The Guardian’s Blindspot

The problem is not blindness but hypocrisy.

The Guardian would defend and justify Islamic terrorism by blaming foreign policy. It would not however defend the rise of the BNP by blaming domestic policy.

Of course the Guardian is happy to engage in the slander of the American Right as it seems to defend their claim that most terrorism is non Islamic.

Of course no Glenn Beck viewer has ever blown anything up.

The Obama administration is clever at portraying opposition to its policies as “dangerous”, “far right” and other canards.
The Guardian did not however denounce the vitriol directed against Bush and Sarah Palin, some of which crossed every line of decency.
The Guardian praised a movie about the assassination of Bush but would probably not be so kind to one about the killing of Obama.

For the record, I saw some of the pamphlets coming out of the RNC.

They compared Harry Reid to Scoobydoo and Pelosi to the evil lady from 101 Dalmations. They also included the joker face which was originally drafted by a Left wing Dennis Kucinic supporter who wanted more socialism and was displeased with the slow pace Obama was taking in turning America into an internationalist socialist state.

Wow, we got a militia uprising in the USA!!

Into your bunkers and up with your tinfoil hats.

Guardinistas live in a fantasy world where Americans are marching with guns and bibles in hand looking for gays and minorities to shoot and where shop lifters are executed in the electric chair to the sound of country music.

Just don’t remind them of shop lifters mutilated in Iran as that is “neocon propaganda”.

The Guardian will not attack the idea that Obama is advancing socialism in the USA.
Why would they?
They would prefer if Obama would act like Chavez and start confiscating private property and denounce Jews as agents of Israel.

Obama is trying to advance socialism and Americans are right to oppose it.

Though that is another story…

A documented mentally ill nut shot up the subway near the Pentagon (who equally hated Bush and Obama and was a registered democrat), will “prove” that Obama is facing an armed terrorist right.
What a terrorist he was. He wanted to replace the US dollar with marijuana and lived with his parents refusing to take his meds believing that pot will cure his bi-polar disorder.

They will however defend Nidal Hasan as a victim of “Islamophobia” for having been recruited, promoted, trained and paid for by the US Taxpayer and claim all sorts of mental issues and emotional trauma yet no medical evidence to that effect ever existed.

He was a psychiatrist for heaven’s sake !!!

The news of a former Obama organizer shooting 13 people in a University for having been denied tenor (killing 2) gets no news like “left wing maniac killing spree”.
Nor does the new Powpow of Black racists in Chicago awarding another award of grandeur to Luis Farrakhan who just recently claimed that the “white right” is out to get the Messiah.

Nor would they segway into the subplot that Farrakhan openly called for the gassing of Jews as late as 1986.

Media hypocrisy is grand in the US and in the UK.
The Guardian is even worse because unlike the US media which would want us to forget that Farrakhan and Obama’s pastor Wright are vile Jew haters, the Guardian wants to promote the ideas and conspiracies which do forment antisemitism. Not to mention giving a platform to the vilest of bigots like Galloway and Ben White.

I will not even go to the Hamas / Press TV “guests” they invited to “share their side of the story” deleting comments calling a Hamas leader a bigot.

So this is no blind spot. Blind spots are about brushing things aside over covering them up so that they do not disturb a given narrative.

The Guardian promotes what the others “blind spots” miss.

ModernityBlog,
You make a valid observation right up to the point where you refer to the guardian’s editorial slant having a “blind spot” which in essence means that they aren’t aware of what they are doing.

I would say quite the contrary, they are very aware and want to indulge to such a degree that their “blind spot” is not realizing how blatantly obvious it is.

Their actions reek of the entitlement that sets in to people having spent too much time in the position and think they can get away with saying black is white and white is black.

The daily drone of the Arab spin machine conjuring up nazi imagery (Occupation),
discrimination (depicting zionism as racism), racial purity (apartheid) isn’t being plastered on CiF by mistake or by some naive noble intentioned people.

This isn’t a “blind spot”.

Its very deliberate, despite seaton writing below the line that the caption under the photo of the cave of the patriarchs in the article dealing with the Arabs ongoing identity theft wasn’t referred to as the al-Abrahimi Mosque with any ill intent:

“@ PetraMB: Your point about the photo caption is taken, although there was no editorialising intended as perhaps you imply.”-seaton

Of course there was, it is the guardian’s editorial slant and they promote it obsessively.

They don’t read the goings on at this site religiously for their health, they groan daily at how they are exposed, so much so that they commissioned one of the house jews to write an article about Yiddish, although even there the ingrained editorial slant reared its ugly head at the tail end of the article with this line:

“It proves that Zionism failed to consign other forms of Jewish life to oblivion. ”

which became the by-line:

“The revival of this death-defying language shows that Zionism has failed to consign other forms of Jewish life to oblivion”

blind spot?
Hardly.

“By God,The Guardian is a loathsome newspaper;a local North London morning daily for Stalinist metro libtards,perpetually arrogant,snobbish, self-righteous,humorless,dull,relentlessly middle class,cowardly and cheap”.

-Rod Liddle

“Instead of attacks on President Obama, creeping socialism etc, instead of that Comment is Free posts outpourings of anti-Jewish racism ”

Im sorry I have misunderstood this. I thought it is in the definition of anti Semitism that to call Israel “a racist state” is anti Semitic…i. e being pro Jewish is not racist …so how can being anti Jewish be racist as noted above ? This article is trying to have its cake and eat it.

I concur with Modernity Blog’s point: the Guardian is contributing to anti-Jewish racism. However I think his condemnation is too faint by far.

First of all, the Guardian’s fanatical anti-Israel bias in its own pages – forget about CiF which I suspect is read predominantly by activists. Certainly many of the anti-Israel and anti-Jewish comments I have read in CiF are far from gentlemanly and many more are blatantly “bellicose demagoguery”.

No, these comments only show the extent of the damage to the British psyche.

Their cause is the “aggressive rhetoric in public discourse” as evidenced most prominently in the pages of the Guardian itself. Indeed much in those pages is far from gentlemanly; it is almost all unrelievedly tendentious, painfully biased and indeed amounts to “an aggressive campaign capitalising on fear of and more importantly hatred towards Israel”.

This is done in so many ways. Intemperate rhetoric; biased reporting – not only in the opinion pages, but even more in the news sections, to the point where one cannot trust the “news”; excessive focus on Israel, a small country with little influence which figures entirely disproportionately in the Guardian; and much more.

I know of no denouément by insiders confessing this. I do believe the evidence before my eyes. The Guardian may not have this bias as a policy platform – but I wouldn’t bet on it.

peterthehungarian, I agree about the loathesomeness and stupidity of the Lerman article. However, at the time of the early Aliyahs when the decision to revive Hebrew was taken, there can have been few non-European Jews in Israel and certainly very few among the Zionists.

George AZ

First of all, the Guardian’s fanatical anti-Israel bias in its own pages – forget about CiF which I suspect is read predominantly by activists. Certainly many of the anti-Israel and anti-Jewish comments I have read in CiF are far from gentlemanly and many more are blatantly “bellicose demagoguery”.

I look at it another way George.

The Guardian is no longer a newspaper. It is printing agenda driven drivel that is presented as news.

In short. It is a mind fuck. Not that much different from watching Fox (and friends), News. And using similar techniques of misrepresentation and omission.

It was not always thus.

The current management must be dismissed and new editorial management appointed. I will enjoy seeing the present management coven on the dole and I hope that Rustbucket invests his savings in the ‘new economies’ which, according to The Guardian and its groupies, are fast removing the United States and the EU from their ascendancy.

“Instead of attacks on President Obama, creeping socialism etc, instead of that Comment is Free posts outpourings of anti-Jewish racism,…”

It is all part of the Guardian World View, which reminds Duvidl of the singing voice of the late great Louis Armstrong:

That’s The Guardian World View
(to the tune of: “It’s A Wonderful World.” Hat tip: Louis Armstrong)

Matt sees skies that are Red; Red sunsets too.
Guardianistas are Red; only babies are blue;
And Matt thinks to himself,”I’ll make Cameron Red too.”
And I think to myself, “that’s the Guardian World View.”

I see Shameless condemning each Israeli Jew.
Idolising Hamas; even Fatah might do.
And he consoles himself with this Guardian World View,
And he thinks to himself, “Obama’s a Jew too.”

Bridge: All the colours of the rainbow coagulate blood-Red.
Except for old red roses Brian’s forgotten to dead-head.
He says, “Marx rules my butt; Engels and Gramsci too.
He’s really excreting The Guardian World View-pooh.

As the coven glugs its brew, they shriek “we happy few.”
“We band of buggers; Georgina bugs too.”
“We’re buggers and muggers; a KGB crew.”
And they think to themselves; “spread this Guardian World View.”
They keep kidding themselves, that we’ll believe it’s true.

Foreverisraeli, the rod little quote sums up the Guardian perfectly. Nothing more needs to be said.

@ modernity

Sorry, but your post from 6:59 am is a pretty poor attempt to dismiss those who disagree with you.

Could the charges of e.g. “devoid of introspection” or “pathological inability to admit when they are in error” not just as well be turned on certain posters here?

I mean … if you’re going to at least try to be objective, that is …

@Berchmans

Racism defines those attitudes to others as reprehensible which depend for their effect on animosity towards attributes the victim can never change and for which he can never be blamed. Foul invective against Jews wherever they live, is a form of racism because it loads onto the innocent whatever faults the racist finds in the Israelis. Referring to Israel as a racist state implies that the Israelis discriminate against their Arab Muslim population for similar reasons, which is a lie and the telling of lies against Jews is classical anti Semitism. There is some discrimination against Muslim Arabs but only to protect Jewish Israelis from ever again being in the position the victim of their declared enemies. To afford equal rights to those whose religion calls upon them to oppose the Jews and fight to return them to divinely designated subjugation, is of such startling generosity that it is even resented, for it illustrates too well the moral and cultural gap that exists between Muslim and Jew, and between Muslims and the West.

Epidermoid.

Well explained.

BUT

It’s just too much for Dopey.

modernityblog in trademark juvenile form there at 2:12 pm.

Baseless insults and no attempt to address the points I made.

A sorry sight indeed.

@ Gert

Do you actually know MB personally, then?

MB also loves deploying his ‘bad faith’ thingy. If he’s not busy accusing others of it, he claims he’s been accused of it himself. It must have some hidden meaning or else it just ‘sounds good’. Where on Earth is Pretzelberg accusing MB of ‘bad faith’?

Epidermoid

.

” Foul invective against Jews is a form of racism because it loads onto the innocent whatever faults the racist finds in the Israelis. ”

Oh what a tangled web. What you and the article are saying is that racists are horrible and anti Semites are horrible. Using the word ” racist” is convenient as it is such a horrible slur. Regardless there cannot both be “anti Jewish racism” and a ban on calling Israel “racist” because it is pro Jewish.

@MB:

Again, for the Guardian inflammatory language in America is wrong, but they can’t see their own contribution to a similar state of affairs in Britain.

To you, any criticism of Israel or Zionism is ‘inflammatory’ (except perhaps if I criticised WB settlers for not washing their Israeli flags often enough!) The only thing that will make Israel budge is pressure: without it, it has no motive to change its behaviour at all. The cost of maintaining the Occupation, if need be for another 40 years, is negligible. The harm of low level warfare (terrorism) directed at it is also very bearable and pays off great dividends in terms of anti-Palestinian propaganda and a ‘motive’ for walls, sieges, checkpoints and other so-called security measures (hint: no Occupation, no resistance to Occupation – a child can understand it).

Increasing numbers of people, Jews and non-Jews alike, are beginning to see this: to them you’re a little nincompoop and amateur belletrist who finds himself at the wrong side of the argument thanks to a self-inflicted obsession with antisemitism. I’m actually giving you the benefit of the doubt here: for all I know you might be a hardline Zionist…