I think it's on the lower end of the scale of ...

2016-04-28T11:22:19.484+01:00

I think it's on the lower end of the scale of antisemitism, which is why I think she should be given the benefit of the doubt; what makes it especially objectionable in my view is how Shah apparently couldn't see how loaded the entirety of what she reposted was, let alone then commenting further on it. It might not be explicitly racist, but then we quite rightly don't tend to wait until someone is explicitly racist to criticise them.

This said, I do think there is a concerted pushback against criticism of Israel that is once again conflating anti-Zionism and antisemitism for political gain, and it's especially interesting how it's coming when there hasn't been another major flare up in Gaza. Take for instance what Daniel Clemens, one of those criticising Malia Bouattia said:

"I think that anti-Zionism and antisemitism are two and the same thing. Zionism is the belief that Jewish people should have a homeland to live in without threat of annihilation or war. This stems from a Jewish belief. So when someone attacks Zionism they’re indirectly attacking Judaism as a religion, because the two go hand in hand."

You could say perhaps we should have expected this when a few on the left have definitely had a problem separating Islamism and Islam, but to hear that kind of statement from Clemens go unchallenged makes clear where some intend for this to head. Add in how this has been identified as an area where Corbyn is weak, which is indisputable, and no, these stories aren't going to go away when there is so much to be gained from claiming some of the least prejudiced people around are in fact racist.

That Facebook image was certainly anti-Israeli and...

2016-04-27T22:35:15.488+01:00

That Facebook image was certainly anti-Israeli and anti-Zionist, to the point of denying the right of the state of Israel to exist & denying the Jewish people the right to a state in the historic land of Israel. As such it's bound to be unacceptable to those who identify with the state of Israel, a group that includes many, probably most, British Jews. But I don't think that in itself makes it anti-semitic, and I think the attempts to prove that the language is anti-semitic (finding great significance in the words 'transportation' and 'solution') are thin as hell.

Cameron said something interesting today; he said "anti-semitism is, in effect, racism". Well, anti-semitism is racism, that's straightforward - so why the 'in effect'? It wasn't just a verbal tic - if you listen to the audio it really sounds as if he's putting forward an argument. I wondered if in the back of his mind anti-semitism and anti-Zionism had already merged - so the claim he thought he was making was that anti-Zionism (of which Naz Shah was indubitably guilty) was, in effect, racism.

I've got a bad feeling about this; I think there are going to be more "Labour anti-semitism" stories, and not because there's much Labour anti-semitism to be found.

Comments on Obsolete: The antisemitic muppetry of Naz Shah and connected silliness.

I think it's on the lower end of the scale of ...

That Facebook image was certainly anti-Israeli and...