Israeli official report.
| 28 April 2012, 4:57 pm |
I stated that this was what the video was about:
What happens when one asks certain supporters of Israel a question for which they do not know the answer, not that there is no answer, just that they don’t know it.
I have emphasised the relevant words that amie might do well to read and re-read. She clearly has a comprehension problem. At no point did I say there was no answer to the question as to why white phosphorus was used. I just said that the person who was asked did not know the answer. That was what the video was about. No one could ever cite my video and declare Michael Ezra said Israel’s use of white phosphorus was illegal as I would not let them get away with it. Just like I shall not let amie get away with her ridiculous claims about the video and how people might interpret it.
Perhaps amie ought to get someone else to explain the video to her and what it is about, as over a number of threads she has brought this video into the discussion and each time she makes the same errors.
As to which “pillars of the mainstream Jewish establishment”, might well have seen my video in advance, it is not something I wish to disclose. I do not wish to provide amie and Judy ammunition to write blog posts or otherwise attacking the Jewish establishment.
Nevertheless, this was just an animated video which is hardly a scholarly source. It does not compare to Feminist Reviewpublished by Palgrave Macmillan and available in university libraries around the world for academics to cite. The very same journal which published Yuval-Davis and associated with someone who amie has decided to defend.
Anyway, only a few more hours till the stars come out. Perhaps Judy will come back and provide me some more entertainment.
| 28 April 2012, 5:29 pm |
“She clearly has a comprehension problem”. You have a problem addressing me directly. I have no problem comprehending your reasoning, tortuous though it is. This is groundhog day- you have difficulty understanding my argument expounded at length on the original thread and again here- I explained that people do not take the trouble to read or digest such tortuous captions: all they hear is the multiplicity of repetitions of the question why did Israel use wp and the failure to provide an answer. That is what sticks. That is how advertising and propaganda works. The simple repeated mantra.
The test is not what the creator’s heavily nuanced intentions were, but what the impact is. The fact is, the clip has been used by at least one anti Israel propagandist to my knowledge.
| 28 April 2012, 5:55 pm |
Anyway, only a few more hours till the stars come out. Perhaps Judy will come back and provide me some more entertainment.
As I’ve said before, this – the snide reference to her observance of shabbat, the stated wish to be amused/entertained – goes to the nub of your conduct. Other ABL authors as well as BTL commenters seeHP as a means to disseminate views they consider socially and politically significance, or to improve their knowledge.
You are here only to derive amusement from ridiculing and rubbishing named individuals.
You are the blogging equivalent of a child who pulls the legs off insects.
You were wrong about her being ex Spare Rib. You were wrong about an eight hour break from her last comment at sunset being in any way a sign of her dodging your question. And still you persist, with eternal bad grace purposefully depersoning your interlocutur by referring to them in the third person… someone with knowledge of the behaviour disorders should be able to give a suggestion as to the underlying pathopsychology, but Just Looking (who has dropped enough hints as to his/her identity for anyone who’s met him/her surely to identify him/her; and also, unlike some people, isn’t so monumentally self-obsessed that s/he needs to link his/her name to everyone s/he says anywhere, anywhen) seems to have the measure of you.
~alec
| 28 April 2012, 5:59 pm |
amie,
You seem to like making assumptions about people which are not based on fact. You keep, for example, reiterating how other people would see the video and all that they would do is hear the repetitions of the white phosphorus question because that is all that they would understand.
According to you:
The test is not what the creator’s heavily nuanced intentions were, but what the impact is. The fact is, the clip has been used by at least one anti Israel propagandist to my knowledge.
It is true, the video was praised and used on blog where I suspect that the authors are not the most pro-Israel people in the world. But one can look at the post and read it and one can also read every single comment to the post – and you know what – not once did a single person mention “white phosphorus.” The reason for this was because they understood what the video was about!
| 28 April 2012, 6:05 pm |
RE: I have a lot of time for people who are prepared to marshal serious arguments, even if I strongly disagree with some of their opinions.
Kolya, I couldn’t agree more. Unfortunately, schmezra is not one of those people, as so many here can attest.
| 28 April 2012, 6:10 pm |
amie – I learned a long time ago that Ezra isn’t worth the expense of energy it takes to interact with him. He isn’t interested in a discussion, merely in proving you wrong and stoking his enormous, overinflated ego. Quite why he’s kept on here as a contributor is a mystery, given his total inability to withstand criticism of any kind and his tendency to lash out like this. He’s an above the line troll.
| 28 April 2012, 6:41 pm |
vildechaye & Flaming Fairy
I’ve not been an active participant here for very long, so I’m still getting the measure of the place. The experience is enriching, if a little disorientating at times.
While in practice I’m not quite as benefit-of-doubt giving as is Sarah, I do believe there is both intrinsic and tactical merit in looking for the best in one’s interlocutors, even if one strongly disagrees with them.
But I must admit that notwithstanding Michael Ezra’s undeniable utility as a somewhat erratically accessible database of modern political history, the lack of respect and consideration he displays in his incorrigibly remorseless triumphalist hammering of his opponents, is – how to say this nicely? – quite despicable.
| 28 April 2012, 7:31 pm |
Sadly, I come back and despite a few posts there is not much to be said by me. I came here for an argument and all I received was abuse. Still, I give you all credit, you are all quite good at abuse, it is just a shame that you don’t really seem to be up to argument. I am sure if you all try harder, you might be able to argue. But perhaps I am overestimating all your capabilities.
In any event, I am off out. “just looking” might be pleased to know that I am going to be doing that St. John’s Wood thing. If Judy comes back tonight after the havdalah, I shall, baruch hashem, respond tomorrow.
| 28 April 2012, 8:14 pm |
The reason for this was because they understood what the video was about!
yes, you can be very proud of yourself that part of your traducing of israelinurse is preserved there although gone from here. The fact that they approve of that slur demonstrates that they have no clue. Israelinurse’s rigorous mode of argumen,t closely based on relevant, substantiated and well researched facts, often based on first hand eye witness inspection in loco, is light years removed from the artificial construct of stock slogans you have created in your cartoon character.
| 29 April 2012, 9:44 am |
amie,
An alternative,and in my opinion, better, explanation is that they do have a clue and were able to understand what I said, whereas you, on the other hand, despite your protestations, clearly don’t.
Given you claim that Israeli Nurse’s mode of argument is “rigorous” and “based on relevant, substantiated and well researched facts,” don’t you think it is a shame that she clearly didn’t understand the very basic difference between nationality and citizenship in Israeli law when going on television to argue the point?
One thing that you say that is accurate is that my construct was artificial, that is why I did it in cartoon format. As I have previously explained to you, it was a parody of certain pro-Israel advocates. Indeed, within a week or so prior to I created that video, I had this conversation on someone else’s Facebook wall. I have changed the name of the person in the comments below to “Hasbara Operative.”
Hasbara OperativeOk great selection tomorrow at LSE: Gideon Levy at 6pm and GALLOWAY at 7pm. Who is coming and filming?Michael Ezra ….
I went to listen to Gideon Levy speak at Jewish Book Week today. He got a pretty good reception.Hasbara OperativeYou being one of the fans?Michael EzraI listen and learn.Hasbara OperativeMichael, as an Israeli who represents the consensus view I find these comments of yours offensive. I rarely use this word, but I totally mean it this time. You are very welcome to comment elsewhere.Michael EzraGosh, I thought Gideon Levy was also Israeli and not only Israeli but a journalist for the prestigious Israeli newspaper Haaretz and a former aide to Shimon Peres who is currently President of the State of Israel. Perhaps I am wrong and it is a different Gideon Levy.Hasbara OperativeI really do not intend do get into this at 11.45pm on facebook. all I am saying is I’m not interested in self-proclaimed friends commenting on my facebook wall. All the best with your learning expeditions.Hasbara OperativeDid you know? I was “Peace Now” between 1995-1999. Still have the t-shirt. Some things called relevance, changing reality, learning, common sense have joined the equation and changed many people’s views. They didn’t change Gideon’s. Fine. End of discussion here. Good night
This was real life and in some ways real life was more extreme than my parody. As a result of the conversation above, I asked on my personal Facebook status a question such as “Why do some people gets so offended when Israel is criticised?” This conversation ended up with one of my Facebook friends accusing another (Linda Grant), in my opinion, without any justification, of being a self-hating Jew.
It was as a consequence of these episodes that the video was made. Indeed, one of the best lines that I believe I used in the video for the female character was based directly on a line from a pro-Israel defender in that Facebook discussion.
So, those that understand the video, including the person who put up the post on the Aaronovitch Watch site, realised what the post was really about and that is why they did not bother mentioning “white phosphorus” but declared that the best bit of the video was this:
– All you are interested in doing is hating Israel. You read the Guardian. I read it too. Look how many articles that they publish attacking Israel. And then look at the comments. If there is an article on Canada, a massive country, they will be lucky to attract 50 comments. But on the tiny little country of Israel, they would get 500 comments on an article.– A lot of those comments are your comments or responses to your comments. If you did not comment, there would be a lot less comments.– I comment because I have to defend Israel.
And while my video is a parody, I believe there is an element of truth in the argument above.
| 29 April 2012, 11:42 am |
I’ve had time to check the detail of the video on the blog post I wrote which I linked to earlier on this thread..
I’m very grateful to Sarah AB and particularly to John who helped me identify the error I made through mis-remembering Livingstone as having said words to the effect that “It’s only Jewish Londoners who ever ask me about Qaradawi”, when he actually said words to the effect that, “It’s only Londoners who ever ask me about Israel”
As SarahAB says, accuracy is crucial, and I’m happy to correct that error. I think SarahAB’s comment is spot-on at 7:47 on the 27th, to the effect that re Livingstone’s discourse
I see the quote as a (comparatively) subtle visible sign of the attitude that complaints about antisemitism are manufactured, opportunistic or, at best, symptoms of neurotic oversensitivity.
This Livingstone ploy is also tellingly skewered by DCook’s comments on 27th April at 10:38 and 10:40.
Apart from that, I see that while I’ve been otherwise engaged–almost entirely on the pleasures of my Orthodox Jewish observance– there’s been a level of personal attack on me which is in my view not just out of order, but manifestly irrelevant to the subject of this thread and the points I’ve been making on it.
I think when any attempt is made to demand that the thread is diverted onto one person’s issues which are diversions from the topic in hand, and attempts made to lay down the terms on which participants are deemed to have the authority or status to speak, that’s something to be refused and not indulged.
Readers can make up their own minds about who’s right on that score and on the points I make here and on my blog.
Getting back to the topic of the thread, there’s one additional wonderful piece of irony in the letter issued by five of the six Jewish Labour supporters who wrote their private letter to Miliband urging him to help Livingstone to clean up his image so more Jewish Londoners will vote for him.
And that’s their closing assurance in their latest letter that they’re sure that Livingstone will sort the 210 bus issue. Now, which Jewish Londoners are really deeply concerned about the 210 bus issue? Overwhelmingly, it’s the various Charedi communities’ Jews, whose main centres are in Stamford Hill and Golders Green and who often have educational, learning, family and business reasons for wanting that commute to be as safe and easy as possible.
So how do you think they’ll view assurances coming from very senior figures in Jewish religious movements which they regard as absolute anathema and a perversion of the Jewish religion– a former chair of the Reform Synagogues and the Chief Executive of the Liberal Synagogues of Great Britain?
That’s inter alia likely to be a reason why Rabbi Avraham Pinter would not have signed the original letter or the latest one, though he was clearly deeply disappointed with the original private meeting Livingstone had with the Labour activists, and very much wanted him to make some effort to make some effort to reach out to his constituency’s concerns.
incidentally, Rabbi Pinter has for some years been thanking me warmly (as he did again at the LJF meeting with Boris Johnson) for consistently defending the Charedi communities and way of life on HP when they’ve come under blanket attack on the basis of their religious beliefs, lifestyles and attitudes to Christians claiming to be “Messianic Jews”.
“the stated wish to be amused/entertained – goes to the nub of your conduct. Other ABL authors as well as BTL commenters see HP as a means to disseminate views they consider socially and politically significance, or to improve their knowledge.
You are here only to derive amusement from ridiculing and rubbishing named individuals.
You are the blogging equivalent of a child who pulls the legs off insects.”
Write a comment