'Antisemitic' Guardian Gaza cartoon shows Jews as puppeteers

[King_David]

A Guardian cartoon that implies that Jews are "omnipotent conspirators" has sparked furious debate online.

Barrister Jeremy Brier, who has already lodged a complaint about Steve Bell's drawing with the Press Complaints Commission, labelled the image "plainly antisemitic".

The cartoon in question shows Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a puppet-master, controlling tiny versions of Foreign Secretary William Hague and Tony Blair.

It was published after Mr Hague said on Thursday that Hamas bore "principal responsibility" for the military operation".


http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/91164/antisemitic-guardian-gaza-cartoon-shows-jews-puppeteers

[King_David]

1. another 1 comes Out of the woodwork...

Or slithersss out from under a rock.

[King_David]

8. Most Jews I spoke to disagree

They considered it classic antisemitism .

[King_David]

10. No it was about a Jew ( any Jew let alone the PM of the Jewish state)

Depicted in a classic antisemitic trope.

That is why it was picked up by the Jewish newspapers ( not just Israeli ones )

[oberliner]

11. "There's no antisemitism here at all"

Wow - shocking statement from you.

So if someone made a cartoon poking fun of Obama and used traditional racist imagery - would you say the same thing?

"It was just about Obama, it wasn't an attack on African-Americans..."

Doubtful.

[cali]

14. You can't take it out of context and the context is

an ugly history of cartoons depicting Jews as puppeteers . In addition, does anyone actually believe that there's any truth to the cartoon's basic claim- that Netanyahu (read Israeli government) controls British foreign police.

It is classic anti-semitic imagery.

[shira]

15. Ken, it was a trope about Jews controlling foreign govt's. n/t

[Bad_Ronald]

22. Wow! That's like watching Der Ewige Jude & concluding it was just a harmless film about rodents

[Igel]

23. So try this on for size.

In 2009 there were two photoshopped pictures circulating on the Internet.

One had a picture of the Obama White House surrounded by watermelon fields.

The other had Obama's face the place of a Papuan (IIRC) shaman, widely taken to be calling Obama a tribal African witchdoctor.

Since they both dealt only with Obama--one only with the White House and not Obama directly--they couldn't have involved anti-black racism. Nope. No racism there at all.

Agreed?

(Because I find this entire kind of analogy valid and both "no racism" claims utterly absurd.)

[King_David]

24. Trying to minimize antisemitism

Is offensive as multiple posters in this thread have explained to you.

[Ken Burch]

27. ok...you're all right...it was a bad cartoon and they shouldn't have run it.

I was wrong.

[Alamuti Lotus]

6. are you implying he is a snake?

That's a really disgusting racial stereotype, you should be ashamed of yourself.

And what is wrong with woodworkers? Are you meaning to say that all woodworkers hate Jews? That's a remarkably awful piece of generalizing.


Wow, this is fun. I never noticed how entertaining it can be to paranoiacally accuse everybody of being racists and stuff. I see why you do it now! If only I had more of an attention span for this nonsense, I could've kept that going for quite a while before drawing back the curtain.. I might've used the more advanced "by your silence, can I assume that {fill in the blank with some bonkers assumption}" tactic that is really popular around here sometimes, but I think that requires some higher certification.. oh well. It was nice while it lasted.

In all seriousness, what a dumb cartoon. I have always hated that whole "Israel/Jews control {fill in the blank}" stuff. It's too "easy" of an accusation, explains nothing, and is too worthless of a train of thought to pursue. And in this case, I feel that gives some run of the mill asshole like Netanyahoo more credit than he's due. I mean, the guy never had a bomb dropped while in high office until now. You can't control puppets like Barry or Rmoney without more of a militaristic record, no matter how much he reads from the Holy Book of Douchebag. And this is particularly amusing coming from an English newspaper, considering their self-appointed puppetmaster history of "sun never sets on the empire" and all.

[Ken Burch]

7. It is a dumb cartoon...and they shouldn't have run it.

But there's no reason to make it more sweeping than it actually was.

Nobody SHOULD be saying that Jews(or any other ethnic group)controls the media(or even that Israel does). But that wasn't really what this cartoon was saying. Probably didn't need to get even as close to it as what the cartoon did say, though.

[oberliner]

12. Another shocking response

I'd love to see your take on a cartoon that mocked, say, Nasrallah using traditional anti-Arab imagery. I'm sure you'd think that was just fine and dandy. Not Islamophobic at all - just an attack on one individual...

Come on now.

[Alamuti Lotus]

16. Did you even read my post?

Particularly the parts where I said it was a dumb cartoon and I hate that sort of thing?! Granted that the post was a bit scattershot in other areas, I couldn't have made that part any clearer if I had drawn it with a clear crayon.

And I do see those blatantly racist and chauvinistic renderings of Sayyid Nasrallah and other figures all the time--in Israeli papers and pro-Israel blogs, with the comments just piling on the filth like its one great circlejerk. That's what I'd call irony if it wasn't so damn hypocritical and just bullshit business as usual.

[Ken Burch]

30. While this cartoon was wrong(I now see)that doesn't justify what you're doing here

You're using this to try to demonize not only antizionists, but essentially anybody who disagrees with your hero Netanyahu.

You're trying to set up this bullshit Manichean thing in which the only positions permitted are unquestining support of everything the Israeli government does to Palestinians, or absolute hatred of not only Israel but everything and everyone Jewish.

You're out of line on that. There needs to be freedom of speech, there needs to be freedom to speak up for ALL the victims(on BOTH sides)and freedom to challenge the wrongdoing on both sides. What you're doing is about forcing people to support things they sincerely believe to be unconscionable injustices just to prove they don't hate you.

It's wrong to do that. And you don't actually help either Israel the fight against antisemitism by doing that.

Israel doesn't need to be exempt from criticism and debate to survive. It's government doesn't need special sanction and special dispensation to act without anyone having to face any dissent. You demean that country by acting as if it does.
And you demean the actual victims of historic antisemtism by using that term like a bludgeon just to shield a group of politicians from criticism(the one thing no politicians anywhere SHOULD be shielded from).

[King_David]

31. 'your hero Netanyahu. '

Really? My hero??

Not only seances but a mindreader too ?

[Mosby]

4. are you the one who alerted?

0-6 to leave it, gotta love the comments.

[azurnoir]

5. were you on the jury? n/t

[King_David]

9. Post it for us .

Amazing that somebody is so desperate to whitewash bigotry that they would alert on a post attempting to highlight antisemitism in a major newspaper that has caused a major controversy and a complaint to a journalistic standards council.

[Mosby]

17. results

At Fri Nov 23, 2012, 01:31 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

'Antisemitic' Guardian Gaza cartoon shows Jews as puppeteers
http://www.democraticunderground.com/113423335

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

The thread headline is a lie...the cartoon in question depicts Netanyahu as a puppet master. It is not aimed at "Jews" as a group, or even Israelis as a group.

Inflammatory and untrue.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Nov 23, 2012, 01:40 AM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: The cartoon shows Netanyahu, not some clownish, anti-Semitic stereotype. It's calling out the PM of Israel. No problem here.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Good grief. This dispute grows tiresome. Wish everyone would just get along. I agree that post is over the top. But think the place to say that is on the boards. Articulate a reasoned response. Support free speech. As a thanksgiving gift, please see this post: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021863971

[King_David]

18. Pretty clear whoever alerted prefers to pretend

There's not as big a problem with antisemitism amongst the "Anti-Zionist" crowd that there obviously is.

Free Gaza Movement , Amnesty International and now The Guardian .. It seems this problem is obviously much bigger than any of us thought.

[Ken Burch]

28. Amnesty International ISN'T "anti-zionist'. they're a human rights organization.

They take no position at all on whether Israel should exist or not. SO it's not fair to throw them in with the others.

You're totally out of control here.

[shira]

35. Why doesn't Amnesty Int acknowledge & condemn Hamas human shielding?

They deny it goes on.

B'tselem admits it as fact.

Why do you think Amnesty is tacitly supporting Hamas' war crimes?

[Ken Burch]

40. I don't accept that Amnesty tacitly supports Hamas at all.

It's just that Amnesty isn't obsessed with Hamas to the exclusion of everything else. And, frankly, there's no reason why they should be.

You .constantly set up these arbitrary and unfair litmus tests that everyone must pass to avoid being called "anti-Israel".

Basically, you're insisting that everybody must take Israel's "side" against Hamas(AND on the illegal settlements, AND on the Occupation) or be called anti-Israel or antisemitic. That is not something you have the right to impose. The question of whether an organization vilifies Hamas to your satisfaction should not be THE test of whether that organization is bigoted or not.

The truth is, Amnesty is neither pro-nor anti-Israel. They're just pro-human rights. They have spoken out loudly about human rights abuses in every country on the planet...including every Arab and Muslim country. What you're really mad about is that they aren't giving Netanyahu aid and comfort in his campaign to keep the war going by any means necessary.

It simply isn't true that every organization is obligated to put denunciations of Hamas' actions before their right to express any other views on the matter. because Hamas is not the cause of all of this, any more than the South African Communist Party was the cause of the anti-apartheid movement, or the Irish Republican Army was the cause of "The Troubles" in Northern Ireland.

In each of those cases, the cause was one people oppressing another people. If that oppression hadn't existed, the tactics that apologists for each oppressive order spent so much time sanctimoniously condemning wouldn't have existed either.

The way to get rid of Hamas is to end the oppression of Palestinians...Hamas can't survive for any length of time in a situation in which the people it is supposedly trying to liberate have, in fact, already been liberated without Hamas getting credit for it.

[kayecy]

13. What is all the fuss about?...................

.......................
www.guardian.co.uk

Chas Freeman, a former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia, withdrew before starting work as chairman of the national intelligence council, accusing his critics of libel, character assassination and "utter disregard for the truth".

The "Israel Lobby", he argued, was stifling any discussion of US policy options in the Middle East except those endorsed by "the ruling faction in Israeli politics" - a situation that could "ultimately threaten the existence of the state of Israel".

....................................

Senator Fullbright, Chair of Senate Foreign Relations Committee: 10/07/1973 on CBS' "Face the Nation".

"I am aware how almost impossible it is in this country to carry out a foreign policy [in the Middle East] not approved by the Jews..... terrific control the Jews have over the news media and the barrage the Jews have built up on congressmen .... I am very much concerned over the fact that the Jewish influence here is completely dominating the scene and making it almost impossible to get congress to do anything they don't approve of. The Israeli embassy is practically dictating to the congress through influential Jewish people in the country"

[Mosby]

19. do you agree with fulbright?

Last edited Fri Nov 23, 2012, 02:16 PM - Edit history (1)

I tried to google the statement but all I get in the results are conspiracy and hate sites like rense, veteranstoday and of course stormfront.

He was quite the antisemite apparently.

[kayecy]

20. Have you tried looking to see if CAMERA has got upset with these quotations?....n/t

[King_David]

25. Camera is better than the hateful websites you link to on this thread,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113414543#post10

Your post was hidden.

[holdencaufield]

21. Eventually ... they reveal themselves ...

... no matter how hard they try and hide.

[King_David]

26. 'What is all the fuss about?...................`

So it is acceptable now to say Jews control the world?

What about Hollywood ,Wall Street and the White House?

I think we understand .

You agree with those disgusting statements of Fullbright? Please clarify for us.

[kayecy]

32. You think we should not mention Israeli influence in Washington?.......

Should we just disregard the Guardian’s quotation of Chas Freeman?........If so why?

The "Israel Lobby", he argued, was stifling any discussion of US policy options in the Middle East except those endorsed by "the ruling faction in Israeli politics"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/11/obama-administration-barack-obama

......................................................
Should we disregard what Fulbright said on the grounds you think his statements were 'disgusting?'

President Bill Clinton seems to have had a high regard for him: "Hillary and I have looked forward for sometime to celebrating this 50th anniversary of the Fulbright Program, to honor the dream and legacy of a great American, a citizen of the world, a native of my home state and my mentor and friend, Senator Fulbright."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._William_Fulbright

.........................................................
Should we stick our heads in the sand with regard to the activities of AIPAC?

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or Aipac, is perhaps the most prominent of the groups that lobby the United States government on behalf of Israel.........Aipac has more than 100,000 members, and its influence, especially in Congress, comes in part from its ability to raise money in a wide range of congressional districts for specific contests. Aipac is not a foreign lobby — its members and officials are largely American Jews

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/a/american_israel_public_affairs_committee_aipac/index.html

............................................

In 1992, AIPAC president David Steiner was forced to resign after he was recorded boasting about his political influence in obtaining aid for Israel. Steiner also claimed that he had met with Jim Baker and I cut a deal with him. I got, besides the $3 billion, you know they're looking for the Jewish votes.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Israel_Public_Affairs_Committee

....................................................
In the 1950s President Eisenhower's administration repeatedly demanded the leaders of the American Zionist Council register as "agents of a foreign government." In November 1962 Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy's Department of Justice ordered the American Zionist Council to register as a foreign agent because of FARA violations alleging it was being funded by the Jewish Agency for Israel and acting on behalf of Israel. Under pressure from the Israel lobby and the President Lyndon B. Johnson administration, the Department of Justice later withdrew its demand........


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Agents_Registration_Act
...................................................

Does anyone seriously think that successive Israeli Governments have not been able to pull strings in Washington?

[King_David]

33. Your post is about US Jews

And what Fulbright said and posting it and supporting it is disgusting .

But you have had such posts hidden before I hope this one remain up for everyone to see.

[shira]

34. Well, at least it appears he learned not to post from Rense anymore. n/t

[kayecy]

37. The main-stream media often refers to AIPAC as "The Jewish Lobby".......

The main-stream media sometimes refers to AIPAC as: "The Jewish Lobby".......The Guardian quote did not mention US Jews. It stated:
".....except those endorsed by "the ruling faction in Israeli politics"

Fulbright referred to: "......The Israeli embassy is practically dictating to the congress through influential Jewish people in the country"

If Fulbright was so disgusting, how do you explain Clinton's paean: "........a great American, a citizen of the world, a native of my home state and my mentor and friend, Senator Fulbright"?

You obviously disagree with Clinton, but have you any main-stream media reference claiming Fulbright was disgusting?.........Or is it just your personal belief?


So far you have made no attempt to explain why you find what Fulbright said was so disgusting....You have, however, made it abundantly clear that anyone disagreeing with your views should not be allowed to post on DU.


You seem strangely keen to close down any discussion of the question of Israel's influence on US policy......Why?

I too hope this post will remain up for everyone to see.........I believe in free speech, you obviously do not.

[King_David]

38. I do believe in free speech

Too bad your other posts were hidden so people can't read them now.

[kayecy]

39. You clearly do not believe in free speech and........

You clearly do not believe in free speech and you also do not believe any explanation is required to support your claim that a US Senator's speech was " disgusting".........King David says it was "disgusting" and therefore there is nothing more to be said.

As for my concern that the Israeli Government can pull strings in Washington, well, ........you just think that is not a fit subject for discussion.


I respect your right to express your own opinion.

You appear to be more interested in censorship in case some unpalatable truth comes out........

[Ken Burch]

29. What Fulbright said was horrible. Kayecy, you shouldn't be quoting those kinds of things.

n/t.

[shira]

36. What do you think of Guardian editor who supports Hamas terror?

http://cifwatch.com/2012/11/20/the-guardians-seumas-milne-defends-palestinians-right-to-kill-israelis/