Britain’s Guardian newspaper yields to pressure from pro-war Zionist smear-mongers

By Mary Rizzo

Redress, October 10, 2008

 

Once regarded as a bastion of freedom of expression, Britain’s left-of-centre Guardian newspaper has taken a sharp lurch to the right, dismissing an Iranian-born writer whose views offended a group of pro-war, neo-conservative Zionist Islamophobic smear-mongers. In a shocking example of Zionist lobbying at the heart of the mainstream British media, the Guardian newspaper has dismissed an Iranian contributor after a group of pro-war, Islamophobic neo-conservatives accused her of anti-Semitism.

Soraya Tehrani, an Iranian mother who lives in London and works for a children’s charity, had been asked to write two pieces for the Guardian’s blog, Comment is Free (CiF), chronicling the horrors endured by Arab women whose lives have been ravaged by US and Israeli invasions. But her pieces were suddenly dropped in response to intense pressure from Zionist “watchdogs” and blogs. According to CiF Editor Matt Seaton, Tehrani had posted comments on a forum which, in his view, amounted to “anti-Semetic, racist discourse”. However, on reading both her editorial contributions and comments one is struck by the fact that Tehrani’s sharp, eloquent political criticism is totally devoid of any racial, ethnic or religious connotations.

Yet, Seaton promptly banned Tehrani from CiF and sent an apologetic letter to notorious pro-war Zionist smear campaigner David Toube, promising to improve the Guardian blog’s “moderation policy” and work to curtail anti-Semitism in the blogosphere.

As if it were not enough that the Guardian CiF editor was sending an apologetic letter to Islamophobe Toube, a few days later the editor took part in an interview with the Jewish Chronicle assuring its readers that he would not tolerate “racism” or “hate speech” in any form. However, let us take a closer look at what the Guardian blog editor regards as racism and hate speech. Here is one of Tehrani’s supposedly offensive “anti-Semitic” comments:

The [US] Republicans have killed millions across the Middle East and elsewhere to please their darling Israelis, what more are you moaning about??? What else the American-Israeli gov’t in Washington can do to please their SUPER-masters in Tel Aviv??? More killings, maybe this time they are after Persian blood??? Who knows, these gods always get what they want ... mindless, selfish, arrogant lot...

Where is the anti-Semitism here? To admit that recent American wars served Israeli interests is simply telling the truth. It is hard to understand how blaming Washington for war crimes in the Middle East is an “anti-Jewish”, racist slur. Clearly, the issue of race or ethnicity was not mentioned once by Tehrani who, thanks to the so-called “liberal” Guardian, has found her political voice silenced.

In another comment, which has also been deleted from CiF, Tehrani said: “The Star of David has been flying inside No.10 [Downing Street] since Thatcher’s days.”

The Star of David is, unfortunately, depicted on Israel’s flag, warplanes and tanks. As long as Israel is dropping bombs on civilians from aircraft decorated with the Star of David, criticism of this symbol must be acknowledged as legitimate. Also, bearing in mind the fact that the British Labour Party’s number-one fundraiser is none other than Lord Michael Levy, who is described by The Times as “a pillar of British Judaism and a leading international Zionist”, the link between the Star of David and Downing Street is clear.

Regrettably, due to Israel’s genocidal policies and practices, the Star of David has become a symbol of murderous, expansionist ideology. Yet, far more concerning is the fact that a “leading international Zionist” star was financing the Labour government at the time Britain was taken to an illegal war.

Tehrani, however, does not divulge the substantial list of Zionist Jews (Wolfowitz, Libby, Levy, proxy donation masters, etc.) working within the fabric of the US and British governments to champion the Israeli cause. Instead, she refers merely to “Republicans” and “Israelis”, and to a national symbol.

As people who fight for the Palestinian cause and confront Zionist racism on a daily basis, we are eager to learn from the Guardian and its editors what are Muslims and Palestinian supporters entitled to say? What is permissible? Can we not even criticize the Republican Party or Zionist genocidal policies? What is really left for us to do except lie down and allow ourselves to be killed by tanks and cluster bombs decorated with the Star of David?

It is both frightening and amusing to witness the Guardian, hitherto regarded as a bastion of the “liberal media”, yield to a neo-conservative pressure group that not only supports the Iraq war, but witchhunts humanist activists. The Guardian is happy to engage an Iranian contributor but shuns her the moment she fails to love Israel. Sadly, it would seem that the Guardian has stooped to being a tool for silencing critics of the devastating, murderous ideology of a notorious Zionist pressure group.

Mr Seaton has been contacted by telephone and email on several occasions in recent days. We would like him to explain his policy of censorship and his criteria for labelling people as anti-Semitic. We would like him to analyse the writing that is quoted and to explain to us how this serves as grounds for smearing and silencing a person.

So far, he has failed to respond.

Mary Rizzo is a writer and translator living in Italy. She is editor and co-founder of Palestine Think Tank and co-founder of Tlaxcala, the international network of activist translators. Her personal blog is Peacepalestine. A version of this article originally appeared in Palestine Think Tank.

 

---

Fair Use Notice

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.