Last night Channel 4 news presenter Jon Snow was at the London School of Economics to chair a panel of hardcore anti-Israel polemicists but as I was questioning him face to face about his own use of the term “the Jewish lobby” (Clip 1 below) he violently grabbed my mobile phone attempting to dislodge it from my hand accusing me of trying to secretly record our conversation. He then repeatedly called me “a creep” and claimed a breach of his human rights.
He had been explaining to me that “the Jewish lobby” is a common term in America. I asked him if he would use the term “the Muslim lobby” to which he replied that he would.
This was how the event itself was described:
On this panel discussion, chaired by Jon Snow of Channel 4 News, the speakers will discuss aspects of the current situation in Palestine, including: Palestinian domestic politics, Israel’s position, the international dimension of the impasse and the insights into the conflict provided by film-making.
I went mainly to hear Peter Kosminsky, director of Channel 4’s drama series The Promise which portrayed Jews in British Mandate Palestine and contemporary Israel by using anti-Semitic stereotypes. For example, Israeli Jews were shown to be stunningly wealthy, and there were lines like these spoken by a British soldier:
“The Jews and Arabs have been living here in relative harmony for years. But our victory over the Germans has turned the trickle of Jews coming to this land into a flood. You must understand, the Jews see it as their holy land. But the Arabs, who have been here for over a thousand years, see them as stealing their land. Our job is to keep the two sides apart…..”
“After Bergen Belsen, I thought that the Jews deserved a state, but now I’m not so sure…. Their precious state has been born in violence and cruelty to its neighbours, and I’m not sure I want it to prosper….”
Last night Kosminsky said that after the series had aired:
“Nothing prepared me for the level of vitriol that was going to drop on me from the Zionist lobby…personal, vicious stuff came my way….If I choose to criticise my country, and I often do, nobody calls me ‘a racist’. They accept that it’s a legitimate thing in a free society to criticise the political and diplomatic behaviour, the domestic and foreign policies of a sovereign state. It just means that you disagree with its political behaviour. But if you’re Jewish, as I am, and you criticise the domestic and/or foreign policy of the sovereign state of Israel you are immediately called an anti-Semite. Very clever isn’t it.” (Clip 2)
No it’s not clever actually because Kosminsky doesn’t just “disagree with its political behaviour”. He disagrees with Israel’s existence and calls for Jews in Israel to be boycotted (presumably he doesn’t wish those of other religions in Israel to be boycotted). He said:
“the boycott creates so much anger in Israelis. They really hate the idea, particularly the academic boycott, which suggests to me it would probably be quite effective. So I think, yes, we should do it.” (Clip 3)
I hear the Nazis also boycotted Jews. In the 1930s it was considered anti-Semitic but apparently in 2013 it isn’t.
On America’s support for Israel and the similarity of the creation of both countries he said:
“this is why America finds it so hard to take a stand against the illegality and the disgusting behaviour of the state of Israel, because that’s how they (the Americans) came into existence, guys!” (clip 4)
There was also a lengthy discussion on how much Jews were hated by America and Britain, this being the main driver by these countries to create Israel in order to get Jews to go there instead.
Kosminsky put it like this:
“America was very keen to strong arm Britain into accepting a Jewish-controlled state in what had been Palestine because…they really didn’t want any more Jews in New York, please.” (clip 4 also)
As for Rosemary Hollis, former director of research at Chatham House, she claimed that at the same time Lord Balfour was drafting the Balfour Declaration he was also driving anti-Jewish immigration legislation through Parliament. (clip 5)
Hollis also claimed that it wasn’t the Jews that invented Jewish nationalism but “the Europeans”. She said “it was the Europeans who decided somehow that Judaism was something above and beyond a religion”. Incredible! Who was Theodore Herzl anyway and that book he published in 1896. Der Judenstaat, anyone?
Jon Snow didn’t hold back either but suggested that Britain might well have delayed bombing the railway lines to the concentration camps because of Britain’s hatred of Jews. (clip 6)
Snow had also started the evening claiming that there was “Palestine fatigue” in the media (clip 7). Palestine fatigue! Has he not picked up The Independent or The Guardian recently or watched his own beloved Channel 4 which aired The Promise and many other programes about the Palestinians including one being aired while we were at the event!
To round things off nicely Ilan Pappe implicitly compared Israel to Nazi Germany (clip 8). He said Israel is beginning to look like “your own worst enemy” in its obsession with having as many Jews in Israel as possible.
Meanwhile, Karma Nabulsi spent most of the evening calling for the so-called “right of return”, commonly known as a pretext to the demographic destruction of the Jewish state. Nothing new there then from ex-PLO Ms Nabulsi.
(Read Jonathan Hoffman’s account of the event here)
Clips from the event (customer warning: may contain anti-Semitism)
(Snow mentions “the Jewish lobby” at 1 min 34 secs.)
“The Promise” was anti-Israel fiction, from the Channel that thought it a hoot to have Ahmadinejad give its Christmas broadcast…
Wow Richard you had a great evening! What a wonderful panel of Jew haters!
Clip 2 from 8:00 on: Watch Kosminsky resort to the ‘Livingstone Formulation’ – the antisemitic lie that suggests that Jews call anyone who criticises Israel an ‘antisemite’. Pathetic creep.
Please be aware that – incredibly – this event was put on by an academic department of the LSE, the Middle East Centre. Yet there was zero academic objectivity. Again … this was NOT a student society event but an even staged by supposedly bona fide academics at LSE. Unbelievable that academics can stoop to such anti-intellectual depths.
Hard to believe how seemingly intelligent people can be so blind to the truth, and even harder to understand how a TV presenter can be so biased bearing in mind he is often called on to report on the Middle East and the Israel Palestinian situation.
It is incredible, even by LSE standards, that such an unbalanced panel should have been hosted to air such outrageous views. I usually try to avoid using the antisemitic card when commenting on matters relating to Israel, but the clips posted cannot be described as anything else. Richard we owe you a debt of gratitude for so often being willing to put yourself in threatening and uncomfortable situations to expose such anti Israel hate.
These folks (the panelists) are a gene or two separated from classic racists. They assume all right-thinking intellectuals despise Israel, Zionists, America, etc. Of course good-natured, ordinary gentiles have been brainwashed by the all-powerful Lobby of Zionists to feel guilty about critcising Israel.
I’ll like to know what are these one or two genes separating them from classic racists… Is it the one that just prevent them to state bluntly that they hate Jews? As for me, they are classic racists in tuxedo.
Another question is, if they admit the existence of a “Muslim lobby”, which of course benefits from incredibly vast oil-money fundings, how come this rich “Muslim lobby” has virtually no influence on the Americans (in the Congress, at least). They so quickly accused Congressmen to be ‘in the pay’ of the “Jewish lobby”, and the characteristic of those ‘in the pay’ is that they accept money from the one that offers most.
Well done, Richard, for once again shining the spotlight on such a bunch of snarling, Jew-hating swine! I think there are plenty of instances of antisemitism as defined by the EUMC working definition here.
Richard, may I ask you to please explain what you mean by, “Jon Snow didn’t hold back either but suggested that Britain might well have delayed bombing the railway lines to the concentration camps because of Britain’s hatred of Jews.”? I heard a gasp on the clip (you?). It is indeed outrageous to suggest that Britain hated Jews (although not surprising that some politicians did) , but could this be taken as a sympathetic statement by JS towards Jews?
JS also deconstructed the term Jewish Lobby and I think he disagrees with the way it is used because there are different shades of opinions within the community.
Perhaps I’ve missed something here, but I’m sure there will be no shortage of people happy to correct me! The other speakers were the usual stuff you step on by accident in the street.
Obviously, Snow does not want to be sympathetic to Jews. But that doesn’t mean he want to be sympathetic to Britain. So suggesting Britain delayed bombing of railway lines is just giving a bait to accuse ‘real antisemites’.
Of course Snow is not one of them! 😉
So, that is how present antisemites as Snow deny being one, ie saying that there are even worse ones. Present antisemites love DEAD Jews, they like them as dying martyrs. The living ones, they don’t like so much, especially the tendency they have to defend themselves, survive, win, and prosper!
Richard, you need to get a more conspicuous recording device! You can find loads on the web (e.g. http://www.onlinespyshop.co.uk/section.php/72/1/spy-voice-recorders)
Once again, well done for attending these events, I don’t think I can even bring myself to watch these videos…
My understanding is that Snow was saying how much the British hated the Jews that they even held back from bombing the German railway lines. The problem is that so called liberals take the Arab Palestinian stance because they are drunk on the propaganda they have swallowed. And of course however liberal, somewhere deep inside each of them is that ancient notion that Jews killed Christ – cant get away from it even if the say “what, who me?” With consternation.
Interesting how the sheepskins are coming off and the teeth are showing. In the US they are still claiming that one can be an anti-Zionist and not be an antisemite. It seems in Europe, they no longer require this fiction. What do you think about the Scottish hotel that disinvited the Jewish student charity group function.
I would add that, “Jewish lobby,” is about as common and just as pejorative a term as the “N” word is in the US. What they are talking about is not the “Jewish,” lobby but the Israel lobby; supporters of Israel that are both Jewish and not Jewish.
This was a fascinating post by the truly courageous author of this excellent blog. It raises many questions, several of which have already been thoroughly chewed over in earlier discussions.
My interest was taken by “Jon Snow didn’t hold back either but suggested that Britain might well have delayed bombing the railway lines to the concentration camps because of Britain’s hatred of Jews.” which Sniper characterizes as outrageous. I too was outraged; however, I have been unable to find a more convincing explanation. Martin Gilbert explained in a recent Jerusalem lecture regarding Churchill that the British were unable to do so as they bombed at night while the US air force bombed by day and it would have been impossible to have seen a railway line at night. This rationalization is ingenious, but begs as many questions as it answers.
I always took the anti-Semitism of the British foreign office and defense establishments as a given, and while I’ve never heard it suggested that they wished the holocaust to continue, neither did they care enough to bend over backwards to either attempt to slow it down nor to save European Jewry.
I am unsure what Sniper is basing his argument upon when he attempts to distinguish between “Britain” and “some politicians”:
“It is indeed outrageous to suggest that Britain hated Jews (although not surprising that some politicians did)..”
I have no reason to believe that then or now British politicians were any more or less anti-Semitic than their electorate and would be interested to know on what Sniper bases his implication that Britain was (or is) any more loving of Jews than her leaders – other than understandable wishful thinking.
Daniel, probably understandable wishful thinking!
as to the railway bombing I was impressed years and years ago by an info-bit by Max Hastings (no friend of Israel as best I know after he’d been through his romanticizing stint) as to what it took to hit a ship in the Channel with the technical equipment of the time – furthermore I learned that railways are comparatively easy to restore.
I think if one would start thinking a bit out of the box away from that railway line automatic one might come up with much more interesting and also disturbing stuff albeit judging from what I come across it’d take hard work to melt that complicated and convoluted stuff into one-liners.
I can’t help thinking that by now that railway-one-liner has become a very convenient smoke-screen to hide a lot, like for example what Begin says in The Revolt about British intentions re KZ-survivors – this popped back into my mind when I read yesterday on Israel’s excellent state archive blog this
I am glad to hear that Martin Gilbert talked sense since though to date I’ve only heard him speak on podcast he made it onto my list of trustworthy historians long ago which as pompous as it may sound is not easy to get on even less to stay on for any length of time.
Railway lines are not easy to repair if bridges are blown apart by bombs! Churchill was livid that the railway to Auschwitz was not bombed as per his instructions. It seems cock-up rather than conspiracy was to blame.
… now if bridges were feasible tagets at the time then I wonder why they sent their planes into presumably heavily protected by flak city centres instead of having them bomb bridges which can be found all over the German country side in nice remote and probably not too well surrounded by anti-aircraft stuff?
and looking at this map I can’t even today see any knots that look as promising disruption as do inner German ones i.e. Katowice is just two lines crossing i.e. you have to hit it as much spot on as you would have to hit bridges within Germany while hitting a city like Nuremberg chances are much much better of delivering a damaging blow to its logistic capabilities.
and of course Rubin is right, there was no wish to do it and even individuals who might have wanted to do it had to admit that trying to popularize the goal of saving Jews would have been not only futile but harmful to pro-war-commitment after all that wag the dog talk that seems to have been even more mainstream than it is today in the decades leading up to the war.
Having “killed Christ” is a piss-poor excuse for liberal antisemitism, especially those who pretend having an education and are mostly atheists.
As far as I know, the excuse for hating Jews in the confused Left (the one that goes to bed with neo-Nazi Muslims) is a MONEY jealousy. Jews have money you know, they are capitalists, bankers. And those who have money have power (political,as well as financial) so they are also responsible for all the evils of this world. Hence the common antisemitic ground of the “Jewish lobby”, the disproportionate focus on Israel, the Israel-bashing, very justly mentioned in the EUMC working definition of antisemitism.
I am a Hebrew roots Protestant attached to a Sabbath congregation that keeps the Biblical feasts and not the Pagan so-called Christian festivals but I must point out that the last few Roman Catholic Popes teach that Yeshua died for the sins of the human race. It is heretical for Christians to call Jews ‘Christ killers’ and I profusely apologise for this false accusation that has been made for nearly 2,000 year.s
Hey, Don’t mention it Chris.
What’s are a few crusades, expulsions pogroms and blood libels between friends?
Tell me, do you guys still believe in the immaculate conception?
Protestants believing in immaculate conception??? I don’t think they ‘still’ believe it because it seemed they never believed it.
as best I remember from some 60 years ago the word “immaculate” wasn’t used but that Mary did get pregnant from the visit of the angel and not the way us “normal” mortals do I was definitely told during protestant compulsory religion lessons in state school.
Yes, that is it, Silke.. The only problem is that it is a Catholic dogma, not a Protestant belief. It was created in 1854 by Pius IX.
What about it Chris. I know it was a long time ago, but how exactly did Mary get pregnant? And if it was (a) god who did it, isn’t that a rather Pagan kind of concept?
the whole concept of virgin birth is not only pagan but probably Asian as well – as best I remember the Greeks always had one of their very earthly male gods taking part in the making and come to think of it they didn’t go for the self-castrating stuff as well.
As much as I am all for women-power the fact that men allowed themselves to be pushed into the “maculate” corner I’ll never understand.
and it was one subject on which my mother would invariably become livid insisting that there had been nothing objectionable in my conception i.e. the “immaculate” one wasn’t any more immaculate than mine had been and I wasn’t “guilty” of “inherited sin” before I even managed to yell my first yell.
If Jesus is all love as they say why did he allow such terrible stories to take a hold? sounds to me like love with lots of sticks and the carrots mostly to be dispensed in the afterlife
So, was the lady a virgin or not?
These anti -semites sound so calm and rational as all those in the past who wanted to destroy the Jewish people did. We cannot just passively accept and watch as they are allowed to spread their poison against the Jews in a civilised country again . We know what the the consequences could be. . Britain has laws against spreading hatred. If only we did have a “Jewish lobby” who could put a stop to this so called “freedom of speech” – it is simply another type of rabble rousing to intellectuals to hate the Jews.
Jews need to be creative so that they can use the laws that exsist in Britian to stop such people spreading hatred against them.There is an Israeli law centre Shurit HaDin that could be called on to help.
I’m am sure you have heard of Dreyfus and how he was falsely accused and sentenced. Well we have our Dreyfus here in the UK, not so much being brought to court as the accused, but becoming the accused as he brought the UCU (University College Union) to a Law Tribunal on grounds of their Antisemitism. Net result is that the union was exonerated with Fraser, who brought the trial coming away being accused of using the Antisemitism card. You can bet your bottom dollar that any court in the UK will exonerate Snow’s use of the term Jewish Lobby on some spurious grounds.
I’m no fan of Jon Snow, particularly when it comes to his Israel stance
(see my posts here http://www.oyvagoy.com/2012/10/25/whining-about-pathetic-rockets/ and http://www.oyvagoy.com/2009/01/23/rockets-pretty-pathetic-things-nobody-gets-injured/) but his comments in that video about ‘Jewish lobby’ are far from his worst.
I can’t hear clearly what he’s saying on that clip but he seems to be saying that what is widely described as the ‘Jewish lobby’ in the US is in fact a lobby including other people (predominantly Christian Zionists http://www.oyvagoy.com/2012/03/13/are-the-goyim-to-blame/) and that not all Jewish people in the US support what this lobby does.
If that is what he’s (rather ramblingly) saying, then it’s all true – and these are good points for such an audience to be informed of.
That said, if he threw a tantrum at you at the end that is dumb of him.
But mere use of the ‘Jewish Lobby’ phrase – even to deny its existence – opens the door to all sorts of revolting lies – and Snow knows that.
As chaya1957 commented here it seems to be an insulting and pejorative term. I just googled “Jewish lobby” and it isn’t a nice sight. I agree with Chas’ sentiments but why did Snow not explain what Chas explained but without using the term?
“the Jewish lobby” made it as best I remember first into public consciousness as “The Israel Lobby” (before it was just AIPAC the too Christian for comfort ones) the “core” of which incidentally was first published in the UK by the London Review of Books after the article commissioned by “The Atlantic” was turned down by them with no reason ever given but as best I know a very rare occurrence.
I don’t know whether it’s now being “the Jewish lobby” is an up-toning or down-toning of the “revelation” which a careful look at the bottom of the German cover design of the book tells you all you need to know about. I’d say as a tail wags dog insinuation it is quite well done. ;-(
In general a country under siege is smart to be not too generous in turning away supporters. No now so very very squeaky righteousness claiming western democracy ever was.
I think Chas you give him a bye. He’s a Jew hater through and through. If you’re a Jew and you’ve lived amongst these hate riddled people you can spot them a mile away.
Blow hards who would dearly love to see the demise of Israel but find the nearest they can come to that realisation is to stage infinite numbers of meetings such as this one to talk among themselves . It’s pathetic and meaningless . The only thing it accomplishes is to provide a ‘ good feel factor ‘ for both panel and audience . They can go home having dismantled Israel in theory . Just a few more words to add to the billions uttered by Israels haters as they break their teeth on granite . Frustration born of hatred .
Thanks to Richard and Jonathan who tirelessly attend these hate fests in order to provide a window in order to expose the racist hate filled sordid world of these so called academics .
Kick a stone over and watch the insect life scurry about trying to escape the light . Richard quietly records the event and Snow physically tries to stop him . Sunlight on darkness . Kol Hakovod Richard and Jonathan !
As with Harvey above hats off to Richard and Jonathan for their endeavoursm.
Given the formal title of this event I find it curious and disturbing that an academic ‘Panel’ was composed of individuals from only one side of the argument. Nothing any of them said was at all surprising but the lack of any alternative was a sad reflection of the level of discussion that now seems to be the norm among the so-called intelligensia and the chattering classes. A sign of the times in which we live?
Well covered as usual by Richard and Jonathan! Facing down the whole Panel of Fascist ,Anti -Semite B——s takes plenty of nerve especially with
an audience also hostile to the true narrative of the Jews and Israel.Unfortunately with Jews like Kominsky and Pappe giving convoluted legitimacy to their twisted tale any rational `debate` is dead in the water and adding a well known high profile figure like Jon Snow makes it easy for them to convince an even ` open minded audience`of our infamy.Shalom,Paul Muslin.
I muchly dislike Kosminsky
My memory says that the Middle East Centre could only be founded after Fred Halliday’s death i.e. before he and his objections to the agenda (or whatever it is called properly in English) were no longer advocated.
I also dimly remember that its finances enabling its opening didn’t look too appetizing when they were published round about the time that brouhaha about Ghaddafi or his son having been generous with their purse to the LSE.
(In the LSE’s podcast offerings one can still listen to/download lectures by Fred Halliday – I’ve got 2 from 2008 and 2 from 2009 – normally I abstain from downloading i.e. planning to listen to any LSE events staged by the Middle East Center. Halliday when saying something about Israel was as best I remember what I’d call not driven by that bias that mustn’t be named)
Here’s another prolific blow hard , Ben White tweeting Richards Post
36.7 K tweets later and White is still no nearer to realising his wet dream of a single Palestinian state .
Didnt copy properly . Here it is again https://mobile.twitter.com/benabyad/status/328491387572068352
Ilan Pappe the liar.
As Steven Plaut said, About 10 years ago a middle aged MA student named Teddy Katz, submitted a masters thesis to the University of Haifa that had been prepared under the supervision of Israels most extremist and anti-Zionist academic, Ilan Pappe. Pappe likes to describe himself as Israels most hated person and I suspect he may be on to something there.
He spends his days addressing anti-Israel and anti-Jewish rallies and conferences around the globe and likes to write Israel-bashing pieces in the PLOs journal. He appears in al-Ahram. He has openly called for Israel’s destruction – to be replaced by a Palestinian state with Arafat as its dictator.
He ran for the Knesset on the slate of the Arab Stalinist party HADASH.
The MA thesis in question claimed that a platoon of the Alexandroni brigade of the Hagana had in 1948 conducted a massacre of Arabs at the town of Tantora near Haifa when the town was conquered in Israels war of independence.
It was of course, as it turned out, a complete fabrication based on some Arabs suddenly recovering from repressed memory syndrome after 50 years and claiming there had been a massacre when they were infants. Except when the tapes of interviews with these folks were checked out, it turned out even these Arabs had never said there was any massacre but rather that the Hagana had been very nice about helping the civilians.
Katz and Pappe had simply invented the story. When word hit the press, the Hagana vets organization sued Katz and the University of Haifa for libel. Eventually the matter reached a court settlement in which Katz agreed to admit publicly he had lied, publish a retraction at his own expense, and apologize to the vets. Katz was represented in all this by ultras-leftist lawyer Avigdor Feldman, who took time off from his usual passion for representing Arabs who have murdered Jewish children.
Feldman was present when Katz signed the court settlement.
But a few days after that, Katz tried to back out of the settlement, probably under encouragement to do so by Pappe, who continues to insist the massacre really took place even though not a shred of evidence has ever been discovered by anyone that there had been one. (Even Arab journalists and reporters who had been present at the battle never claimed there had been any massacre.) The judge refused to allow Katz to back out of the deal. When Katz refused to publish the retraction, the vets successfully sued Katz to recover their costs. Pappe and the communists then organized a campaign to try to raise cash to help out Katz with this.
Meanwhile, the University of Haifa looked ridiculous in all of this and demanded that Katz submit a revised version of the thesis if he wanted a degree. The original version had been awarded a grade of 97 by Pappe and his collaborators.
Katz ultimately did resubmit a revised thesis. This week the University of Haifa rejected it, after five independent reviewers had read it and dismissed it as garbage. Pappe and his comrades are running about now insisting that these five were lackeys of Ariel Sharon and George Bush or some similar sort of academically scrupulous argument. The University agreed to kick Katz out by granting him a MA degree without a thesis, an act of cowardice by the campus authorities. Katz should have been simply expelled permanently and Pappe fired for his role in the fabrication and charlatanism.
Anyway, I have decided to make an alternative proposal about how the university could better resolve things. Why not just let Katz write a completely NEW thesis on a different topic under Pappes supervision? This time the thesis should be on one of these topics:
– An oral history proving the Germans never killed any Jews in Auschwitz.
– An oral history proving that Lincoln actually shot John Wilkes Booth at that theater.
– Proof that the Mossad was really behind the attack on the WTC on September 11.
– An oral history that proves that Jews, and especially settlers, drink the blood of gentile children on Passover after all.
I bet Pappe would give the new thesis a grade of 98!
Earth to Kosminsky, Israel is dealing with Islamo Nazis.
A New Shoah: The Untold Story of Israel’s Victims of Terrorism
Every day in Israel, memorials are held for people killed simply because they were Jews–condemned by the fury of Islamic fundamentalism. A New Shoah is the first book devoted to telling the story of these Israeli terror victims. It centers on a previously unheard oral history of the Middle Eastern conflict from the viewpoint of the Jewish victims and their families.
Ten years ago, Palestinian terrorist groups launched their Second Intifada, resulting in an Israeli “Ground Zero” with 1,500 civilian victims. Israel is a tiny country, and this number would be proportionally equivalent to about 54,000 terror victims in the United States. The hundreds of attacks in Israel, day after day, amount to a sort of “new Shoah,” as Roger Scruton explains in his foreword. Giulio Meotti spoke to many of the Israeli families that have been destroyed by terror attacks on all the ordinary places of everyday life: on buses, kibbutzim, religious places, cafés and restaurants. Many of the survivors told their heartbreaking stories of loss for the first time. In these human fragments lie the raison d’être for the State of Israel, the first country in the world to experience suicide bombings on a massive scale, the fruit of jihadi nihilism.
No Jewish nation can be at peace when it is surrounded by Islamofascists.
A great article documenting how the British have always supported the Arabs against Israel.
In the service of the Palestinians
Op-ed: In light of its dark past, Britain’s involvement in building of PA’s army very problematic
How Ilan Pappe makes up lies.
University of Exeter Gives Pappé a Pass on Invented Ben-Gurion Quote
February 3, 2012
Dexter Van Zile
How Fatah terrorizes anyone who doesn’t surrender to Palestinian lies.
Palestinian activists seek to derail major Jerusalem film
April 19, 2013
Palestinian activists tried to derail an ambitious European documentary shot in Jerusalem this week, complaining that the film would reinforce an image of Israeli sovereignty over the deeply divided city.
Producers of the Franco-German “24h Jerusalem”, which sets out to depict a day-in-the-life of the troubled city, said on Friday that their plans had been badly disrupted by a last minute campaign of “intimidation and harassment”.
“We very much regret what has happened, but we are still here and we will carry on shooting,” said producer Thomas Kufus, hoping to recapture the success of his ground-breaking 2008 project – the day-long “24h Berlin” film.
One of the co-producers, Germany’s Bayerischer Rundfunk, said their staff had faced an “onslaught of menacing calls” and threats to “inflict bodily harm”, accusing Palestinian activists of trying to prevent Arabs from telling their stories.
With some 70 camera crews working across the city from 6.00 a.m. on Thursday to 6.00 a.m. on Friday, the project is one of the most ambitious documentaries ever shot in Jerusalem and had the blessing of the local Israeli authorities.
However, some Palestinian politicians and militants accused the filmmakers of failing to coordinate properly with their own authorities and said the film would present a united Jerusalem under full Israeli control.
Israelis seized East Jerusalem in the 1967 war, later annexing the land and pronouncing the city as their undivided capital in a move that has never been internationally endorsed.
Palestinians want to establish a capital of their own in East Jerusalem, including the Old City and its holy shrines.
“This is not one city, it is two cities,” said Dimitri Diliani, spokesman in East Jerusalem for the Fatah party of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who holds sway in Palestinian self-rule areas of the nearby West Bank.
“The whole idea of accepting the occupiers’ claims that this is one city is totally wrong. This has political ramifications,” he told Reuters. He denied accusations that opponents of the film had threatened any of those involved.
The producers said a handful of Palestinian cameramen and technicians had dropped out just before shooting started. More damagingly, some of the Palestinian locals they had hoped to feature in the film had withdrawn at the last minute.
“We have very strong material from the Israeli and European teams … The Palestinians are still shooting, so we are very much working on having an equal standard in this project,” said Kufus, conceding that this meant the documentary would not be filmed over a single 24-hour period as originally hoped.
The spat over the documentary, which is part-funded by the Arte television channel, has highlighted fierce opposition within some Palestinian quarters to anything that might smack of a “normalization” of Israeli control.
Cultural events, such as a U.N.-backed concert last July, have had to be abandoned in the face of pressure from activists who say any efforts to build bridges between communities should be resisted until the Israeli occupation ends.
Kufus said the problems he had faced with his film showed the ever-present tensions between Israelis and Palestinians.
“They just cannot work together. It is impossible,” he said, adding: “Everything that happens here is connected to the conflict, especially on the Palestinian side.”
# BDS fail # Ben White fail
Jonathan H made the point that this event was put on by an academic department of the LSE, the Middle East Centre. This Centre has ‘history’ as far as anti-Israel propaganda goes. Please see the various reports about it here:
Col. Richard Meinertzhagen
In April 1920, during Easter week, Arab riots, instigated by some officials of the British military government, broke out. Upon investigation and verification, Meinertzhagen wrote to inform the Foreign Office on April 14, 1920; in his own words:
“I recorded that the officers of the administration are, almost without exception, anti-Zionist in their views and are encouraging the Arabs. Zionism is being brought into the world as a discontented child, accustomed only to trouble and disappointments…. The Arabs are encouraged and imagine that by acts of violence they can sabotage Zionism… It was known that Easter is the season of disturbances. It was known that the police were untrustworthy… The aftermath of these events is typical. The Moslems formally demanded the removal of the Zionist Commission…”.
Meinertzhagen went on to record the details of the British perfidy: Col. Waters-Taylor of Allenby’s staff was in contact with haj Amin el Husseini (later the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and a Nazi collaborator), and encouraged him to use the Easter occasion to show the world that Palestine’s Muslims will not tolerate the Zionists. Waters-Taylor explained that if the disturbances were sufficiently violent, Allenby would use them to advocate the abandonment of the “Jewish National Home”. To ensure the riots took place, Waters-Taylor even informed Husseini that the Jews intended to assassinate him.
I attended the Christians for Zion annual conference at Shotton, North Wales, earlier this month when founder and director Mike Fryer detailed the actions of some British officers who actively supported Jews in their drive to reconstitute the modern nation of Israel. I’m ashamed at Britain’s U-turn on the rebirth of Israel. With France, Japan, and Italy the UK was one of the main signatories of the San Remo Treaty which was unanimously accepted by the League of Nations. The treaty gave the future state of Israel the right to settle Jews anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea provided there was no interference with existing communties. Organisations such as the European Coalition for Israel say this treaty is irrevocable and yet the United Nations and its members are whitewashing out of history. Remember Jordan got 78 per cent of the old Palestine and one its first actions was to ban Jews from its borders. Now that’s what I call an apartheid state.
Oy, as my grandmother would say, that Kosminsky’s no Shakespeare is he? Not even a Larry David or Woody Allen. The talentless wretch is yet another anti-Israel, luvvie-loving forelock-tugger, churning out mendacious bilge that slanders those better than him. Although it’s repulsive, I wouldn’t worry about the LSE freakshow though. Israel is on the up – sorry about that Mr Snow – and in the end we will win. Sit, swivel and dribble on that, Ilan Pappe…
I see Millett now bans and blocks any dissenting voices on his blog. He has opted for censorship and the abandonment of freedom of speech, thus turning his blog into a classic circle jerk of like minds. Pathetic.
I think he blocks mostly personal attacks and serial offenders. And since then, some jerks appear with their real names or something that allows correct identification.
If it is true he blocks, which I doubt, then it is a case of the anti Israel lobby getting a taste of their own medicine as pro Israel comments are always blocked. Problem is the antis don’t like the truth or the accurate history. Wonder if any of you have seen the article in the Telegraph exposing the military training of young Palestinians and children and the incitement to hate
I have been edited and even deleted on both this and other blogs. It goes with the territory and is the right of an author of any blog and certainly nothing to do with being a Zionist. The very excellent http://developing-your-web-presence.blogspot.co.il/ has not allowed a single comment by friend or foe in almost a year and nobody could accuse my mate Gert (of Bridlington fame) of being any kind of lover of Zion.
I do note that you now call Richard “Millett” in contrast to the more friendly first-name usage that characterized your comments when you were a radical
pro-Zionist, verging on Islamophobe (if such a thing existed). Here’s the old roger idiotically rushing to the defense of an anti-Semitic Ahava worker.
I never particularly liked you when you were “on our side”, roger, and frankly feel much more comfortable hearing you defend anti-Semites as a critic of Israel than as one of our “allies”. With friends like you we never needed enemies, but now that you are one, everything seems much more as it should be.
Have a great week!
Not sure whether it was on this thread that Jonathan (and Richard and/or Harvey) mentioned being threatened with arrest by the police for taking photographs.
Well, that would be in direct breach of the Met’s own very clear guidelines:
“Members of the public and the media do not need a permit to film or photograph in public places and police have no power to stop them filming or photographing incidents or police personnel.”
Any such behaviour by the police where they do stop lawful photography, could be publicised in the media and a complaint made to the Commissioner.
In addition, I suspect that the British Photographic Council
which advises photographers and journalists on their legal rights, may be interested and perhaps even wish to take up the matter themselves with the police.
Look at the Act for America website and see how Muslims are making inroads into the warp and woof of American life. I find the Bible a wonderful source of information. The Hebrew Prophets spoke of a Jewish return to the Promised Land long before Herzle as did famous Christians such as John Owen, John and Charles Wesley, Charles Haddon Spurgeon and Bishop John Ryle. Those Christians who think the Church has replaced Israel should read Romans 9-11 and Revelation.
How come ? Is he on probation Richard ?# tread carefully sunshine .
I guess Richard…see Daniel, my old self is back……has decided to show how magnanimous he is by allowing my comment. Perhaps he has also rediscovered the value of debate. We shall see. In the meantime, Daniel, you’ve hurt my feelings.
BTW, I thought Kominsky’s Promise was a worthy production, apart from the absurd implausibilities in the Gaza scenes.
Surely, the whole idea behind the panel’s concentration on Jewish hatred by wartime Britain and America, was to add credence to their own personal hatred as if to say: the whole world can’t be wrong about those pesky Jews! This is what we have come to today in this country. Anti-Semitism has gone mainstream, particularly in academic circles, as well as vile outbursts by British parliamentarians. There would not have been such a discussion, or such utterances, say twenty years ago. In this respect the UK has become by far the worst place in Western-Europe. David Cameron keeps schtum about free speech being denied to Israeli speakers, even ambassadors, or Jews in support of Israel, as well as the harassment of Jewish students at universities which the government could curtail if it was that way inclined.
The debate about the failure to bomb the railway lines is largely academic. On this, John Snow was right, but he came out with it for the wrong reason; to justify hatred of Jews. The fact is that the Western Allies remained indifferent to the fate of the doomed victims in Europe. Yes, the railway lines could have been repaired quickly, as were those bombed by the Allies all over Germany but it didn’t deter the Allies from carrying on. The main point about bombing the lines leading to the camps, and more important the crematoria, would have sent the right message to Hitler and his henchmen. The fact that no such strong message was ever sent, Hitler took it as carte blanche to murder every Jewish man, woman and child in Europe. He said as much surrounded by his cronies at his “table talks” that the world would be grateful to him for ridding Europe of its Jews…
Well said Rubin. Hope Snow reads this.
Water exists in three forms, liquid, vapour and ice and our Creator exists as a Trinity. Study Scripture and you will find this to be so. Napoleon said he knew men and Jesus Christ was no ordinary man. The first reference to the Messiah is in Genesis 3:15. In His pre-existent state He walked with Adam in the Garden of Eden as the Lord God, a theophany. Scripture teaches us that the Virgin Mary was found to be pregnant with Jesus through the Holy Spirit. After the resurrection of Jesus the doubting Apostle Thomas felt the wounds of his Messiah and declared that He was his “Lord and God” and was not rebuked. I do not think comments on Richard Millett’s Blog are the right vehicle for this discussion but I was challenged to give an answer. As Isaiah 9:6 says: “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.”
if that is so simple and unequivocal why then have Christians been killing eachother over the centuries with relish and abandon because of disagreement as to the exact description of the trinity?
So, she was a virgin?!
I’m really weak in the area of Christian theology. What is the difference between an immaculate conception and a virgin birth?
now that is an interesting question – I don’t remember having ever read about a dispute about that – but surely there must be a difference provided that the proof is in something as physical as the hymen and not something completely spiritual
By that question you managed to add another bit to my ever rising mount of confusion as to why that whole female (as opposed to male) virginity thing (besides of course that in mortals it makes a father feel certain) is such an interesting topic.
Daniel the term “immaculate conception” is not connected with the term “virgin birth”. The term “immaculate conception”, which by the way refers to Mary and not to Jesus, is the concept that Mary the Mother of Jesus was born without “original sin”. It was never suggested by the Church that Mary was a “virgin birth” indeed anyone who suggested it was strongly condemned by the Roman Catholic Church.
according to Gore Vidal’s Julian (confirmed by others less vitriolicly minded) the church picked up lots of things dear to a pagan’s heart and integrated them, one of them being virgin birth
Germany is a mixed Roman Catholic and Protestant country and I am used to hearing talked of Maria as the mother of god AND a virgin even though
type into Google – heilige jungfrau maria – and you get 850.000 results.
Maybe theologians know better but then they have failed to convince the masses, besides orthodox Christians call her virgin explicitly as to the German translation, in English it is maid. (source Wikipedia)
and here it says born by the virgin Mary – now since she had no original sin and since having “known” a man seems to constitute sin this reading of the thing seems quite a feat of hair splitting and IMHO still an insult to all children who were conceived by more mothers making love to mortal fathers.
Thank you Gerald. Your excellent comment is fully backed up by Wikipedia:
“The Immaculate Conception should not be confused with the perpetual virginity of Mary or the virgin birth of Jesus; it refers to the conception of Mary by her mother, Saint Anne.”
At this point my understanding is that while according to some Catholics ( Pope Pius IX et al) his (only) grandmother was a virgin, all Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and most Protestant churches say that his mother was. These are basic tenets of Christianity of which I am ashamed to admit that though I lived in a Chrtian country for 18 years, I knew next to nothing.
Let’s stop schnecking at Christopher Proudlove and his faith. The only thing we can truly say about God is that we understand less about him/her/it than an amoeba does about a human being. Mr. Proudlove supports Jews and Israel and expressly condemns supercessionism. That’s good enough for me. He does not say our faith is wrong, and we should extend to him the same courtesy. Read ‘Defending Identity’ by Natan Sharansky. God knows, we have few enough friends!
Unfortunately, certain Jews are so sure their faith is the only right one that they forget courtesy. As an atheist, I have the same severe judgement on all faiths. Some are just more tolerable because they don’t infringe the human rights of others.
Well said Ric Cooper. There is today in our world only one enemy that is looking to rule supremely over the entire world and we Jews stand in their way. That enemy may once in the past have been Christianity. Today it is not. The enemy is the Red/Green alliance, that 1400 year old genocidal ideology back by Jew hating “liberals” with an excellent propaganda machine the likes of which Snow and his panel absorb like a wet sponge. My personal thanks to all who join us in combatting that. For this not the Jew’s war alone, but an attack on basic freedoms and human rights for all.
I’ve never objected to being asked questions about Judaism or Jewish theology and I’ve even endeavored to reply to the best of my abilities. If Chris was offended by my questions regarding Mary, I assure him that was not my intention. I too am delighted that we have Christian supporters of Israel and see no reason not to shoot the breeze with them about myriad issues. Chris identified himself as a Christian for Zion and, as I’m sure that we agree about the Zion bit, I thought, as a practicing Jew that it might be more interesting to discover what it means to be a practicing Christian. Furthermore, at the age of 52 (today!) I seem to be meeting fewer Jewish virgins than ever, and I wondered whether Mary was or wasn’t.
In general, I think that Ric et al might be surprised to hear that our non-Jewish supporters are not children nor in any way our intellectual inferiors and do not need to be “defended” by such patronizing comments made by my well-meaning coreligionists. On the contrary, the faith of the Christophers of this world in the righteousness of Israel’s cause is often far deeper and more resilient than that of our still exiled Mosaic brethren. Their support for Israel is based on the belief in an eternal truth rather than perceived transitory self interest. At times when Jews stopped visiting Israel because of “security risks” the Christians kept coming. In the last US election most American Jews chose the more hostile to Israel candidate while our Christian supporters opposed him. No Christian Zionist organization, that I know of, has sought to curry favor for itself by outflanking Israeli governments from the left and calling upon us to be more “flexible” or take greater “risks”. When discussing such matters on a Friday night after dinner my late grandfather was oft to read the Jewish Chronicle, sip his lemon tea sorrowfully, moan (in Yiddish) and say, “Give me a good goy any day.”
All that having been said, if I have offended Chris, I most sincerely apologize.
Many happy returns, Daniel! What I mean is this: there’s a difference between asking in a neutral spirit of enquiry, thereby showing an interest in comparative religions, and asking rhetorically, implying “How can you belive in such tosh!” It’s all in the tone, and yours was more the latter. I just think it’s bad manners to reply to an honest declaration of support with a tough theological challenge. I don’t like punk music, beetroot of Catholic doctrine: but I wouldn’t denigrate the consumers of any of these fine products.
Couldn’t agree more, Ric!
Thank you for your warm greetings.
Last night I attended a friends’s daughter’s bat mitzvah and a group of us discussed the “interesting” question as to whether Lot was allowed to use the salt from his dearly departed wife to put on his chips. This question was halachic than theological, but included a rabbi, a few seculars and several regular ignoramuses like myself. Nobody was upset or changed their political views as a result.
You are quite right that my questions,though serious, were asked in a somewhat tongue in cheek fashion, however Chris prides himself on being a friend of Israel, and if you can’t have a laugh with a friend, who can you laugh with? Before you ask, not only do I have no objections to discussing the virginity (or lack of it) of out Matriarchs and other ladies from ancient Jewish history, but such matters – the virginity of queen Esther for example – are discussed by our sages in the Talmud, with nobody getting upset.
Finally, I have yet to hear any practicing Christian upset about discussing such matters, it seems to be mainly upsetting the Jews. I am reminded of those of my Yiddishe brethren who picketed the showing of “Life of Brian” all those years ago while their Christian countrymen lines up to see the movie. How history repeats itself.
Wait for 2 minutes 28:
This off-topic pseudo-religious discussion is tiring. Can the ultra-religious refrain from importing their obsessions and discuss these matters privately with whoever wants to hear them?
Always look on the bright side of life…
That’s the spirit, Ric.
BTW I find the whole subject of the support that Israel receives from Chris and his pals to be very interesting indeed. Besides everything else, they are a true thorn in the sides of my Left-wing countrymen in their gallant endeavors to convince the Israeli public that we are all alone and shall remain so as long as we do not concede to all Palestinian demands and return to what Abba Eban famously dubbed the Auschwitz borders.
Were that there were more like them!
I heartily agree with Sharon Klaff and Ric Cooper with everything they say about Christians friends who stand with us and the Jewish State. I have spoken to Christian-Zionist groups myself, where I’m received very well indeed, including RevelationTV. Though I am a survivor, I have agreed to next appear on RevTV in a program with the son of a high-ranking Nazi criminal who was hanged for war crimes. The gentleman in question has lived in this country for some years and is now a Pastor with a large following in the West Country. He cut himself off from his father, turning against everything he stood for, and is very supportive of the State of Israel – I would not have agreed to it otherwise. .
Daniel. First of all, Happy Birthday!
I wish you many more years of blissful blogging in the best of health.
I am rather intrigued to know, on meeting a lady how you can tell whether she is a virgin or not. I realize I’m a lot older than you, but this is an insight I don’t think I ever had – a gift that could have been useful once, alas the years have flown by…!
Thank you for your kind blessing, always so much more reliable when given by a righteous priest. May we blog together for many years to come.
Regarding your query; as virgin births play no role in my dogma, the first giveaway clue would have to be if she has children or grandchildren or appears to be in the family way. They don’t conceive themselves, you know.
Secondly, if she’s wearing a wedding ring or the traditional Jewish head-covering that religious married women wear, it’s a pretty good bet.
There are other less reliable determiners, but thankfully, they fall well outside the scope of this excellent blog.
All the best
I wish you guys would start talking with equally keen interest about male virgins and them doing immaculate impregnation.
I can’t help but understand this hyperbole interest in female hymens as an insult to all mothers, sisters, wives and daughters who conceive via nature’s way.
And since hopefully you are when not fixated on hymens behaving in a becomingly chevalresque way to them I can’t help scratching my head why you are willing to not only tolerate but indulge discussions about all that virginity crap in a more or less wink of an eye fashion.
… your suspected by me adoration of which, reminding you of extremes, must be quite hurtful for all women who have suffered rape in peace and war alike making them realize that in your heart of hearts you all consider the “undamaged” hymen guarantees higher status aka more respect.
I really don’t see this immaculate impregnation idea of yours catching on. It seems to me that most young red-blooded men are looking for ways to enjoy the cause without its effect rather than the result without its cause, which you appear to be proposing.
I am reminded of a tale of two elderly Jewish gentleman one of whom says, “I think my wife might be dead.” “Think!” replies his friend, “How can this be? Either she is or she isn’t. Don’t you know?”
“Well,” replies our hero, “The sex is still pretty much the same, but there are a lot of plates in the sink.”
In advance I apologize to Ric if he takes offense on behalf of old Jews or widowers who might be supporters of Israel, and Jose who, rather inevitably, “couldn’t agree more”.
I couldn’t agree more if you stopped involving people into off-topic, inane, religious discussions. Try to remember what the article is talking about, which is much more serious than the matters about which you seem to worry.
Lies and more lies
Pingback: Jon Snow At Anti Israel Lobby Lets his Skewed Views Surface | Skewed Media