British commentator Yasmin Alibhai-Brown has a reputation for publishing anti-Israel screeds dating back over many years. So it isn’t unexpected to find the usual litany of lies, half-truths and hatred in her latest piece that appears in i News.
The Holy Land belongs to all three faiths – we cannot simply colonise it with one, @y_alibhai
writes https://t.co/lbWT5TMnN8— i newspaper (@theipaper) November 27, 2018
According to Alibhai-Brown:
Over the centuries, various holy land sites have been sacred to all three Abrahamic faiths – Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Jewish believers believe these were promised to them by Abraham, and for Muslims, Jerusalem is where Prophet Mohammed was sent glorious dreams and despatches from Allah. For centuries the three faiths were able to coexist in peace. Not any longer.
Why is the Jewish claim to the land a religious ‘belief’ while Islamic links to the holy land are referred to as factual?
In any case, Jewish links to the region in a purely religious context ignores (most likely deliberately) 3,500 years of Jewish nationhood that goes far beyond Judaism as just a religion.
And what history books has Alibhai-Brown been reading? Apparently none if she believes that “the three faiths were able to coexist in peace” for centuries, ignoring the fact that she is talking about one of the most fought-over pieces of real estate in the world.
Bethlehem a “walled prison?”
YAB continues:
The current Israeli government is exerting its dominance like never before. Bethlehem has been turned into a walled prison; last year Palestinians were denied entry into Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem, one of Islam’s most revered sites.
A look at this B’tselem map of Israel’s security barrier is enough to show that Bethlehem is not a “walled prison.” A prison would imply that there is no way out. This is clearly not the case as Bethlehem is not surrounded. Yet more hyperbole from Alibhai-Brown.
Israel ‘denied entry’ to Al-Aqsa?
Alibhai-Brown states that “last year Palestinians were denied entry into Al-Aqsa mosque” as if this were a deliberate act of Israeli malevolence aimed at destroying Palestinian freedom of worship.
What she doesn’t tell you is that in July 2017, three terrorists emerged from the Temple Mount complex opening fired on a group of Israeli policemen, killing two of them.
The Times of Israel described Israel’s reaction at the time:
Israel’s reaction to the attack was similarly out of the ordinary.
For the first time in decades, Israel closed the Temple Mount to visitors on a Friday, which is ordinarily one of the most popular times for Muslims to visit the holy site. . . .
After attacks in the Old City in the past, the government has at most restricted entrance to the Temple Mount — typically only allowing in elderly men and women — not shut it down entirely.
It was not entirely clear when was the last time Israel shut down the Temple Mount for Friday prayers. According to the Muslim Waqf, the religious authority on the Temple Mount, this was the first time Israel has taken this measure in the 50 years that it has controlled the holy site. Others, however, said Israel shut down the Temple Mount in August 1969, after an Australian Christian man tried to burn down the Dome of the Rock.
In other words, Alibhai-Brown’s charge simply doesn’t stick when presented with the actual facts.
Later, Alibhai-Brown goes on to quote from an anti-Israel article by Prof. Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian on this very subject. It becomes clear, however, that Alibhai-Brown has not even bothered to read to the end of the professor’s anti-Israel article where it clearly states that it was Palestinian worshipers themselves who refused to pass through metal detectors to get to the Temple Mount and not the Israelis preventing them from praying there.
Palestinian residents of Jerusalem
Alibhai-Brown’s direct quote from Shalhoub-Kevorkian says:
Palestinians, native to and residing in Jerusalem, are categorised by Israeli law as ‘permanent residents’ or as foreign residents who have to prove to the Ministry of Interior that their ‘centre of life’ – where they live, go to school, get medical care and pay for utilities – are all taking place in Jerusalem.
Yet more selectivity given that Palestinian residents of Jerusalem have the option of applying for Israeli citizenship and even without that, are entitled to participate in municipal elections, and receive national insurance and health benefits. The majority, however, choose not to take out Israeli citizenship either because they perceive doing so as legitimizing Israeli control over Jerusalem or due to societal pressure.
Holocaust abuse
Alibhai-Brown has a nasty habit of abusing the Holocaust to criticize Israel’s behavior as well as claiming that defenders of Israel use the antisemitism charge to shut down criticism and her latest piece follows that well trodden pattern:
Now the reporting of Israeli injustices brings on instant accusations of anti-Semitism. The savage persecution of Jews by the Nazis necessitated the creation of this safe homeland – Israel exists and must. But the horrors of the past do not bestow on Israel the right to break international laws and violate in perpetuity the human rights of those whose land was taken to make that homeland.
The reference to “instant accusations of anti-Semitism” is a typical maneuver by anti-Israel activists who claim that Jewish concerns surrounding antisemitism are made in bad faith and meant to shut down the debate. As David Hirsh points out:
This is a formulation which often appears in response to an accusation of antisemitism, which I have called The Livingstone Formulation (Hirsh 2007; 2010). It is a rhetorical device which enables the user to refuse to engage with the charge made. It is a mirror which bounces back an accusation of antisemitism against anybody who makes it. It contains a counter-charge of dishonest Jewish (or ‘Zionist’) conspiracy.
We aren’t going to fall into Alibhai-Brown’s trap but we will still point out that when someone chooses to write about Jews, they need to be sensitive to antisemitic tropes, which is how this statement from Alibhai-Brown could be read:
Mere mortals cannot resist Israel’s might and resolve.
A common trope is to attribute enormous power to Jews or Israel to the extent that they are accused of trying to control the world or wield disproportionate influence over governments, media and the financial system – exactly the sort of scenario that “mere mortal” would have difficulty resisting.
Indeed, Alibhai-Brown’s particular use of language offers a disturbing insight into her prejudice:
Since March, over 200 Gaza inhabitants have been killed by Israeli forces and thousands injured. The quarries included medical workers and journalists.
The dictionary definition of the word “quarries” refers to animals or prey being hunted or “any object of search, pursuit, or attack.” In the context that Alibhai-Brown uses, it is a direct charge that the IDF is deliberately hunting and targeting Gazans, including medical workers and journalists.
The IDF doesn’t ‘hunt’ Palestinians as if it were a sport and to suggest this is malicious.
Alibhai-Brown concludes by calling on UK parliamentarians to “support peaceful Palestinian man, women and children who have so long been denied rights, livelihoods and dignity. Sometimes goodwill is the best present.”
Goodwill is certainly the last thing that Yasmin Alibhai-Brown is capable of when it comes to Israel.
For more on Yasmin Alibhai-Brown see the following HonestReporting posts:
- Yasmin Alibhai-Brown: Distortions and Outright Lies
- Plane Hijacker, Terrorist… Female Icon?
- Straw Men and “Hard Zionists” in UK Political Race
- UK Columnist: ‘Israel Now More Wicked and Dangerous Than Hamas’
Please send a letter to the editor at i News – [email protected] – remembering to include your name, postal address and daytime telephone number to be considered for publication.
