Male, late twenties, mother tongue: English, fairly recently arrived in Israel and based in Yaffo, self-declared ‘expert’ on the I/P conflict and a CiF ‘tame’ Israeli. If you’re thinking ‘Seth Freedman’ that is understandable, but you would be wrong because we have a new kid on the block who goes by the name of Jesse Rosenfeld. So who is he? Well, here are his own words:
“My Jewish last name and identity became a weapon I used against the Zionist justification of Israeli legitimacy and the actions of the state of Israel. If Zionists could spin Jewish history, I could use my socially assumed Jewish identity to strike back.
I became an active anti-Zionist and Palestinian solidarity activist, going to weekly demonstrations in front of the Israeli consulate and arguing in my high school classes about the daily violent Israeli repression of Palestinian demands for self-determination.
As the Israeli repression of the Second Intifada intensified, with the Army routinely using live ammunition against Palestinian youths throwing stones, I got involved with a Toronto group called Jewish Youth Against the Occupation. I was determined to stop Zionism from speaking in the name of Jewish liberation, and the only form of Jewish identity I could associate with was one in opposition to Zionism.”
Like several others in the CiF stable, Rosenfeld has written for such outfits as Electronic Intifada and the Palestine Monitor and seems to be a bit of a one-trick pony in that all his articles have the same simplistic and stereotypical message of ‘Zionists behaving badly’, whilst the Palestinians are always poetically noble harvesters of ancient olive trees. Predictably, he’s already had a star turn in Ha’aretz and runs a rather curiously named blog.
With this kind of CV and pedigree he’s clearly a prime candidate for any CiF commissioning editor, and in an article on February 23rd did not disappoint.
“Meanwhile, Israeli military assassination missions against resistance in Nablus resumed on 26 December, with three men linked to the Fatah movement being killed in cold blood while PA security forces connived with the Israeli military and were nowhere to be seen.”
Naturally, Rosenfeld does not bother to burden his readers with the real details of the incident he describes such as the fact that the three armed terrorists were killed whilst resisting arrest for the brutal murder of Rabbi Meir Avshalom Chai during which they had shot the father of seven in the head ten times in a drive-by attack a couple of days previously.
Rosenfeld goes on to quote the advocacy officer of Al-Haq in his article as though the latter were some sort of objective assessor of the situation, but far from being a human rights organization, Al-Haq is actually one of the prime instigators of lawfare against Israel, including an ongoing case in the British courts. Al-Haq was also one of the major players in the infamous 2001 anti-Israel UN sponsored hate-fest in Durban. It is funded in part by the Ford Foundation and Christian Aid and its General Director Shawan Jabarin has alleged ties to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). Rosenfeld does not even shy away from quoting the prisoners’ affairs representative of the PFLP in his article and indeed her words form the essence of the message he is trying to put across.
The significance of this is that the Guardian – supposedly part of the mainstream media – is once more disseminating the propaganda of an active terrorist organisation proscribed by the EU, Canada and the USA. Whilst there is nothing new in that – Kahlid Mish’al has of course been hosted above the line on CiF – it is high time that the UK government engaged in a serious review of the fact that it pours public money into advertising government sector jobs in a newspaper which enthusiastically provides a platform for terrorists and their supporters, at the same time as British soldiers are bravely fighting terrorism abroad and the British security services are trying to combat Islamist terrorism from within. As a British voter and tax payer, I find this government ambivalence incomprehensible and this is but one of the points I will be putting to any Labour party canvasser who knocks on my door in the next few weeks as the elections approach.
I urge other British readers to do the same: there is no logical reason why the Guardian should be profiting from the public purse as long as it provides a platform for those actively engaged in the terror which is designed to destroy the Western democratic and libertarian values cherished by those of us who provide those funds.