Instructive antisemitic comparison


By Stephen Pollard
January 29, 2013
Share

Oh dear. I really didn't want to have to write about antisemitism again. Believe me it's not something I ever want to have to discuss. But this past week there have been two instructive episodes.

At the end of last week, a LibDem MP no one had ever heard of called David Ward decided to share his thoughts for Holocaust Memorial Day. In a spectacularly appalling piece of timing, he posted the following on his blog immediately after signing the Holocaust Memorial Trust's book of remembrance:

"Having visited Auschwitz twice– once with my family and once with local schools ... I am saddened that the Jews, who suffered
unbelievable levels of persecution during the Holocaust, could within a few years of liberation from the death camps be inflicting atrocities on Palestinians in the new state of Israel and continue to do so on a daily basis in the West Bank and Gaza."

Leave aside the grotesque comparison between 'persecution' of the Jews during the Holocaust and the 'atrocities' inflicted on Palestinians – I have yet to see the evidence which Mr Ward presumably has of death camps on the West Bank, and Israeli guards herding Palestinians into gas chambers to be murdered.

Leave that aside, as I say.

If I had a pound for every time I'm told that Jews use the Holocaust to justify Israeli policy then I'd be a very wealthy Jew. (I hope you see where I'm going with this.)

What's especially interesting about the otherwise deeply uninteresting Mr Ward is the way he turns that around. It's not the Israelis who inflict atrocities on Palestinians. It's me. It's 'the Jews' - at it again.

We Jews of all people – those in Golders Green, in New York and, I imagine, even in Ethiopia – are each of us, individually, responsible for what is going on. Presumably that's because we conspire the whole time.

Just in case there was any doubt, he went on Sky News to elaborate: "I'm accusing the Jews who did it so if you're a Jew and you did not do it, I'm not accusing you. I'm saying that those Jews who did that and continue to do it have not learned those lessons. If you are a Jew and you do not do those things and have never done those things then I am not criticising you."

I see. Good Jews are ok. It's bad Jews that are the problem.

Putting the most charitable gloss on it – rather than believing that Ward simply adopts casual antisemitism as his modus operandi – let's say he thinks that Jews, of all people, should know better.

Howard Jacobson has shown how this leaves Jews doubly damned: to the Holocaust itself and for ever more to elevated moral scrutiny as a result of it. Thus "the Holocaust becomes an educational experience from which Jews were ethically obliged to graduate summa cum laude, Israel being the proof that they didn't."

Worse, that argument means that it is Jews, not antisemites, who need to learn the lessons of the Shoah, and Jews who need to get their act together.

Ward has acted like a chided child ever since his post. A mealy mouthed 'explanation' and then a churlish response to the LibDem chief whip's demand that he never again refer in such fashion to 'the Jews'.

In truth, Ward is of no consequence to anyone and will slink back into deserved obscurity now. But his reaction to being found out speaks volumes for a certain mindset.

There's a useful contrast with the latest imbroglio, over the Sunday Times' Scarfe cartoon of Netanyahu appearing to glory in the blood of his Palestinian victims. As it happens, for me that does slip over the edge
into antisemitism, because it invokes the blood libel. It's a fair point to say that the previous week Scarfe depicted Assad in a similar way, and he's entitled to his view of Netanyahu, just as the Sunday Times are entitled to print it.

But there's never been an anti-Alawite blood libel, and the context matters. The blood libel is central to the history of antisemitism.

I don't think Scarfe is an idiot – far from it. So I find it impossible to believe he was unaware of the resonances of his cartoon.

(Incidentally, I am close to being absolute on the issue of free speech. I think every newspaper should be free to print pretty much anything. I disagree in principle with criminalizing Holocaust denial and I certainly don't think that just because something gives offence it shouldn't be published. But having the right to publish something doesn't mean it is always right to publish something. And with that right goes responsibility.)

In the end what I think is irrelevant, because here's the big difference between these two cases. Ward has dug himself further into his hole and clearly refuses to even consider that he might have made a mistake.

Martin Ivens, the Sunday Times' editor, has done the opposite (as has Rupert Murdoch). He's seen the reaction, thought about it, and held his hands up.

We all make mistakes – editors, of all people. Goodness me there are stories I regret running! But what matters is admitting it and saying sorry. The Guardian, which regularly publishes vile images and pieces dripping with hate for Jews, has never, as far as I am aware, once admitted getting anything wrong.

The Sunday Times has done just that, and deserves credit for it.

COMMENTS


YMedad

Tue, 01/29/2013 - 14:00

Rate this:

1 point

Another aspect is that derived from the Midrash.

The Midrash says that Pharaoh, a leper, bathed in the blood of Jewish children, had the Jewish children burned in Egyptian furnaces, and, if the Hebrew slaves failed to produce their quota of bricks, Jewish children were plastered into the walls to fill the gaps. *

The Egyptian strategy was to disrupt Jewish family life and prevent the birth of Jewish children. And, even when Pharaoh (Exodus 10:10) finally agreed to allow the Israelites to worship for three days, he would not allow the children to accompany the adults.

That Jews could be portrayed as placing Arabs, adults and children, into a wall being built when that wall is intended to bring Jews security from Arab terrorism, especially suicide-bombers who destroy themselves in their hatred, is to be so upside-down and backwards a reality that it boggles the minds of all humanists, of which the caricaturist is not. Nor his editor.

http://myrightword.blogspot.co.il/2013/01/the-sunday-times-and-jewish-mi...


happygoldfish

Tue, 01/29/2013 - 14:31

Rate this:

1 point

YMedad: That Jews could be portrayed as placing Arabs, adults and children, into a wall being built when that wall is intended to bring Jews security from Arab terrorism …

to be fair, the wall in the cartoon is surely intended to depict a wall of a house in a settlement

this is scarfe's comment on netanyahu's plan to build in E1, announced two months ago

hmm, i wonder why scarfe waited until holocaust memorial day before cartooning it?


suzanna

Thu, 02/14/2013 - 15:07

Rate this:

0 points

x


Rich Armbach

Mon, 07/29/2013 - 13:51

Rate this:

0 points

" .......appoint unpaid volunteers from among the users"

I nominate Jonny the Hoff


joemillis1959

Tue, 07/30/2013 - 13:37

Rate this:

0 points

Dear Mr Pollard
Just as suspected, happygoldfish, a pseudonym for the banned Jose and blacklisted dictator, has been leapfrogging messages about my Bromley Board affiliation and earlier claims about his aliases.
If you want to clean up the blog, please prevent this.

Joe Millis


joemillis1959

Tue, 07/30/2013 - 15:06

Rate this:

0 points

Me thinks the multi-pseudonym happygoldfish blacklisted dictator Jose doth protesteth too mucheth


happygoldfish

Fri, 08/09/2013 - 18:38

Rate this:

1 point
joemillis1959 (Tue 30th July, 13:37): … happygoldfish, a pseudonym for the banned Jose and blacklisted dictator …

joemillis1959 (Tue 30th July, 15:06): Me thinks the multi-pseudonym happygoldfish blacklisted dictator Jose doth protesteth too mucheth

joe miillis, sole elected deputy for bromley reform synagogue, has invented this lie about me … without any grounds, and without any support from his friends …and has repeated it over 50 times

for a full list of different variants of the lie (and of different misspellings), and for my reply, click here

joemillis1959: … … has been leapfrogging messages about my Bromley Board affiliation and earlier claims about his aliases. …

joe miilis has "leapfrogged" over 20 times (clink above link for list) in his campaign of sinat chinam

all i have done is to continually repeat my refutation of his lie, and instead of posting multiple copies of the same long refutation (and since it incorporates the list, it gradually gets longer), i simply re-post the original copy (which joe calls "leapfrogging")

dear stephen pollard

there are now "editor's blog", "staff blogs", and "your blogs"

and who are the "your" bloggers, representing the jc's readership (as opposed to staff), who are still allowed to blog?

they are (from 23rd july 2013) …

jennifer lipman geoffrey paul michael sophocles
naomi bloomer simon friend paul lester
gideon schneider anshal pfeffer graham morrison
looks pretty much like staff and ex-staff to me!

bloggers such as jonathan arkush, jonathan hoffman, and even scojec (the scottish jewish communities) are now banned

thejc.com should have a lively interactive community section, with both "personal" and "political" blogs

but you have gradually opted out of this

you have progressively restricted access to the blogs in response to misuses which are largely the jc's own fault

you cannot run an acceptable internet forum without proper effective moderators … the result is that the contributions are often so unpleasant (see eg the whole-page off-topic slanging match on this recent in-memoriam blog) that hardly anybody wants to contribute, or even to read them

effective moderation particularly means clamping down on personal abuse … ie "tackling the player rather than the ball" … by deleting it as soon as it appears, and by giving warnings or suspensions (many forums also impose "infraction points")

since you cannot afford a paid moderator, you need to follow most other similar websites, and allow self-regulation … ie, appoint unpaid moderators from among the users

and it would also help if (instead of indexing only the latest blog of the latest five bloggers, and the latest five comments) you had a proper index pagesuch as your own http://http://www.thejc.com/forums/msfl … neatly showing all topics, and the number of views and the number of replies

(btw, that msfl index page shows how unsuccessful that forum is … nearly all topics have 0 replies, and most also have 0 views!)

(a more appropriate forum software, such as vBulletin, would also be a lot more helpful that your present Drupal

it would probably also help slightly if thejc subscribers, logging into "JC Subscriptions" also automatically found themselves also logged into "JC Blogs, Directory and Events", instead of having to log in twice! )

you should aim for the community section to be an enhancement of thejc website, rather than an embarrassment!

(and if you could achieve, and show, a large community readership, you could even sell advertising space on the community section! )

best wishes

happygoldfish


zaheerayin

Mon, 08/19/2013 - 13:36

Rate this:

0 points

Looks like Mr. Pollard isn't taking Happy Lipman's calls. lol


happygoldfish

Fri, 08/30/2013 - 18:53

Rate this:

1 point

dear stephen pollard

cannot blogging hours be extended to, say, 7pm?

most potential contributors to the blogs are unable to contribute during working hours

the present cut-off of 6pm, together with the recent banning of non-staff approved bloggers, has resulted in hardly anybody taking part

(even the fairly prolific jonathan hoffman seems to have disappeared)

since we all know that (unlike most comparable sites) there is virtually no moderation, and what moderation there is takes about 24 hours, what harm would it do to allow readers to go home and contribute up to 7pm?

and what better way of improving the jc's image (particularly among the younger generation) than by creating a thriving online interactive community?

best wishes

happygoldfish


happygoldfish

Thu, 10/03/2013 - 13:12

Rate this:

0 points

dear stephen pollard

why is thejc.com walking steadily backwards into the 20th century?

this website will soon be not much different from a newspaper

the interactive features now range from almost unused to unavailable

the forums (http://www.thejc.com/forums/msfl) attracted 3 posts last year (and no replies)

the "your blogs" are now entirely staff blogs

and, from around midday yesterday, the "LATEST COMMENTS" box has been removed, making it impossible to tell which staff blogs have been commented on (except of course by going through them all)

even before that, readership participation had virtually disappeared (in the previous few weeks, i think, all previous participants had given up except for myself and one other)

the past was a great place to visit, but i wouldn't want to live there!

best wishes

happygoldfish

ps: readers wishing to continue to see the heads-up of tv and radio programmes of jewish or israeli interest should now go to http://happysjewishtvguide.wordpress.com/ (and click "Follow")


happygoldfish

Tue, 10/08/2013 - 09:00

Rate this:

1 point
ahh, the "LATEST COMMENTS" box is back!
thankyou!

(the JBBC memos here will be resumed)


suzanna

Tue, 10/08/2013 - 10:48

Rate this:

1 point

happygoldfish

Tue, 10/08/2013 - 11:42

Rate this:

-1 points

suzanna: Isreal will try anything to provoke another war:

why do racists write headlines that are totally unsupported by the associated text?

suzanna, you should be writing for the daily mail!


Chaim Pesach

Tue, 10/08/2013 - 11:52

Rate this:

1 point

Well Bibi was caught with his knickers in a wad and his Levis down, if I may mix my metaphores


suzanna

Wed, 10/09/2013 - 14:41

Rate this:

1 point

suzanna

Wed, 10/09/2013 - 14:41

Rate this:

1 point

StevenKalka

Wed, 10/09/2013 - 16:21

Rate this:

-1 points

"suzanna, you should be writing for the daily mail!"

She'd be well received writing for 'The Nation' as well.


happygoldfish

Wed, 10/09/2013 - 16:55

Rate this:

0 points

suzanna: http://americans-forpeace-now.uberflip.com/i/187542

that's a peace now booklet on the financial cost of the settlements (not the political cost or any other sort of cost) …

so what?

why should that be of concern to anyone other than an israeli taxpayer?

(btw, it's hardly investigative journalism … it seems to have come from information supplied directly to peace now by the israeli government!)


suzanna

Thu, 10/10/2013 - 12:53

Rate this:

0 points

happygoldfish

Thu, 10/10/2013 - 14:38

Rate this:

0 points

suzanna: More terrorism …

the attack yesterday, by perhaps 20 jewish "illegal" settlers, while criminal and deplorable, did not injure anyone, nor does it appear to have been intended to do so …

they're not very good at terrorism, are they?

suzanna: … and hate: …

most settlers, who live in the official ("legal") settlements, do not hate their palestinian neighbours

unfortunately, the "illegal" settlements tend to attract extremists, including presumably some racists

hatred of palestinians, however, may have not been an issue here …

the attack was a "price tag" reprisal against the israeli government's destruction of another settlement …

the hatred seems to be of the israeli government and of democracy and law


happygoldfish

Mon, 10/14/2013 - 15:15

Rate this:

0 points

dear stephen pollard

happygoldfish: do we now have guardian/independent sub-editors (the guys who write the headlines) working at the jc?

the jc's headline Miley Cyrus attacks "old Jewish men" (14/10/2013) is claiming that the complete phrase "old jewish men" appears in the article complained of (in hunger tv magazine, at http://www.hungertv.com/feature/interview-miley-cyrus/)

and the jc's article claims that the complete phrase "old jews" appears too

they don't … the word "jewish" occurs only once in the interview (and the word "jew" or "jews" doesn't occur at all):

"You know me and [photographer] Rankin were talking about it. With magazines, with movies, it’s always weird when things are targeted for young people yet they’re driven by people that are like 40 years too old. It can’t be like this 70 year old Jewish man that doesn’t leave his desk all day, telling me what the clubs want to hear. I’m going out, I know what they want to hear. I know when you’re in a club, what makes everyone go crazy and when the time is where everyone’s like “alright I’m going go get a drink”. I know when people walk off the dance floor and I know what’s driving it so I’ve got to be the one doing it because they’re just not in on what 20 year olds are doing."

(and why is there no link, nor even any acknowledgment of the source of the interview?

this is the internet!! )

best wishes
happygoldfish


Chaim Pesach

Fri, 12/06/2013 - 10:15

Rate this:

0 points

I see Ephraim Borowski or some other Neddy Numpty from ScoJec is getting it wrong. Again. The piece makes it clear that the letter's authenticity was called into question.
I suggest that all who care about Scottish Jews write to Hilary Rifkind, chair@scojec.org , or Vice-Chair: Micheline Brannan (vicechair@scojec.org), or even the Hon Secretary: Simon Dover (secretary@scojec.org) to complain about this abuse of their good name.

Crazy name. Crazy hair.


happygoldfish

Fri, 12/06/2013 - 10:49

Rate this:

0 points

Chaim Pesach: … Ephraim Borowski (aka happygoldfish) …

chaim pesach, please stop lying about me

i'm not ephraim borowski mbe (director of scojec, see http://www.scojec.org/scojec/people/people.html … though i wouldn't mind being!) …

"As its Convener of the grandly-titled Standing Committee of Scottish Jewry at the time of Devolution, Ephraim led its transformation into SCoJeC, a democratic representative body with the authority to speak on behalf of the entire Jewish Community of Scotland.
Before his early retirement from Glasgow University, Ephraim was head of the Philosophy Department, a member of Court, and President of AUT.
He is the joint author of the Collins Dictionary of Mathematics, and has been President of the Royal Philosophical Society of Glasgow, a Governor of Hutchesons' Educational Trust, Vice-President of Glasgow Jewish Representative Council, and Chairman of Giffnock Synagogue. He currently chairs the Regional Deputies of the Board of Deputies, is Convener of BEMIS, and a Lay Member of GTC(S). Ephraim was awarded an MBE for services on behalf of the Jewish Community, and was made an Honorary Member of the Royal Philosophical Society - only the third since Einstein!"

dear stephen pollard

it is very regrettable that you have chosen to breathe new life into the lie that nelson mandela wrote to thomas friedman criticising israel as apartheid (jc, 5/12/2013) …

"He was accused of calling the Jewish state an “apartheid state” in a letter to New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman, although the authenticity of this letter was not clear."

the lack of authenticity of this memo is extremely clear

it was written as a 'mock memo' by dutch-palestinian journalist arjan el fassed (of the palestine right to return coalition (al-awda) and electronicintifada.net), and published on 30/3/2001 at http://www.mediamonitors.net/arjan28.html

it begins by showing who wrote it

by Arjan El Fassed

Memo to: Thomas L. Friedman (columnist New York Times) 
From: Nelson Mandela (former President South Africa)

Dear Thomas,

unfortunately, jimmy carter and other racists chose to quote a quite obvious spoof, provoking el fassed to take the trouble to repeat that it is obviously a spoof … see http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article6628.shtml on 6/3/2007 …

There is no possible basis for Pollak to say I intended people to believe the memo was written by anyone other than myself. At the time, Friedman, a staunch defender of Israel, was famous for writing mock memos in the voice of the US president. In a clearly labelled spoof, under my byline, I published a mock memo from Mandela to Friedman on March 28 2001. Unfortunately, someone forwarded it on the internet without my byline, as I explained to the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz.

(for the full history, see his detailed letters at http://arjansweblog.blogspirit.com/mandela_memo/)
there is no record anywhere else of mandela accusing israel of apartheid!
nelson mandela understood apartheid very well, and (despite his support for the palestinians, and his visits to occupied areas), he clearly chose (in many speeches about the palestinians) not to apply that word to israel
as someone who has actually suffered under apartheid, he no more wanted to cheapen the word than someone who has actually suffered under the holocaust

i hope you will be correcting this uncalled-for and il-researched libel

the jc should be refuting stories such as this, not reviving them

best wishes
happygoldfish


Chaim Pesach

Fri, 12/06/2013 - 11:05

Rate this:

0 points

The only one lying about identity is the happygoldfish, who hides behind a pseudonym. No one can believe someone who is scared to reveal his true identity. I bet even his TV and radio updates are embellished. So no one here is lying except the person who hides.


Chaim Pesach

Fri, 12/06/2013 - 12:13

Rate this:

0 points

Happygoldfish - he should call himself happychicken, he's such a coward - hides behind a pseudonym, and claims that others lie about him (and calling someone a liar is libellous). This rings very hollow. No one can believe someone who is scared to reveal his true identity. I bet even his TV and radio updates are embellished.

Now, irrespective of the authenticity of the letter, Israel is an apartheid state in all but name.

It is a state where 93 per cent of the land has been nationalised for one religious group (Jews) to the exclusion of another ethnic group (Palestinian Arabs). Or where vetting committees operate by law in hundreds of communities precisely to prevent one ethnic group (Palestinian Arabs) from living in these communities.

It is not a state for all its citizens, just for the Jewish ones, and those who aren't Jewish have no stake in its present or future.

It has two separate citizenship laws – the Law of Return (1950) and the Citizenship Law (1952) – which are designed to confer rights on members of a religious group (Jews) who are not actually yet citizens or present in the state, giving them advantages and privileges over an indigenous group (Palestinian Arabs) who do have citizenship and are present in the state.

It has 55 laws that explicitly discriminate based on which religious group you belong to.

It defers some of what should be its sovereign powers to extra-territorial bodies such as the Jewish Agency and the Jewish National Fund whose charters obligate them to discriminate based on religious belonging.

It denies its citizens access to any civil institutions on personal status matters such as marriage, divorce and burial, requiring all citizens to submit to the whims and prejudices of religious leaders.

It does not recognise its own nationality - the Supreme Court ruled there is no Israeli nationality, so for Jews there is a Jewish "nationality" - and where the only way to join the dominant religious group (Jews) or to immigrate is through conversion.

Apartheid and institutionally racist, in all but name. And no amount of PR exercises and hasbara can help wash away that.


happygoldfish

Fri, 06/20/2014 - 17:56

Rate this:

0 points
dear stephen pollard

the principle behind the opposition of FAWC (the farm animal welfare committee of the government department DEFRA) to shechita becomes clear on reading a letter of 24/10/2012 (here) from its chairman, professor christopher wathes

THE MINISTRY OF MORAL DOUBT

george orwell's 1984 is primarily about the concepts of "doublespeak" and "doublethink", defined respectively as saying, and thinking, one thing while meaning the opposite

for example, the 1984 ministry of peace (minpax, for short) was actually the ministry of war, and the 1984 ministry of truth (minitrue) was actually the ministry of lies

and now a 2014 ministry committee says "moral doubt" when meaning "immoral doubt"

chief ministry expert professor christopher wathes describes the approach his committee has adopted to shechita …

(p3) "Adopting an approach consistent with the 'precautionary principle' (whereby the animal is given the benefit of any scientific or moral doubt) and backed by current scientific knowledge …"

the precautionary principle (see eg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle ) – increasingly being adopted into international environmental law – states that where opponents of a proposed policy suspect that it will cause harm which is irreversible or very serious, the burden of proof falls on the supporters to produce scientific evidence that the harm does not exist, and the supporters' lack of scientific evidence that the harm does exist is irrelevant

in other words: the opponents do not need any evidence of harm, a mere suspicion is sufficient

mere suspicion may well be a good guide where, for example, the harm is the escape of a genetically modified pathogen, or subsidence caused by fracking

but choosing to give it general application – to any type of harm – means that, in any arbitrary case of the opponents' choosing, rational argument and evidence is always unnecessary, and mere suspicion is always enough

the FAWC euphemistically calls this "moral doubt", to conceal the fact it is based on prejudice, which most people would call an immoral doubt

a further example of doublespeak and doublethink is the way the BVA (british veterinary association) uses the word "possible"

there is an experiment which shows that sheep (after the throat is cut) take up to 7 seconds to flat-line (reach isoelectric EEG or ECoG)

obviously, that proves – scientifically – that, after 7 seconds, the sheep must be unconscious!

but it does not answer whether the sheep can be conscious after (say) 6 seconds: consciousness is lost long before flat-lining occurs, and the experiment is not designed to detect consciousness (only to detect flat-lining)

if jewish slaughterers wished to prove that sheep are always unconscious after (say) 8 seconds, they certainly could validly rely scientifically on that experiment (because flat-lining proves unconsciousness)

but if their opponents wish to prove that sheep can still be conscious for (say) 6 seconds, they cannot rely on the experiment (because absence of flat-lining does not prove absence of unconsciousness)

so how does the BVA manage to rely on it?

it correctly observes that – looking only at that experiment – the possibility of consciousness for 6 seconds is not eliminated: therefore consciousness for 6 seconds is possible: therefore it convinces itself that the experiment has scientifically proved that consciousness for 6 seconds is possible!

in the BVA's doublethink, "scientific evidence that something is possible" includes scientific evidence which fails to deal with the possibility

as dr s d rosen says (in the Veterinary Record, 2004) …

(p.763 (p.5 of the .pdf), column 2): "In broader terms, it can be seen that time to insensibility is not actually being measured in any of the above experiments, let alone time to loss of any possible feeling of pain. The measurement that has been made is time to 'brain failure'. Raw EEG and ECoG data can indicate undoubted consciousness and undoubted insensibility, but not the start of insensibility."

the opposition of FAWC and the BVA to shechita is based on doublespeak and doublethink: on extending the precautionary principle to include mere prejudice, and on valid scientific experiments misapplied to answer questions they fail to deal with

p s any chance of restoring my blogging rights?


StevenKalka

Tue, 06/24/2014 - 17:33

Rate this:

0 points

http://www.earbox.com/stage-works/the-death-of-klinghoffer

So, now we have an opera in New York involving a non-fiction political tragedy. This is so in your face. Will we ever see an opera about the murder of Christians in Islamic countries? What about an operatic version of Sunday, Bloody Sunday in which British soldiers fire at unarmed Catholic demonstrators in Northern Ireland?

The answer is no. Those so obsessed with any conflict between Jews and non-Jews can never get enough of any media constantly drawing no moral distinction between any of the involved parties.


happygoldfish

Wed, 07/16/2014 - 09:07

Rate this:

2 points

Don't let's be beastly to Hamas!

Don't let's be beastly to the Gazans,
We really ought to let them have their way
Let us treat them very kindly,
And never raise our voice,
For whatever they've done was meant in fun,
And they really had no choice

Let's be sweet to them
And day by day repeat to them
That launching rockets really is quite crass.
Let's sweetly sympathize again,
And help them all to rise again,
But don't let's be beastly to Hamas!

We must be kind
And with an open mind,
We must endeavour to find a way
To let the Gazans know
That when the fight is over,
They are not the ones who have to pay.

Don't let's be beastly to the Gazans,
For they're civilized, and generous as can be.
They don't send us many rockets – but they send us all they can
And our attitude of ingratitude still shocks them to a man
They don't have the materials to send us large amounts
For they can't fulfil their orders
Till we open up their borders
And we don't even appreciate that it's the thought that counts!

Let's be meek to them
And turn the other cheek to them
And send them all they need of oil and gas
Let's help them all some more again,
And fill their weapons stores again,
But don't let's be beastly to Hamas.

Don't let's be beastly to the Gazans.
You can't deprive a militant of his gun!
Though they've been a little naughty
To the residents of Sderot
I can't believe those people
Really minded a jot.

Let's be free with them
And share the BBC with them.
We mustn't mock, or give them any sass!
Let's forgive all their duplicity
And supply them electricity
But don't let's be beastly to Hamas!


happygoldfish

Mon, 07/28/2014 - 09:20

Rate this:

1 point

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.

STEPHEN POLLARD ON TWITTER

    LATEST COMMENTS