Labour Muslim peer reveals his antisemitism

Engageonline has this item on the first Muslim peer in the UK, Lord Ahmed, and his antisemitic outburst. Note that the Labour Party has suspended him, declaring against all forms of racism and antisemitism. So this situation isn't all bad.

I've added a comment I posted just below, in case, when this item appears here, my comment hasn't been posted yet. You will note, at the end of my comment, that I refer to The Guardian being its usual mealy-mouthed self when it can't, quite, twist the story into yet another anti-Israel diatribe, despite Ahmed's invocation of "The Lobby".

"Brian R., having read The Times coverage (unfortunately behind a pay wall, so I can only reproduce parts of it), I have to support your contention that your friend was being kind. The Times says in its article that it "...has obtained video and audio of the Urdu-language broadcast, in which the...Pakistani born businessman also claims [beyond that is his comments about the Lobby] that his conviction was subsequently overturned 'in a way that kept my honour intact'." As The Times notes acerbically, Lord Ahmed is wrong. The full article covers the equivalent of a whole page.

One might be excused for thinking that The Times, as a normally Conservative Party supporting paper, might be out to get in a blow against the Labour Party. However, it has a proud record of being against antisemitism. It was, after all all, their then-Constantinople/Istanbul correspondent who secured a copy of the book, published in 1864, that carried the equivalent of the Protocols, but aimed at the Freemasons, which reappear in the Tsarist fabrication aimed at the Jews. (You can follow this whole farrago, fictionalised, but essentially a drama-documentary in Umberto Eco's "The Prague Cemetery". I have to tell you that I have held a copy of the loan agreement between The Times correspondent and the White Russian emigre that caused the book to be passed to The Times, and the papers expose of the whole thing.

The Times, in a powerful editorial, also today (14 March), reminds us that this is what they did back then in 1922, as well as attacking contemporary antisemitism. Today, The Times definitely earns its soubriquet of "The Thunderer". BTW, The Times also finds space to note Lord Ahmed's House of Lords hosting of that nice man Israel Shamir; they don't fail to note that Shamir is an antisemite.

Unfortunately, The Guardian manages to struggle to a couple of column inches, no editorial (and, no, I haven't logged on to "Comment is Free") and the report is fairly anodyne.

By: Brian Goldfarb