The Oldest Hatred is back with a Vengeance

 The oldest hatred is back, and I am absolutely done with this [and I should] get angry and then get angrier.

Andrew Fox April 20th

 

I am done pulling punches. This will not be an easy read. Do not look away.

[To  hell with] this. I am furious at the antisemitism pouring through the West, confident and shameless, and at those who know it is wrong, yet sit by and let it happen and say or do absolutely nothing.

In Britain, we have already had Jews and their security guards stabbed to death. Jewish ambulances were set on fire. Now we have had multiple synagogue fire bombings in London. I woke this morning to a WhatsApp message from a Jewish friend I treasure, telling me about the latest atrocity against British Jews. I am sick of this. I am sickened by it, and I do not understand how anyone with any decency is not sickened too. Why are we not angrier?

Jewish people are being forced to answer, again, for every accusation, every fantasy, every blood libel hurled at the State of Israel. A Jewish student in London, Paris, New York or Melbourne is treated as if they sat in the Israeli war cabinet. A synagogue is treated as if it were a military installation. A kosher restaurant becomes a proxy battlefield. A Jewish child in a school uniform is expected to carry the moral weight of a war they did not start, a government they did not elect, and a region most of their accusers could not find on a map without help. It is grotesque. It is ancient hatred with new slogans. I am angry, and you should be too. If you are reading this, why [the hell] are you not angrier?

Holocaust survivors have told me in person that the atmosphere in Britain today is like 1930s Germany. Why will our leaders, our government, our legal system not listen to them? The Holocaust did not arrive fully formed. It started with demonisation, isolation and undeserved blame.

[It’s Time to Wake Up].

The blood libels are back. They have just been laundered through the language of activism, human rights and moral urgency. Jews are again cast as uniquely cruel, uniquely conspiratorial, uniquely bloodthirsty. Israel is accused not merely of error, not merely of brutality, not merely of war, but of metaphysical evil. Every casualty is flattened into proof of Jewish depravity. Every complexity is erased. Every Hamas or Hezbollah or Iranian atrocity is contextualised into mist. Jewish grief is interrogated. Jewish fear is mocked. Jewish self-defence is treated as criminal.

The most sickening expression of this is the obscene inversion of the Holocaust in Gaza. Gaza is not the Holocaust. Gaza is not Auschwitz. Gaza is not Treblinka. Gaza is not the industrialised, continent-wide mechanical attempt to exterminate an entire people. Gaza is not the murder of six million people because they were Jews. Gaza is not children selected for gas chambers, families shot into pits, communities erased from Europe, nor names turned to ash. To compare the war in Gaza to the attempted extermination of the Jewish race is an obscene desecration. There is no parallel. None whatsoever.

Civilian suffering in Gaza or Lebanon is simply a feature of [a terrorist organization that went to] war. It can be real without turning Jews into Nazis. War can be horrific without becoming the Shoah. Palestinians can be mourned without stealing the language of Jewish annihilation and weaponising it against Jews. The Holocaust is not a metaphor for anyone’s rhetorical convenience. It was a specific crime, committed against a specific people, at a specific scale, with a specific ideological purpose: the eradication of Jews from the earth. To invert it against Jews now is morally obscene.

Everyone in the West should stand with their Jewish neighbours. They should stand with Jews because Jews are being threatened, harassed, isolated and collectively blamed for the actions of a state. They should stand with Jews because history has already shown us where this road leads when decent people find a thousand elegant reasons to look away.

Silence is permission. When Jewish schools need guards, when students hide Stars of David, when families wonder whether it is safe to walk to synagogue, and when mobs chant slogans that make Jews feel hunted in the cities they call home, when Jewish ambulances and places of worship are being firebombed, the moral test is not complicated. Stand with Jews, or admit that your principles are worth piss in the wind.

The absence of solidarity is a stain. The refusal to name antisemitism because it wears a fashionable political mask is a stain. The cowardice of institutions, politicians, universities and cultural figures who can identify every hatred except this one is a stain.

What the [bloody hell] are we doing, Britain? Why are we not angrier? Why are we not forming human shields around our Jewish community? Our grandparents fought a global war so that this could never happen again. It is literally happening again, and we are standing by and doing absolutely nothing.

I am angry because Jews should not have to beg for support. Jews should not feel they have to thank someone merely for showing solidarity with them. I am raging because “Never Again” has become a slogan people applaud, yet it fails when courage is demanded. I am angry because standing by Jews is the only right option, and too many otherwise good, decent people are choosing silence, disregard or antipathy.

Look: I cannot say this anymore simply. Once they are done with the Jews, they are coming for you, too. Get [really] angry before it is too late, if not for the Jews, then for yourselves and your children

Rattling Israel's BBC Tormentors

 Video Of The Week - BBC'S "Blood Libel" https://tinyurl.com/9urahnes   

 Melanie Phillips April 21st 2021

 For the full Article go to - https://tinyurl.com/ed9vrvfw

 A reliable sign that someone has managed to puncture one of the BBC’s doctrinal falsehoods is when an interviewer is sufficiently rattled to keep interrupting.

 These theatrics occurred last evening on BBC TV’s Newsnight, when anchor Emily Maitlis grilled Tzipi Hotovely, Israel’s new ambassador to the UK.Hotovely,  is highly controversial because of her profile as an Israeli religious nationalist.

 The Newsnight item was ostensibly about what Britain might learn from Israel’s “green” vaccination passport.Maitlis noted concerns that the introduction of a British vaccination passport might widen social divisions. Then she said : But in Israel, where the Palestinian population has not been inoculated at anywhere near the rate of the Israeli population, there’s plenty of concern about the passport’s ability to widen the gulf.

 Subsequently noting Israel’s impressive achievement in getting nearly 60 per cent of its population fully vaccinated, she nevertheless added:

…but the roll-out to Palestinian citizens has been much slower at 0.5 per cent.

 Woa! Stop right there! She appeared to be suggesting that Israel was discriminating against its own Arab citizens by vaccinating them at a slower rate. This is totally untrue. Israeli Arabs have been offered the vaccination in exactly the same way as every other Israeli citizen.   Maitlis seemed to be conflating Israeli Arabs, who are Israeli citizens, with Palestinian Arabs who are not Israeli citizens but inhabit those disputed territories beyond Israel. Under the Oslo Accords, their health needs are delivered by the Palestinian Authority.

 Hotovely proceeded to hole other falsehoods below the waterline. She pointed out that the Palestinian Authority hadn’t wanted Israel to provide the Palestinian Arabs with a vaccination programme. The PA had instead wanted to provide it for them itself, and had done just that by purchasing doses of the Russian Sputnik vaccine.

 This unanswerable fact so wrong-footed Maitlis that she pulled out what she presumably believed was her killer point — that six Israeli ultra-leftist NGOs had said Israel had a “legal, moral and ethical” obligation to deliver Covid vaccinations to the Palestinians.

Hotovely kept her cool and responded with the first of her two zingers of the evening. “Let me ask you, Emily,” she said, “would you actually impose getting vaccines [on] the leaders of the Palestinians? Would you actually say [they had to] accept Israeli access and Israeli help? When they’re not interested?”

 Maitlis started to talk over her by robotically intoning “legal, moral and ethical obligation”. Hotoveley,proceeded to drive her point home:

But you’re not answering my question. My question is very simple. Can you impose receiving the vaccine on populations [whose] leadership wants to be in charge of the programme? You’re patronising the Palestinians.

 Maitlis asked:

You’re telling me that the Palestinians didn’t want to take up the vaccinations? Replied Hotovely:

No no, they had their own programme, they bought the Russian vaccine, they had a agreement with the WHO and they wanted to run their own programme and I think we need to respect that. And when they asked for Israel’s help, we were there to help.

With the collapse of that line of attack, Maitlis switched to the presumed awfulness of both Hotovely herself and the State of Israel that she represents.

 So it was that an item on the issue of vaccination passports found it necessary to accuse Israel of having proposed last year to annex up to one-third of the “West Bank”; and to accuse Hotovely, a former “settlements minister”, of being such a right-wing religious extremist that her appointment as ambassador had provoked 2000 liberal British Jews to petition against it. Did she or did she not, demanded Maitlis, support the “two-state solution”? To which Hotovely said how gratified she had been by the warm response to her arrival from the Jewish community, and calmly delivered her second zinger of the evening.

 You cannot speak about a formula when the Palestinians aren’t willing to sit and negotiate with Israel. They’re not interested in any two-state solution.

 From all of which we might make two observations. The first is that this was an impressive debut appearance by Tzipi Hotovely. She remained calm, factual and pleasant while delivering facts that punctured the lies (and which many Brits will not have heard before).The second is that,  the BBC seems to be taking its talking points not just from the Guardian, but also now from extreme-leftist NGOs.

 NEW ,VIEW OUR WEBSITE WWW.BRITISHISRAELGROUP.WEEBLY.COM