Yasmin Alibhai-Brown believes that insufficient attention is being paid to the situation in Gaza. “Where is the media outrage?” she asks, in the headline of her outrage-laden piece for a British national newspaper.
After a genuflection in the direction of Saint Lauren Booth, she goes on to say,
It will be a year in January since Israel imposed the blockade, knowing it was against international law and human rights conventions. It is a siege without mercy, locking people into a prison, most of whom have not been convicted of any crime except that of being Palestinian. I am not defending the militants who attack Israel; what they do is extreme provocation. But even that cannot excuse Israel’s actions. Neither United Nations food aid nor European Union medical supplies are allowed through. Fishermen are gunned down, power cuts mean industries have shut down.
If Israel had been imposing a siege without mercy on Gaza over the last ten months then the Hamas regime would long since have been toppled and tens, if not hundreds of thousands of Gazans would now be dead. What Israel has been doing, over the course of its “siege”, has been to supply the civilian population of an entity whose government has sworn to destroy it with practically all their basic needs. It’s true that the crossings have been closed from time to time, usually as a result of Hamas attacks on them, and it’s also true that they have been closed in recent days as a result of continuous rocket fire into Israel from Gaza. However, no one doubts that Israel will soon open the crossings again, with or without a worthless undertaking from Hamas to stop the rocket attacks. Over the course of the last year Israel has been sending food and fuel in Gaza while Gaza has been sending indiscriminate rocket fire into Israel, that’s the truth of the matter.
She continues,
Compare the coverage with, say, Zimbabwe where Mugabe goes on annihilating opposition, wrecking the economic future of his country and pushing his people into a famine. This state-made devastation is recorded daily by the Western media, in spite of all the restrictions placed on journalists. So why this blackout on Gaza?
I don’t know exactly how you’d set about accurately measuring the comparative amount of media coverage of Gaza and Zimbabwe but I’d suggest that the word “blackout” may be something of an exaggeration, especially in view of the fact that a Google search for Gaza+siege gets more than 1,700,000 hits while a similar search for Zimbabwe+famine yields a miserly 630,000. Furthermore, even if it was possible to show that the situation in Gaza was receiving less coverage than that in Zimbabwe, this just might have something to do with the fact that Mugabe’s tyranny in Zimbabwe has cost a vastly greater number of lives than the conflict between Israel and Hamas.
Alibhai-Brown leaves the best till last,
As for propaganda to justify the unjustifiable, there are commentators in this country for whom Israel can do no wrong. One of the most vociferous, Stephen Pollard, now edits the Jewish Chronicle, a newspaper that once expressed a range of views, including those held by liberal British Jews. It is turning hardline.
Translation: a prominent British journalist who does not agree with me is a mere propagandist and a vociferous one at that. The absolute evil of Israel and the absolute purity and innocence of the Palestinians being so obvious, that’s all that anyone attempting a defense of Israel’s actions can be described as.
PR onslaughts are launched by the Board of Deputies and British Israeli Communication and Research Centre, whose head, Lorna Fitzsimons (a former Labour MP for Rochdale but not herself Jewish) sends out press releases week after week defending all Israeli actions. In an interview she once said: “We need to think carefully about the consequences of questioning the defensive reactions of a nation-state that is constantly bombarded by an enemy calling for its destruction.” Note the implicit warning in that statement.
Writing as someone who is not himself Jewish, I find this reference to Lorna Fitzsimons’s ethno-religious status a bit odd. Why does it need to be mentioned at all? Of what relevance is it? Does Alibhai-Brown think that one must necessarily be Jewish one’s self in order to find some of Israel’s activities to be worthy of support? Does she think that non-Jews have to be paid to express such opinions?
And finally, this:
Note the implicit warning in that statement.
A clear, yet deniable allusion to the dark power, the hidden hand, the limitless reach of global Jewish power, a conspiracy so subtle that it can even whisper veiled threats through the lips of a non-Jew.
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown is having none of it. A national newspaper columnist and a regular on political talk shows, she’s not going to allow herself to be intimidated and silenced. Heedless of the high price she’s going to pay for doing so, and at all times ready to absolve exceptional Jews from guilt, she’s going to speak out, whatever the cost.
Bravo!
Wow that’s a great post!
Eammon:
Who knows what lurks in the heart of Yasmin A-B. Maybe by referencing Ms. Fitzsimon’s “non-Jewish bona fides”, she’s hoping someone will contact her with information to reveal direct links to the Jewish community.
As for the comparison of Mugabe’s repression of political opposition, there’s another much greater piece of gormlessness, and not with respect to the amount of media coverage. The repression of non-violent, anti-corruption, pro-democracy dissenters practiced by the PA, whether Fatah or Hamas, goes way beyond any actions of the Israeli government within Israel’s boundaries or in the PA territories. The measures she condemns are invariably in response to violence, especially when it’s directed against civilian targets.
I wonder if our Yasmin is aware that non-white African nationals, regardless of their faith, have a much more positive opinion of Israel and its place in the world than the average European.
Lynn, people in general, it’s “Eamonn”, trust me on this :=))
One should keep track as to how often an anti-Zionist columnist writing for a major newspaper complains that they are not being to allows to express their opinions.
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown is by no means the first one.
My favorite example thus far is GEOFFREY WHEATCROFT writing for the NY Times said this:
“Not only does Judt lament that the United States has suffered a catastrophic loss of international influence in recent years, thanks to “self-defeating and even irrational” conduct, in the Middle East above all; he says that the reflexive charge of anti-Semitism against critics of Israel, and of the American alliance with Israel, must ultimately be “bad for Jews — since it means that genuine anti-Semitism may also in time cease to be taken seriously, thanks to the Israel lobby’s abuse of the term.” Anyone who writes on this subject is asking for trouble (à qui …), and Judt’s notably brave and forthright essays have brought him much obloquy.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/books/review/Wheatcroft-t.html?ref=books&pagewanted=print
The “obloquy” he mentions is a couple of critiques by some writers in The New Republic”
Israel haters claim the right to attack Israel but when someone criticizes them they claim that they are being censored.
Wheatcroft’s “(à qui …)” is classic. I’d like him to point out one attack of Israel by him had been rejected by a major newspaper.
Same with Yasmin Alibhai-Brown!
The reference to Fitzsimmons relgion may stem from the fact that because of her support for Israel it was alleged that not only was she Jewish but that she was an MP for the seat of Israel (or some such). In other words, she was subject to an antisemitic campaign.
Apparently for many of those who dislike Israel, the fact that one can support Israel publically and yet not be Jewish is beyond their comprehension. After all, for them, the questions of Israel and Palestine are reducible to “identity”, “race”, Jewish psyches” etc. and never about politics.
Eamonn says: “Writing as someone who is not himself Jewish, I find this reference to Lorna Fitzsimons’s ethno-religious status a bit odd. Why does it need to be mentioned at all? Of what relevance is it? Does Alibhai-Brown think that one must necessarily be Jewish one’s self in order to find some of Israel’s activities to be worthy of support? Does she think that non-Jews have to be paid to express such opinions?”
Saul says: “Apparently for many of those who dislike Israel, the fact that one can support Israel publically and yet not be Jewish is beyond their comprehension.”
Norm Geras pointed to such a twisted view of Israel’s case in his July 24 blogpost, commenting on a Guardian’s leading editorial which claimed:
“When a presumptive US presidential candidate arrives in Jerusalem, he willingly dons a jacket designed by Israeli tailors. He is compelled to call the country a miracle, to visit the Israeli Holocaust Memorial Yad Vashem and to link the memory of the 6 million Jews who died in Europe to Israeli victims of Palestinian violence today.”
He called it “foul stuff”:
“Is there anything wrong with a visitor to Israel paying his respects at Yad Vashem to the memory of several million dead?”
Moreover:
” But notice something else in the general presentation here: though Obama dons the jacket ‘willingly’, it seems that he is ‘compelled’ to do the things he does - to say miracle, visit Yad Vashem, make the lamented link. Really? We are to believe, for example, that he would not have gone to Yad Vashem just on his own steam? How does the Guardian know this? We are to believe that the Israelis have a way of getting visiting politicians to do what they otherwise mightn’t? Being Jews, they’ll have the knack for that, I suppose.”
It’s as if there is something counter-intuitive about a person’s position when it does not quite align itself with the sentiments of Alibhai-Brown. It seems unnatural to her that anybody would choose, upon reflection and free will, to speak up for Israel. The most disturbing feature in her rhetoric is the complete absence of critical self-awareness when it comes to putting forth these astonishing suspicions.
Norm’s blogpost can be found here:
http://normblog.typepad.com/normblog/2008/07/barack-obama-and-the-jewish-tailors.html
“Apparently for many of those who dislike Israel, the fact that one can support Israel publically and yet not be Jewish is beyond their comprehension. After all, for them, the questions of Israel and Palestine are reducible to “identity”, “race”, Jewish psyches” etc. and never about politics.”
If this were the case, does it also mean that any supporter of the Palestinian cause must be in some way an “Arab, a Muslim” or in the pay of people who are?
Again, it is interesting that antisemite make claims of “underhanded Jewish influence” being the cause of support for Israel but never make the claim that underhanded Arab or Muslim influence is the cause of support for the Arab cause?
It’s hard to decide if antisemitism makes people stupid or if stupid people gravitate towards antisemitism. In any case there is certainly a correlation if not a cause between these two states of mind.
Let’s see how the Israel haters in Britain are going to square their love for “justice” and their countries dealing with Tibet?
“Did Britain Just Sell Tibet?”
By ROBERT BARNETT
“THE financial crisis is going to do more than increase unemployment, bankruptcy and homelessness. It is also likely to reshape international alignments, sometimes in ways that we would not expect.
As Western powers struggle with the huge scale of the measures needed to revive their economies, they have turned increasingly to China. Last month, for example, Gordon Brown, the British prime minister, asked China to give money to the International Monetary Fund, in return for which Beijing would expect an increase in its voting share.
Now there is speculation that a trade-off for this arrangement involved a major shift in the British position on Tibet, whose leading representatives in exile this weekend called on their leader, the Dalai Lama, to stop sending envoys to Beijing — bringing the faltering talks between China and the exiles to a standstill.
The exiles’ decision followed an announcement on Oct. 29 by David Miliband, the British foreign secretary, that after almost a century of recognizing Tibet as an autonomous entity, Britain had changed its mind. Mr. Miliband said that Britain had decided to recognize Tibet as part of the People’s Republic of China. He even apologized that Britain had not done so earlier…”
Read the whole article here
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/25/opinion/25barnett.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=print
Anyone for boycotting British Universities?
Will the British UCU boycott itself?
Sorry if this sounds terminally thick but I can’t even see an “implicit” warning in the offending passage. Surely all it is saying is no more in effect, than that Israel is under attack, defending itself, and so should not be criticised for doing so.
There is no implicit warning in the passage, Mark. That’s the point isn’t it?
It is actually Yasmin Alibhai-Brown who is warning “non Jews” like Lorna Fitzsimons not to side with Israel or they will be attacked by people like her.
I wonder if Lorna Fitzsimons replied somewhere to this vicious attack.
Alibhai-Brown is on record somewhere as having written after the 7/7 attacks that she had hoped they were caused by IRA rather than Muslims. That says at lot about her, doesn’t it?
And as for outrage about the situation in Gaza, she should read Comment is Free on Guardian Online where every variation on that theme is regularly played out, including by Hamas activist and suicide terror supporter Azzam (”I would if I could”) Tamimi, and various useful idiots.
Judging by what I read today on ENGAGE, Gaza is doomed anyway, regardless of what Israel may or may not do, since the population is stuck with “democratically elected” Hamas, which has outlawed Fatah.
I’m not Jewish;I’m an atheist,(for what it’s worth).
Proud to be a longterm and loyal,supporter of Israel and I too have visited Yad Vashem:(it left a lasting impression).
The double standards beggar belief:recently I read that 10 people have been hanged in Iran this week,one of whom,according to her lawyer,was in a ‘very,very bad state’.What chance did such a hapless woman have before an Islamic court?
Silence from Ms Alibhai-Brown and her fellow travellers.
Fianally,what would she do if her neighbours decided that they wished to liquidate her just for being there?