This thread is a ruthless dismemberment of a terrible @ObserverUK article about Covid vaccines in Israel & the Palestinian territories. It's also a case study of when inaccurate anti-Israel commentary *might* be antisemitic according to @TheIHRA definition of antisemitism /1
The most contentious line in @TheIHRA definition is the one that says it "could" be antisemitic to apply to Israel "double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation". Is that what this article is? holocaustremembrance.com/resources/work… /2
On the one hand, and as the thread by @ShMMor explains, the article implies expectations of Israel that are not expected or - or at least, met by - most other democratic nations; and it does so to make Israel look worse than it is /3
On the other hand, Israel wouldn't be the only country to be unfairly portrayed by misleading journalism. And while the overall impression from the article is definitely misleading, there's nothing explicitly false. Sometimes people aren't antisemitic - they are just wrong /4
Plus, everyone has double standards about something. Most people have issues, countries or causes they care about more than others. In itself, that isn't unusual or alarming /5
But two things sway this one for me. First, this article is wrong in a way that fits pre-existing antisemitic ideas: that Jews spread disease; they use their cleverness to gain advantage; they do not care about the suffering of others. This is relevant even if it is unwitting /6
Second, the article fits a pattern. It is rare that the @guardian website publishes articles that are wrong in a way that makes Israel look better than it is. The poor journalism isn't random: it is pretty much always towards the negative, and a particular type of negative /7
This is why the @TheIHRA line about "double standards" is useful. Double standards on their own aren't the problem as much as the prejudices that they sometimes reveal and perpetuate: the drip, drip effect creating a narrative that, reinforced over time, justifies hate. /End
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There are three reasons why Corbyn's statement today does not change his disgraceful response to the EHRC report:
1. Saying "concerns about antisemitism are neither "exaggerated" nor "overstated"" does not contradict his original claim that "the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons". They are different claims.
2. Saying "I fully support Keir Starmer’s decision to accept all the EHRC recommendations in full" does not contradict his original statement that " I do not accept all of its findings". The report's findings and recommendations are different things.
The BBC podcast "Intrigue: Mayday" on White Helmets co-founder James Le Mesurier really is interesting. Especially if you have a niche interest in antisemitism, conspiracy theories and the Labour Party /1 bbc.co.uk/programmes/p04…
Episode 4 opens with a recording of Holocaust denier Nicholas Kollerstrom giving a speech at the Keep Talking conspiracy group exposed in this @CST_UK & @hopenothate report cst.org.uk/data/file/6/c/… /2
A regular at Keep Talking was Vanessa Beeley, a prominent purveyor of conspiracy theories about the White Helmets. According to this episode she was radicalised by pro-Palestinian activism and a visit to Gaza /3 bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0…
The @EHRC report into antisemitism in the Labour Party is out today. It finds that Labour broke the law by discriminating against Jews. Here are some of the thoroughly depressing and jaw-dropping 'highlights'.
Labour is guilty of antisemitic harassment and discrimination against Jews. There was a failure of leadership, processes, training and policies. Crucially, Labour could have dealt with antisemitism in the party but the leadership chose not to.
The report goes further: it identifies an culture in which antisemitism was ignored or accepted in the party. This culture needs to be eradicated if Jews are going to feel welcome again in the Labour Party.
Andrew Murray's interview is another example of someone from Corbyn's circle suddenly agreeing with everything we complained about over antisemitism in the Labour Party, having ignored or rebuffed our complaints for years
Treating antisemitism as a second-class form of racism? Assuming Jews can't suffer because they are rich? Listening to fringe JVL cranks rather than the mainstream Jewish community? It's all there. Shame he didn't come out with this when they were in charge
As for this jaw-dropping quote... fascists didn't stop beating up Jews in the 1970s, they just came up with a conspiracy theory that blamed Jews for encouraging immigration and diversity, supposedly as part of a plot to bring about "white genocide"
THREAD: Remember that claim that a Corbyn supporter was thrown out of the Labour Party for liking the Foo Fighters? It turns out it wasn't true, and the Labour Party knew it wasn't true but kept telling people it was true anyway. John Ware has the scoop. But who fell for it?
It was regularly cited as the prime example of right wingers in Labour HQ abusing their powers to purge the left. The Daily Mail and Guardian reported it as fact.
Momentum and Jon Lansman used it to recruit supporters
Tim Llewellyn is complaining that @BAFTA has nominated the excellent Panorama episode on Labour Party antisemitism. Is this the same Tim Llewellyn who once said "the Jewish Lobby is not much fun. They come at you from every direction... they use Jewish connections to get you"? /1
Llewellyn said this in a meeting at the Frontline Club in 2013 organised by @MiddleEastMnt. You can read about it here cst.org.uk/news/blog/2013…. But what else has Llewellyn said about this terrible Jewish Lobby? /2
In 2004 Llewellyn complained that broadcasters fail to properly identify former US ambassador Denis Ross as a Jew because he has "a lovely Anglo-Saxon name" /3