The highlighted remark is a remarkably honest and forthright statement...
Posted on 01/26/2005 1:58:21 PM PST by abu afak
Good, bad and ugly
Julie Burchill November 29, 2003 The Guardian
As you might have heard, I'm leaving the Guardian next year for the Times, having finally been convinced that my evil populist philistinism has no place in a publication read by so many all-round, top-drawer plaster saints. (Well, that and the massive wad they've waved at me.) Once there, I will compose as many love letters to the likes of Mr Murdoch and Pres Bush as my black little heart desires, leaving those who have always objected to my presence on such a fine liberal newspaper as this to read only writers they agree with, with no chance of spoiled digestion as the muesli goes down the wrong way if I so much as murmur about bringing back hanging. (Public.)
Not only do I admire the Guardian, I also find it fun to read, which in a way is more of a compliment. But if there is one issue that has made me feel less loyal to my newspaper over the past year, it has been what I, as a non-Jew, perceive to be a quite striking bias against the state of Israel. Which, for all its faults, is the only country in that barren region that you or I, or any feminist, atheist, homosexual or trade unionist, could bear to live under.
I find this hard to accept because, crucially, I don't swallow the modern liberal line that anti-Zionism is entirely different from anti-semitism;..."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1094420,00.html
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
Here I agree with you.
The Guardian has no balance of arguement.
It appears as if there's at least one Englishman who's tired of being "Fisked."
Julie Burchill, beleive it or not is a woman.
And story this is two years old.
The story is 14 months old.. not 2 yrs..
and is Relevant as there is a rather heated discussion going on in another, now well down the board string, on the BBC and British Press.. with Kingfisher telling us this is just "Leftism" not Israel Demonization or Anti-Semitism.
SO, in addition to the fact this is a Great Article from an inside source that probably few now using the board have seen...
THAT'S why I'm posting it now.
I consider Guardian even Worse and more Biased than BBC and into the realm of Anti-Semitism from mere 'Critcal of Israeli policy'.
I dunno about all that. But I have noticed that the Guardian is getting more and more ANTISEMITIC every day. Some recent columns have been absolutely atrocious. It goes way beyond antipathy to Israel. It's left wing lunacy.
This woman is a really good writer -- I like her good humor. I hope freepers will post more of her work in the future.
If you take into account the theory that Jews are responsible for everything nasty in the history of the world, and also the recent EU survey that found 60% of Europeans believe Israel is the biggest threat to peace in the world today (hmm, I must have missed all those rabbis telling their flocks to go out with bombs strapped to their bodies and blow up the nearest mosque), it's a short jump to reckoning that it was obviously a bloody good thing that the Nazis got rid of six million of the buggers.
...is probably the most brilliant destruction of anti-Israel anti-semitism that I have ever read.
Thanks for posting this article abu, this is the first thing that I have ever read in the guardian that i have agreed with.
"This woman is a really good writer -- I like her good humor. I hope freepers will post more of her work in the future."
She is a god writer, and she can be humourous.
But I doubt that most Freepers would appreciate most of her work.
"I consider Guardian even Worse and more Biased than BBC"
So do I, but at least they have an openly left wing agenda and aren't publically funded propagandaists.
End of the day, you don't like it, then don't read it.
I avoid the Guardian like the plague.
I for one am sick of "debating" these people - we need to publish photos of them cruising the public bathrooms and we need to send their addresses to Osama c/o of aljazeera and let him know they are "spies for Israel."
Playing by debating rules with people who excuse, or apologise for Koranimals who cut off heads and blow up women and children is simply INVITING THEM TO DO IT TO YOU.
"This woman is a really good writer."
She's also openly, indeed voiciferously bisexual. Just thought I'd mention it.
Cool! I'm liking this chick more and more.
vociferously, even.
I loved this column..What a great opus!
"I hope freepers will post more of her work in the future."
Here you are, go hog wild - her last 12 months' worth of Guardian columns:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Archive/0,5673,-4,00.html
Thinking about it, I'm really surprised Burchill hasn't popped up here before. FR would appear to be her spiritual home. As a Guardian columnist I guess she's automatically been dismissed as a leftist anti-semite, but that really couldn't be further from the truth. And it's not like that article is indicative of a sudden change in her - she was writing passionately pro-Israel, anti-Muslim, pro-American, pro-war articles for years. In The Guardian, yes, that's right. Who'da thunk it eh? (You doubt me? Check the link.)
And the real reason she left The Guardian is that The Times offered her more money.
Good Post...Considering her Columns... and opinions...
As she says... money was just another reason; ("A Wad of cash"), no doubt a Good one as well, But If you read Guardian's other crap, you realize she probably wasn't Miss Popularity there.
Well, she did say that, as an aside.See? That's what I love about FR. Every day I come here I learn new things from my freeper friends and read some interesting new articles.
Thanks for the info. I'm trying to do my taxes now -- when I need a break (which will be any minute now) I'll check out the link you provided.
Good, bad and ugly
Julie Burchill
Saturday November 29, 2003
The Guardian
As you might have heard, I'm leaving the Guardian next year for the Times, having finally been convinced that my evil populist philistinism has no place in a publication read by so many all-round, top-drawer plaster saints. (Well, that and the massive wad they've waved at me.) Once there, I will compose as many love letters to the likes of Mr Murdoch and Pres Bush as my black little heart desires, leaving those who have always objected to my presence on such a fine liberal newspaper as this to read only writers they agree with, with no chance of spoiled digestion as the muesli goes down the wrong way if I so much as murmur about bringing back hanging. (Public.)
Not only do I admire the Guardian, I also find it fun to read, which in a way is more of a compliment. But if there is one issue that has made me feel less loyal to my newspaper over the past year, it has been what I, as a non-Jew, perceive to be a quite striking bias against the state of Israel. Which, for all its faults, is the only country in that barren region that you or I, or any feminist, atheist, homosexual or trade unionist, could bear to live under.
I find this hard to accept because, crucially, I don't swallow the modern liberal line that anti-Zionism is entirely different from anti-semitism; the first good, the other bad. Judeophobia - as the brilliant collection of essays A New Antisemitism? Debating Judeophobia In 21st-Century Britain (axt.org.uk), published this year, points out - is a shape-shifting virus, as opposed to the straightforward stereotypical prejudice applied to other groups (Irish stupid, Japanese cruel, Germans humourless, etc). Jews historically have been blamed for everything we might disapprove of: they can be rabid revolutionaries, responsible for the might of the late Soviet empire, and the greediest of fat cats, enslaving the planet to the demands of international high finance. They are insular, cliquey and clannish, yet they worm their way into the highest positions of power in their adopted countries, changing their names and marrying Gentile women. They collectively possess a huge, slippery wealth that knows no boundaries - yet Israel is said to be an impoverished, lame-duck state, bleeding the west dry.
If you take into account the theory that Jews are responsible for everything nasty in the history of the world, and also the recent EU survey that found 60% of Europeans believe Israel is the biggest threat to peace in the world today (hmm, I must have missed all those rabbis telling their flocks to go out with bombs strapped to their bodies and blow up the nearest mosque), it's a short jump to reckoning that it was obviously a bloody good thing that the Nazis got rid of six million of the buggers. Perhaps this is why sales of Mein Kampf are so buoyant, from the Middle Eastern bazaars unto the Edgware Road, and why The Protocols of The Elders of Zion could be found for sale at the recent Anti-racism Congress in Durban.
The fact that many Gentiles and Arabs are rabidly Judeophobic, while many others are as horrified by Judeophobia as by any other type of racism, makes me believe that anti-semitism/Zionism is not a political position (otherwise the right and the left, the PLO and the KKK, would not be able to unite so uniquely in their hatred), but about how an individual feels about himself. I can't help noticing that, over the years, a disproportionate number of attractive, kind, clever people are drawn to Jews; those who express hostility to them, however, from Hitler to Hamza, are often as not repulsive freaks.
Think of famous anti-Zionist windbags - Redgrave, Highsmith, Galloway - and what dreary, dysfunctional, po-faced vanity confronts us. When we consider famous Jew-lovers, on the other hand - Marilyn, Ava, Liz, Felicity Kendal, me - what a sumptuous banquet of radiant humanity we look upon! How fitting that it was Richard Ingrams - Victor Meldrew without the animal magnetism - who this summer proclaimed in the Observer that he refuses to read letters from Jews about the Middle East, and that Jewish journalists should declare their racial origins when writing on this subject. Replying in another newspaper, Johann Hari suggested sarcastically that their bylines might be marked with a yellow star, and asked why Ingrams didn't want to know whether those writing on international conflicts were Muslim, Christian, Sikh or Hindu. The answer is obvious to me: poor Ingrams is a miserable, bitter, hypocritical cuckold, whose much younger girlfriend has written at length in the public arena of the boredom, misery and alcoholism to which living with him has led her, and whose trademark has long been a loathing for anyone who appears to get a kick out of life: the young, the prole, independent women. The Jews are in good company.
Judeophobia: where the political is personal, and the personal pretends to be political, and those swarthy/pallid/swotty/philistine/aggressive/ cowardly/comically bourgeois/filthy rich/delete-as-mood-takes-you bastards always get the girl. I'll return to this dirty little secret masquerading as a moral stance next week and, rest assured, it'll get much nastier. As the darling Jews them-selves would say (annoyingly, but then, nobody's perfect), enjoy!
I never saw this before.
BUMP for good freeping.
#26 ping
Hope we get Kingfisher/BBC-Guardian apologist in on this one too..
............................................................
Firstly my name is kingsurfer.
Secondly I am the first person to comment on this. PLease read your posts.
I am not a BBC apologist. We simply do not agree on where it stands.
If you actually bother to read my post you will see I openly loathe the Guardian.
Get a grip.
It is post 2 on this thread.
I have already told you this on the other thread.
Apparently you either cannot read or are purposefully ignoring it.
Either way
BOTHERED!
Sorry Bloak.
To think after just two hours we went from Enemies to allies for fair Journalism.
Isn't Freep THE Place to see it all.
Indeed.
To be fair I thought the Guardian was not bias for while then I actually bothered to read it.
I do go to the website sometimes for a laugh though.
In all seriousness I have taken your comments about the BBC in and will certainly be reigetering a complaint over the Al jazeera guy.
al-Jazeera.. Don't get me Started.
(I have lost more on the BBC too but that's enough for now)
Then again.. Ha'aretz has some Leftist anti-Israelers second to none... and I do mean None.
This might also be of interest.
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/530846.html
Last Update: 23/01/2005 18:01
Israel charts anti-Semitism rise in Russia, Britain
By Reuters
A government report expressed alarm on Sunday at what it said were sharp rises in violent anti-Semitism in Russia and Britain over the past year, but noted France had made inroads fighting the phenomenon.
Figures from Israel's Global Forum Against Anti-Semitism showed the number of violent anti-Semitic incidents held steady at 96 in world-leader France in 2004, but rose from 55 to 77 in second-place Britain and from 4 to 55 in Russia, third on the list.
The group, under the auspices of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's office and the Jewish Agency, said it received reports from local Jewish communities of 282 attacks against Jews and Jewish institutions in 2004 compared with 234 in 2003.
"The greatest number of events and the most severe attacks occur in Europe," the report said, listing three incidents last year of violent anti-Semitism in the United States, which has the largest Jewish community outside Israel.
Commenting on anti-Semitism in Russia and Ukraine, where physical attacks against Jews and their institutions rose from 15 in 2003 to 44 last year, the report said the governmental response to a "disturbing situation" was "woefully insufficient."
It said the steep rise in anti-Semitism in Britain was "alarming," with much of the desecration of synagogues and Jewish cemeteries carried out by Islamists.
"A central cause: years of hostile reporting and commentary about Israel in the British press now is spilling over into the street," the report said in apparent reference to coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Jewish community leaders in Britain, where around 265,000 Jews live, said in public comments on Wednesday anti-Semitic attacks in the country were increasing substantially.
British police said there had been at least eight racist attacks in the last two months on Jewish men in the Stamford Hill area of north London, which has a large Jewish community.
The British reports came a week after Prince Harry, third in line to the British throne, caused global outrage after he was pictured at a costume party wearing a Nazi uniform with a swastika.
He apologized, but Jewish groups said he should visit the Auschwitz death camp for ceremonies this year marking the 60th anniversary of its liberation.
In its report, the Global Forum said that since mid-2004 anti-Semitic expressions in France, where some 600,000 Jews live, had declined somewhat.
"Over the past year, French authorities have invested significant effort in fighting, and educating against, anti-Semitism," the document said.
I agree. Also they are not the news source of record as is the BBC. The BBC is seen all over the world and has a reputation much as the NY Times does here.
Thanks for posting. There are a few journalists and intellectuals who have broken with the MSM lefty anti-Israel, anti-US press. They deserve recognition.
In Italy, Oriana Fallaci comes to mind. Alain Hertoghe in France. Special mention also to Bernard Henri Levy, Jacques Tarnero and Philippe Bensoussan for Decryptage.
I like the article, but I'm embarrassed. Felicity and Kendal who?
'Felicity Kendal'
SJackson.. GOOGLE!!!!
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/K/htmlK/kendalfelic/kendalfelic.htm
The Guardian is the paper that openly called for the assassination of the US President in its editorial pages.
Anti-semitism is the least of their problems.
""""Thanks for posting. There are a few journalists and intellectuals who have broken with the MSM lefty anti-Israel, anti-US press. They deserve recognition.
In Italy, Oriana Fallaci comes to mind. Alain Hertoghe in France. Special mention also to Bernard Henri Levy, Jacques Tarnero and Philippe Bensoussan for Decryptage.""""
...
Also closer to home ... is Jeff Jacoby...
The only Conservative Columnist for the Boston Globe
(The Globe is owned by the NY Times)
http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/Boston_Globes_Jeff_Jacoby.asp
and his great articles like.. "THe Settlement Myth".. which I've used to great effect on many boards.
http://www.likud.nl/press47.html
No disrespect, Marilyn, Ava, and Liz are fine
"I don't swallow the modern liberal line that anti-Zionism is entirely different from anti-semitism"
neither do I. It's the same thing.
I like her. This is the second piece by her I've read here; the first was at least a month ago. She reads sort of like Ann Coulter's somewhat more polite English cousin.
Yes on Jacoby. He had a great piece about the 'canary in the coal mine," a metaphor for the mistreatment of Jews in a society being an early warning of bad things to come.
"She reads sort of like Ann Coulter's somewhat more polite English cousin."
That's the first time I've ever heard Burchill being referred to as "polite." Just type her name into Google and you'll see just how infamous and widely reviled she is in her own country. And it's not her politics, more the fact that she abandoned her two children from her first marriage, her (wait for it) five abortions, and the fact that she regularly claims to be proud of both of these things. You might not like her quite so much after reading this:
http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/5-24-2002-19096.asp
Thanks for that link to the darker side of Julie B. Methinks the lady doth protest to much in that article: sounds to me like so much whistling in the dark, her insistense that her abortions were undertaken with clear-eyed decisiveness, and exacted no real emotional toll on her. That's her opinion FOR NOW and FOR PUBLICATION.Opinion writers like her HAVE to be assertive, flamboyant, and overstate their case. I think she's smart and independent-minded enough to eventually come to grips with her decisions and see them with a little less defensiveness.
"The Guardian is the paper that openly called for the assassination of the US President in its editorial pages."
Purley on a point of information: It wasn't in the editorial pages, it was obscurely hidden away in the TV guide.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.