I have been faithful to thee, Cynara, in my fashion...


By Jenni Frazer
March 3, 2011
Share

Well, boker tov al Yisrael. Antisemitism is officially a Bad Thing.
How do we know?
Because the Guardian has dedicated the cover story of G2 to a three page dissection of it by Jonathan Freedland.
Forgive me, Jonathan, but this made me slightly feel like going into a cushioned room and banging my head repeatedly against the wall. I know Jonathan reads the JC, I know Jonathan is a columnist for the JC. So how can it be that with the air of a conjurer bringing a rabbit out of a yarmulke, Jonathan introduces Guardian readers to an apparently box-fresh new set of prejudices which they didn't know about before?
Do me a favour.
It is naive bordering on the impudent for the Guardian to run a piece with no reference to the toxic atmosphere it has helped to create for the Israel-backing Jewish community in the UK. Day after day, week after week, the Guardian has opened its pages and its Comment area on its website to the most poisonous, vitriolic abuse, much barely moderated. But the most Jonathan is able to come up as far as the media is concerned is an attack on an eight-year-old issue of the New Statesman, the notorious "Kosher Conspiracy" cover story. I fully understand that Jonathan is in an invidious position: he can hardly kick his own paper. But I do wonder whether Julian Assange's alleged attacks on the Guardian's editor, Alan Rusbridger, and two of its writers, John Kampfner and David Leigh, may have predicated a wake-up call at the paper's editorial conference.
Meanwhile, in another part of the forest, The Sun has woken up to antisemitism, too. Its features editor, solemnly quoting last year's CST statistics, has invited the Chief Rabbi to write them something. Whether he will accept this gracious invitation is a moot point, at the moment. But the reason The Sun is interested is because hating Jews more than is strictly necessary is now a story about slebs, innit?
Well, now we know. The Guardian's egregious trail on its front page this morning, "Another day, another antisemitic rant from a celebrity", could barely be read in my house for the plethora of pots and kettles cloying my vision.
I prefer the JC's front-page take on the matter: "Even in his bigotry, Galliano was entirely on-trend." Wouldn't do to be unfashionable, would it?

COMMENTS

Joe Millis

Thu, 03/03/2011 - 13:35

Rate this:

-3 points

But the reason The Sun is interested is because hating Jews more than is strictly necessary is now a story about slebs, innit?

Snork!


Jonathan Hoffman

Thu, 03/03/2011 - 15:05

Rate this:

1 point

Yes yes yes

Freedland has zero credibility on this topic. He supported Livingstone at the last London election and has jumped on the Galliano bandwagon a week late, after dior had fired him, when it was safe to do so. where was he last Friday when the story broke?

The Guardian at first (last Friday) tried to make excuses for Galliano:

http://cifwatch.com/2...011/02/28/guardian-humiliation-watch-the-papers-...

And even on Tuesday Linda Grant - appallingly - was still making excuses for Galliano, in The Guardian

http://cifwatch.com/2011/03/02/the-guardians-linda-grant-and-fashion-abl...


Jonathan Hoffman

Thu, 03/03/2011 - 15:06

Rate this:

1 point

If Freeedland felt so strongly about AS in the Guardian he would quit.

He hasn't.

Says it all really ....


Yvetta

Thu, 03/03/2011 - 16:38

Rate this:

3 points

Great post, Jenny!


Joe Millis

Thu, 03/03/2011 - 16:42

Rate this:

-3 points

Yvetta, have you not noticed how Jenni spells her name?


Yvetta

Thu, 03/03/2011 - 16:50

Rate this:

4 points

I have now!


cityca

Thu, 03/03/2011 - 17:28

Rate this:

3 points

You know a person by the company he keeps. Jonathan Freedland keeps some pretty horrible company over at the Grauniad.

There's a roll call of anti-Zionist 'writers' who take it in turns to put the boot into Israel, Zionists and the Jews although when it comes to Jews, they are not quite so specific. Who needs to be when the term Zionist covers a multitude of sins?

As Jenni writes, do me a favour Freedland, as a Grauniad asaJew, you simply have no credibility.


J.Clifford

Thu, 03/03/2011 - 22:06

Rate this:

0 points

Freedland supported Livinstone the same Ken Livingstone who welcomed to London as his "honoured guest" Yusuf al-Qaradawi the Qatar-based Egyptian cleric who advocates the use of Palestinian children as suicide bombers.

Does he still support Red Ken now that his "honoured guest" has issued a Fatwa permitting killing of Libyan Leader Mu'ammar Al-Qadhafi? How about the Gazan Salafi-Jihadist asking: Why Don't You Issue a Fatwa to Kill Sudan's President or Saudi Arabia's King?

That should gives Livingstone and by association his supporter Jonathan Freedland a big problem because this time it's not Jews or Israelis in the firing line.


LindaGrant

Fri, 03/04/2011 - 10:54

Rate this:

-2 points

Can I point out to Jonathan Hoffman that Stephen Pollard, the editor of the Jewish Chronicle, was trying to contact me on Wednesday to write about Galliano's anti-semitism for this paper, presumably having read the Guardian piece which appeard the previous day. Unfortunately I was in meetings all day and unable to do so, but it seems a little surprising that the Jewish Chronicle would commission a whitewash of anti-semitism. Or perhaps it was not a whitewash after all?


mattpryor

Fri, 03/04/2011 - 11:03

Rate this:

2 points

The point, Ms Grant, is that your newspaper has gone out of its way to encourage anti-Semites through its horrific campaign against Israel. Your online edition is a cess-pool of Jew hatred. Your coverage of the Palestine Papers was highly selective and negative. You publish letters encouraging suicide bombers. The Guardian is an absolute disgrace. To take the moral high-ground about anti-Semitism is hypocritical and shameful.


Jon_i_Cohen

Fri, 03/04/2011 - 11:07

Rate this:

2 points

@LindaGrant
Have you ever read The Guardian CiF Middle East web site?


LindaGrant

Fri, 03/04/2011 - 11:14

Rate this:

0 points

I don't work for the Guardian, I write around four or five pieces a year for them. I am solely concerned here with the statement that my article about Galliano was making excuses for his anti-semitism. If that is indeed the case, it seems odd that the editor of this paper does not seem to have recognised this.

And neither does Norman Lebrecht, though he may agree with you about about the Guardian

http://www.artsjournal.com/slippeddisc/2011/03/john_galliano_-_the_two_i...


Jon_i_Cohen

Fri, 03/04/2011 - 11:31

Rate this:

1 point

As Lebrecht put it "That is anti-semitism, 2011 style".
And "The Guardian with its obsessive focus on Palestine".
Linda, if you associate yourself with anti-semites a la The Guardian you are in danger of "being tarred with the same brush", especially when you "attempt" to justify Gallianos actions as "just another taboo".
Anti-semitism is not another taboo, it is illegal in France and Germany and should be so here in the UK, (the reasons why it is not are for another debate),
Galliano was not out "to shock", when drunk, people revert to their true feelings and there is obviously something anti-semitic in Gallianos upbringing and/or background, your article attempted to justify, excuse and defend the indefensible, hence the critiscism.


LindaGrant

Fri, 03/04/2011 - 11:41

Rate this:

0 points

As I say, both Stephen Pollard and Norman Lebrecht seem to have understood what I wrote in an entirely different way, which was very far from an endorsement or excuse for Galliano's views but a rather biting condemnation of the fashion industry and its vacuous amoral mindset which builds up shallow creatures an lets them believe that anything they think is significant and true.

I'm satisfied that enough people, including the editor of this paper and one of its columnists, amongst many others, read my piece correctly.


LindaGrant

Fri, 03/04/2011 - 11:45

Rate this:

0 points

If I can make it any clearer to you, Galliano sees anti-semitism as just another taboo. This is a million miles from my own opinion, as the piece made abundantly obvious.


amber

Fri, 03/04/2011 - 11:52

Rate this:

1 point

Linda Grant, you shouldn't write for the Guardian at all. It is the modern face of anti-Semitism.


mattpryor

Fri, 03/04/2011 - 11:54

Rate this:

-1 points

@LindaGrant

Galliano sees anti-semitism as just another taboo

This is, I'm afraid, making excuses for him!


LindaGrant

Fri, 03/04/2011 - 12:13

Rate this:

0 points

Perhaps Norman Lebrecht and Stephen Pollard can explain to you why this is not the case since I don't seem to be able to.


Jon_i_Cohen

Fri, 03/04/2011 - 12:20

Rate this:

1 point

"LindaGrant

4 March, 2011 - 11:13

Perhaps Norman Lebrecht and Stephen Pollard can explain to you why this is not the case since I don't seem to be able to".

Because it is NOT the case, you have simply tried to make excuses for Galliano by blaming the fashion industry - we do NOT see that as an excuse for inherant and blatant anti-semitism.


mattpryor

Fri, 03/04/2011 - 12:21

Rate this:

1 point

Well my point is that how do you know that Galliano sees anti-Semitism as "just another taboo"? Have you asked him? Did he say "oops sowwy, I thought anti-Semitism was just another taboo!"?

You are implying that he doesn't understand anti-Semitism, he doesn't understand its significance for humanity, and therefore is not entirely responsible for his words. This is making excuses for him.

I think that he understands it only too well - particularly given his other comments about Hitler.


amber

Fri, 03/04/2011 - 12:28

Rate this:

1 point

I am reminded the of the case of Karlheinz Stockhausen, the composer, who, right after 9/11, said something along the lines of "this was a great artistic statement". It isn't good enough to hide behind narcissism and a self-important wish to "break new ground" as an artist by making deeply offensive and crass statements. Artists live in the real world as much as anyone else. That means they share the same responsibilities. Someone needs to tell them.


LindaGrant

Fri, 03/04/2011 - 12:51

Rate this:

1 point

I entirely agree, Amber. Indeed that was one of the points of my piece, that the yes men and sycophants by pandering to his 'genius' have let him get away with not living in the real world.

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.

LATEST COMMENTS