Michael White in The Guardian shows his obsession with Israel

This Guardian article by Michael White about how we should or shouldn't react to the attack on Charlie Hebdo contains this section:

'Islam is a prime case in point. The moderate Muslim majority – here and elsewhere – are as horrified by the Paris attack as other decent people. But they must often feel abused by western media. The feeling is shared by beleaguered Christians, who feel their faith is safely mocked in print and on the airwaves by "brave" satirists who might hesitate to do the same to Islam or even Judaism, behind which secular Israeli politicians sometimes take cover.'

Perhaps Michael White could give some examples of satirists who have not satirised Judaism for fear of the response. Perhaps Michael White could give some examples of satirists who have satirised Judaism and in return have been slaughtered by Jews.

I can't think of any examples of the former but I can think of dozens of vilely anti Semitic cartoons that are published around the Muslim world, some of which (or similar) may even be seen in publications freely available on the streets of London. Here are some examples...

First four examples of the anti-Semitic blood libel

Next six examples of Jews / Israel as or equivalent to Nazis

Next some examples of the anti-Semites favourite claim that Jews / Israelis are controlling the world or at least the USA. for many Muslims and anti-Semites The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a factual account

Next four miscellaneous anti-Semitic cartoons

Finally one cartoon, from America, that shows the anti-Semites favourite get-out, anti-Semitism is a false flag operation

Having published these am I scared of attack from Jews?

Would I have something to fear from Islamists if I reprinted Charlie Hebdo's cartoons about Islam?

Funniest Wikipedia remark, re the 'journalist' Michael White

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_White_(journalist)

'With regard to the Israel-Palestine conflict, in July 2006 he stated that as he gets older his sympathies are shifting back to Israel.'

They've a bloody long way still to go.

BBC News - Mid-East talks 'within reach' - US secretary of state

The BBC. piece on the prospects of peace talks does concentrated on what Israel is being asked to do in order for talks to take place, yes it's 'settlements' again; Michael White will be happy.
I found this extract interesting:

' Among other issues, Mr Abbas is said to be pushing Israel to release the longest-serving Palestinian prisoners.'

No BBC interest in what these prisoners were convicted for? Of course not.

More here http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23118403

The deliberately 'offensive' Michael White

His words, not mine...

One question is why is he being so deliberately offensive towards me and at least one other blogger, @yidtech.

The other questions are a) why Michael White made that original 'settlements' comment and b) why he is so shy of answering that simple question?

One final question, I've been nothing but polite when questioning him, so why has he been so 'offensive'?

UPDATE:
Since writing, but not posting this piece yesterday afternoon, I have continued to try and elicit a reply from Michael White to my questions; I have not been successful...

I've tried for several days to get Michael White to actually explain why he brought up Israeli 'settlements' in response to a story about a Muslim Labour peer being accused of hate speech against Jews. Unfortunately it seems that he thinks he can just keep blustering and casting insults and the matter will go away.

Well this post is out there, I'll keep nudging him with the occasional tweeted reminder and we'll see if he ever does just answer the question.

Honest Reporting When in Doubt, Blame the Jews...or the Settlements - aka Question for The Guardian's Michael White

Honest Reporting have a fine article about the Michael White affair. That would be true even if it didn't include one of my tweeted questions!

Finally, White unleashed his best defense for the BBC’s failure to report the brazen anti-Semitism from a Peer. The delay was caused by the BBC’s need to check its sources since Lord Ahmed’s interview was conducted in Urdu for a Pakistani network. It’s an ironic argument, especially in light of last week’s UN report clearing Israel in the killing of a child in Gaza which the BBC had previously – and incorrectly – blamed on Israel.



Standards do matter, Mr. White, but apparently not when it comes to Israel. Oh well, must be because of those settlements…

So come on Michael White answer my question, it's a fair one.

Michael White, Guardian Assistant Editor, cries “Israel” in response to concern over Lord Ahmed’s antisemitism | Engage - the anti-racist campaign against antisemitism

Engage has a take on the Michael White, Lord Ahmed, Israel story...

'White’s point is that when a newspaper exposes a clear example of anti-Jewish racism, then it is right to look for a sub-text, a hidden reason underlying the exposé.  Finkelstein is described as “saintly” – IE “not saintly” – not innocent, but really its opposite.

Why?  What is suspicious about a newspaper exposing clear and serious racist sentiment articulated by a Labour Peer?

Well, White seems to think that the story should be contextualized, or balanced by, or mitigated by, or explained by, the bad behaviour of those Jews who organise or who defend or who facilitate settlements in the West Bank.

Or perhaps it is a tu quoque point.  Perhaps he is saying that YOU also behave badly, YOU also have double standards.

YOU being Finkelstein, The Times, acting for the Israel Lobby, or for the pro-settlement lobby, or for “The Jews”, as Lord Ahmed would put it.

Senior figures at The Guardian increasingly act as though antisemitism in public life is no longer a story in itself.

Michael White is a man who seems to think that anybody who raises the issue of antisemitism has to be inspected for subtexts or for prior motives or for cunning plans.

Antisemitism is no longer just, simply, and on its own, to be condemned, exposed, explained and opposed.  Now we have to ask whether the Jew crying antisemitism was wearing a short skirt at the time, or had had a drink, or had been nagging the antisemite.  What did the Jews do to deserve this antisemitic treatment?'

 http://engageonline.wordpress.com/2013/03/14/michael-white-guardian-assistant-editor-cries-israel-in-response-to-concern-over-lord-ahmeds-antisemitism/

Lord Ahmed update

Now that the Labour party have suspended Lord Ahmed, the BBC have started to report the Lord Ahmed story albeit so far just as a breaking news banner -'BREAKING NEWS: Labour Party suspends Lord Ahmed from membership following allegations of anti-Jewish remarks'

Here's my original story.

Meanwhile The Guardian's associate editor and former political editor. Michael White has been tweeting re this matter and one of those tweets was very strange.

Settlements? What relevance to this story about a Muslim Labour peer being accused of hate speech do the so-called Israeli Settlements have?

I asked Michael White some followup questions

Here's his somewhat aggressive reply

Michael White has not responded.

Two other tweets seem relevant here.

I obviously know of Michael White, not reading The Guardian I don't read much of his work, but I see him interviewed occasionally. Does he have a problem with Israel? Is he inclined to disparagingly refer to Israel when there is no need? I dod some digging... The JC reports in 2009:

'The indefatigable Robin Shepherd highlights a jaw dropping comment by Michael White, Assistant Editor of the Guardian:

In a discussion on security for political leaders pegging off the assault on
Silvio Berlusconi the other day, White talked meanderingly about previous
attacks on political leaders and, understandably for a British discussion show, brought in the case of Northern Ireland where Unionists and Nationalists in the main desisted from assassinating each others leaders. And then, like a flash of lightening out of a clear blue sky, this:

“In Israel they murder each other a great deal. The Israeli Defense Forces
murder people because they don’t like their political style and what they’ve got to say and it only means that people more extreme come in and take their
place.”

No interruption from the BBC moderator of course — apart from an approving “hmm”. No one to stop such appalling, defamatory lies in their tracks. There it is. On the record. A vicious calumny about Israel, pumping yet more sewage into the public mind as the Jewish state is portrayed as nothing better than a violent, totalitarian dictatorship which silences political dissent through the barrel of a gun.

 Mr White has a habit of making throwaway remarks which seem almost calculated to offend. But even from him, this is especially outrageous.

I did have a quick look at his Wikipedia entry (I know...)

With regard to the Israel-Palestine conflict, in July 2006 he stated that as he gets older his sympathies are shifting back to Israel.

White, in discussing media self-censorship in March 2011, says, "I have always sensed liberal, middle class ill-ease in going after stories about immigration, legal or otherwise, about welfare fraud or the less attractive tribal habits of the working class, which is more easily ignored altogether. Toffs, including royal ones, Christians, especially popes, governments of Israel, and US Republicans are more straightforward targets."

If this morning's tweets are anything to go by, if Michael White's 'sympathies are shifting back to Israel' as he gets older then I shudder to think what his former self would have written in these circumstances.


PS:
As I went to post this piece I noticed that the BBC have finally put a report on the Lord Ahmed story up on their website

The one line that struck me was this: 'He was freed by the Court of Appeal after serving 16 days of the sentence because of "exceptional" mitigation relating to his community work.' As my original post reported, that community work was building bridges between the Muslim world and others. Lord Ahmed is doing a stand up job building bridges with Jews isn't he?!