Tag: Antisemitism

Central European leaders view Mr. Netanyahu as a close ally. For his part, Mr. Netanyahu has cultivated relationships with Central European populist leaders. It is widely believed in the region that in order for a leader of a small Central European country to get an invitation to visit the White House, he should either buy a lot of American military equipment or Mr Netanyahu should lobby for the visit. Many of the founders of the Jewish state were from Central and Eastern Europe and their political imagination was shaped by the politics of the newly independent states that emerged in the region after World War I. It has preserved the heroic ethos of sacrifice in the name of the nation that nationalist politicians covet for their own societies. Central and Eastern Europeans see Israel as the only Western society that is winning the population war by reversing the trend of demographic decline. Central European nationalists’ fascination with Israel East European populists also share Mr. Netanyahu’s mistrust in anything that appears post-national or hints of cosmopolitanism. They agree with Yoram Hazony, a conservative Israeli political philosopher and Netanyahu supporter who is the author of the influential ‘The Virtue of Nationalism,’ who says that the major political clash in world history is neither between classes nor nations, but between nationalists who believe that the nation state is the best form of political organisation and imperialists who advocate for universal empire. Mr Orban sees much to admire there. Populist leaders in Central Europe view Israel as the model of how a small state could be sovereign and heroic.

President Trump said Saturday that Democrats have allowed anti-Semitism to “take root in their party and their country” as the party’s base is pushing it to the left and to positions more critical of Israel. “They’ve allowed that.” Trump noted that in January, Democrats blocked legislation to confront the Boycott, Divest, Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel over its treatment of Palestinians. Democrats cited the ongoing government shutdown at the time for their opposition to the bill, saying that only legislation that would reopen the government should be passed. But Democrats have struggled with accusations of anti-Semitism, a controversy that blew up in March when Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., suggested that supporters of Israel were pushing for U.S. politicians to declare "allegiance" to that nation. “I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is OK for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country," Omar said. “It’s all about the Benjamins baby,” she tweeted, a remark for which she later apologized. Those comments led to a broad resolution against bigotry that passed the House -- but that only indirectly condemned Omar’s comments, and did not mention her by name. At the beginning of his remarks on Saturday, Trump “thanked” Omar before issuing a mocking apology when the friendly crowd booed the reference. On the escalating migration crisis on the southern border, for instance, he said that some migrants claiming asylum are “the roughest people you’ve ever seen.” “People that look like they should be fighting for the UFC,” he said to laughs from the audience.

The anti-hate resolution approved by Congress sparked a clash of opinions between Federalist senior editor Mollie Hemingway and Georgetown Institute of Politics executive director Mo Elliethee on Thursday night’s "Special Report" All-Star panel. What was supposed to be a condemnation of anti-Semitism in reaction to controversial remarks by U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn, developed into a broad resolution that condemned all forms of hate. It passed with support from an overwhelming majority, although 23 Republicans opposed it because it didn’t solely address anti-Semitism -- nor did it explicitly condemn Omar. Elliethee began by condemning Omar’s recent remarks and expressing that Omar should have been mentioned in the resolution. But he also defended the congresswoman, who has “received a lot of hate” in recent weeks, pointing to a West Virginia poster linking Omar to the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. “To be able to take a strong stand against all forms of hate I think is a good thing and I think the Republicans who’ve been trying to make hay out of this have trapped themselves because every single ‘no’ vote, two dozen members of the House voted ‘no,’ they were all Republicans who are now all on record against a resolution condemning all hate,” Elliethee told the panel. Hemingway pushed back, calling Elliethee's assessment “very unfair,” and adding that many on Capitol Hill were hoping for an “actual resolution” condemning Omar's rhetoric, but that type of resolution “didn’t happen.” “The rise of anti-Semitism is not something anybody should be thinking about what’s good politically out of it because it is a really bad thing,” Hemingway said. “You’re seeing a rise of anti-Semitism in the Democratic Party right now, but it’s a problem that’s happening globally.” Meanwhile, Washington Examiner commentary writer Tom Rogan invoked British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn and his “personal” problem with anti-Semitism and raised the red flag that “lines get blurred” between discussing Israel policy and invoking anti-Semitic conspiracies pushed by progressive Democrats.

Britain’s equality watchdog has said it believes Labour may have “unlawfully discriminated against people”, as it announced the first step of a statutory inquiry into the party’s handling of antisemitism complaints. An Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) spokesperson said: “Having received a number of complaints regarding antisemitism in the Labour party, we believe Labour may have unlawfully discriminated against people because of their ethnicity and religious beliefs. As set out in our enforcement policy, we are now engaging with the Labour party to give them an opportunity to respond.” The action by the regulator followed legal complaints made by Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) and the Jewish Labour Movement last year, which have argued that the party was not compliant with equalities law in dealing with antisemitism. The move is the first step in an investigatory process by the EHRC, and if the regulator concludes Labour has a case to answer it could go on to open a rare full inquiry under section 20 of the Equalities Act 2006. The EHRC will send a formal letter to the party at the end of this week or early next week that sets out draft terms of reference for a section 20 inquiry. Labour then has 14 days to respond. If the regulator decides the reply is insufficient, it would then have the power to demand that Labour produce documents, emails and other evidence, as well as request interviews from staff, past and present. In its reply to the EHRC letter, the party has the option of proposing its own reforms to its complaints processes. It could enter into a voluntary legal agreement with the regulator under section 23 of the Equalities Act in lieu of a full investigation. “Antisemitism complaints received since April 2018 relate to about 0.1% of our membership, but one antisemite in our party is one too many.

Formby accused Watson of “completely unacceptable” behaviour after he asked for antisemitism complaints to be forwarded to him. They said that during and soon after the period in question, Formby overhauled the process she inherited, to cut out the leader’s office and her team. In response, Murray called for an investigation without a suspension. “I was asked by party staff a year ago to give advice on 13 individual cases relating to alleged antisemitism, to assist in getting through the backlog,” he said. In April, Formby’s official opposed a recommendation to suspend a member who claimed that a Labour Jewish group had links to the Freemasons, instead backing an investigation with no suspension. Play Video 0:41 In another April case, a recommendation to suspend a member who had already been given a warning was opposed by Formby’s official, who instead backed an investigation. In each of the cases, Labour staff dropped their recommendation in favour of the action backed by the official or, in the mural case, Murray. The Observer has also seen cases in which the pair agreed with the recommendation from Labour staff. Members can be suspended while further investigations are carried out. Staff in the investigations team have always led on investigations and recommendations on individual cases.

Was it anti-Semitism when Rep. Ilhan Omar wrote on Twitter that the pro-Israel American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, pays politicians to support the Jewish state? That depends on whether it was mostly malice or simply ignorance that motivated her. The Minnesota Democrat, one of only two Muslim women in Congress, apologized and said she is “grateful for Jewish allies and colleagues who are educating me on the painful history of anti-Semitic tropes.” She might have learned that it is insulting and racist to portray Jews as people who achieve their goals by amassing money and using it to buy influence. On the other hand, perhaps all Omar has learned is that it is dangerous in American politics to speak ill of AIPAC. The fact is that the lobby group does not make any political contributions. Yet it is undeniable that many members of AIPAC are significant players in the world of campaign donations. They believe they are rewarding and showing approval for politicians who share their concern for the safety and success of Israel — as an important ally of the United States. Perhaps Omar is unaware of how it works. That is part of American politics. Sign up for The Point Go inside New York politics.

The surprise vote attached the nonbinding resolution to an unrelated measure demanding an end to American support for Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen. The anti-Semitism resolution comes two days after Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the entire Democratic leadership condemned Representative Ilhan Omar, Democrat of Minnesota, and forced her to apologize for a Twitter post in which she insinuated that American support for Israel is fueled by money from donors and pressure from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the pro-Israel lobbying group known as Aipac. “She apologized for her remarks,” Ms. Pelosi said of Ms. Omar. Republicans have repeatedly attacked Ms. Omar and another freshman Democrat, Representative Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, as anti-Semitic, citing remarks that both have made on Twitter. movement — that they support. The National Republican Congressional Committee blasted out emails on Wednesday insinuating that two freshman House Democrats, Elaine Luria of Virginia and Mike Levin of California, were covering for Ms. Omar’s anti-Semitism. “We are still waiting for an apology” from Mr. McCarthy, Representative Katherine M. Clark of Massachusetts, a member of the House Democratic leadership, told reporters on Wednesday. Representative Steny H. Hoyer, the Democratic leader, echoed her point, adding that Mr. Trump routinely makes offensive comments — such as his recent tweet making light of the Trail of Tears, the genocidal removal of Indians from their homelands — while Republicans remain silent. Mr. Trump, too, has been accused of anti-Semitism. by the House of Representatives today.”

President Trump goes to Pittsburgh to show support for the 11 victims of the Tree of Life Synagogue shooting and their families. FOX News Channel (FNC) is a 24-hour all-encompassing news service dedicated to delivering breaking news as well as…

The Democratic donor Tom Steyer on Sunday denounced as antisemitic a now-deleted tweet from Kevin McCarthy, the No2 Republican in the House of Representatives, that said Steyer and two other wealthy donors were trying to buy the November midterm elections. Then Pittsburgh happened | Cas Mudde Read more McCarthy’s tweet, posted on Tuesday and deleted the next day, was captured in images on media sites. “We cannot allow Soros, Steyer, and Bloomberg to BUY this election! #MAGA,” McCarthy wrote. “I think that there – that is a classic attempt to separate Americans. I think that absolutely falls into the category of what I’m describing as political violence.“ Steyer spoke a day after a gunman killed 11 Jewish worshippers at a Pittsburgh synagogue in what the Anti-Defamation League said was the deadliest attack ever on the Jewish community in the US. The suspect made antisemitic remarks to police. Trump condemned the attack and antisemitism. Steyer, who is well known for his ads calling for Trump’s impeachment, said he did not blame Trump for the shooting, “but I’m absolutely associating and blaming him for creating the atmosphere that exists”. Cesar Sayoc: details of pipe bomb suspect's past emerge before court date Read more He said the Republican party has created a politically violent atmosphere and accused Trump himself of lawlessness.

We have long had serious concerns about the lack of due impartiality and accuracy in the reporting of allegations of antisemitism against Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party. The recent report by the Media Reform Coalition examining coverage of Labour’s revised code of conduct on antisemitism shows that we are right to be concerned. The research examined over 250 articles and broadcast news segments and found over 90 examples of misleading or inaccurate reporting. In relation to the IHRA definition of antisemitism that was at the heart of the dispute, the research found evidence of “overwhelming source imbalance” in which critics of Labour’s code of conduct dominated coverage, with nearly 50% of Guardian reports, for example, failing to include any quotes from those defending the code or critiquing the IHRA definition. Moreover, key contextual facts about the IHRA definition – for example that it has only been formally adopted by eight countries (and only six of the IHRA member states) – were consistently excluded. The researchers conclude these were not occasional lapses in judgment but “systematic reporting failures” that served to weaken the Labour leadership and to bolster its opponents within and outside of the party. It is of course entirely appropriate and necessary for our major news outlets to report on the horrors of antisemitism, but wrong to present it as an issue specific to the Labour party. In covering the allegations that Labour is now “institutionally antisemitic”, there have been inaccuracies, clear distortions and revealing omissions across our most popular media platforms. We believe that significant parts of the UK media have failed their audiences by producing flawed reports that have contributed to an undeserved witch-hunt against the Labour leader and misdirected public attention away from antisemitism elsewhere, including on the far right, which is ascendant in much of Europe. Prof Noam Chomsky Brian Eno Francesca Martinez Yanis Varoufakis Ken Loach Raoul Martinez Justin Schlosberg Birkbeck, University of London Prof Des Freedman Goldsmiths, University of London Prof Imogen Tyler Lancaster University Prof Aeron Davis Goldsmiths, University of London Prof Annabelle Sreberny Soas, University of London Prof Greg Philo University of Glasgow Prof Natalie Fenton Goldsmiths, University of London Prof David Miller Bristol University Prof David Hesmondhalgh University of Leeds Prof James Curran Goldsmiths, University of London Prof Julian Petley Brunel University Stephen Cushion Cardiff University Jason Hickel Goldsmiths, University of London Einar Thorsen Bournemouth University Mike Berry Cardiff University Tom Mills Aston University Jenny Manson Jewish Voice for Labour Leah Levane Jewish Voice for Labour Lindsey German Stop the War Coalition Mike Cushman Free Speech on Israel Glyn Secker Jewish Voice for Labour