London Evening Standard journalist: “I’m prejudiced against Jews.”

Twitter is a good way of seeing what our elected politicians are up to. One in particular is a voluminous anti-Israel tweeter. Labour MP Richard Burden, for it is he, is also an enthusiastic retweeter of Ben White:

and

In my opinion, for an elected politician to promote Ben White, considering White’s views, is highly offensive.

It is Ben White who, in his article for Counterpunch in 2002 Is It Possible to Understand the Rise in Anti-Semitism?, wrote:

“…I do not consider myself an anti-Semite, yet I can also understand why some are.”

More recently White tweeted:

and this was the picture he linked to:

Joseph W. at Harry’s Place argued:

“Ben White appears to be linking Howard Jacobson – an English Jew – and Israeli Jewish Habima actors, by aesthetics and looks. If you are aware of the history of antisemitism, you will know that a great deal of attention was given to the physical appearance of Jews, who were portrayed as people whom one could legitimately hate based on how they look.”

The Warped Mirror neatly recounts what happened.

As I was concerned that Richard Burden MP was promoting someone such as White with such contemptuous views, I tweeted Burden about it. However, it was Mira Bar-Hillel, who writes for the London Evening Standard newspaper, who responded. Here’s Bar-Hillel’s Twitter profile first:

In response to my tweet to Burden pointing out White’s view that he can “understand” why some people are anti-Semitic Bar-Hillel stated that she “can understand it too”:

When challenged as to whether she could also “understand” people who were Islamophobic she, somewhat ambiguously, responded:

“I understand hatred for anyone one who feels wronged – or unjustly treated – by. Racism I abhor.”

Good to know Bar-Hillel abhors racism. But then how would one explain the following quote apparently attributed to her in Anshel Pfeffer’s article in Haaretz in June which discussed the set exam question “Why are some people prejudiced against Jews?” (Haaretz might be behind a pay-wall for some so I have copied and pasted the full article below for context purposes):

“The Jews of today scare me and I find it almost impossible to talk to most of them, including relatives. Any criticism of the policies of Israel – including the disgraceful treatment of Holocaust survivors as well as refugees from murderous regimes – is regarded as treason and/or anti-Semitism. Most papers and journals will not even publish articles on the subject for fear of a Jewish backlash. Goyim (gentiles) are often treated with ill-concealed contempt, yet the Jews are always the victims. Am I prejudiced against Jews? Alas, yes.” (Emphasis added)

So Bar Hillel abhors racism, but is “prejudiced against Jews”. Work that one out.

Meanwhile, I continued to question Richard Burden MP as to whether he found White’s view offensive. Sadly, instead of agreeing that it was he refused to give a straightforward answer:

It is very concerning that a British MP, who does denounce anti-Semitism, still goes on to promote someone like White with such views and doesn’t see anything wrong in that. Or maybe, as Burden suggested, I should just “grow up”.

Anshel Pfeffer’s Haaretz article in full:

Anti-Semitism in 100 words or less
In rhyme, in sorrow and in a single word, readers took my challenge. Which one gets the bottle of wine?

By Anshel Pfeffer | Jun.22, 2012 | 2:42 AM | 2

Nine years ago, I found myself hanging out with a group of Pakistani journalists I met at a seminar abroad. At the time, we were all hearing about secret and not-so-secret dealings between Israel and Pakistan, and one of them showed me his passport. On the bottom of every page was written, “For travel to every nation in the world except Israel.” “It’s just politics” he explained to me. “There is no anti-Semitism in Pakistan; there are no Jews.”

Technically, that may be true, as the small Jewish communities of Karachi and Peshawar dispersed decades ago. But it is interesting that he felt the need to create a distinction between a hatred of Israel and the shunning of Jews.

There is anti-Jewish rhetoric in the local media in Pakistan. Many would argue that in a nation without a history of local anti-Semitism, this is actually a manifestation of anti-Western sentiments, along with the country’s intense hostility with neighboring India, which is increasingly becoming a strategic ally of Israel. It doesn’t seem as though Pakistan has a homegrown tradition of Jew-hatred.

On Wednesday, a British woman of Pakistani origin, Shasta Khan, was charged in a Manchester court for planning, along with her husband Mohammed Sajid, what could have been the worst anti-Semitic attack on British soil in living memory. Born and raised in the Manchester region, she would have seen and recognized Jews from the large Orthodox community in the city. The couple is alleged to have scouted out targets in the Prestwich neighborhood, where thousands of Jews live and work.

A different duo of young British-Pakistanis, Asif Mohammed Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif, became radicalized after traveling to study in Damascus, where they were recruited by Hamas and carried out a suicide attack at a Tel-Aviv pub, killing three people, in 2003. In contrast, Khan and Sajid are accused of embarking on their Jihad after surfing radical websites. They allegedly learned how to build homemade bombs from Al-Qaida’s Inspire magazine, and instead of travelling to the Middle East to strike at the Zionist enemy, they decided to avenge the Palestinians by murdering fellow Britons, members of a neighboring religious community.

But that is how anti-Semitism has evolved: Defying reason and ideology, overcoming geographic and social divides, it adapts to new environments and conditions. Anti-Semitism is the most flexible and versatile of hatreds. That is my main conclusion from the many answers I received over the last two weeks, following the question I posed to readers: “Why are some people prejudiced against Jews?” But that was not the only conclusion.

A brief reminder: I decided to open up the column to readers following the hysterical reactions of some politicians and community leaders in Britain when this question was posed to high school students in a national exam. Financial blogger Henry Blodget was inundated with angry responses when he asked the same question with sincerity and seriousness. I had hoped that this column’s readers would prove both more intelligent and display a greater sense of equipoise than those who expressed outrage over the exam question. The reader responses exceeded my expectations.

There were a handful of responses such as the commenter who wrote, “Anti-Semitism should be condemned not explained – full stop.” But most readers who answered believe, like I do, that no subject should be beyond discussion, even if some of the responses do not make for easy reading. Of course, there were a few nasties, such as the writer who tried to convince me that the world doesn’t have anything against Jews in particular, but rather just against Israelis. After all, he wrote,”the Internet has shown the world what kind of people you are.”

Others were also critical but from a place of sorrow. Mira Bar-Hillel wrote that “The Jews of today scare me and I find it almost impossible to talk to most of them, including relatives. Any criticism of the policies of Israel – including the disgraceful treatment of Holocaust survivors as well as refugees from murderous regimes – is regarded as treason and/or anti-Semitism. Most papers and journals will not even publish articles on the subject for fear of a Jewish backlash. Goyim (gentiles ) are often treated with ill-concealed contempt, yet the Jews are always the victims. Am I prejudiced against Jews? Alas, yes.”

Honorable mentions

I know that some would label Mira with the despicable title of “self-hating Jew,” and while I don’t necessarily agree with all she writes, I think she expresses genuine concerns and should be heard. Mira’s answer is one of my two honorable mentions.

The other honorable mention goes to Richard Asbeck, who managed in verse to convey the uneasy feeling of many Jews and non-Jews at the separateness, perhaps aloofness, that Jews have conveyed over the millennia.

“How could I by virtue of reciprocity,

blessed by the honor of having been treated as a friend,

remembering the humanity of a shared meal,

remembering the hachnasat orchim (hospitality ), how could I, in the attempt of responding in kind, avoid the self-allegation of impurity and ‘unchosenness’ clearly marked by the catered dinner on a stranger’s plate, or worse: the foil-wrapped carton board plate?”

Although I allowed up to 100 words, some readers made do with just one or two words: Envy; jealousy; religion; Zionism; ignorance; Jesus Christ. All are indeed reasons why people are prejudiced against Jews, and there are of course many more, often conflicting, and never justified reasons. And that is why I said that anti-Semitism is the most flexible of hatreds and why I chose Mark Gardner’s entry as the winner. My only hesitation is that the writer is a professional in the field, who serves as director of communications of the Community Security Trust (CST ), of British Jewry. My choice of Mark as winner is not an endorsement of the CST; indeed I criticized the organization in a column on an unrelated matter two months ago. But unlike others who monitor anti-Semitism, I think that his entry proves he can address the issue in a balanced manner. So he gets the (kosher ) bottle of wine.

Here is his answer to why some people are prejudiced against Jews. “If prejudice is hating someone more than is necessary, then you must consider the anti-Semites’ charge sheet. So, let us be brief: Allied with the Devil to kill the son of God; lost God’s covenant; fought God’s last prophet; visible rejecters of God; kill children and drink their blood; conspiratorial; money hoarding; greedy; corrupting; mean-spirited; physically grotesque; contemptible; ferocious; ingratiating yet always alien and never authentic; devious, evil, corrupting geniuses; unchanging and unassimilable; racially distinct, self-superior hypocrites; financiers of war; harbingers of revolution; pornographers; hucksters and fraudsters; whiners and liars; imperialists and colonizers; thieves, racists, war-mongering destroyers. More briefly: scapegoat.”

About these ads

19 responses to “London Evening Standard journalist: “I’m prejudiced against Jews.”

  1. What exactly does Mira Bar-Hillel mean by explaining her “understanding” of antisemitism in terms of Israel allegedly “rejecting and hounding black African refugees”?
    1) Does she (and her pet antisemites) not distinguish between Israeli government policy and Jews?
    2) Does she not draw positive inferences from the fact that such refugees want to go TO Israel in the first place (rather than stay in Egypt)?
    3) Is she asking us to believe that the antisemites are people of liberal disposition who want Israel to be kind to the refugees and respond to Israel’s alleged “hounding” by hating JEWS rather than the Israeli government?
    4) If the antisemitism were a reflection of a genuine concern for the well-being of the African refugees, would these liberal antisemites not also hate Egyptians for not being more welcoming to the refugees (which is why the refugees go on to Israel)?
    5) Indeed if Ms Bar-Hillel’s logic is sound then should not these liberals who are concerned for the refugees not also go on to hate all Arabs and Muslims for their inhospitality?
    6) Is she seriously suggesting that 60,000 (and growing both by birth and more immigration) is a small number relative to Israel’s population?
    Or could it be that Mira Bar-Hillel is taking a load of mendacious rubbish!

  2. I too would love to hear more from her on why she singles out Israel for its less-than-perfect treatment of black refugees, as if the rest of the world is some sort of rainbow alliance, devoid of even a hint of racism.

    Interesting post as always, Richard. I hope your mission tonight goes well and I look forward to reading about it.

    Meanwhile, speaking of Twitter, I successfully duped George Galloway on Twitter on Sunday night. Details here: cifwatch.com/2012/11/11/george-galloway-tweets-for-israel/

  3. Have we really reached the point where people are comfortable admitting their anti-Semitism OUT IN THE OPEN?

  4. Hi Dan,

    If we have reached that point, I for one, am glad. It’s no secret that there were a great deal of anti-Semites and anti-Semitic organizations in many parts of the civilized world up until about 1945. Where are we supposed to believe they all disappeared to?

    Too many Jew haters the world over have had to bottle up their true feelings all these years or pretend they’re only “anti-Israel”, or more precisely anti the Jews who live in Israel and all their supporters, or more precisely anti-all-the-Jews minus a Quisling or two.

    These haven’t been easy years for the anti-Semites nor have they been easy years for us. If they are finally coming out of the closet, I say, “Good luck to them all. Let it all hang out!”

  5. Are Arab Israelis never racist against Africans?

  6. When combating antisemitism (and, for that matter, all forms of prejudice against groups) I think it is important to distinguish between pretexts (out-and-out lies) and reasons (which are often wilful misunderstandings, coated nevertheless with a film of truth). Drinking Christian babies’ blood is a pretext; Israeli government policy is a reason. The pretexts can and should be exposed for the lies they are; the reasons deserve rebuttal by setting them in a truly balanced context. If you dismiss (say) criticism of Israel with one word: “Antisemitism!”, while agreeing that (say) most Jews practise fraud, you are playing right into the enemy’s hands.

    • A lie coated with a film of truth is nevertheless a lie. The coating is addressed as the usual political criticism. The fact is that antisemites criticise the Israeli politics, whichever side is in power, while they wouldn’t do it if they were speaking about domestic affairs. For Israel is it always damn if you do and damn if you don’t, a behaviour that is considered very clearly as antisemtici by the EUMC working definition of antisemitism.

    • The typical example is making calling Israel an “apartheid state” while all the criticism could be made on any other democratic state, possibly even worse than on Israel. Until very recently, Israel was much more welcoming to and tolerant to illegal foreign migrants than Obama’s USA !
      Few antisemites, however would criticise Obama’s or US policies so harshly as they do for Israel.

  7. very good Biodegradable – other infos were only the non-faint-of heart dare to tread are Frontex, Lampedusa or whatever the current hot spot is there and last but by no means least the much maligned Greece which seems to be forced into acting as the cul de sac at least for all those who try it via Turkey and where conditions seem to be as is to be expected. I am too faint of heart to check on those hot spots, but I know that they are there but the claiming to be non-faint-of-heart concentrate on guess-who?

  8. Ironically, Ben White looks like exactly like an Aryan German Waffen-SS stormtrooper so it does not surprise me that he tells people not to like Jews based on their facial features. Ben White is living up to his image.

  9. Jane, Ben may be white but his heart is black as sin…..

  10. Bar-Hillel brought up what she calls the “disgraceful treatment of Holocaust survivors” in Israel. Indeed, we read of people living below the poverty line, as they do in other places. There are several reasons why this is so in the case of survivors. Many were sole survivors who remained single, perhaps having lost their spouses with no family to help them. This of course manifests itself more in old age. Some never managed to rebuild their lives at a time when Israel was an underdeveloped country; others lost six years of education during their formative years which affected their careers.

    I seem to recall in an earlier post, a prejudiced speaker referred to Palestinian refugees who had lost everything, so Richard raised the case of Jewish refugees from Arab lands and Holocaust survivors who had also lost everything, and she answered that survivors have been compensated by Germany. Many people are under the impression that Jewish survivors live on the fat of the land on German reparation money. Nothing could be further from the truth, if they are so rich – how come they are so poor…?

    • I know a Shoah survivor who worked all the five years of the war in ghetto, forced labour camps and German factories. She lost her most important learning years, was beaten, was on death marches. She now gets something like 300 euros per months from Germany. Pays a modest half-rent in Israel.