You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Gaza’ tag.
The Guardian’s coverage of the incident which occurred on May 31st 2010 on board the Mavi Marmara – an organized effort by the Islamist organisation known as the IHH to break Israel’s blockade against weapons smuggling into Gaza – was characteristically obsessive and one-sided.
It included 71 separate pieces (reports and commentary placed on their special Gaza Flotilla page) published on the first four days following the incident and represented a quintessentially Guardian frantic rush to judgement: Israel was guilty of naked aggression against peaceful pro-Palestinian activists.
Perhaps the most surreal Guardian piece in the days after the incident was the following report, which uncritically reported the sage advice of the sensitive Syrian despot known as Bashar al-Assad meditating upon his vision for peace in the region – harmony he believed was complicated by events on the Mavi Marmara. (Assad, of course, was correct. Over 13,000 Syrian civilians murdered by the regime in Damascus can attest to this fact.)
Moreover, the long-awaited UN Palmer Report - published in July 2011 – reached conclusions almost completely at odds with the Guardian narrative. Here are some of the main points of the report:
- Contrary to a mind-numbing number of accusations in the media that Israel’s blockade of Gaza was “illegal” the Palmer report concluded that the Naval blockade is fully consistent with international law and that IDF Naval forces have the right to stop Gaza-bound ships in international waters.
- Contrary to claims that the IDF attacked peaceful activists, the reports concluded that when Israeli commandos boarded the main ship they faced “organized and violent resistance from a group of passengers” and were therefore required to use force in order to ensure their own protection.
- The report concluded that the IHH sponsored flotilla, including the Mavi Marmara, “acted recklessly in attempting to breach the naval blockade.”
However, the Guardian’s Conal Urquhart – in the great tradition of Guardian pro-Palestinian activists – filed the following story unburdened by such quaint journalistic notions as adjusting a long-held narrative based on new information.
In fact, “Israel offers compensation to Mavi Marmara flotilla raid victims” of May 24th 2012, contains one passage completely contradicted by the Palmer Report.
According to Urquhart:
“Turkey cooled diplomatic relations with Israel after nine of its citizens were shot dead by Israeli commandos who landed on the Mavi Marmara to prevent its passage to Gaza. Protesters on the ship repelled the first wave of lightly armed commandos, but then the Israeli soldiers used lethal force against the unarmed passengers to end their resistance.”
This is blatantly untrue.
According to sections 123 and 124 of the Palmer Report:
“It is clear to the Panel that preparations were made by some of the passengers on the Mavi Marmara well in advance to violently resist any boarding attempt. The description given in the Israeli report is consistent with passenger testimonies to the Turkish investigation that describe cutting iron bars from the guard rails of the ship…”
“Furthermore, video footage shows passengers…carrying metal bars, slingshots, chains and staves. That information supports the accounts of violence given by IDF personnel to the Israeli investigation…”
“The Panel accepts, therefore, that soldiers landing from the first helicopter faced significant, organized and violent resistance from a group of passengers when they descended onto the Mavi Marmara. Material before the Panel confirms that this group was armed with iron bars, staves, chains, and slingshots, and there is some indication that they also used knives. Firearms were taken from IDF personnel and passengers disabled at least one by removing the ammunition from it. Two soldiers received gunshot wounds. There is some reason to believe that they may have been shot by passengers,”
It simply doesn’t get more clear than this.
A Guardian reporter tells his readers that passengers on that fateful day of May 31st were unarmed, peaceful activists – despite definitive evidence that they were armed Islamist terrorists.
I’d recommend Tweeting Mr. Urquhart (@conalu) and asking him about this simply indefensible claim.
Related articles
‘Activist Journalism’ – in the anti-Zionist context – refers to the capacity to frame any event in the Jewish state in a manner consistent with a pre-determined narrative.
So, any isolated case of injustice is reported as evidence of the state’s alleged systemic and institutional racism or oppression, while counter evidence – indicating that the behavior in question may represent the exception and not the rule – is typically ignored.
For instance, the Guardian will report a Palestinian civilian death in Gaza during an IDF anti-terror operation but largely fail to note the context of Hamas terror or the remarkable care Israel takes to avoid non-combatant deaths – including precision bombing of terrorist targets which often results in far better outcomes in comparison to other armies’ military operations around the world.
Of the 100 Gazans killed in IDF anti-terror operations in 2011, 91 were terrorists and 9 were civilians. That is a civilian to combatant death ratio of roughly 1 to 10.
This contrasts quite dramatically with the average civilian to combatant death ratio in recent conflicts involving NATO forces in Iraq and Afghanistan: There, NATO had a 3 to 1 ratio (i.e. there were 3 civilian deaths for every 1 combatant death).
Similarly, Israel has been accused on the pages of the Guardian of making it very difficult for Palestinians in Gaza to receive medical care, often with the particular circumstances of each decision ignored, along with that of the broader context of a state which – though at war against a terror movement which calls for Israel’s destruction – still allows thousands of Palestinians (100,000 in 2011) to receive medical care in its hospitals.
Harriet Sherwood’s latest report is an even more egregious illustration of such journalistic bias. Her report entitled “Palestinian Paralympians visit Jerusalem holy site” of May 21st, (tucked away in the sports section of the Guardian), had it been based on the raw facts, could have fairly advanced the following narrative:
Israel, though in a state of war with a Hamas government which does not recognise its right to exist and launches hundreds of deadly projectiles into its cities each year, still allowed – on humanitarian grounds – disabled Palestinian athletes (who are competing in the Paralympics in London this summer) to visit al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock.
But, we’re talking about Harriet Sherwood, after all, and so Israel was not credited. Instead she wrote:
“The distance between Gaza City and Jerusalem is less than 50 miles, but one that is near-impossible for most Palestinians in the tiny enclave to undertake. But Qadoom was one of nine athletes and coaches – four of whom will compete in the Paralympics in London this summer – to visit the holy site on Monday, courtesy of the British consulate in Jerusalem” [emphasis added]
Unreported by Sherwood is the fact that for years there has been an unofficial boycott of Jerusalem by Arab states to protest Israeli control of the city.
Sherwood continues:
“Officials from the British consulate applied to Israel for exit permits on the group’s behalf in March. Confirmation for the nine finally came on Thursday, but there was still a six-hour wait at the Erez crossing.”
Then Sherwood’s tale devolves even further. She quotes a paralympian, Hatam Zakut, who says:
“We consider ourselves representatives of all disabled athletes in Gaza. Thanks to the Israelis, there are a lot of us.”
Adding to Zaku’s vague charge, Sherwood writes:
“[In fact] tens of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza are disabled as a result of Israeli military operations.”
“Tens of thousands…”?
There is no source provided to back up Sherwood’s outrageous claim, but after doing a bit of research I found an official United Nations report on Operation Cast Lead – the war in Gaza with the most casualties in recent history.
Per the UN report, there were an estimated 600 Palestinians disabled as a result of injuries sustained during Cast Lead.
While no figures seem to be available on the total number of people disabled in Gaza as a result of conflicts with Israel, a report by the Gaza Ministry of Public Works and Housing, in August 2009 (seven months after Cast Lead), placed the total figure of all disabled Palestinians in Gaza – for all reasons – at 19,763.
In fact, the only reference this definitive report makes to Israel is this line on page 2:
“The increasing in injured people due to Israeli continuous aggressions [sic] led to an obvious increase in number of disabled”
So while there are – according to the official agency in Gaza responsible for collating this data – just under twenty thousand disabled Palestinians in total in Gaza, even the Hamas-run ministry does not attempt to quantify the percentage of this total who were disabled due to IDF military actions, let alone make the claim that “tens of thousands” were disabled by Israeli military operations”.
So, where did Harriet Sherwood get this number?
We’ll likely never know.
But this is no minor question.
Harriet Sherwood is the Jerusalem correspondent for one of the more influential liberal English-language broadsheets and what she reports as fact necessarily has an impact on how millions of readers filter the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Most importantly, such reports greatly influence their readers’ degree of moral sympathy towards Jews’ defense of their right to self-determination in a region resistant to this supremely modest aspiration.
The additional moral issue pertains to the very real world impact Sherwood’s reports have on the Arab world – serving to fuel antipathy towards the Jewish state.
Finally, and no less important, Harriet Sherwood is a professional journalist and therefore owes her readers more than hearsay and half-truths.
Even as a blogger – one with unapologetic and transparent pro-Zionist sympathies – I would never make a specific statistical claim without a link leading to a credible source.
It speaks volumes about the Guardian that their reporters are evidently not held accountable to such basic professional standards.
Related articles
- The racism of no expectations: The Palestinians on the pages of the Guardian (A six month review) (cifwatch.com)
- What the Guardian won’t report: Attempted Palestinian kidnapping of Israeli mother & baby (cifwatch.com)
- Harriet Sherwood’s continuing advocacy journalism on behalf of Palestinian terror suspects (cifwatch.com)
- Guardian photo story on Gaza drawings by Palestinian who are children curiously on-message (cifwatch.com)
- Contrary to what The Observer claims, there has not been “relative peace” in Israel (cifwatch.com)
- Suzanne Goldenberg avoids mentioning her Jenin lies at the Guardian Open Weekend (cifwatch.com)
- Harriet Sherwood legitimizes characterization of Israel’s border fences as ‘sign of weakness’ (cifwatch.com)
- Guardian’s biased coverage of terrorist hostilities in Israel’s south: Numbers, headlines and photos (cifwatch.com)
Who are the Palestinians?
If Israelis represent the most obsessively and disproportionately covered national group on the pages of the Guardian, the Palestinians represent their antithesis.
While every conceivable flaw in Israeli society is reported ad nauseam in the news section (and ‘Comment is Free’) there is an egregious dearth of critical coverage of Palestinian politics, culture and society. Instead, the familiar facile moral binarism, which posits Palestinians as victims of Israeli villainy, overwhelmingly frames the coverage.
The questions which are almost never asked by Guardian reporters and commentators include:
- What is the Palestinians’ guiding moral ethos?
- Which political principles and traditions would inform a future Palestinian state?
- If the Palestinians achieve political independence, how will they treat their citizens? Will the state be truly democratic? What rights will be guaranteed for political, religious, ethnic and sexual minorities?
The last six months of coverage of Palestinian society by the Guardian (consistent, it seems, with coverage prior to the period under examination) provides almost no insight into these vital questions.
In short, the Guardian’s Palestinians are abstractions (void of any flaws, nuance or complexity) and protagonists – morally juxtaposed with their Israeli antagonists. The Palestinians never act. They are always acted upon.
The Palestinian page of the Guardian, in 183 stories and commentaries going back six months, from November 22nd 2011 to May 21st 2012, reveals a few patterns:
- Most stories on the ‘Palestinian’ page are merely cross posted from the ‘Israel’ page, and often have little to do with Palestinians, their society, or government. This is especially curious in light of the fact that the overwhelming majority of Palestinians are governed by Palestinians: all of Gaza, and in Areas A (civilly and militarily) and B (civilly) of the West Bank.
- The number of stories or commentaries devoted to critiquing or analyzing government policies in Gaza or the PA: 7 out of 183 (here, here, here, here, here, here, here)
- Number of stories focused on human rights abuses against Palestinians by the governments of Gaza and the PA: 4 out of 183 (here, here, here & here).
- Number of stories about Palestinian antisemitism or other racism/intolerance: 0 out of 183
- Number of stories focused on acts or attempted acts of terrorism against Israelis: 0 out of 183 (In fairness, there were several stories reporting on the barrage of rocket attacks from Gaza in March, but none were framed as terrorists attacks against Israeli civilians as such, and all emphasized Israel’s retaliatory attacks and the resulting Palestinian casualties.)
- Number of stories about Palestinian glorification of terrorists and terrorism: 0 out of 183
In addition to the Guardian’s institutional hostility to Israel, while contextualizing the Guardian over the last two years – and consistent with the results of this review – I have often been struck by their reporters’ stunning lack of intellectual curiosity concerning the actual values, mores, politics, culture, and ethics of living, breathing Palestinians.
The corollary of this professional abdication (their cognitive blind spot) is that such journalists often completely fail to assign to the people living in the Palestinians territories the moral agency generally associated with those deemed as genuine equals.
A more exquisite expression of racism would be difficult to find.
(Note: Here are screen shots of all the headlines, with story captions, in the six-month period covered in this report.)
The Guardian published a photo story, Gaza’s children reveal their hopes and fears, May 11, about drawings by children from the Gaza town of al-Zarqa which are currently on display at the East London Mosque. The show is sponsored by Oxfam GB.
The piece can be found on the Guardian’s ‘Global Development’ page.
The Guardian characterizes the art as an expression of the childrens’ “collective yearning for a clean, safe neighborhood”.
The drawings are accompanied by a quote from the child artist explaining his or her inspiration.
A few of the children were curiously quite on-message.
A Palestinian boy, 11, named Amani explained that the following was motivated by his wish that he no had longer had to “live under occupation.” [emphasis added]
A Palestinian child, eight, named Rouane was responsible for the following drawing and is quoted as explaining: “I’d love to have a cleaner and safe neighborhood and a nice countryside and uninterrupted electricity.”
A Palestinian child named Amal, nine, responsible for the following drawing, complained of life “under siege“.
At the very least it seems improbable th Palestinian children (aged 8 to 11) typically use political vocabulary which, when translated from Arabic to English, just so happens to be exactly the same as what is typically employed by anti-Israel activists.
If there indeed was some “adult interference” in these attributions it wouldn’t be the first time a display of drawings allegedly created by Palestinian children was fraudulent.
Elder of Ziyon posted in 2011 (The fake child artists of Gaza) about another exhibit by Gazan children in the same town (al-Zarqa), documenting their experiences during the Gaza war, which were allegedly culled from art therapy sessions at Gaza children’s centers.
The drawings include one of a bomb painted with American and Israeli flags crashing into a street filled with dead bodies and IDF missiles targeting innocent civilians and destroying a mosque.
As Elder noted, the picture above from the exhibit was clearly based on an image by antisemitic artist Carlos Latuff:
Elder observed:
“[The drawings] look like they were done by adults trying to draw in a childish style. The symbolism, the coloring and the motifs seem, at the very least, to have been heavily prompted by adults.
Kids don’t come up with this stuff on their own.”
Related articles
- Guardian’s biased coverage of terrorist hostilities in Israel’s south: Numbers, headlines and photos (cifwatch.com)
- What the Guardian won’t report: Palestinians continue to laud Itamar Massacre terrorists (cifwatch.com)
- Guardian corrects story with false translation of Noam Shalit interview after his son’s release (cifwatch.com)
- Should the Guardian’s Phoebe Greenwood be sacked? (cifwatch.com)
- ‘Elder of Ziyon’ responds to the Guardian’s Ben White on BDS. (cifwatch.com)
- The relative relevance of a search on the Guardian website (cifwatch.com)
- Should we laugh or cry over Catherine Ashton’s remarks about Toulouse massacre? (cifwatch.com)
Last weekend the tenth ‘Palestinians in Europe’ conference – this year sponsored by Tunisian interim president Monsef Marzouki – was held in Copenhagen. The event was co-organised by the Palestinian Forum in Denmark and the Palestinian Return Centre (PRC) of London which is a permanent organiser of the annual event.
The conference’s president was Majed al Zeer of the PRC and also of the Hamas-linked European Campaign to End the Siege on Gaza (ECESG) which was set up by the Muslim Brotherhood’s European arm in 2007 and takes part in organizing the various flotillas, including the fatal one of 2010.
The Palestinian Return Centre is a Hamas-supporting organization which promotes the ‘right of return’ for Palestinian refugees and is banned in Israel due to its links with a terrorist organisation. Besides its General Director al Zeer, others of its staff are well-known for their anti-Israel activities.
PRC spokesman and chair of trustees Zaher al Birawi recently acted as spokesman for the ‘Global March to Jerusalem’. He has also functioned as spokesman for George Galloway’s ‘Viva Palestina’ convoys, is an official of the Palestinian Forum in Britain and trustee of a UK charity named ‘Education Aid for Palestinians’ which is a member of the Hamas-supporting ‘Union of Good‘.
The PRC’s operational director, Arafat Madi Shoukri, is also connected to the ECESG as well as director of the Brussels-based European parliament lobbying group called the ‘Council for European Palestinian Relations‘. Ghassan Faour – a trustee of the PRC – is also linked to the UK charity ‘Interpal’ which is a member of the ‘Union of Good’. Another PRC trustee Majdi Akeel – a known Hamas activist and also connected to ‘Interpal’– was mentioned in the Holy Land Foundation trial in the US. The PRC’s senior researcher and editor, Daoud Abdallah, is also the director of MEMO and well-known as a signatory of the Istanbul Declaration.
Speakers at the recent conference included former British MP and Minister Clare Short (also a patron of ICHAD UK and an activist with the ECESG, as well as a member of the advisory board of Res Publica) and leader of the Palestinian party ‘al Mubadara’ (aka Palestinian National Initiative) Mustafa Barghouti who was recently involved in the organization of both the ‘Global March to Jerusalem‘ and the ‘Welcome to Palestine’ flytilla.
According to a ‘Union of Good’-linked website:
“The Conference called on the Arab countries and the countries sponsoring Palestinian refugees to improve these refugees’ conditions reminding the Europeans of their historical responsibility for the Palestinian problem, and stressing on the steadfastness and great sacrifices of the Palestinians people to defend their land.
The conference’s organizers also launched an initiative in which many European Communities will take part entitled “the wall and settlements’ removal” and aiming at pressuring “Israel”.
Meanwhile, a number of participants in the conference agreed unanimously on the key issues that must be supported, most importantly opposing the Judaization of AlQuds, the Palestinian prisoners’ issue and the internal situation stating that these issues can be solved only after a Palestinian reconciliation.”
The conference launched a new PR initiative on the subject of Palestinian prisoners, claiming that:
“Thousands of Palestinian and Arab prisoners are deprived of their basic freedom and incarcerated in Israeli prisons, lacking the basic standards required in any jail. They have endured many unjust practises (sic) inflicted by the Israeli government which is violating its own commitment to International law and Charters of Human Rights. These violations are committed with total impunity and International accountability.”
Given some of the recent media coverage on the subject of the Palestinian prisoners’ hunger strike, we may well assume that the campaign is already in full swing.
Related articles
- Jenny Tonge & the Hamas Lobby (cifwatch.com)
- CiF Watch Special Report on extremists behind ‘Global March to Jerusalem’: Pt 2, Europe Chapter (cifwatch.com)
- CiF Watch Special Report: Extremists & terror supporters organizing ‘Global March to Jerusalem’ (cifwatch.com)
- Harriet Sherwood on the Palestinian prisoners’ hunger strike – high on pathos, low on fact. (cifwatch.com)
- CiF Watch Special Report: Latest Assault on Israel’s legitimacy, ‘Air Flotilla 2′, April 15th, 2012 (cifwatch.com)
A CiF Watch reader has alerted us to the fact that on the Guardian website’s search page, entering the word ‘Israel’ brings up the following.
First, we get the “Editor’s picks”, the second of which is a series of five year old films made for the Guardian – about Gaza – and over two years after the Israeli withdrawal from the Strip.
Next come the “Most recent” articles.
After that, the “Most relevant articles matching your search”.
The “most relevant” that the Guardian search facility can come up with is a series of four to six year-old articles?
At the bottom of the search page it says:
“Our search has changed. Let us know what you think.”
Over to you, dear readers.
Related articles
- ‘Comment is Free’ places obituary for Israeli PM’s father on ‘Palestinian Territories’ page. (cifwatch.com)
- Harriet Sherwood promotes the mantra of “death of the peace process”. (cifwatch.com)
- Comment is (apparently far from) Free. (cifwatch.com)
- You may need to read this twice – the Guardian Denies that Jerusalem is Israel’s Capital. (cifwatch.com)
- Racist stereotyping in the Guardian sports section (cifwatch.com)
- What the Guardian won’t report and the influence on perceptions of Israel. (cifwatch.com)
- Israel fires back at Harriet Sherwood over allegations that Palestinian kids were mistreated (cifwatch.com)
- Guardian’s “relative calm” in Israel continues, 130 rockets fired from Gaza in last 30 hours (cifwatch.com)
The article published on CiF Watch yesterday concerning the Co-operative Group’s decision to upgrade its boycott policies towards Israeli firms was, of course, just one of many. Among those also tackling the subject was ‘Elder of Ziyon‘, who – along with ‘Harry’s Place‘ – then became the subject of an article on ‘electronic Intifada’ by BDS groupie and Guardian writer Ben White.
‘The Elder’ responded:
“Ben White, who is apparently a writer specializing in hating Israel, wrote an article in Electronic Intifada criticizing my post pointing out the hypocrisy of the British Co-op boycott of Agrexco, which I noted also effectively hurts the livelihood of most Palestinian Arab farmers. In his critique, White unwittingly shows exactly the hypocrisy that I am talking about.”
Read the rest here.
This is an article I wrote last year about the BDS movement’s targeting of Agrexco and the reality of cooperation between that agricultural export company and Palestinian and Arab Israeli farmers.
In 2010 the government of the Netherlands donated 6 million Euros to two projects designed to “address food security concerns, high unemployment rates as well as to maintain and develop the full economic potential of the Gaza agricultural sector”. However, the Dutch government’s partner in these projects – an NGO known as the Palestinian Agricultural Development Association (PARC) – turns out to be active in the BDS campaign. In January 2011 it issued a press release which included the following statements:
“The last attempt by Agrexco to export to Europe limited quantities of strawberries and flowers from the Gaza Strip, exploiting the illegal Israeli siege of Gaza and the inability of Palestinian farmers there to export except through Agrexco, was aimed at beautifying the image of the Israeli occupation and covering up all its ugly crimes against the Palestinian people, and especially through the ongoing Israeli siege of the steadfasting Gaza Strip.
On this occasion, PARC salutes all activists and international supporters for the BDS campaign and especially our French friends and partners who were able to frustrate the Agrexco attempt to conduct a joint press conference with a few exploited Palestinian producers.”
(Coincidentally, it just so happens that another recipient of funding from the government of the Netherlands is none other than ‘electronic Intifada’.)
As ‘Elder of Ziyon’ correctly points out:
“To see what real Palestinian Arabs want, look at their companies who attend Israeli trade shows and fairs to increase their market. Look at those who visit the ports at Ashdod and Haifa to better understand import/export procedures.”
Related articles
- Ben White BDS letter published on Guardian letters page. (cifwatch.com)
- Hamas Hagaddah? Jewish Voice for Peace & great achievements in Jewish far left self parodies (cifwatch.com)
- Peter Beinart and the Crisis of American Jewish Liberalism (cifwatch.com)
Like this:
Why it should have taken two writers – both Observer ‘chief reporter’ Tracy McVeigh and Guardian Jerusalem correspondent Harriet Sherwood – to put together what is in fact no more than a re-hash of a ‘Boycott Israel Network’ press release is anyone’s guess. But it apparently did, and the result is this so-called article from April 29th on the subject of the Co-operative Group’s decision to boycott not only Israeli firms located over the green line, but also those with any connections to other businesses in those areas.
The section from the BIN press release which McVeigh and Sherwood neglected to include provides background information on how this decision on the part of the Co-op came about.
“The announcement by the Co-op came just before their Regional AGMs, due to take place over the next two weeks, and where motions on this issue have been submitted for discussion. For months Co-op members have been highlighting their concerns about trade with complicit companies through co-ordinated letter-writing and discussions with local offices.”
For those unfamiliar with the Co-op’s structure and the manner in which that lends itself to easy manipulation by pressure groups, here is a brief primer. Anyone over the age of 16 can become a member of the Co-op for £1. Most of those who join do so for the offers, discounts and end of year dividends, but it is also possible for them to set up local members’ groups and the Co-op actually assigns funding to enable their meetings.
The nature and purpose of each local group depends very much upon the members. Some might choose to go in for tasting the supermarket’s new range of wines at their meetings. Others may decide to recruit more new members at a local gala or engage in some kind of charity work. Still others may decide to liaise between the Co-op and the local community on a transition town-style green agenda – for example persuading their local Co-op to abandon the use of plastic bags or recycle food waste as compost.
The local groups send representatives to regional meetings, which in turn send representation to national level meetings. Thus, anyone committed enough to put in the time and effort can promote a specific agenda and influence the Co-op’s operations at both local and national level.
And that is precisely how this latest (and the previous, less far-reaching) boycott decision came about. Around 2008 the Co-op was identified by anti-Israel campaigners – in particular members of the PSC – as a ‘soft’ target. They became members, set up local groups and began pushing their agenda up the ladder. That task was not particularly difficult; the vast majority of Co-op members do not attend meetings and even those who do are often quite relieved to find that someone else is willing to spend time going to regional AGMs.
The project was made even easier by the fact that, unable to compete with Britain’s big supermarket chains on price or quality, the Co-op markets itself as the progressive ‘ethical’ alternative.
Sherwood and McVeigh quote one Hilary Smith in their article, describing her as “Co-op member and Boycott Israel Network (BIN) agricultural trade campaign co-ordinator”. The Boycott Israel Network of course involves itself in far more than just supermarket boycotts.
Smith is also a member of Sheffield PSC and Sheffield BDS and active in the ‘Coordin8‘ lobbying network (her regional organizer is recent failed ‘flytilla’ participant and would-be fixer of online polls Terry Gallogly of York PSC). In 2009 she was to be found addressing students occupying Sheffield University on behalf of Sheffield PSC and is apparently not averse to the libeling of Israel as an ‘apartheid’ state.
In February of this year Smith took part in an ‘Israel Apartheid Week’ event at Sheffield University which also featured a speaker from ‘Who Profits‘, (a ‘Coalition of Women for Peace‘ offshoot) who was described in the promotional material as coming “from Haifa in the occupied territories”. That negation of Israel’s existence is of course an underlying principle of the BDS movement.
In addition to her above activities, Hilary Smith is also a ‘volunteer international coordinator’ for the ‘Free Gaza’ movement ‘. Here she is reporting on a ‘Free Gaza’ speaking tour of the UK. Here she is acting as official contact and spokesperson for UK Free Gaza in 2009. Here she is posting information about the 2010 flotilla on the UK Trade Union movement’s ‘Labournet‘ site and here complaining to the BBC about its coverage of the Mavi Marmara incident and its portrayal of the ‘Free Gaza’ movement. Ahead of the 2008 flotilla organized by ‘Free Gaza’, Smith chaired a press conference held in London.
The participants in one of the 2008 jaunts organized by ‘Free Gaza’ did reach their destination and were received (and presented with medals) by leaders of Hamas, – the terrorist organization designated by the UK government which ‘Free Gaza’ enables and supports.
Activists in the ‘Free Gaza’ movement are very aware of the legal implications of their actions, as this briefing document – seized aboard a ‘Free Gaza’ ship – indicates.
For the source of the above document and more information on the ‘Free Gaza’ movement, its ties to Hamas and other designated terror-connected organizations such as the IHH and its roots in the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), see here.
The management of the Co-operative Group may not be aware that it has in fact been manipulated into this latest boycott move by subscribers to a political campaign which works towards the rather less than ethical ultimate aim of wiping a sovereign country off the map and often collaborates with designated terror organisations in order to do so.
On the other hand, the Co-op might simply not care. After all, this is the same organization which (rather hilariously, given its advertising spiel on ‘ethical banking‘) provides banking services to George Galloway’s ‘Viva Palestina‘ – which is at this very moment on yet another Hamas-supporting road-trip and travelling via Syria, where the incumbent dictator (for whom Galloway has such admiration) is still slaughtering civilians in their thousands.
This new boycott move by the Co-operative Group should actually be seen as very useful on a number of fronts.
It exposes the way in which it is laughably easy for very small numbers of energetic activists to dictate the agendas of large organizations in the UK. We have seen it happen in British churches, universities and trade unions – now it is the turn of the co-operative movement.
It also points a spotlight on the discrepancies between the ‘ethical’ image the Co-op likes to project for PR purposes and its actual practice. Let’s face it; the £350,000 worth of trade affected by this boycott is negligible (barely the price of a modest Tel Aviv apartment), but the move does highlight once again how the Co-op is apparently willing to overlook the terror-sympathetic connections (and real aims) of clients and campaigning members in order to curry favor with a perceived ’progressive’ client base.
The move also serves to highlight the manner in which UK-based anti-Israel campaigners have in the last decade or so managed to bring their message into the mainstream at local levels. Using letters to local newspapers, occasional PSC or ‘Friends of Palestine’ stalls and demonstrations, co-opting the support of churches and various specific interest groups, they have ensured that although the vast majority of the population understands little or nothing about the Arab-Israeli conflict, many are nonetheless convinced that they are capable of making ethical judgments about it.
Of course most British citizens will find this move by the Co-op somewhat less than ethical, if not downright abhorrent. The good news is that due to the company’s structure, they can do something about it by using exactly the same methods as employed by BDS activists in order to reverse the agenda.
Related articles
- Harriet Sherwood on the Palestinian prisoners’ hunger strike – high on pathos, low on fact. (cifwatch.com)
- Feeble reasons not to boycott the Guardian (cifwatch.com)
Like this:
On April 16th 2001 the first Hamas-orchestrated rocket attack from Gaza took place. In the eleven years since then, the one million civilians living within the range of fire have suffered over 12,700 additional rocket and mortar attacks. Forty four people have been killed and over 1,600 injured.
An estimated 55% of the residents of the southern Israeli town of Sderot – located less than a mile from the Gaza Strip – have suffered either physical or mental injury as a result of the rocket attacks. 86% of children between the ages of 12 and 14 suffer from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. One in 24 of the town’s residents receive psychiatric care due to trauma stemming from the attacks.
When the ‘Colour Red’ warning of an incoming rocket sounds, Sderot’s residents have 15 seconds in which to take cover in one of the town’s fortified bus stops, fortified schools, fortified playgrounds or in the nearest air-raid shelter or safe room.
At intermittent junctures throughout the past eleven years, the UN has “urged” Hamas to stop firing rockets and called the attacks “unacceptable“. The EU has occasionally “condemned” them and Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have defined the rocket attacks on civilians as war crimes.
And yet, despite these platitudes, UN bodies host Hamas representatives and the EU allows various Hamas-linked lobbying groups to operate on its premises and take its MEPs on trips to Gaza. European MEPs have even participated in Hamas-run anti-Israel publicity stunts and the European Parliament was quick to endorse the Goldstone Report which managed to largely avoid dealing with the highly significant aspect of Operation Cast Lead which is Hamas attacks on Israeli civilians. Amnesty International, meanwhile, continues its flirtation with the most hard-core of Hamas supporters.
It is often said that no other country besides Israel would put up with 12,700 rocket attacks on its civilians and that may very well be true. Eleven years on, there are now thousands of Israeli children who have never known life without the 15 second run to the nearest bomb-shelter as part of their daily routine.
The UN, EU and Human Rights community bodies which aid and abet the mainstreaming of extremism and terror by collaborating with Hamas and its supporters are ensuring that many more Israeli children will have their lives shattered too.
Like this:
If, by any chance, you’ve been wondering what sort of people will be taking part in next Sunday’s ‘Air Flotilla 2‘, then here’s an opportunity to meet three of the delegation from Greater Manchester. All three are connected to the Manchester Palestine Solidarity Campaign.
This is also an opportunity to record the number of typical anti-Israel campaigner buzz words such as ‘ghettoised’, ‘ethnic cleansing’, ‘apartheid wall’ or ‘total siege’, along with the number of downright lies such as ‘Israel steals Palestinian water and sells it back to them’ or ‘no access to health-care’ which can be squeezed into just under 12 minutes.
Norma Turner is an advocate of the ‘right of return‘ , a campaigner for ‘Stop the JNF‘ and a promoter of BDS, having apparently attended the 2009 ‘Gaza Freedom March’ meeting which produced the Cairo Declaration. She is on record as agreeing with Ken O’Keefe’s claim that Israel was behind the murder of Vittorio Arrigoni and was one of the Manchester PSC members who showed up to bat for Caryl Churchill’s anti-Semitic play ’7 Jewish Children’ at the Octagon Theatre in Bolton in 2009.
Despite the claims by the ‘Air Flotilla 2′ organisers and participants that Palestinians cannot receive visitors, Turner appears to have travelled to Palestinian-controlled areas on at least three separate occasions, including a visit to Gaza as a member of a ‘Viva Palestina’ convoy.
The Manchester PSC organized a ‘Naqba Day’ demonstration outside the BBC building on Oxford Road last year.
“The group members said that that there was no particular reason why they held the rally outside the BBC, but they felt that the BBC did not present the Palestinian side of the debate as often as the Israeli side.
Criticisms of Nakba Day claim that it is marked by Palestinians to celebrate their alleged wishes for the dismantling of the Israeli state and the Jewish population.
Linda Clare, chair of the MPSC, claimed that this was not true at all.
She said: “What we want to see the end of is the Zionist state – you can’t be democratic and then say the country is for one group of people only.”
Norma Turner, 60, who is also a member, said: “We are not calling for the destruction of the Israeli people. People should live together and there should be peace and justice.”
The same BBC studios were also targeted by the Manchester PSC – and Norma Turner – in 2010 following the Mavi Marmara incident.
“Police were forced to secure the entrance to the BBC building on Oxford Road as anti-Israeli protesters tried to storm their way inside. Several arrests were made and windows were smashed. One protester attached a Palestinian flag to a BBC flagpole on the reception area’s roof during the demonstration. He was later led away by police. Oxford Road was closed and police dogs were brought in to control huge crowds. Protesters surged forward and attempted to smash through glass doors leading into the building. They were kept back by lines of police officers inside.
Palestinian support groups marched through the streets carrying placards and banners reading ‘Stop the massacre’ and ‘Free Gaza’. Norma Turner, from the Manchester Palestine Solidarity Committee, said: “This was an act of piracy. They went in to kill people and they know they can get away with it. “It’s time Israel was brought to book.”
Sandy Broadhurst from Stockport is a former member of the Labour party who quit due to being “enraged by the Iraq war”.
“It’s left quite a big hole in my life,” she says. “I go to [George Galloway's] Respect Coalition meetings now, but I’m not a member. I’m not sure they even have members. And I belong to groups such as Palestinian Solidarity, the anti-fascist people, stuff like that. But it’s not really filling the gap. ”
Naturally, Broadhurst is also a supporter of BDS in its variety of forms and locations.
Pia Feig put her name to the ‘who’s who’ list of anti-Zionist British Jews who wrote to the Guardian in 2008 protesting Israel’s 60th anniversary. She is, of course, a member of ‘Jews for Justice for Palestinians’.
Commiserations to anyone who happens to be scheduled to fly from Manchester to Tel Aviv on Jet2 flight LS907 at 10 a.m. next Sunday morning.
Related articles
- Israeli Jews characterized as Nazis on the ‘Air Flotilla 2′ Facebook account (cifwatch.com)
- CiF Watch Special Report: Latest Assault on Israel’s legitimacy, ‘Air Flotilla 2′, April 15th, 2012 (cifwatch.com)
Like this:
Khulood Badawi is a UN representative and a partisan activist who published a picture of a child who was killed in an accident in 2006 as “another child killed by #Israel…another father carrying his child to a grave” during the latest escalation between Gaza and Israel.
She and other retweeters at the UN were informed of the mistake on the same day.
It took her 8 days to make a “correction” of sorts while stating that these were her personal views and not related to her work. This puts Badawi in violation of articles 100 & 101 of the UN charter (objectivity and non-partisanship of UN employees).
And, she still has not apologized for making a “mistake”.
People to contact:
Richard Miron: Chief Public Information Officer – mironr@un.org
Ramesh Rajasingham: Head OCHA – rajasingham@un.org
Or sign a petition here: http://t.co/jlrI4b8z
Related articles
- EXPOSED: UN Media Official Responsible for False Photo Tweet (cifwatch.com)
- Israeli ambassador: Fire UN fake Gaza pic tweeter (thejc.com)
- Anti-Israel tweeters post fake photo of Gaza wounded (thejc.com)
In the eight stories (and one commentary) the Guardian published about last week’s terrorist violence from Gaza, all but one accompanying photo depicted Palestinian suffering, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of those killed in Gaza were Islamic Jihad or Popular Resistance Committee terrorists (and all of those targeted by Gaza terrorists were Israeli civilians).
So, here are some photos depicting the real life consequences (of terrorist violence which began on March 9) on Israeli communities within range of Gaza rocket attacks - images of towns under siege not seen at the Guardian.
Gaza terrorist assaults on communities injured over a dozen Israeli civilians, forced hundreds of thousands into bomb shelters, and closed schools for up to a week.
South of Ashdod, children take cover in a concrete pipe/shelter as incoming Palestinian rockets seek their targets.
Iranian made Grad rocket hits Netivot, March 14
Young Israeli girl takes cover in Beer Sheba after rocket siren sounds
The Reuters caption reads: "An Israeli girl looks for steel ball bearings on a wall of a school in the southern city of Beersheba, after it was damaged by a rocket fired by Palestinian militants in Gaza March 11, 2012. "
A woman and child in Ofakim, Israel covers to protect against Gaza rockets
Israeli teens in Nitzana taking shelter in a sewage pipe
An Israeli man looks out of a window after a rocket attack from Gaza, March 12
Ashdod, Israel - March12: Israeli woman evacuated after rocket attack from Gaza
Ashdod, Israel, March 12: Israeli schoolgirls take cover next to bus during a rocket attack
Thai worker, injured when rockets fired from Gaza into Israel hit the area of Eshkol, is brought into the Soroka hospital March 9
Also, here’s a short compilation of rocket attacks on Israeli communities, filmed by civilians during the first few days of hostilities.
Meanwhile, Palestinian Islamic Jihad has claimed victory, per this official PIJ poster: (H/T Challah Hu Akbar)
Related articles
- Rocket attacks on Israel, and reporters without borders (of integrity) (cifwatch.com)
- Photos of Islamic Jihad Terrorists killed by IDF (Challah Hu Akbar)
- Guardian’s “relative calm” in Israel continues, 130 rockets fired from Gaza in last 30 hours (cifwatch.com)
- Guardian’s biased coverage of terrorist hostilities in Israel’s south: Numbers, headlines and photos (cifwatch.com)
Like this:
H/T Mark
The first indication that the essay by Tareq Baconi, “Hamas is making a tactical appeal to the grassroots“, CiF, March 8, was going to represent yet another example of a Guardian whitewash of a terrorist group committed to the Jewish state’s destruction was the accompanying photo.
The beloved Ismail Haniyeh, a true man of the people.
But, it gets much worse.
Baconi writes:
Hamas officials have said that in the event of a war between Iran and Israel, they will not become involved on Tehran’s side.
Historically, Hamas has always gone to great lengths to assert its independence from any foreign influence. It is widely recognised that it receives support from powers such as Syria (until recently) and Iran. Yet this has never been worn as a badge of honour by the movement.
Rather, its leadership has consistently asserted that the movement cannot be influenced or directed by any external power. It has insisted that it charts its course based on the will of the people – in stark contrast to Fatah and its leadership, who have frequently been portrayed as the pawns of western powers and Israel.
Hamas: Authentic, boldly asserting its independence from imperial powers while engaging in terrorism.
Fatah: A pawn of the U.S. and Israel.
Baconi continues:
Hamas, which governs Gaza, is also territorialised, limiting its resistance to historic Palestine.… Unlike the Palestine Liberation Organisation…Hamas has rarely if ever meddled in regional or global affairs, either rhetorically or through acts of resistance.
[and has] limited its war to a well-defined battle: that of liberating Palestine from “Zionist occupation”.
At a time when people at the grassroots are calling the shots across the region, Hamas is prudently differentiating itself from other regimes and parties by visibly siding with the people.
This is not a new concept for Hamas, since it has always derived its legitimacy and popularity from Palestinians [emphasis added]
Please read the above passages over.
The euphemisms are meant to communicate the following:
- Hamas, unlike the more moderate Fatah, is not guilty of cravenly being influence by Western powers, charts its own path, determined by the will of the Palestinian people.
- As such, Hamas limits its terrorist attacks by targeting merely Israeli civilians (those living anywhere in pre or post 1967 borders): The murder of innocent Jewish men, women and children in Israel as an act of restraint.
Yes, “resistance” means murderous terror attacks.
Yes, “historic Palestine” means the entire nation of Israel.
And, yes, ‘Comment is Free’ published a commentary suggesting that brutal terrorist attacks against Israelis are consistent with the responsible and admirable behavior of a legitimate “resistance” movement.
Related articles
- The anti-Zionist malice of ‘Comment is Free’ contributor Mya Guarnieri (cifwatch.com)
- Hamas, Harriet Sherwood and the Guardian Left’s continuing antisemitic sins of omission (cifwatch.com)
- Fatah arrests 8 Hamas members. Israel arrests 1. Which do you think Harriet Sherwood reported? (cifwatch.com)
- The Guardian’s Phoebe Greenwood promotes the new kinder, gentler, peaceful Hamas (cifwatch.com)
- Jenny Tonge & the Hamas Lobby (cifwatch.com)
- Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh announcing Global March to Jerusalem (cifwatch.com)
- Rocket attacks on Israel, and reporters without borders (of integrity) (cifwatch.com)
- Guardian’s biased coverage of terrorist hostilities in Israel’s south: Numbers, headlines and photos (cifwatch.com)
- Fascinating Twitter exchange between Guardian’s Seumas Milne & Hamas member Azzam Tamimi (cifwatch.com)
- Guardian moral equivalence watch: Iran edition (cifwatch.com)
- Hamas’s immutable malice towards Jews that the Guardian won’t report (cifwatch.com)
Hawkeye
Omar2
WellofSense
Medusa
The Alchemist
Louise
Tosca
Maimon
Telling the Truth
Israelinurse
Adam Levick
Margie in Tel Aviv
Guest/Cross Post
Hadar Sela
Overview of Guardian coverage of Israel: April 30th to May 27th 2012.
May 27, 2012 in Comments which are off-topic, ad hominem, racist, vulgar or include threats of violence will be deleted | Tags: BDS, Boycott, Comment is Free, Delegitimization, Distortion, Gaza, Guardian, Iran, Israel, Terrorism | by Hadar Sela | 1 comment
Last month we published a review of the Guardian’s coverage of events in Israel during April, highlighting the subjects it chose to address and – no less important – those it did not. Several readers suggested that this should become a regular exercise, so here is a breakdown of the subjects tackled during the period from April 30th to May 27th 2012.
During that four-week period, 58 articles appeared on the ‘Israel’ page of the World News section on the Guardian’s website. Two of those actually appear twice, so in fact we are addressing 56 articles, eleven of which also appeared on the ‘Israel’ page of ‘Comment is Free’.
Three items dealt with the subject of boycotts against Israeli targets whilst three others were obituaries. One article pertained to literature and one other was a video report in Jon Ronson’s series about ‘astroturfing’.
Six articles dealt with the Iranian nuclear issue and two pertained to the subject of the British government’s reaction to a hypothetical Israeli military strike on Iran.
Two articles speculating about early elections in Israel were followed by five articles about the Kadima party’s joining the coalition government.
One article contained archive material concerning the Manchester Guardian’s coverage of Israel’s declaration of Independence in 1948 whilst four items dealt with the subject of events on Nakba Day 2012. Five articles were published on the subject of the Palestinian prisoners on hunger strike whilst a further four dealt with subjects which can be classified as carrying a theme of ‘Israeli authorities against Palestinians’.
Two articles were connected to the subject of the Olympics – one concerning the IOC refusal to mark the Munich terror attack and the other about disabled Palestinian Olympians. Two items related to the Israeli TV series ‘Hatufim’ – one of which still carries the spelling mistake “Israeil” in its by-line.
Four articles (three of which appeared on the same day) were about the subject of illegal migrants in Israel, one dealt with the subject of the Mavi Marmara flotilla and potential compensation arrangements and two articles can be classified as relating to ‘settlements’ or ‘settlers’.
Six items appearing on the ‘Israel’ page have little if any connection to Israel, including one about the Hamas clamp-down on the ‘Palfest’ event in Gaza, one about Palestinian Authority actions against Palestinian journalists, one about human rights in Bahrain and another concerning Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
So what did the Guardian choose not to report during the same period of time? A partial list includes the following:
On April 30th a rocket fired from the Gaza Strip fell near the town of Sderot. (source)
On May 1st shots were fired from the Gaza Strip at Israeli soldiers engaged in routine activities on the Israeli side of the border fence. During the week May 2nd to May 8th, two rockets and one mortar fired from Gaza hit the western Negev.(source)
On May 3rd, two Palestinians carrying knives and explosives were arrested at Tapuach Junction. Later the same night, a Palestinian carrying a knife tried to infiltrate the village of Elon Moreh.
On May 7th, Israeli soldiers thwarted an attempt to smuggle weapons through the Kalandia checkpoint. On the same day, a Palestinian carrying three pipe bombs was apprehended near Tapuach Junction.
During the week May 9th to May 15th, one rocket fired from the Gaza Strip hit the western Negev. On May 10th Egyptian security forces apprehended three vehicles containing weapons – including 40 anti-tank missiles – being smuggled from Libya. (source)
Also on May 10th, two Palestinians carrying pipe bombs and fire bombs were arrested by the Border Police near Tapuach Junction.
On May 20th a Palestinian tried to stab a soldier at a roadblock. During the preceding month, three Israeli civilians were wounded in stabbing attacks. Information concerning the apprehension of a Ramallah area based terror cell which planned to abduct Israeli civilians was made public, including details of attempted kidnappings:
“During March 2012 the cell tried to abduct an Israeli several times:
(source)
In addition, incidents of rock-throwing at Israeli vehicles continued throughout the month.
As we saw in the previous review, the Guardian’s coverage of Israel goes out of its way to avoid any mention of the daily threats posed to Israeli civilians. Whilst Guardian readers world-wide may now be familiar with the TV drama ‘Hatufim’ the paper does not inform them about real-life attempts to kidnap Israelis. The same readers now know all about the Palestinian prisoners’ hunger strike, but little or nothing about the type of ongoing terror activities which lead to the arrests of Palestinians. Whilst the subject of building in towns and villages beyond the ‘green line’ is covered, an attempt by an armed Palestinian to infiltrate one of those villages is ignored.
Once again, the Israel-related news which Guardian editors elect to avoid telling their readers is no less significant than the stories they do choose to tell.
Share this:
Like this: