You’d have to be living under a rock not to have noticed the slew of propaganda manufacturing anti-semitism through accusations to ‘get’ Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.Everything he has said in the past is up for scrutiny, and a speech he made in January 2013 at the Britain’s Legacy in Palestine Conference is now being used to further these attacks in mainstream media.
Doughty St Barrister Adam Wagner is using the New Statesman to express his view that this latest clip shows Corbyn really is an anti-semite.
–
The Context of Context
However, just scratching the surface of his article shows what a fallacy this is, and brings up questions about Wagner’s honesty and integrity.
Somewhat ironically, Wagner states that context is important to order to understand Corbyn’s remarks (it is), then promptly misquotes what he said and veers off into an opinion that is totally removed from the actual context.
Here’s what Corbyn said at the conference which is apparently so contentious:
“The other evening we had a meeting in parliament in which Manuel [Hassassian, the Palestinian ambassador] made an incredibly powerful and passionate and effective speech about the history of Palestine, the rights of the Palestinian people. This was dutifully recorded by the, the thankfully silent Zionists who were in the audience on that occasion, and then came up and berated him afterwards for what he had said. They clearly have two problems: one is they don’t want to study history and secondly having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don’t understand English irony either. Manuel does understand English irony and uses it very, very effectively, so I think they needed two lessons, which we could perhaps help them with”
The context is clear: Corbyn was referring to a previous speech Hassassian gave which a handful of Zionists berated him on. He then jokes that even though these disruptors had likely lived in the UK all their lives, they had less understanding of English irony than the Palestinian Ambassador, a foreigner.
–
Tampering with Evidence
So what did Wagner make of this? First off, he misquoted Corbyn, removing a sentence from the above quote without telling his readership that he had done so:
“They clearly have two problems: one is they don’t want to study history and secondly having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don’t understand English irony either. They needed two lessons, which we could perhaps help them with.”
Removing the part where Corbyn states that unlike this handful of Zionists, Hassassian does understand irony, removes some of the context of the speech and more crucially, the comparison Corbyn was making.
Wagner also changed “I think they needed two lessons” to “They needed two lessons”, turns a clear opinion, into a statement. Again, this alters the context.
But Wagner doesn’t stop there.
–
Look at my Banner, Not the Facts
He now grafts on intent: “It is said with anger, and as though he is trying to prove something to the audience”, and “the video is evidence [of] his obvious anger at those men”.Watch the video for yourself and you’ll see there is no anger there. Corbyn is passionate and emphatic and obviously not impressed at the Zionists’ actions, but he is not expressing anger.
Wagner is clearly hoping that having established himself as a fair and decent person, by holding up a massive banner that says “Human Rights”, people will take him at his word and not check the misquote or the mistaken opinion about Corbyn’s emotional state. Of course a “Human Rights” advocate from Helena Kennedy’s own Chambers would never intentionally misrepresent facts, now would they?
Then Wagner goes much further:
“[Corbyn’s] passionate support for Palestine, has spilled over into a stream of anti-Semitism that classes Jews as aliens and un-British.”
This is completely untrue. Corbyn’s speech is very clear: he is critical of a handful of Zionists. Although many Jews are Zionists, not all of them are, and there are many non-Jewish Zionists.
So to twist Corbyn’s comments about a handful of disrespectful Zionists into a statement that Corbyn said Jewish people are aliens and un-British is utterly false.
Corbyn explained this very clearly to the BBC: he spoke to “defend the Palestinian ambassador in the face of what I thought were deliberate misrepresentations” from people “for whom English was a first language, when it isn’t for the ambassador”.He said: “I described those pro-Israel activists as Zionists, in the accurate political sense and not as a euphemism for Jewish people – and that is made clear in the rest of my speech that day. I am now more careful with how I might use the term ‘Zionist’ because a once self-identifying political term has been increasingly hijacked by anti-Semites as code for Jews.”
–
The Limitations of Context
Has Wagner deliberately fallen into that misrepresentation himself? This statement by him might make you wonder: “If you doubt this, try reading the above excerpt and replacing “Zionists” with “blacks” and see whether you see racism.”
Except Zionism isn’t a race, nor is it a religion, and Corbyn didn’t attack all Zionists nor even all Jewish people, but a handful of rude ones. The casual reference to “blacks” is also disturbing.
Wagner doesn’t stop there. He states: “I am not sure whether he is referring to all British Jews or not, or even all Zionists, but it doesn’t really matter as it is such an incautious comment.”
It does matter. Context, remember? Corbyn’s words were: “This was dutifully recorded by the, the thankfully silent Zionists who were in the audience on that occasion, and then came up and berated him afterwards for what he had said.” Now unless all Zionists and all British Jews were present at that conference, then clearly, Corbyn was only talking about the ones in attendance. No one else.
Wagner’s statement also raises the dangerous notion that to criticise a handful of berating Zionists is to attack the Jewish race as a whole.
Wagner tries to appear balanced near the end of his article by pretending to consider the possibility that truth exists: “Corbyn may, in his own mind, have only been focussing on the small group of Jewish activists who attend pro-Palestinian events, ask difficult questions and write critical blogs afterwards”
As shown above, this is what Corbyn was doing: defending the Ambassador against a small number of disrespectful Zionists. But by using “in his own mind”, Wagner is trying to show Corbyn as at least naive and unclear, and at worse a disingenuous racist, whereas his words truly do speak for themselves.
So why all the misrepresentation? The New Statesman is right: a proper look at the context makes Wagner’s unsubstantiated accusations much, much worse!
–
–
Contextual Addendum
1. In order to fully understand the “British irony” remark we did a little digging to find ambassador Hassassian’s original statement, and here it is:
“You know I’m reaching the conclusion that the Jews are the children of God, the only children of God and the Promised Land is being paid by God! I have started to believe this because nobody is stopping Israel building its messianic dream of Eretz Israel to the point I believe that maybe God is on their side. Maybe God is partial on this issue.”
And how was this reported by at least one of the Zionists in attendance? The post’s title alone pretty much says it all: Palestinian Ambassador to the UK: “I’ve started to believe that the Jews are the only children of God”
–
2. If anyone has any doubt regarding Corbyn’s position on anti-semitism, his public record should speak for itself:
–
–
Related Articles
by Jonathan Cook (8/8/2018)
by Shaun Lawson (23/7/2018)
Adam Wagner, Benjamin Netanyahu, Doughty Street Chambers, featured, Helena Kennedy, israel, Jeremy Corbyn, Manuel Hassassian, new statesman, palestine
By ANM
He now grafts on intent: “It is said with anger, and as though he is trying to prove something to the audience”, and “the video is evidence [of] his obvious anger at those men”.
Corbyn explained this very clearly to the BBC: he spoke to “defend the Palestinian ambassador in the face of what I thought were deliberate misrepresentations” from people “for whom English was a first language, when it isn’t for the ambassador”.
Unlike Wagner on Corbyn, we can’t pretend to know what is going on in Wagner’s own mind, but the importance of the subject surely merits a harder look at real anti-semites, like those Benjamin Netanyahu hangs around with.
Wagner talks about the importance of context, but does not seem to realise that the version of the Corbyn speech which has been circulating has been edited (either by the Daily Mail, or by whoever provided it to them), to remove a short section in which Corbyn talks about history, the Balfour Declaration, British trades unions etc. THIS is the context that is missing, and which makes clear that he is absolutely not classing Jews as aliens or un-British. Quite the contrary. The unedited video is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rGUsKRUcFA
Thanks for your comment. Wagner later discovered the missing section of the speech – and used it to prove that Corbyn is othering all Jewish britons…