One of the most despicable editorials ever to appear in the Sydney Morning Herald cropped up on Monday, October 29. It concerned the recent appalling anti-Semitic shooting rampage in a Pittsburgh synagogue which left 11 worshipers dead and 6 injured.
At first, it stuck to the facts, namely that the gunman, Robert Bowers, was a dyed-in-the-wool anti-Semite, nothing more, nothing less, connected to the American alt-right. Then it veered way off course with this vile conflation of the unconflatable:
"This is not to besmirch the mainstream right, which has often led the way in protecting minority groups, nor to play down anti-Semitism and political violence among African-American and left-wing anti-Zionist movements. A left-wing extremist shot a senior US Republican in 2017." (Alt-right terrorism now stalks the US)
Let me unpack its nastiness.
*"This is not to besmirch the mainstream right... " Just who exactly are "the mainstream right"? Trump's Republicans? What precisely does the editorialist mean by this term?
*"... nor to play down anti-Semitism and political violence among African American... movements... " Who exactly are these anti-Semitic and politically violent African American movements, and when, if ever, has a representative of one of them gone on a shooting rampage in a Jewish institution, spewing, like Bowers, his hatred of Jews? I'd really like to know.
*"... and left-wing anti-Zionist movements." What "movements" are referred to here? Can we have a list of them? And when, if ever, has a representative of one of them gone on a shooting rampage in a Jewish institution, spewing, like Bowers, his hatred of Jews?
*"A left-wing extremist shot a senior US Republican in 2017."
The "left-wing extremist" obliquely referred to here is James Hodgkinson, who harboured a dislike for Trump and a partiality for Bernie Sanders. This, apparently, in the eyes of the editorialist, is all one needs to qualify for the label "left-wing extremist." And, since Sanders is a Jewish supporter of a Jewish state in Palestine, in other words a Zionist, quite how this qualifies Hodgkinson as a card-carrying anti-Zionist is beyond me.
What the editorialist is doing here, of course, is conflating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, a smear straight out of the Zionist playbook. To go on and explain the simple fact that when Zionism first emerged in the late 19th century, the vast majority of the world's Jews were anti-Zionists would be wasted on the Herald editorialist. To conflate the likes of Bowers and Hodgkinson with ant-Zionists, many of whom today are Jews, is about as low as it gets. In fact, it speaks volumes that not even the editorial in the Australian of the same day (Toxic ingredients in America) on the same subject went that far.
Enough said...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment