Category: antisemitism

  • ANALYSIS: By M. Muhannad Ayyash, Mount Royal University

    American President Joe Biden is among the latest Western politicians to land in Tel Aviv in a show of support to Israel.

    As Israel’s primary backer, the United States has sent two aircraft carriers to the region and indicated it could deploy 2000 American troops to Israel.

    Biden was also set to meet Palestinian and Arab leaders in the Jordanian capital Amman. But Jordan cancelled the meeting after a reported airstrike on October 17 killed about 500 people at a Gaza hospital.

    In the days after Hamas launched Operation Al-Aqsa Flood against Israel, European and North American governments (with few exceptions) were quick to provide a unified and consistent message of support for Israel.

    That message contains at least four interconnected elements:

    • Israel is the victim of an unprovoked terrorist attack;
    • Israel has the right to defend itself;
    • The West fully stands with Israel against the barbaric and wanton violence of the Palestinians; and
    • Hamas is to blame (either partially or fully) for all civilian deaths on both sides since they began these hostilities and forced Israel’s hand while hiding behind civilians.

    Palestinians erased
    There are a few important features of this message, but I want to focus on two that highlight the West’s double standards.

    First, is the advancement of anti-Palestinian racism in the West. It is critical to underscore a salient feature of anti-Palestinian racism: the silencing of the Palestinian critiques of Zionism and Israel.

    This is a dynamic which has its roots in the Nakba (Arabic for “catastrophe”) and erases Palestinian voices, history, presence, aspirations and identity from public discourse.

    Political, media and educational institutions in the West regularly sideline and silence Palestinians and their supporters. This is not just an issue among the right-wing or even centrists, but occurs across the political spectrum.

    Left-wing politics, including progressive spaces, that purport to be anti-racist often remain hostile to Palestinian voices

    Here in Canada, a statement by progressive Toronto Mayor Olivia Chow painted a rally in support of Palestinians as allegedly supporting violence and as a threat to the safety and security of Canadian Jews. That statement is still up on her X account.

    This is precisely the anti-Palestinian narrative that has permeated in the West for years: that all support for Palestine is inherently violent and driven by antisemitic hatred of all Jews. Thus, in the name of anti-racism, Palestinians and their supporters are denounced and even criminalised.

    Differing reactions to civilian death
    Second, the double standard is on display in the reactions we have seen to the killing of Israeli civilians and the reactions — or lack thereof — to the killing of Palestinian civilians. Many are rightly highlighting Western hypocrisy by drawing comparisons to how the West responded to Russia’s war on Ukraine.

    We need to look at how Western governments have responded to the killing of Israeli civilians versus the killing of Palestinian civilians. For the Israeli state and Israeli victims, political, military, economic, cultural and social institutions have fully mobilised to provide support.

    The same is entirely absent for the Palestinians. For the Palestinians, there are no evacuations. Aircraft carriers are not sent to provide military support. Mainstream political and cultural discourse does not humanise Palestinian life and mourn Palestinian death.

    Aid relief is withheld and used as a bargaining counter. Economic support is not forthcoming. Institutions do not send Palestinians messages of support.

    In some ways, this silence is not surprising. No one expressing support for Israel risks losing their livelihood. Many who have voiced solidarity with Palestinians have lost their jobs, been rebuked, suspended and faced doxing.

    Western self-interest
    States are not moral entities, but act purely in self-interest. Palestinian freedom and liberation does not align with the interests of the US-led West.

    Therefore, Western institutions repeat the increasingly weak talking point that “terrorism” is the cause of all the violence. This talking point is used to provide Israel with the green light to unleash uninhibited violence against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, West Bank and Jerusalem.

    The idea that Western governments and institutions are horrified by violence against civilians rings hollow because of their silence when it comes to violence against Palestinian civilians and other groups around the world.

    For decades, Palestinians have been expelled from their land, killed and maimed in great numbers, including in mass atrocities and many well-documented cases of sexual violence and torture in Israeli prisons.

    This only scratches the surface of the violence that Palestinians continuously experience, and have experienced, since well before Hamas was formed.

    Palestinians continue to suffer what Palestinian scholars Nahla Abdo and Nur Masalha have called an ongoing Nakba and genocide of the Palestinian people. Yet, when Palestinians suffer, as they are now in Gaza, what Israeli historian and expert on genocide Raz Segal has called “a textbook case of genocide,” Western governments remain silent.

    There was no Western outrage when Israel ordered more than a million Palestinians to leave their homes in 24 hours. In February, Israeli settlers went on an hours-long rampage in the Palestinian town of Huwara after two settlers were shot by a Palestinian.

    Western condemnations of the rampage were muted or non-existent.

    Hundreds of scholars and practitioners of international law, conflict studies and genocide studies are now sounding the alarm about the possibility of genocide being perpetrated by Israeli forces against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

    The stories of Palestinian lives that end with the sudden drop of a bomb are not told. Palestinian voices that explain the settler colonialism they suffer remain sidelined. And Palestinian aspirations for decolonised liberation are denied.

    The West’s institutional reaction is not just hypocritical, it is an expression of where Western governments stand on the question of Palestine. The West is an active participant in the erasure of Palestine, and when moments of intensified violence like this happen, the West’s true position becomes clear for all to see.

    However, people power across the world, including in the US, provide reason for hope. Increasingly, many in the West are disgusted and ashamed by the erasure of Palestine and the killing of Palestinian civilians.

    More people are joining the protests and calling for the siege on Gaza to be lifted once and for all. More people power is needed to demand that governments do everything they can to resolve this issue, which can only begin to move towards peace and justice when the Palestinian people are free.The Conversation

    M. Muhannad Ayyash is professor of sociology, Mount Royal University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • As the House goes into the third week of not having an elected leader due to GOP chaos, progressive Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pennsylvania) is condemning Republican members for continually nominating speaker candidates like Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) with an extensive background of peddling antisemitism and white supremacy. In a scathing press statement released Tuesday, Lee’s office referred to Jordan as…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • The Roald Dahl Museum has said that it is working “towards combatting hate and prejudice.” It acknowledged that the renowned children’s writer’s racism was “undeniable and indelible”.

    The admission by the museum, located in Buckinghamshire in southeast England, follows an apology in 2020 by the Dahl family and Roald Dahl Story Company for his well-documented anti-Semitic comments.

    The museum has placed a panel at the entrance of its exhibition acknowledging the racism in Dahl’s work. It has also put up a similar message on its website.

    Anti-semitism, colonialism and misogyny

    Dahl, the creator of books such as ‘Matilda’, ‘The BFG’ and ‘Charlie And The Chocolate Factory’  made offensive remarks about Jewish people in a 1983 interview with the New Statesman magazine.

    Readers have also accused Dahl of misogyny and racism. For example, he depicts the Oompa-Loompas as workers that Willy Wonka has kidnapped “for their own good”. He goes on to say that these characters in ‘Charlie And The Chocolate Factory’ came from the:

    deepest and darkest part of the African jungle where no white man had ever been before.

    Puffin, Dahl’s publisher, hired ‘sensitivity readers’ this year to edit and sometimes rewrite offensive sections of Dahl’s work.

    Museum ‘condemns all racism’

    The Dahl museum, which is a charity, said it fully supported the 2020 apology. The museum said on its website that it:

    condemns all racism, including antisemitism, directed at any group or individual.

    Despite Dahl’s racism, the museum says it still sees his creative work as a potential force for good. They continued:

    Roald Dahl’s racism is undeniable and indelible but what we hope can also endure is the potential of Dahl’s creative legacy to do some good.

    The museum said it was:

    committed to being more welcoming, inclusive, diverse, and equitable in all aspects of our work.

    The museum said it had taken steps towards that, including:

    reflecting the visible diversity of our audiences in our marketing, by running accessible and inclusive recruitment campaigns for staff or trustee positions.

    It said it was working closely with several organisations within the Jewish community, including the Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Jewish Leadership Council.

    The museum noted that it chooses not to repeat Dahl’s anti-Semitic statements publicly, but keeps a record of what he wrote in its collection, “so it is not forgotten”.

    Dahl’s comments have long cast a shadow over his personal legacy, which has remained prominent as a number of his children’s classics have made it onto the screen and stage since his death aged 74.

    Cultural problem

    Reflecting on his life, the Dahl Museum said he was “a contradictory person” who could be kind. But:

    there are also recorded incidents of him being very unkind and worse, including writing and saying antisemitic things about Jewish people

    The fact that the museum has taken until now to acknowledge Roald Dahl’s racism is an example of how slow institutions often are to respond to obvious bigotry by celebrated cultural figures. The Royal Mint even considered Dahl as a prospective subject for a commemorative coin five years ago. Although, happily. he was eventually rejected.

    Dahl is by no means the only commemorated UK cultural personality to be an out-and-out racist. Just take fellow children’s authors Enid Blyton and Rudyard Kipling for instance. The excruciating inertia in recognising the oppressiveness in these writer’s work is a testament to the deep-seated racism and colonialism embedded in UK society and culture.

    Featured image via Solarisgirl/Wikimedia Commons, via CC 2.0, resized to 1910×1000 

    Additional reporting by Agence France-Presse 

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • On 14 July, Swedish police said they had granted permission for a protest which would include burning holy texts outside the Israeli embassy in Stockholm. The controversial protest, which has raised concerns around respect for religious beliefs, is scheduled for Saturday 15 July. It comes just weeks after a man set fire to pages of the Quran outside Stockholm’s main mosque.

    So far, there seems to be little information on who has organised Saturday’s protest. According to Agence France-Presse (AFP):

    The demonstration would include a burning of the Torah and the Bible… in response to the Koran burning protest and would be an expression in support of freedom of speech, according to the application to police.

    But I don’t need to know who’s organising this ‘protest’, or why, in order to know that it is not only misguided but utterly deplorable.

    Religious belief: the freedom to be

    Being a religious minority living in the West is a grinding experience. This is particularly the case for Muslims. The constant superiority of Western mores and laws wears you down to the point where faith itself becomes an act of defiance. Few issues reflect a supposed ‘clash of civilisations’ between the West and Islam more so than the conflict between religious belief and freedom of expression.

    The trope that Muslims’ desire for respect towards their religion violates Western ‘freedom of expression’ constantly remains under the surface. It also rears its ugly head periodically. We saw it with the Rushdie Affair, with the Danish cartoons of Prophet Muhammad, with the Charlie Hebdo debacle. And now we see it with the burning of the Quran in Sweden.

    Proponents of free speech will say that freedom of speech includes ‘freedom to offend’. What they don’t realise, however, is that for people of faith, degradation of their religion and its associated symbols goes far beyond mere ‘offence’.

    For those who adhere to a religion, it forms a part of their identity. It’s not simply something they believe – rather it constitutes an integral part of who they are. Freedom of religion, therefore, isn’t just the freedom to be religious. It is the freedom to be. The freedom to affirm what you believe to be true, and to live your life accordingly.

    I don’t expect non-religious people to understand the pain felt by a person of faith when seeing their faith being humiliated. However, the issue here is not respect for beliefs, but respect for human beings. What we are asking for is not reverence towards the Quran, the Torah, or the Bible. It is basic human empathy.

    Hierarchy of freedoms

    Stockholm police stressed that in line with Swedish legislation, they granted permits for people to hold public gatherings and not the activities conducted during them. Carina Skagerlind, press officer for Stockholm police, said:

    The police does not issue permits to burn various religious texts – the police issues permits to hold a public gathering and express an opinion.

    What an absurd rationalisation. Following the Quran-burning, Swedish authorities said they had opened an investigation against the perpetrator over “agitation against an ethnic group”. Which begs the question: if they know the desecration of religious texts constitutes “agitation against an ethnic group”, and they know the protest they approved involves this action, why are they approving it?

    The behaviour of authorities in these situations demonstrates a truth I’ve come to know all too well: freedom of expression is only protected for those agitating against marginalised and oppressed groups of people.

    Meanwhile, people from marginalised groups must stick together. It is for this reason, and also due to being a person of faith, that I will always condemn the desecration of sacred texts. If you can’t make your point in a way that shows empathy, especially for marginalised groups, then I have no interest in what you have to say.

    Featured image via YouTube/Al Jazeera

    Additional reporting via Agence France-Presse

    By Afroze Fatima Zaidi

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • A recently released White House strategic plan on combatting antisemitism, while including numerous mentions of “cross community solidarity” and the importance of combatting all forms of hate, fails to promote a framework that makes that kind of solidarity possible. The plan, in actuality, singles out antisemitism and, by extension, Jews, as requiring a special strategy — one that does not embrace…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • By Fiyaz Mughal

    Islam’s history contains some glorious periods, spanning Andalusia, Baghdad and the seats of learning and art that they created. I am proud to be attached by birth to this part of our cultural heritage.

    However, over my life I have come to understand that Islam initially grew from a zealous desire to spread the faith out of Arabia and across parts of Africa and the Middle East. Like any religion, it has its bloody history.

    Muslims have never seriously debated the really hard questions, such as whether Islam’s supremacy over other beliefs is simply based on man-made legitimacy and power, rather than being divinely ordained. This also goes for other faiths, primarily Christianity, which, like Islam, has its own violent past.

    Over time, I have come to realise that much of the life of Prophet Muhammad was never documented. It was orally transmitted, potentially subjected to embellishment; it was around 80 to 100 years before anything was actually chronicled.

    Much of the Sunnah (the traditions and practices of Muhammad) may well have changed over time as they were recorded. In fact, how much of the Islam that people practise today resembles the Islam of Prophet Muhammad is a question that needs to be asked. Few Muslims dare to do so.

    There needs to come a time when Muslims who want to see a progressive interpretation of their faith hold to account the failings within Islam.

    There are many difficult issues to reflect upon. Islam’s early history with Jewish communities in Arabia was at different points positive and friendly — and bloodthirsty. Sunni Islam’s history with the Shia sect is also deeply disturbing, with the schism leading to what can only be called a genocidal attempt to wipe out the Shia community, including the targeting of women and children.

    Islam is becoming increasingly irrelevant to many people in the modern world. What must also not be dismissed is how Islamist antisemitism and ignorance of the Holocaust has become endemic in parts of Muslim communities across the globe.

    Conspiracy theories about Jewish power travel from Cairo to Islamabad and then back into the UK, while casual comments about the murder of Jews in alleyways of such cities go unchecked. It is as though, while some Muslims talk about Islam being a “religion of peace”, they are often willing to overlook fantasies of brutalising Jews.

    This split within their own minds shows that there is a multi-generational challenge in countering antisemitism within Muslim communities.

    Given that there are nearly 1.8 billion Muslims across the globe, that is a lot of minds to change if, for example, even just 20 per cent of them think this way.

    Take for example, Dr Rizwan Mustafa, whom the Jewish Chronicle has highlighted recently. He is the founding chair of the West Midlands branch of the National Association of Muslim Police (NAMP), and was discussed in the recent Prevent review by William Shawcross.

    The JC revealed how a probe has been launched into Dr Mustafa, given that he is in charge of recruiting new recruits into the force. He is alleged to have shared content describing Jews as “filth”.

    How has it come to be that Islam, which is fundamentally based on Judaism, has seen so many of its followers relish and wallow in Jew hatred? How has it become the “new norm” that antisemitism is virulently alive and spreading in so many Muslim majority countries

    When I ask fellow Muslims why this is the case, denial is the usual response.

    While modern-day developments such as the Abraham Accords open up new opportunities between Arab Muslim majority countries and Israel, I hope there comes a time when Muslims in those countries ask the questions that I have dared to ask.

    The conclusion that I have come to is that Muhammad was a man of courage, vision, drive, leadership and determinism. He was indeed remarkable and Islamic history has brought much to civilisation and enhanced many parts of our collective lives.

    Yet, he was also pragmatic, willing to go to war, to pressurise and defeat people with the sword. He also enjoyed the company of women, much like men of his time. In today’s moral framework, some elements are troubling, but looking at history through a modern lens is unfair.

    Unless many Muslims stop acting as if their history smells of roses, we will never see the reality of what Muhammad’s life and teachings really were. Tough, kind, brutal and, sometimes, at stark odds with what we think and choose to believe.

    Credits:

    Fiyaz Mughal is the founder of Muslims Against Antisemitism.

    This blog was first published by The Jewish Chronicle, 9 March 2023.

    This post was originally published on Voice of Salam.

  • A recent book detailing the seven most poisonous fabrications that make antisemitism possible starts by asking: “Why have the Jews been so despised and so brutalized throughout history?” Another book with potential answers is Why the Germans? Why the Jews?, which follows up on reasons such as envy, race hatred, and the prehistory of the More

    The post The 7 Poisonous Fabrications of Antisemitism appeared first on CounterPunch.org.


    This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Thomas Klikauer – Danny Antonelli.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Rachel Maddow’s podcast tells the story of American Nazis in the 1940s. But the era’s real and lasting authoritarian danger came from the spectacular growth of a national security state.

    This post was originally published on Dissent MagazineDissent Magazine.

  • In an unprecedented move, a Manhattan grand jury voted Thursday to indict former President Donald Trump for hush-money payments made to adult film star Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential campaign to hide an alleged affair, making Trump the first former U.S. president to face criminal charges. While the precise details of the charges are not yet known, the development culminates years of…

    Source

  • Keir Starmer has torched the Labour Party in one fell swoop – telling socialists to eff-off while barring former leader Jeremy Corbyn from standing as a candidate at the next general election. Of course, this shouldn’t come as any surprise. However, is it now time to just shut up about Labour and move on?

    Starmer: blah blah blah

    Starmer was speaking after the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) lifted the Labour Party out of the special measures it had placed on it regarding antisemitism. As Sky News reported, the EHRC:

    had been scrutinising the party since ruling it was responsible for unlawful acts of harassment and discrimination more than two years ago.

    But the watchdog has said that, under Sir Keir’s leadership, the party has improved its complaints and training procedures to protect current and future party members.

    The Labour leader, writing in the right-wing Times, said:

    under my leadership there will be zero tolerance of antisemitism, racism, or discrimination of any kind.

    An interesting statement, given that Starmer’s team has expelled or investigated dozens of Jewish members – most recently forcing an 85-year-old holocaust survivor to quit the party:

    Starmer’s comments are also interesting given his stance on some issues. For example, he has shown racism over refugees and foreign-born workers – saying about the latter and immigration that:

    our common goal must be to help the British economy off its immigration dependency. To start investing more in training up workers who are already here.

    Meanwhile, his policies have been echoing the Tories – like his support for the electronic tagging of more refugees. Plus, Starmer has repeatedly chosen to ignore Islamophobia:

    One example of this was his lack of support for Labour MP Zarah Sultana when people were sending her Islamophobic abuse.

    Clearly, though, those issues aren’t a priority with the EHRC.

    Socialists out, racists in

    Starmer gave a clear indication that socialists are no longer welcome in Labour – saying that the “door was open” for them to leave:

    One socialist in particular will not be returning:

    Starmer’s refusal to allow Corbyn to stand is predictable – but also downright hypocritical and dishonest:

    As the Canary‘s Joe Glenton previously wrote:

    The reason Keir Starmer… [is] so desperate to slander Corbyn is because they fear and hate the ordinary working people who identify with the reformist program he put forward during his time as leader. Sadly, these capitalist goons are what the public is left with in the Labour Party, now – and Corbyn is well out of this toxic mess.

    What’s Corbyn to do, then? As of 12pm on Wednesday 15 February he hadn’t commented on Starmer’s actions. However, people were calling for him to form a new party:

    So, where is Labour heading now?

    Shut up about Labour?

    Starmer wrote in the Times that:

    The Labour Party I lead is patriotic. It is a party of public service, not protest. It is a party of equality, justice and fairness; one that proudly puts the needs of working people above any fringe interest.

    This rhetoric is predictable – given Starmer has thrown protesters to the wolves, refused to sanction transphobic MPs and ignored the Forde Report’s recommendations over racism in his party. Of course, this was all apparent back in 2021. As the Canary wrote at the time, in Labour:

    The left wing is being systematically and permanently destroyed. Starmer and Co have plotted a course back towards the corporate, capitalist status quo. So is now, finally, the time for anyone with socialist tendencies to leave the party and put their efforts into a more worthwhile project? The answer may well be a resounding ‘yes’.

    Now, Starmer has given his clearest indication yet that Labour is no longer anything remotely left wing – in fact, it is little more than a racist, discriminatory Tory-esque husk. The time of supporting these right-wing charlatans is well and truly over. It’s probably time to stop talking about them as well. However, the public is now faced with no choice from its two main political parties. So, we need to look to trade unions, grassroots community groups and each other to affect change. Whether Corbyn will feature in this on a national level remains to be seen.

    Featured image via Sky News – YouTube

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • As Jewish students and anti-Zionist organizers, we know that it is in no way antisemitic to support the fight for Palestinian liberation. False accusations of such should not be used to silence Palestinian solidarity activists. That’s why we were glad to see the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights ditch a misleading and discredited definition of antisemitism in its recent fact sheet…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • The House voted along party lines to remove Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minnesota) from her assignment on the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Thursday in the party’s latest escalation of tactics to stifle Democrats and silence dissent. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-California) has seemingly made removing Omar a top priority in recent days after reports emerged over the past weekend that a few…

    Source



  • Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and her progressive allies are denouncing the Republican effort to oust her from a key House panel as early as Thursday.

    House Republicans on Wednesday advanced a resolution to remove Omar from the House Foreign Affairs Committee (HFAC). In a party-line 218-209 vote, GOP lawmakers approved a rule that sets the parameters for debate on the chamber floor prior to a final vote.

    “It remains unclear when House Republicans will bring the Omar resolution to the floor for debate and a final vote,” The Hill reported. “Democrats still need to formally submit a separate resolution with their roster for the Foreign Affairs Committee.” That is expected to happen by Thursday.

    The GOP has sought for years to remove Omar, a principled critic of Israeli apartheid and Washington’s role in perpetuating it, from the HFAC. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) has unilateral authority to boot any lawmaker from a select committee, but because the HFAC is a standing committee, removing a member from it requires a full House vote.

    On Tuesday night, after Rep. Max Miller (R-Ohio) introduced the measure to remove Omar from the HFAC over supposedly “antisemitic” remarks, the progressive lawmaker tweeted that “there is nothing objectively true in this resolution.”

    In response to Miller’s argument that “Omar clearly cannot be an objective decision-maker on the Foreign Affairs Committee given her biases against Israel and against the Jewish people”—a contention that wrongfully equates criticism of Israel’s colonization of Palestine with criticism of Jewish people—the Minnesota Democrat said that “if not being objective is a reason to not serve on committees, no one would be on committees.”

    In a Wednesday statement, Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) called the House GOP’s pending vote against Omar “the latest racist attack by the far-right to silence progressives in Congress who speak up for a human rights-centered foreign policy, including Palestinian human rights.”

    “The GOP is riddled with white nationalists and antisemites. It is infuriating and absurd that they are trying to distract from the bigoted hatred in their own party by attacking a progressive woman of color.”

    “Anti-Palestinian politicians and organizations” have long tried “to censor the Congresswoman’s consistent calls for accountability for the Israeli government’s apartheid and human rights violations against Palestinians,” said JVP. “Sadly, these Republican attempts to attack Congresswoman Omar have been buoyed in the past by attacks on Palestinian rights advocates within the Democratic party.”

    According to Beth Miller, political director of JVP Action: “These attacks are happening because Congresswoman Omar is effective. Because she is a progressive. Because she is a Black Muslim woman. Because her values are universal and include fighting for Palestinians.”

    “The GOP is riddled with white nationalists and antisemites,” said Miller. “It is infuriating and absurd that they are trying to distract from the bigoted hatred in their own party by attacking a progressive woman of color. Congresswoman Omar consistently calls for the Israeli government to be held accountable for its crimes—crimes the GOP would rather cover up.”

    Meanwhile, Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said Monday that the CPC “stands fully behind our deputy chair.”

    “Omar is a valued member of the Democratic caucus and of this Congress,” said Jayapal. “Throughout her service in Congress and on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, she has brought her essential and unique voice and lived experience to bear: as a refugee, war survivor, and soon, as the first African-born ranking member on the Africa Subcommittee.”

    “You cannot remove a member of Congress from a committee simply because you do not agree with their views,” Jayapal continued. “This is both ludicrous and dangerous. In the last Congress, Republican members were moved from committees with a bipartisan vote for endangering the safety of their colleagues. Speaker McCarthy is attempting to take revenge and draw false comparisons.”

    Jayapal praised the few Republicans “who have already rejected this idea” and expressed hope that “more will join them to state their opposition so it is not brought to the floor, or vote against it should it be brought to the floor.”

    As The Washington Post reported Wednesday:

    Republican leaders have worked for weeks to ensure that there were enough votes to pass a resolution removing Omar from the committee through their razor-thin majority margin, which stands at three as Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) remains away from Washington recuperating from a traumatic fall. Opposition to the effort emerged last month as four lawmakers signaled that they wouldn’t support the measure, citing concerns that it would continue a precedent set by former speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

    But the inclusion of a provision in the four-page resolution, that Republicans argue provides due process to Omar, seems to have appeased at least one crucial voter, as Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.) announced Tuesday that she would now support the measure. Reps. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) and Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) have publicly suggested that they would vote against it before the resolution’s text was released Tuesday, while Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) has said he remained undecided. Republican leadership aides, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to outline private whip counts, said they have the votes to pass the measure whenever Democrats formally appoint Omar to her committee.

    Jayapal affirmed earlier this week that Democrats “will stand strongly with Rep. Omar: an esteemed and invaluable legislator, a respectful and kind colleague, and a courageous progressive leader.”

    On Sunday, Omar argued that House Republicans are trying to oust her from the HFAC because they disapprove of having a Muslim refugee from Somalia on the panel, as Common Dreams reported.

    Omar has been the frequent target of Islamophobic bigotry, including from Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which paid Facebook to host attack ads that endangered the lawmaker’s life. Due to credible death threats, the Minnesota Democrat is often assigned security by the U.S. Capitol Police.

    In her Sunday conversation with CNN‘s Dana Bash, Omar acknowledged that she apologized for the wording of her February 2019 tweets tying U.S. lawmakers’ support for Israel to money from lobbyists—at the time, she specifically called out AIPAC, which has given millions of dollars to members of Congress.

    The GOP’s campaign to expel her from the HFAC “is politically motivated,” Omar said. “In some cases, it’s motivated by the fact that many of these members don’t believe a Muslim, a refugee, an African should even be in Congress, let alone have the opportunity to serve on the Foreign Affairs Committee.”

    On Monday, Omar asserted that her work on the HFAC has contributed positively to “advancing human rights, holding government officials accountable for past harms, and advancing a more just and peaceful foreign policy.”

    Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) concurred, tweeting Monday that Omar’s work on the panel “matters deeply and Republicans’ cowardly efforts to remove and silence her are a disgrace.”

    Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) echoed Pressley, writing on social media: “It’s shameful that Republicans are trying to remove her [from the HFAC] after smearing her for years. We need her voice, values, and expertise on the committee.”

    Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), meanwhile, noted that “Omar is once again facing ugly personal and political attacks with incredible courage and dignity.”

    “It is outrageous that the House leadership wants to boot her off the Foreign Affairs Committee,” Sanders tweeted. “Fair-minded Republicans must join Democrats in preventing that from happening.”

    This article has been updated to include a statement from Jewish Voice for Peace.

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s (R-California) plot to appease the most extremist lawmakers in his caucus by removing Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minnesota) from her committee assignment is teetering on the edge of failure as more Republicans voice their reluctance to go along with the plan. On Friday, Republican Rep. Ken Buck (Colorado) said that he is opposed to removing Omar…

    Source



  • Congresswoman Ilhan Omar on Sunday contended that some of her Republican colleagues—led by U.S. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy—are trying to oust her from the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee because she is a Muslim refugee from Somalia.

    “Let me ask you, Congresswoman Omar, about what Republicans are saying about you, that there is a pattern of antisemitic and other controversial statements that make you unfit to sit on, in your case, the House Foreign Affairs Committee,” CNN‘s Dana Bash said on “State of the Union.”

    Omar (D-Minn.) first addressed a pair of February 2019 tweets in which she tied U.S. politicians’ support for Israel to money from lobbyists. “It’s all about the Benjamins baby,” she said at the time, using slang for $100 bills. Asked who she thought was paying American politicians to be pro-Israel, Omar replied, “AIPAC!” referring to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

    “These people are OK with Islamophobia. They’re OK with trafficking in their own ways in antisemitism.”

    The congresswoman said Sunday: “Yeah, I might have used words at the time that I didn’t understand were trafficking in antisemitism. When that was brought to my attention, I apologized. I owned up to it. That’s the kind of person that I am. And I continue to work with my colleagues and my community to fight against antisemitism.”

    After countering some other criticisms from the GOP, Omar argued that the campaign to remove her from the panel “is politically motivated. And, in some cases, it’s motivated by the fact that many of these members don’t believe a Muslim, a refugee, an African should even be in Congress, let alone have the opportunity to serve on the Foreign Affairs Committee.”

    Bash then said that “it sounds like you’re accusing Kevin McCarthy of racism,” to which Omar responded: “I mean, I’m not making any accusations. I’m just laying out the facts.”

    Omar pointed out when then-President Donald Trump went to Minnesota in October 2019 and criticized the state for welcoming “large numbers” of refugees from Somalia. She also highlighted Islamophobic remarks from Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.).

    “These people are OK with Islamophobia. They’re OK with trafficking in their own ways in antisemitism,” Omar charged. “They are not OK with having a Muslim have a voice on that committee.”

    Omar appeared on CNN alongside Reps. Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, both California Democrats whom fellow Californian McCarthy barred from the House intelligence panel. Because that is a select committee, the speaker could unilaterally block the pair from being on it; however, kicking Omar off the foreign affairs panel requires a vote by the full chamber.

    Republicans only narrowly control the House, and McCarthy ultimately may not have the votes to oust Omar. Reps. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) and Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.) have publicly said they oppose the attempt to remove Omar and Congresswoman Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) has openly criticized the effort. Additionally, Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) said Monday that he will be “sidelined in Sarasota for several weeks” to recover from an injury.

    Omar was also appointed to the House Education and the Workforce Committee. She said in a statement Friday that “as a child survivor of war living in a refugee camp, I would never have imagined that I would one day have the opportunity to serve on these important committees.”

    “Our democracy, and our governing bodies, rest on a healthy and vibrant debate,” she stressed. “Our strength lies not in our perfection, but in the diversity of our voices and our openness to a civil discourse.”

    “Whatever our disagreements may be as members of Congress, policy differences alone have not and must not be cause for eliminating someone from serving on a committee,” she added. “I am grateful for the confidence my constituents and my caucus have shown in me to lead this work, and I look forward to continuing to work for a more just and peaceful world.”

    This post was originally published on Common Dreams.

  • On Tuesday, Twitter reinstated the account of Nick Fuentes, a white supremacist who has given high praise to Nazi leader Adolf Hitler as recently as last week — only to suspend Fuentes’s profile within 24 hours of its reinstatement. The site has not specified why it suspended Fuentes’s account for a second time, but one of the few tweets Fuentes shared while back on the platform referenced…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • The BBC has made an admission about its controversial Panorama documentary about antisemitism in the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn. It has released what it says is further “context” to a member’s claims in the programme about abuse within the party. However, the BBC‘s disclosure prompts further questions about the programme – and about the broadcaster more broadly.

    BBC Panorama: an admission

    The Canary previously reported on BBC Panorama‘s Is Labour Anti-Semitic? documentary. The BBC broadcast the programme on 10 July 2019. As the Canary‘s Joshua Funnell wrote nine days later, one of Panorama‘s claims about allegations of antisemitism in the party already appeared at that point to be incorrect. Now, the BBC has made a further admission.

    As SKWAWKBOX reported, the BBC has admitted it failed to apply context to comments made by one participant in the Panorama documentary. It made the admission on the Corrections and Clarifications page of its website on 14 December 2022.

    The BBC noted that Panorama showed a participant making the following comments:

    I’m Izzy Lenga, I joined the Labour Party in 2015… The antisemitic abuse I received was what I was subjected to every single day… Telling me Hitler was right, telling me Hitler did not go far enough…

    In Labour Party meetings… we’ve seen people engage in Holocaust denial… and that’s terrifying for Jewish members… It absolutely breaks my heart to say but I do not think the Labour Party is a safe space for Jewish people any more.

    You can watch Lenga’s comments from 8:11 below:

    Panorama presented the implication from Lenga’s statement as being that during her time in the Labour Party, people “subjected” her to “antisemitic abuse” “every single day” – including “telling” her “Hitler was right”. We now know this was not true.

    Decontextualising Lenga’s comments

    The BBC has admitted that it cut what Lenga said. It noted that if it was to “re-broadcast” the Panorama documentary now, it would include the following from Lenga’s testimony:

    I’m Izzy Lenga, I joined the Labour Party in 2015… When I was a student… being quite a high profile Jewish woman student, I was subjected to quite a lot of like nasty vitriol and abuse… The antisemitic abuse I received… was what I was subjected to every single day… Predictably a lot of it came from the far right… neo-Nazi abuse… telling me Hitler was right, telling me Hitler did not go far enough and even more… What absolutely baffled me, was at the same time, I was receiving… very similar and almost often the exact same tropes and anti-Semitic abuse… from the far left.

    Lenga was discussing her time on her university campus – not her time as a Labour Party member. This is something Al Jazeera‘s Labour Files series had previously claimed. When referencing “Hitler was right”, Lenga was talking about her experiences as a student in 2015.

    She was giving the example of people putting up posters with those words on them around her campus. However, the point is it had nothing to do with the Labour Party. The BBC has claimed Panorama did not alter the second part of Lenga’s statement surrounding Holocaust denial in Labour Party meetings.

    The BBC says…

    The Canary asked the BBC for comment. We specifically wanted to know why Panorama chose to edit Lenga’s comments in the way it did. A BBC spokesperson told the Canary:

    Following a recent discussion about any potential re-use of the programme it was decided that, if the programme were to be re-broadcast, we would include some additional comments from Ms Lenga’s original interview to give viewers further context around her experiences. We have published these on our clarifications page in the interests of full transparency.

    The Labour Party says…

    The Panorama programme was presented by John Ware. As Press Gazette reported:

    In July 2020, [the] Labour [Party] apologised and agreed to pay “substantial damages” to Ware after it falsely accused him of “deliberate and malicious misrepresentations designed to mislead the public”.

    The Canary asked the Labour Party for comment, specifically regarding whether, in light of the BBC‘s admission of the cutting of context from Lenga’s interview, the party still stands by its retraction and damages pay-out to Ware. The party had not responded at the time of publication.

    John Ware says…

    Meanwhile, on 15 December 2022, Ware commented on Lenga’s antisemitic “experience[s] on campus”. This was in an article about Al Jazeera‘s Labour Files for Jewish News. He also discussed Panorama‘s editing of her comments. Ware said that:

    At times, she was subjected daily to antisemitic abuse (on and offline) that included comments like “Hitler was right” and “Hitler didn’t go far enough” as well as Holocaust denial “with absolutely no sanctions and absolutely no repercussions”.

    Lenga’s Hitler comments referred to attacks from the right when they were targeting her on campus. However, she also recounted Holocaust denial as a feature of abusive comments from the left.

    As Lenga explained, the attacks from both left and right were “very similar… and almost often the exact same tropes”. Through no fault of her own, the fact they were similar meant these comments became mixed up in the editing and we should have made that distinction – Hitler from the Right and Holocaust denial from the Left – clearer.

    Ware’s recollection of Lenga’s comments, though, is not exactly the same as what the BBC claimed she said in its 14 December 2022 correction. Ware continued:

    A relatively minor slip, yet Corbynites have banged on and on about this, as if it invalidates the entire 59 minutes of Panorama. Presumably Al Jazeera knew that the Holocaust denial like that experienced by Lenga from the Left has led to expulsions of Labour members for neo-Nazi views. The antisemitism logs seen by Al Jazeera contain meticulous notes on such cases.

    Poor journalism or intentional manipulation?

    SKWAWKBOX called the BBC‘s actions “grossly-misleading edits“. Moreover, former Labour councillor John Edwards said on Twitter:

    Frighteningly, during the process of a general election @BBCPanorama broadcast significant lies which coincided with Tory government propaganda. Just think about that.

    Labour Files producer Richard Sanders wrote for Byline Times that:

    The Izzy Lenga story is so astonishing that it ought surely to have set alarm bells ringing at the BBC for anyone with even the remotest familiarity with the internal culture of the Labour Party. It certainly did with a number of viewers.

    The BBC‘s admission also begs the question: what, if any, context did Panorama remove from other participants’ comments, in addition to Lenga’s?

    At best, Panorama‘s editorial decision was a poor piece of journalism – and at worst it may have been an intentional misrepresentation of Lenga’s comments, in an attempt to manipulate the viewer. Either way, the broadcaster’s admission only strengthens the argument that the BBC is not fit for its stated purpose of rigorous, unbiased, public service broadcasting.

    Featured image via Peoples War – YouTube

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • In his quest for the House speaker’s gavel, Republican leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy has pledged to remove Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar from her seat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee for allegedly making antisemitic comments. Jewish American groups came to Omar’s defense this week, dismissing the accusations against her and pointing out antisemitism in the GOP’s own ranks. Meanwhile…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • The following interview was originally published by The Institute for Anarchist Studies. Paul Messersmith-Glavin: Talk about what was going on in the world four or five years ago and what motivated you to put this collection together. Shane Burley: I think I first came up with the idea in 2018 when I was at a bar with Kim Kelly and Spencer Sunshine. It seemed like the time to start something like…

    Source

  • A Twitter account managed by Republican lawmakers who are part of the House Judiciary Committee deleted a tweet praising Kanye West after the rapper praised Adolf Hitler and denied the existence of the Jewish Holocaust during World War II during an interview on Thursday. The tweet, authored by the House Judiciary Committee Republicans account, was posted on October 6 and was meant to show support…

    Source

  • Singer and producer Kanye West’s descent from musical genius to fascist fanboy has hit new lows after a bizarre interview with far-right huckster and bullshit foghorn Alex Jones.

    The musician appeared on Jones’ Infowars show for three hours on 1 December, and engaged in a vicious right-wing diatribe. Somehow, West managed to make a programme which is already a sump of racism and fascistic conspiracy theory even worse.

    A love of Hitler

    From behind a mask, West praised Adolf Hitler and attacked Jewish people to the point that even Jones, whose politics are hardly far from West’s, tried to dial back the tone.

    At one point West even stated that there were “a lot of things that I love about Hitler”:

    West’s rant featured some bizarre claims. These included that Hitler invented both highways and microphones. Naturally, the singer offered no evidence to support these claims:

    Mental health?

    As comedian Jolyon Rubenstein pointed out, we are far past the point where mental health issues can be used to cover for West:

    And Rubenstein is absolutely correct. Anyone with a basic understanding of fascism can unpick West’s ramblings for what they are. But his vast platform, and his millions of fans and followers, may not have that capacity. And that is, among other things, a danger to Jewish people and the broader public.

    The interview was so bizarre that it might be tempting to see Alex Jones as a moderate voice within it. But Jones is far from moderate – his politics are barely a hair’s breadth from those of West. On 13 October 2022, Jones was ordered to pay out $965m to the families of victims of the Sandy Hook school massacre. His claims included that the massacre was faked by the government and that the bereaved parents were ‘crisis actors’. Crisis actors are a commonly used trope by conspiracists like Jones. And, like West, Jones has a long history of antisemitic statements.

    Elon Musk

    On the other hand, struggling Twitter owner and self-appointed free speech warrior Elon Musk isn’t free from blame all this, either. Twitter appears to have suspended West’s account as of 2 December:

    However, Musk, West, and Jones are bedfellows in their permissive attitudes to hate speech, albeit dressed up as a commitment to free speech – another common far-right trope.

    As one Twitter user pointed out, Musk can backpedal all he wants, but the fact remains that he had long advocated to allow space online for rants just like West’s:

    The ban came after West had posted an image of the Star of David merged with a swastika. The Guardian reported that after West’s ban, Musk said:

    I tried my best. Despite that, he again violated our rule against incitement to violence. Account will be suspended.

    Dark times

    The likes of Musk, West, Jones, and even Donald Trump are part of the same reactionary milieu. They’re all super-rich right wing grifters who weaponise free speech to justify their need for power and attention. West’s obvious musical talents should not obscure what he is – a fascist. Nor should his clearly troubled mental health be used to explain away his affection for Hitler. It is, after all, perfectly possible to be mentally unwell and not a fascist, as millions of people demonstrate every day.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/Jamielandis101, cropped to 770 x 403, licenced under CC BY-SA 4.0.

    By Joe Glenton

  • THIS ARTICLE WAS UPDATED AT 8:50PM ON TUESDAY 27 SEPTEMBER TO REFLECT AL JAZEERA RELEASING THE FINAL EPISODE OF THE DOCUMENTARY.

    Al Jazeera‘s The Labour Files has caused anger and uproar in much of the left wing of UK politics. The three-part documentary claims to have “the largest leak of documents in British political history”. Much of it covers the time Jeremy Corbyn was party leader. And yet so far, there has been negligible UK corporate media reporting on it. This is, of course, quite predictable – the press was complicit in much of what The Labour Files exposes. Meanwhile, Al Jazeera has run into problems – pulled part three twice from its schedule, finally releasing it late on Tuesday 27 September.

    The Labour Files 

    Al Jazeera‘s Investigative Unit (I-Unit) has touted the documentary as:

    exposing how unelected officials undermined democracy within the Labour Party.

    The leaked data comprises 500 gigabytes of documents, emails, video and audio files from the Labour Party dating from 1998 to 2021…

    The data reveals how the party’s bureaucrats, whose nominal function is to serve the interests of the party, attempted to undermine members supportive of Jeremy Corbyn

    As of 12pm on Tuesday 27 September, Al Jazeera had released the first two episodes:

    Al Jazeera was due to broadcast episode three on Monday 26 September. At first, it delayed it until Tuesday 27. Then, the Al Jazeera I-Unit pulled its tweets about the episode being broadcast. The Canary contacted the I-Unit for comment, but it had not responded at the time of publication.

    At around 8:45pm on 27 September, the I-Unit finally released episode three. It seems there was an error in the documentary, as it tweeted the following:

    ‘Weaponising’ antisemitism

    The series comes on top of the Forde Report – with both drawing similar conclusions in some areas. For example, Middle East Eye said that the Forde Report showed:

    antisemitism was treated as a ‘factional weapon’ by both supporters and opponents of Jeremy Corbyn in senior party positions.

    The Labour Files claimed similar, with Middle East Monitor reporting:

    allegations of anti-Semitism were said to have been weaponised to undermine Corbyn. The plan, it seems, was to tarnish Corbyn’s image in the eyes of the British electorate by failing to build a functioning complaints and disciplinary process capable of dealing with allegations of racism.

    But as Nasim Ahmed wrote, overall, The Labour Files showed that the “British establishment” led a:

    campaign against… [Corbyn]… aided by the right-wing press, as well as self-styled left-wing publications like the Guardian and, most shocking of all, the Labour party itself which, it would later be revealed, sabotaged Corbyn’s chance of becoming Prime Minister.

    Naturally, the corporate media appears to have been silent on The Labour Files except, bizarrely, the Express.

    Fingers in ears for corporate media

    Some corporate journalists have mentioned it on social media. For example, Michael Crick tweeted:

    The Guardian‘s Owen Jones was shocked – saying The Labour Files’ claims about an infamous Panorama documentary on antisemitism in the Labour Party were “extremely serious”:

    However, former journalist Josh Funnell reminded him that he and The Canary exposed this over three years ago:

    Of course, the story here is the same as it always is. Corbyn supporters and independent media like The Canary knew, and said, what was going on years ago. Now, the establishment lackeys feign shock – when they either turned a blind-eye previously, or actively colluded in the scandal.

    So, it’s been left to independent UK media and international outlets to report on the story – again.

    Independent media: The Labour Files

    Inside Croydon ran several articles, noting the South London-based politicians implicated, including Labour’s general secretary David Evans. North East Bylines called The Labour Files “compelling”. Novara Media discussed the show in two episodes of Tysky Sour.

    SKWAWKBOX gave perhaps the most coverage to The Labour Files. As it wrote:

    We are not in a functioning democracy and the rest of the UK ‘mainstream’ media will either ignore, or actively collude in covering up, the vicious, racist, misogynist and blatantly anti-democratic behaviour of what is now the so-called ‘Labour’ regime

    This is true. But what The Labour Files has also cemented is that the corporate media in the UK is broken. It is complicit in what the documentary revealed. And now it is actively trying to bury the revelations about its role. Fortunately, independent media in the UK is still alive and kicking – and it will not let the truth be forgotten.

    Featured image via Al Jazeera English – YouTube

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  •  

     

    Fox News: Let Them In

    Fox News (7/19/22)

    This week on CounterSpin: In May of this year, a white supremacist killed ten people in Buffalo, New York. He made clear that he wanted to kill Black people, because he believes there is a plot, run by Jews, to “replace” white people with Black and brown people. News media had an opportunity then to deeply interrogate the obvious spurs for the horrific act, including of course the media outlets and pundits and politicians who repeatedly invoke this white replacement idea, but it didn’t really happen.

    The Washington Post offered an inane tweet about how Biden “ran for president pledging to ‘restore the soul of America.’ But a racist massacre raises questions about that promise.”

    CounterSpin spoke at the time about the issues we hoped more media would be exploring, with Matt Gertz, senior fellow at Media Matters for America, who has been following Fox News and Tucker Carlson, and their impact on US politics, for years.

          CounterSpin220909Gertz.mp3

     

    And we spoke also with Eric K. Ward, senior fellow at Southern Poverty Law Center and executive director at Western States Center, about ways forward.

          CounterSpin220909Ward.mp3

     

    We  hear these conversations again this week.

    Plus Janine Jackson takes a quick look at recent press coverage of the assassination of Darya Durgina.

          CounterSpin220909Banter.mp3

    The post Matt Gertz and Eric K Ward on White ‘Replacement’ Theory appeared first on FAIR.

    This post was originally published on CounterSpin.

  • The University of Melbourne Student Union recently passed a motion condemning Israeli apartheid and urging support for the Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions movement against the “settler colonial apartheid state”. Gideon Polya reports.

  • A Guardian commissioning editor has been accused of ‘defaming’ independent outlet Novara Media and one of its staff. In a series of tweets, the editor made baseless antisemitism slurs against Novara – and even attacked one of its Jewish team members.

    Guardianista defames Novara

    Siam Goorwich is a commissioning editor for Guardian Labs. This is the paid-partnership/branded content part of the Guardian‘s output. Goorwich currently has her Twitter account locked. Despite this, Novara Media has discovered that she tweeted some deeply unpleasant things about it back in March 2022.

    As Novara co-founder Aaron Bastani tweeted:

     

    But there was more from Goorwich. As Another Angry Voice tweeted:

    Novara commissioning editor and reporter Rivkah Brown accused Goorwich of tweeting “defamatory” content:

    As of 2pm on Tuesday 26 July, Novara has not said if the Guardian has responded to Brown’s complaint.

    The Forde Report

    It’s likely that Goorwich’s comment stems from her stance on Jeremy Corbyn. She wrote for both Grazia and Metro about her unhappiness with his leadership of Labour. For Metro, she wrote:

    don’t you think it’s terrifying that in Britain in 2018, Jews feel that they can’t vote for a major political party because they believe there’s overwhelming evidence that the party’s leader is an anti-Semite? I certainly do.

    Left-wing sites like Novara were supportive of Corbyn – and therefore, got caught up in these accusations too. But as we now know from the Forde Report, allegations like this about Corbyn and his leadership team are untrue. As Justin Schlosberg wrote for Novara:

    For all the nuanced language of the long-awaited Forde report, there is one key finding that lays bare a carefully constructed lie. It was a lie that implicated not just the right of the Labour party but a great swathe of Britain’s political and media class. And it was a lie that underpinned much of the dominant narrative leading up to, during and since Labour’s disastrous performance in the 2019 general election.

    Schlosberg points out that:

    This lie was not that Labour under Jeremy Corbyn had a real and serious problem with antisemitism. The Forde Report is right to call out those on the left who sought to deny or downplay the existence of anti-Jewish prejudice within the party.

    But crucially:

    The Forde report is equally clear that the antisemitism issue was indeed weaponised by Corbyn’s ideological opponents.

    Perpetuating the “lie”

    Schlosberg continued by describing this actual “lie”:

    In order to fatally undermine the Corbyn project, it had to be shown that Corbyn himself, or at least his office, was somehow complicit in the problem: that the leadership was the problem.

    The Forde Report explicitly proves this was not the case. Yet, by attacking Novara, Goorwich was part of perpetuating this lie by continuing to implicate independent media outlets like Novara. As Brown said, this is potentially defamatory – and Novara would be right to take further action.

    Featured image via Aaron Bastani – screengrab, Wikimedia and Wikipedia 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • For many on the Left, the Labour Party was always a bit of a joke. Then in 2015, a socialist was accidentally allowed to run for leader… In 2022, we’re right back where we started. How do we know? Well, the long-awaited Forde Report is out.

    The report is meant to address the contents of a leaked document from 2020. That document contained WhatsApp messages which appeared to show, among other things, that right-wing staff members sabotaged the party’s left-wing leadership.

    Both sides-ing

    For the most part these claims seem to have been borne out by the evidence. Although, the authors of the Forde Report have been accused of “both sides-ing”:

    And, the usual collection of tired Blairite hacks have been accused of selectively citing Forde findings to fit their own elite worldview:

    And here:

    The Clown Party

    But the truth is that people can, and will, argue over the report and the entire Corbyn moment as much as they want. But it’s time to accept that the Labour Party, clown-show that it is, is not, and was never going to be a vehicle for working class power.

    For example, as former trade union leader Len McCluskey tweeted yesterday, it collapses the argument by anti-Corbyn saboteurs who now dominate the party, that Corbyn staff interfered with anti-Semitism allegations:

    McCluskey also reminds us that Keir Starmer actually paid out money to some of those accused of wrecking Labour’s electoral hopes:

    Targeted posts

    Political poet Lowkey reminds us that some of the same group appear to have used a form of information warfare to dupe the Labour leader that they were doing their jobs:

    As John McDonnell, who was shadow chancellor under Corbyn, point outs, party officials diverted funds meant to win the 2017 election as well as a range of other outrageous behaviour:

    Jeremy Corbyn himself pointed out that the party’s (often unelected) right-wing faction simply could not come to terms with the idea of basic democracy:

    Labour is done.

    It is not just that the party’s ruling class wrecked two elections and kept the Tories in power. It is that they did so successfully. Clearly there were also other strategic reasons – some self-inflicted – that the Corbyn moment came to nothing. But let’s be honest. Apart from a flurry of projects after World War 2 (and some good but doomed intentions between 2015 and 2019) the party belongs, as it always has, to capital.

    If there is a parliamentary route to power for the left and the working class, it definitely isn’t Labour. And anyone still flogging that dead horse in 2022 needs to take a long hard look at themselves.

    Featured image by Wikimedia Commons/Rwendland, via CC 4.0, resized to 770×403

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • A Klezmer band had just begun to play for the crowd at the Highland Park, Illinois, July 4 parade when the all-too-familiar sound of automatic rifle fire ripped the day in half. A man on a rooftop poured shot after shot into the fleeing crowd, leaving six dead and dozens wounded. One victim was disemboweled by the power of the rifle used, and a 76-year-old man was killed in his wheelchair.

    The Klezmer music was not out of place; Highland Park, a Chicago suburb with a population of about 30,000 residents, has been a proud Jewish enclave for generations. The demographic makeup of Highland Park is no secret: The streets are lined with kosher delis and synagogues. The Maxwell Street Klezmer Band, who played the parade until the shots rang out, is described by the Cleveland Jewish News as, “Chicago’s preeminent Jewish music group.”

    The alleged shooter, Robert Crimo, opened fire in Highland Park. Whether or not he intended his action to be antisemitic violence, he was shooting up a community that was well-known to be heavily Jewish in broad daylight.

    “Michla Schanowitz, co-director of North Suburban Lubavitch Chabad — Central Avenue Synagogue, was outside her Chabad center at the heart of the parade’s route, just four blocks away from the shooting, when she saw crowds running toward her…. She began rushing people to safety inside her Chabad center immediately,” Chabad News reports. “‘Come inside, it’s a synagogue,’ she shouted to the stunned passersby…. The July 4th parade annually has a strong Jewish presence, with Chabad running a float complete with a giant menorah and providing other Jewish experiences for participants.”

    At this moment, no one knows precisely what Crimo was thinking when he climbed that ladder to the roof. Details of his life and motivations are still coalescing, but the picture coming together is of a meagerly popular lo-fi YouTube and Spotify rapper who calls himself “Awake” and favors violent imagery in his videos. He was administrator of a Discord, a premier platform for neo-Nazis and other far right posters, that was titled “SS.” The channel has since been taken down, along with his videos on other platforms. “On most of Crimo’s social-media pages, and embedded in several of his videos, is a symbol that roughly resembles that used by Suomen Sisu, a far-right Finnish organization,” reports The Daily Beast.

    As usual, the trope of the “angry young (white) loner” has begun to coalesce around Crimo. One of his posts shows him wrapped in a Trump flag, while others reflect positively on President Biden. The Washington Post describes him as “a troubled young man,” a “weird dude” who was “immersed in fringe internet culture” and is depicted by friends as “consistently apolitical.” His uncle, Paul Crimo, told the Post, “He doesn’t express himself, he just sits down on his computer.”

    This dovetails seamlessly with the NRA-peddled defense of the indefensible — “It’s all about mental health!” — and never mind that the weapon used was purchased legally, according to Highland Park Mayor Nancy Rotering. “I think at some point,” Rotering told NBC’s Today,“this nation needs to have a conversation about these weekly events involving the murder of dozens of people with legally obtained guns. If that’s what our laws stand for, we need to re-examine the laws.”

    A grocery store, a church, an elementary school and now a July 4 parade, all shot to bloody splinters in a matter of weeks. Regardless of whether there was a fascist motivation behind Crimo’s attack, it still serves that wretched cause. Law professor Heidi Li Feldman notes on Twitter, “There is a direct connection between destroying opportunities for safe public gatherings and menacing American democracy.”

    Jewish people and other community members were attacked yesterday in Highland Park, but we are all victims of this tidal wave of very American gun violence. As our safe spaces dwindle and our fears rise, fascism finds an ever-growing foothold.

    Also of note: Crimo was apprehended unharmed by law enforcement officials after an intense six-hour manhunt, just days after Akron, Ohio police shot and killed unarmed, fleeing Jayland Walker 60 or more times. One of these two men is Black, and one is not. Three guesses which, but you should only need one. This is not to say that anyone should be killed by police; it’s to say that no one should.

    You see, the killing of Walker, too, was very American.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Gideon Polya writes that free speech faltered and falsehood triumphed at the University of Melbourne, after the student union was forced to withdraw a motion condemning apartheid Israel.

    This post was originally published on Green Left.

  •  

    Janine Jackson interviewed Matt Gertz and Eric K. Ward about the Buffalo massacre and “replacement theory” for the May 20, 2022, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript.

          CounterSpin220520.mp3

     

    Twitter: Biden ran for president pledging to 'restore the soul of America'

    Twitter (5/17/22)

    Ten human beings were killed and three wounded in Buffalo, New York, this week. By the killer’s own admission, he sought to kill Black people because they are Black, and he is a white supremacist who believes there’s a plot to replace white people with Black and brown people, a plot run by the Jews.

    If you’re news media, you could go all in on media outlets and pundits and political figures whose repeated invocations of this white replacement theory are the obvious spurs for this horrific crime. Or you could be the Washington Post, and tweet that Joe Biden “ran for president pledging to ‘restore the soul of America.’ A racist massacre raises questions about that promise.”

    A press corps that wanted to go down in history as doing better than pretending to raise questions about the “soul of America” would be busy interrogating deeply the structural economic political relationships that promote and platform white supremacy. They’d be using their immense and specific influence to interrupt business as usual—to demand, not just today, but tomorrow and the next day, meaningful response from powerful people, including, yes, Democrats and Biden and whomever. They would not be accepting that murder, mass murder, in the name of white supremacy and antisemitism is ultimately just another news story to report in 2022 America, film at 11.

    We’ll talk about what we ought to be talking about with Matt Gertz, senior fellow at Media Matters for America. He’s been tracking Fox News and Tucker Carlson and their impact on US politics for years now.

    And we’ll also speak with Eric K. Ward, senior fellow at Southern Poverty Law Center and executive director at Western States Center, about ways upward and outward from this current, difficult place.

    That’s coming up this week on CounterSpin, brought to you each week by FAIR, the national media watch group.

    ***

    Twitter: Noting that in AP copy, 18-yeear-old Michael Brown was an “18-year old Black man,” while 18-year-old Payton Gendron is a “white teenager.”

    Twitter (5/15/22)

    Janine Jackson: There are some tropes about corporate news media that you wonder if people even wonder at them anymore. Did you catch that when Michael Brown was killed by law enforcement at age 18 in Ferguson, Missouri, AP described him as a “Black man,” but the white 18-year-old who killed 10 people in a Buffalo supermarket because it was in a Black neighborhood and he’s a racist, AP instructs readers to understand as a “teenager.”

    That language-level bias is meaningful. But in the case of the racist hate-based crime of this past week, the media question is also writ very large. I will surprise no one by saying that Fox News and primetime host Tucker Carlson see there is no relationship whatsoever in the Buffalo killer’s explicit reference to the same white replacement theory that they have been pushing for years, and his acting in response to those ideas that, again, they have pushed night after night with vigor. At a certain point the rest of US civil society pretending that white supremacy is not a central factor in our conversation and our politics becomes a dangerously willful ignorance.

    Our next guest has been surveying this swamp and its meaning and its impact for years now. Matt Gertz is senior fellow at Media Matters for America. He joins us now by phone from Washington, DC. Welcome to CounterSpin, Matt Gertz.

    Matt Gertz: Thank you for having me.

    JJ: Depending on which day of the week you ask me, frankly, I have different thoughts about how and whether to respond to people—in media, but also in life—who are saying, without defending this mass murder, that when people talk about immigration, they’re not saying to hurt people. “Immigration,” “demographic shifts”—that’s just language. It seems important to acknowledge, when you hear a Fox News host talking about “demographic shifts,” it’s not a wild interpretive leap to say that they’re actually calling for some sort of action. You’ve been talking about those connections for years now, right?

    MG: I have been, yes. I’ve been working at Media Matters in some capacity or another for almost 14 years, and in that time, I’ve spent much of my career surveying Fox News and the various threads that run through it. And I have to say, in the speed and completeness with which a white supremacist conspiracy theory took hold on the nation’s most popular cable news network, it’s really quite astounding.

    When we talk about the great replacement theory, I think we’re often talking about a couple of different things. The US has, obviously, a long history of xenophobia. America is sort of a competition between our best ideals, in which we imagine that we can bring new people into our body politic and all be Americans together—and backlash that comes against that, that came against the Irish and the Italians and Eastern European Jews, and so on and so forth down through the decades, the fearmongering, the idea that “the other” is joining America in a way that spoils it, that in some way makes it dirtier. So there’s that long story.

    More recently, though, the great replacement is a very particular conspiracy theory, that builds on those long hatreds. And this is the idea that there is some shadowy force that is deliberately bringing in unchecked immigrants, an invasion of them. And the purpose of that is to replace the white populace, and in doing so, gain and retain power. That is a very dangerous phrasing; the idea of replacing one race with another is something that, almost by definition, seems to require some sort of active response to it.

    JJ: Right. Some people belong to be here. If you say “replacement,” that means people being pushed out who are rightfully here by, implicitly, people who are not rightfully here.

    Matt Gertz

    Matt Gertz: “Tucker [Carlson] made it his mission to bring this white supremacist conspiracy theory into the mainstream, to sanitize it just a little bit.”

    MG: Yes. And so this was an idea that, in its recent form, popped over from Europe in 2011. It’s this essay by a Frenchman who wrote in 2011 that French society, white French society, was going to be replaced by Muslim immigrants. And that idea was sort of ported over across the sea to America and, when it was incorporated into the standard white supremacist discourse here, the people who were bringing about this replacement were often described as Jews, and anti-Black racism, obviously, took on a key role. Anti-Black racism, anti-Latino racism, and it took on more of a racial character than the religious one that it had over in France.

    At first, this was largely confined to explicit white supremacist spaces. It’s the sort of thing you’d read if you were on the neo-Nazi Stormfront website, or something like that. It was really kept out of mainstream discourse.

    But it’s not anymore. It’s really everywhere. And the reason for that is Tucker Carlson and Fox News. Tucker made it his mission to bring this white supremacist conspiracy theory into the mainstream, to sanitize it just a little bit so you could get it on the air without it being incredibly obvious what he was doing.

    He started doing this around 2018, and over the years he’s become more and more explicit in his language, until it’s really not different at all from the manifesto that that shooter put out. You don’t have to read that manifesto; it’s not pleasant reading. But you can also get much of the same material if you just turn on Fox News. The conspiracy theory is recited almost on a nightly basis for an audience of millions of people.

    JJ: It’s so meaningful, and I think that CounterSpin listeners know that there are such worldviews and ideologies at work, and that sometimes they’re given platform, and that sometimes others are marginalized. But I think that listeners do understand that this supposedly ideological battle is being fought out in a context of corporate capitalism.

    And Tucker Carlson didn’t put up a lemonade stand and become a millionaire because his lemonade is better. He’s supported and held up and pushed in front of people by a system and a structure that, if we can’t say they wanted him there, we can certainly say they’re happy with him being sustained there. And I just wonder, how do we try to move the conversation from, you know, this twerp with his dumb ideas, to what we could actually push on to change, to push aside the interest in maintaining this kind of fountain of harm and hatred?

    Fox: The Dem Agenda Relies on Demographic Change

    Tucker Carlson (Fox News, 4/12/21)

    MG: You’re certainly right that he is not some sort of lone actor. He is in his position because Rupert Murdoch and his son Lachlan Murdoch want him there, and he is doing, frankly, his job. He’s doing exactly what the Fox News brass wants him to do. They want his blood-soaked conspiracy theories. If they didn’t, they could stop him.

    You know, it’s always sort of unclear whether they’re doing it because they have an affinity with what he’s saying, whether they agree with him, or if they’re simply doing it purely for money. But if they’re doing it for the money, I think that the option available is to try to remove the profitability of Tucker Carlson, for Americans to tell advertisers: “We don’t want you advertising on Fox News. They’re promoting hate and bigotry and, frankly, domestic terrorism.” To tell cable carriers we want an option not to have a bundle that includes Fox News, so that we don’t give them our money every month when we pay our cable bills. That’s really the leverage point, making it not profitable for Fox News to have this kind of hate on its airwaves.

    JJ: I think it’s a big thing to say; part of what we’re critiquing at FAIR is corporate ownership and sponsorship of media, and the leverage that they exert. But given that they exert that leverage, well, exert it, you know?

    I’ll just ask you, finally, because I know it’s the latest thing, “upfronts,” those are places where outlets talk to advertisers and talk to media buyers, and they talk to stockholders and that sort of thing. That kind of behind-the-scenes conversation is where we heard Les Moonves of CBS say, “Donald Trump is bad for America, but he’s good for CBS. So let’s do it.” We just had upfronts for Fox two days ago. No indication there that they are thinking, “Oh, my gosh, people were just murdered based on ideas we’re putting out there. Let’s think about that.” That was not the vibe.

    MG: To the contrary, to some extent, they were rubbing a lot of this in the faces of the advertisers. I mean, the timing for them is really, obviously, quite bad. They were holding this conference, bringing in the nation’s leading advertisers and media buyers, 48 hours after a mass shooting in which the shooter repeated the same talking points that you can hear on Fox News any given night.

    And so they did not talk about Tucker Carlson, I think quite deliberately, at that event. But the person that they had instead flacking for the company was Pete Hegseth, who is another Fox News host who has said that there’s a full-scale invasion of migrants coming to your backyard. Much of the same replacement theory languages as Carlson does, but he’s also one of the network’s biggest defenders of the January 6 insurrection.

    And then there were no apologies, obviously, for Fox News from the Fox News lineup. In fact, they seemed quite clear that they want to brand themselves as victims, that facing criticism in the way that they have is somehow unfair and unjust to them.

    So they are clearly not giving advertisers much to work with, other than to accept that if they continue funding this network, then what they’re doing is giving money for white supremacist propaganda.

    JJ: And we’re gonna end it there for now. We’ve been speaking with Matt Gertz. He’s senior fellow at Media Matters for America. They keep receipts on this sort of thing, and you can find them online at MediaMatters.org. Matt Gertz, thank you so much for joining us this week on CounterSpin.

    MG: Thank you for having me.

    ***

    Janine Jackson: You may have heard the Buffalo mass shooting described as “senseless,” and in some ways that is true, but in other ways, less so. Because we know the man who killed 10 people and wounded three others was armed, not just with military gear and weaponry, but with a particular set of ideas about white people like himself in existential peril, and that these ideas in various forms are being promulgated in an alarming number of places today.

    It’s not about trying to “read the mind” of a murderer, but thinking about what systems and institutions and ideas contribute to such a horrific act, and what different things need to happen to prevent its recurrence.

    Our guest has been working on these issues for many years now. Eric K. Ward is a senior fellow with the Southern Poverty Law Center, and executive director of Western States Center. He was the 2021 recipient of the Train Foundation’s Civil Courage Award, the first American to receive that honor. He joins us now by phone from Portland, Oregon. Welcome to CounterSpin, Eric Ward.

    Eric K. Ward: Such a pleasure to be with you. Thank you for having me. I’m sorry that it is around yet another tragedy.

    JJ: Absolutely. Well, I think that a lot of people have avoided learning about this stuff. It’s toxic and upsetting, and why give it space in your head, you know? So with the acknowledgement that knowing about the particular fear and anger that, by his own account, drove this man’s violent actions, that’s not the same thing as appeasing it. So acknowledging that, what should we know about white replacement theory and the worldview that it offers?

    Eric K. Ward

    Eric K. Ward: “Replacement theory…is a story that teaches that a secret elite are at war to destroy white Christian America.”

    EKW: We have to understand that, at the end of the day, there’s another social movement on the terrain of America, and it is not one grounded in the inclusion of racial, environmental and economic social justice groups. It is one that is grounded in exclusion and ethnic cleansing, and it’s known as white nationalism. White nationalism has a narrative, and that narrative is called the replacement theory. It is a story that teaches that a secret elite are at war to destroy white Christian America, through immigration, through interracial dating, through expanding civil rights for the LGBTQ community, the list goes on.

    But we should all be clear that replacement theory is merely a retelling of an old antisemitic narrative called The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, a forged antisemitic document by Russian Czarist police from 1903. It’s the same story; it tells a story of a secret Jewish conspiracy seeking to destroy European Christendom. And it was brought here to America by Henry Ford, proliferated to tens of thousands of Americans. It was used to try to explain why white segregationists lost against the Black civil rights movement of the 1960s. And today, it’s being called replacement theory, and it’s being used to justify racial terror of Jews, Muslims, African Americans, Latinos, Asians and others.

    But not only is it being driven by the white nationalist movement: Irresponsibly, there are cynical elected officials who are promoting and credentializing this antisemitic theory, and it’s not only killing Jews, it is killing all of us. And we have now lost ten more people from the Black community from this racial terror, and it’s time for us to understand that we are fighting antisemitism.

    JJ: I think sometimes the conversation gets divided according to victims, and then it can make it difficult to see the overarching thing. And so I think when some people hear you, they’re going to say, “Antisemitism? This is about racism.” But it’s important to see the connections of those two streams.

    EKW: That’s right. We, as Black people, have always faced the brunt of all forms of bigotry in American society, along with indigenous communities, we have always been victimized by racism. But we have to be sophisticated enough, particularly those of us on the left, racial justice leaders, we have to be honest with our communities and help them understand what is happening.

    The attacks on Latinos in El Paso in the Walmart that occurred in August of 2019, the targeting of Latinos at the Gilroy Garlic Festival in 2019, the targeting of Jews at the Tree of Life, the targeting of African Americans in 2015 in Charleston. Yes, these were anti-Latino, these were anti-Black, these were attacks on Jews. But in all of those cases, and in many more, they were driven by this antisemitic narrative.

    And we have to let our people know that we are being targeted because of antisemitism. It doesn’t take away from the racism. It doesn’t take away from the xenophobia that Latinos and Asians are facing this community. It is merely helping us understand where the driver is, and if we can disrupt the driver, perhaps we can begin to turn the violence around.

    The Intercept on Les Moonves

    CBS chief Les Moonves in the Intercept (12/10/15)

    JJ: Attention right now is focused, with reason, on Fox News, and Tucker Carlson, and folks who had explicitly talked up white replacement theory for a long time, though apparently Fox has gone very quiet on it just now.

    But we’ve also seen establishment media fail to really be anti-racist and fail to vigorously defend inclusive democracy, as well as kind of a general framework that does tend to present political issues as zero sum. And then again, when Les Moonves said, “Donald Trump might be bad for America, but he’s good for CBS. So keep going, Donald.” That was just dereliction of duty, as far as I’m concerned.

    But as you have just indicated, we know there are more people who oppose this hateful worldview then support it. We know that, although it’s hard not to focus on horrific acts and hate crimes, we know that most people actually support the idea of participatory democracy and inclusive democracy and anti-racism. So I guess my question is just, what do you think is necessary to grow that movement, where’s the energy that we could present in that direction?

    EKW: There is absolutely a pro-democracy movement that is building in the United States. But it’s going to take a broad coalition, meaning lasting progressive movements, and leaders in the United States are going to have to come to terms with what it means to sit in broad coalition with others who may not be progressive or liberal. I’m not talking about some kind of mediocre, Kumbaya, “we’re going to get along and ignore our differences.” It means recognizing that there has to be a broad-based social movement that supports democracy and the functioning rule of law in the United States. And I think there are some things that folks can specifically do.

    So the first is simply this. The first is you have to begin to name that you are part of that pro-democracy movement in this country. “I’m in a pro-democracy movement that opposes authoritarians, that is opposed to bigoted and political violence, and demands that government step up and do its job, that it be of the people.” So that’s the first thing that needs to happen.

    The second is this pro-democracy movement needs to take media accountability, and that includes social media platforms, seriously. We have places like Fox News Entertainment openly promoting an antisemitic theory that has been used in targeting minority communities across this country. Yes, shame on Fox News. But shame on the FCC, shame on the Federal Trade Commission, and shame on the Department of Justice for allowing that to happen without accountability and without consequence. Shame on international businesses who are engaging in business and commerce in United States on the blood of minorities, across this country, who have been attacked over the last five years. Shame on law enforcement for putting ideology ahead of its mission to protect and serve.

    JJ: I just want to ask you one final question, which is, I know that you are a musician, and it sounds trite, but it’s true that music and culture can be healing, and can bring people together. And if you have thoughts on that space, I’d just be happy to hear them.

    EKW: Yes, every musician and artist that is listening right now, if you work in art, if you work within music, your voice and your energy is needed more than ever. We aren’t hearing real stories on social media; we’re being manipulated through algorithm, and we need the stories to be told. And stories get told also through music and through art. And it’s time for artists to tell the real story of America, one that wants to move forward together. We need artists to tell the stories that won’t get told during these times, that keep us moving forward and give us hope.

    JJ: We’ve been speaking with Eric K. Ward from Southern Poverty Law Center and Western States Center. Thank you so much, Eric Ward, for joining us this week on CounterSpin.

    EKW: Thank you.

     

    The post ‘The “Great Replacement” Builds on Those Long Hatreds’ appeared first on FAIR.

    This post was originally published on FAIR.

  •  

    Fox: The Dem Agenda Relies on Demographic Change

    Tucker Carlson (Fox News, 4/12/21)

    This week on CounterSpin: Ten human beings were killed and three wounded in Buffalo, New York. By the killer’s own admission, he sought to kill Black people because they are Black, and he is a white supremacist who believes there’s a plot to “replace” white people with Black and brown people, a plot run by the Jews. If you’re news media, you could go all in on media outlets and pundits and political figures whose repeated invocations to this white replacement theory are the obvious spurs for this horrendous crime. Or you could be the Washington Post, and tweet that Joe Biden “ran for president pledging to ‘restore the soul of America.’ A racist massacre raises questions about that promise.”

    A press corps that wanted to go down in history as doing better than pretending to raise questions about the “soul of America” would be busy interrogating the structural, economic, political relationships that promote and platform white supremacy. They’d be using their immense and specific influence to interrupt business as usual, to demand—not just today, but tomorrow and the next day—meaningful response from powerful people. They would not be accepting that mass murder in the name of white supremacy and antisemitism is just another news story to report in 2022 America, film at 11.

    We’ll talk about what we ought to be talking about with Matt Gertz, senior fellow at Media Matters for America, who has been tracking Fox News and Tucker Carlson, and their impact on US politics, for years now.

          CounterSpin220520Gertz.mp3

     

    And also with Eric K. Ward, senior fellow at Southern Policy Law Center and executive director at Western States Center—about ways upward and outward from this current, difficult place.

          CounterSpin220520Ward.mp3

     

    The post Matt Gertz, Eric K. Ward on the Buffalo Massacre & ‘Replacement Theory’ appeared first on FAIR.

    This post was originally published on FAIR.