Monday, July 10, 2023
From Ian:
David Collier: The BBC blood libel and the shame of a biased media
David Collier: The BBC blood libel and the shame of a biased media
The terrorist recruitment of minorsThe Biden Administration's Anti-Semitism Blindspot
For decades intelligence services and governments in the west have been fully aware that radical Islamic terror groups recruit children (under 18 years of age). From Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan to the Afghani Shia Fatemiyoun Brigade, hundreds of Islamic forces across the globe bolster their numbers and capabilities by using children.
The recruitment can have devastating results, especially as potential victims may be less suspicious when a child approaches. Here are some recent attacks carried out by young terrorists against Israelis:
March 2023 – Muhammad Bassel Fathi Zalbani, 13 years old. Killed a security guard.
February 2023 – Jaffar Matour, 14 years old. Stabbed 17-year-old Israeli child.
January 2023 – Mahmoud Muhammad Aliwat, 13 yearsold. Shot and wounded two Israelis in Jerusalem.
The list above contains just a few recent examples. In 2015/6 many of the attackers in the ‘Knife Intifada’ were minors, and minors-as suicide-bombers were used dozens of times during the second Intifada. For example, on 1 November 2004, a 16-year-old terrorist killed three Israelis and wounded 30 when in the middle of the crowded Carmel Market in Tel Aviv, he detonated the suicide vest he was wearing underneath his clothes.
BBC and the skewing of news
The BBC, like all western media, is fully aware of the truth. Yet what we witness when it comes to reporting on Israel is a reversal of causality. When children die waving the flag of ISIS, Al Qaeda or Boko Haram, the BBC always points the finger of blame at the recruiting terrorist groups. When a Palestinian terrorist is a minor, the BBC points the finger of blame at Israel. Instead of blaming the terrorist groups for the recruitment and indoctrination of children, the BBC ask the question ‘what has Israel done to make this child so desperate’? And ONLY when it comes to Israel, do the media organisations (the BBC is far from alone in this) use this line.
This is part of a 2015 report from the BBC that discusses an attack on ISIL by the French which killed 12 children. Nowhere in the article is there any criticism of the French forces at all. Rather the opposite is true. The entire article focuses on how awful ISIS is for indoctrinating children.
This next BBC report is about a recent attack by US forces against Al Shabab terrorists that killed 30 terrorists. It does not mention the issue of age anywhere. Yet we know that Al-Shabab’s recruitment campaign is dependent on the indoctrination of children – even opening their own schools to maintain a steady supply. 10,000s of children have been recruited – which makes it highly likely that terrorists under the age of 18 were killed in the attack. It seems the BBC journalist did not care about this issue at all when writing this report:
And in a 2017 BBC article that reports on 1300 ‘militants’ killed by UK forces in just 12 months, there is also no mention at all by the journalist of the fact that children were undoubtedly some of the many victims.
There seems to be a simple rule. If child terrorists die in attacks carried out by US, UK or French forces, it is the fault of the terrorist groups that recruited them. If Israel is involved – then it is not just Israel’s fault, but it is also in some way ‘deliberate’.
The BBC mindset
On November 29 2021, a group of Jewish youth were celebrating the first night of Chanukah on Oxford Street in London, when they were attacked by a group of Muslim antisemites. The BBC report on the incident invented an ‘anti-Muslim slur’ in order to blame the Jewish victims.
These two incidents, the invented Muslim slur, and the more recent ‘happy to kill children’ comment are not accidents. They emerge from a mindset within the BBC that sees the conflict in a very skewed way. On the ground, BBC News and BBC Arabic share the same offices in Jerusalem. The BBC Journalists – like most journalists in Israel, become entirely reliant on Arab runners and fixers – who are in turn an embedded part of the Palestinian propaganda machine. Instead of impartial reporting, over time these correspondents become little more than mouthpieces for Palestinian lies.
Today we seem to be in an unacceptable position of accepting the bias as ‘the norm’ and only complaining when it crosses the line in to blatant antisemitism. At no point has the British Jewish community signalled to our communal bodies that this is an acceptable approach.
Reproach of Israel is not criticism but blame—blame for the aggression against it. Anti-Semitism is the strategy of the pointing finger that keeps negative attention focused on the misdeeds of the Jews and their homeland. Jewish apologetics in the face of such assaults have always been reprehensible, but these American Jews are not asking to be kicked themselves: they are inviting Americans to join them in condemning the Jews of Israel. “Please go on pointing the finger away from us and at the Jews over there and we will excuse you, defend you, lend you support.” The corruptions of exile have reach new heights when this happens in the freest society the Jewish Diaspora has ever known.The Egyptian story reminds us how quickly things can change
With anti-Zionism now receding in some of its places of origin while rising in Western democracies, it is good that the White House has outlined a counter-strategy. However, the NSCA does not address the obvious sources, political agents, financial supporters, and ideological carriers of anti-Zionism. Indeed, rather than calling out organizations like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) for fomenting anti-Zionism, it includes them among those expected to implement the strategy, and it supports initiatives that create “a sense of community” among the diversity-equity-inclusion coalitions that have joined together in the past to assail the Jews. The inclusion of CAIR in particular, known as a group with ties to Hamas, systematically engaged in promoting anti-Israel politics, shows how far the administration had to go to accommodate the anti-Jewish elements among its supporters. Whereas President Roosevelt faced the opposition of both parties, today’s anti-Zionism is ideologically centered on the left. The Biden team faces headwinds because, as British author Melanie Phillips observes, “the progressive world to which they belong are themselves the problem.”
Defenders of the administration will no doubt point out that the strategy mentions Israel ten times, that it makes clear that “efforts to delegitimize the state of Israel” should be considered anti-Semitism, that it states bluntly that “the United States has embraced” the IHRA definition, and that American Jews should be grateful we have a government willing to take any steps at all. I have already made clear that the “embrace” of the IHRA definition is effectively undone by the “appreciation” of the Nexus document. So far as the administration’s consideration of anti-Israelism is concerned, it does, to its credit, acknowledge forthrightly that Jews are persecuted “often because of real or perceived views about the state of Israel.” But a closer look at the two key passages shows us something more worrisome:
Although anti-Semitism remains a pernicious global problem, the scope of this national strategy is domestic. The strategy is focused on countering the threat and manifestations of anti-Semitism in the United States of America. The U.S. government, led by the Department of State, will continue to combat anti-Semitism abroad and in international fora—including efforts to delegitimize the state of Israel.
All this is well and good, except that nowhere does the text make any suggestion that the government will take any steps to combat delegitimization of Israel domestically. In effect, it farms out the fight against the greatest source of contemporary anti-Semitism to the State Department, while tacitly committing not to do anything about it domestically.
Worse still is the following: “when Israel is singled out because of anti-Jewish hatred, that is anti-Semitism.” This clause was tellingly cited by both Kamala Harris and an unnamed administration official (interviewed by Jewish Insider) when asked if the White House strategy pays sufficient attention to the issue of Israel. Read carefully: singling out Israel only amounts to anti-Semitism when it is motivated by hatred of Jews. But it is usually impossible to determine anyone’s motivation, especially when discussing irrational animus. According to this logic, a person can speak and write obsessively about the Jewish state’s imagined evils, accuse it of the most fantastical crimes, and argue that it is the demonic source of all the world’s ills—but, so long as he doesn’t slip and admit that he possesses a general hatred of Jews, he is in the clear. As with the Nexus Document, the White House strategy provides pre-approved excuses for the Jews’ most pernicious enemies.
Most ominously, one fears that the NSCA may be a cover for actions that endanger Israel. One of the simplest ways the Biden White House could combat anti-Semitism would be to invite Benjamin Netanyahu as the newly elected and longest-serving prime minister of Israel for an official visit—without punitive conditions. The democratic leader of the Jewish state is the political protector of the Jewish people and Israel is the most reliable American ally in the Middle East. Such a visit could have been the cornerstone of any genuine attempt to stem the war against the Jews, a message that America gives no sanction or assistance to anti-Zionism, and the president’s failure to arrange it speaks much louder than ten pages of national strategy.
Iran declares its unambiguous intention of creating a nuclear bomb to eliminate Israel and to add its menace to those of China, Russia, and North Korea. Yet the Biden administration is once again eagerly approaching Tehran, and is said to be about to unfreeze billions in Iranian assets in hopes of making a deal. Its attempt to circumvent the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act that requires prior submission to Congress for any such negotiation is already facing opposition from Republicans and parts of the media. Buying off the Jews with the NSCA is a cheap way of preventing their opposition to a deal with today’s genocidal schemers.
Without questioning the good intentions of many who crafted the counter-anti-Semitism plan, they do more harm than good if they do not honestly confront the evil strategies of those ranged against the Jews. This initiative advertises its strenuous effort while giving the aggressors every sign of acquiescence. The Evian precedent warns that appeasement is transparent to all but those willing to be deceived.
America and the Jews face myriad challenges. There are white supremacist groups and lone shooters who go after Jews and other minorities. Racism, homelessness, poverty, the “breakdown” of society, all call for redress. But those who organize grievance against the Jews are usually after a larger political conquest, using Jews as the pretext to bring down democracy. This is what the National Strategy should be marshaling federal power to prevent; but instead, it does nothing to deter these enemies of America and its Jewish citizens. Roosevelt’s America missed the danger signs. Biden’s America risks the same threat—to itself.
It’s an all-too-familiar story for Jews, that a community of 100,000 mostly fled within a 10-year period, and can today be counted on one hand.
My parents considered themselves fully Egyptian growing up. They spoke Arabic natively and had generations of ancestors buried there. Jews were accepted and even embraced. My mother’s father led the design and construction of Egypt’s power grid. My father’s father was a top statistician for the census bureau. Both worked in an office building, still there, on Cairo’s famous Tahrir Square.
Zionism and Israel’s birth created some tensions but it did not alter the fundamental acceptance of Jews as Egyptians. But when Gamal Nasser came to power in 1952, via a coup, everything changed. To him, Jews were foreigners. Businesses were confiscated, Jews were barred from many jobs and schools. After the 1956 war with Israel, many were jailed, accused of treason or spying, and expelled. My uncle was a medical student in France, and received a letter one day that his Egyptian passport and citizenship were invalidated.
With no future, Jews started leaving en masse. During the 1967 Six-Day war, the few remaining Jews were arrested, thrown in prison camps and mistreated, sealing the fate of a 2000-year- old community. By the time a peace treaty with Israel was signed, promising to improve treatment of Jews, it was too late.
The Egyptian Jewish community was incredibly diverse and historic. It included the most prominent community of Karaites, a once numerous sect that despite some theological disagreement with “Rabbanite” Judaism, has a rich and fascinating scholarly history.
My parents thought they would never come back, but I was proud to be there with them, along with my two brothers and one niece, for this restoration and dedication of the Karaite synagogue and cemetery. No one has any illusion about a revival of Jewish life here, at least anytime soon. But still, this was a chance for them to preserve a small piece for the future. A chance to tell part of the story of Jews living in Egypt for 2,000 years.
As an American Jew I am incredibly lucky to live in a place that by-and-large accepts me. But the Egyptian Jewish story is yet another reminder of how quickly that can change. And with anti-semitism rising, it’s a reminder that we should not dismiss it, because our Jewish acceptance in the US can disappear far more quickly than we’d like to believe.
.jpg)
