I see the anti-Jewish Methodist blogger is getting desperate with a very sad "with friends like this who needs enemies" tarring British Jews with the English Defence League brush. Any stick to beat the Jews.
But the story is a little more complicated as Joseph W comments on that blog.
One of the leading lights of York Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Terry Gollogly endorsed the rigging of a Jewish Chronicle online poll.
The Jewish Chronicle question was "should Rabbis work with the EDL?" This follows the distressing news that the "English" Defence League whom I have mentioned elsewhere were to demonstrate outside the Israeli embassy and joined by an eccentric Rabbi from California.
The anti Israel lobby thought it would be a weeze to get the JC readers to vote "Yes", giving the impression that Britain's Jewish community were in favour of working with this bunch of racists - provoking exactly the sort of response that our non-too-worldly-wise anti-Jewish semi-official blogger in Methodism now proudly parades.
Terry Gallogly, secretary of York Palestine Solidarity Campaign, says: “People might like to vote in this poll if only to embarrass Hoffie [Jonathan Hoffman] and the Zionist Federation."
Now what has the rantings and dirty tricks of the Secretary of the York Palestine Liberation Front got to do with the Methodist Church?
The Chair of the York Palestine Solidarity Campaign is none other than Stephen Leah. He is a Methodist. No ordinary Methodist.
Stephen Leah was one of the prime movers behind the biased report on Israel which led to the disgrafeful anti-Israel resolution at the 2010 Methodist Conference.
In the report Leah is described as:
Dr Stephen Leah – Peace campaigner with contacts in UK peace and justice community and in Israel/Palestine
No mention is made of his long term connection with the York Palestine Solidarity or his association with someone who would encourage the rigging of an online poll in order to defame Britain's Jewish community.
If Stephen Leah reads this he is welcome to set the record straight.
Did he take part in the Jewish Chronicle poll as suggested by Gollogly?
Has he distanced himself and the Methodist Church which he represents on this issue from this defamatory stunt?
Is he still working with Terry Gollogly?
But to some this won't matter. Last week saw the humiliating failure on an anti-Israel online petiton amongst British Methodists (even though it was signed by someone else involved in the JC rigging scandal).
Now they are scrapping the barrel.
Posts
10 comments:
Readers who have been mislead by the scurrilous and defamatory story on Connexions may like to follow this link:
http://notinourna.me/
Great post, David - you pose some pertinent questions. I have been wondering when Dr Leah, given his holy calling (I mean, his vocation in life, the way he makes his living, not his horrible anti-Israel obession) will dissociate himself from the disgraceful machinations of Mr Gallogly regarding that poll.
Daphne, as I understand it, Leah already has said the Church shouldn't be balanced all the time. One of his colleagues in the motion put to the Church indaba was Nichola Jones who argues that the Jewish G-d is a racist deity 'cos of her typically supercessionarist interpretation of Amos 3:2.
So, don't hold your breath.
David, I do think you diminish your argument by calling Richard "anti-Jewish". I see no evidence for anti-Judaism... I am quite sure he likes Jews, but expects good behaviour of them.
And it's up to him to decide what this good behaviour entails.
Thanks Alec, Trouble is Richard has built himself up quite a case file. I've suggested that he meets some jewish folks and talks about the Methodist Conference stance but he doesn't seem prepared to to that.
Oh, I have to be circumspect until I have quotations in affirmation (evidence-based approach, like; summat certain people seem opposed to), but I also am familiar with the attitude you ascribe to Richard.
In my experience though, it's best to use someone words against them (as we're going with Greenie, and Golloghy of York PSC).
I think we need to go back to Richard's little quip about "Methodists lighting the gas ovens". Hardly the sort of "joke" you make about something as sensitive as the Holocaust!
Incidentally, I go into some detail on this on Dave Warnock's blog:
http://42.blogs.warnock.me.uk/2010/10/why-would-someone-do-this.html?cid=6a00d8345296c369e20133f5618375970b#comment-form
He plays a curious role in Methodist blogging.
Are we witnessing a fight for the soul of the Methodist blogosphere?
That was the sort of comment potentially from Richard I was thinking - followed by my question about how one would treat a similar 'quip' about the Stephen Lawrence case.
I feel on much stronger ground in calling Stephen Sizer an anti-Judaic polemicist because of my familiarity with his writings (not to mention a lout who tried to cast suspicions of preying on children against Joseph Weissman). Despite Richard's attempt to cite Biblical verse yesterday, I don't know enough to peg him with the likes of Nicola Jones.
Nowhere has Richard distanced himself from Nicola Jones' extraordinary speech.
He himself placed Naim Ateek's disgrace speech on his blog and said:
"No fair-minded person could call this an anti-semitic speech, still less a holocaust denial"
I just don't think he gets it. But then quite a few Methodists just don't understand the offence to Jews.
"No fair-minded person could call this an anti-semitic speech, still less a holocaust denial"
Take my mate Darren. He's very concerned about human rights in Jamaica. Very concerned.
He thinks that it was much better when the British were in charge. He has attended meetings where someone called "David Duke" was present, and sometimes at protests outside the Jamaican High Commission there are people wearing white-hoods and holding burning crosses.
Darren doesn't think they're racist.
Post a Comment