Unread post
by David_BTGD » Sat Jan 09, 2021 6:22 pm
I wrote the piece. I am David Collier. I am not here to argue - just to correct a few pieces of disinformation on this thread.
1. I am dismissed as 'totally biased'. Everyone is. A good starting point for discussing truth is to accept we are all biased - and hope that we have enough intelligence to attempt to differentiate between fact, perspective and opinion. I do my best. As a side note I do have a distinction in a masters degree in Ethics and have been studying history for two decades. My work has appeared in major newspapers across the globe. Let's not pretend I am just some bumbling amateur. My report gave numerous detailed examples to support its argument - I see not one of those positions countered here.
2. I am smeared as an "ethnonationalist, religious fundamentalist crank". Is this really the standard of discussion here? As it happens I am a bit of a hard-core agnostic who spent years working alongside Palestinians during the Oslo years trying to build 'peace bridges' between the communities. If you could show me a future where both Israel and Palestine were two states living side by side with open trade and movement -I'd grab it without stopping to see where the borders were drawn. I tire of anonymous people who weakly smear me with empty slurs. 'Don't listen to him he is an extremist' - is not an argument.
3. "I accuse people of antisemitism for blocking Jews on Twitter". More nonsense of course. I personally don't block anyone unless they endlessly harrass me - and even then it is only temporary. I do know of antisemites who habitually block Jews to drown out their voice - but do not believe the blocking is the defining feature. As it happens - after I wrote my report on the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign - ALEX MASSIE wrote in the Sunday Times, you'd have to work pretty hard at it (being antisemitic) to have been included. My reports are well known for setting a high standard for inclusion. I admit Twitter can create an environment for more bombastic language, but it doesn't change the lie about me in that post above.
4. I never said the whole of Wikipedia is antisemitic. I imagine there are even many corners of Wiki with editors who never think about Jews at all. But - in some areas that really matter - antisemites have certainly taken a grip on things.
5. I am called an 'ultra-Zionist' above. I don't even know what it means. I oppose radical settlers in hilltops - so I am not that 'ultra'. I believe that the Jews have a right to self-determination that is ethically sound. I think Israel was an ethical imperative. I do not deny the Palestinians should also have their state. In Israel my politics are pretty much middle of the road. I'd grab for peace if it came, but also believe Israel has the right to defend itself. Calling me an 'ultra-Zionist' in these circumstances, is just absurd.
6. I don't just believe that Amnesty are institutionally antisemitic, I wrote a 200 page report on it which included about 30 in-depth case-studies. If you think NGOs like Amnesty do not develop group-think, begin to recruit like-minded individuals and oppose dissent, you have not been paying attention to what ex-Amnesty people have been saying. As it happens with Israel - Amnesty have a clear obsession and I'd advise anyone to check the stats first. All but one of Amnesty's information gatherers on Israel is a Palestinian. How does it work when you use one of the sides to report on a conflict? One was caught calling Islamic Jihad terrorists 'heroes' - another caught giving advice to Hamas about how to pretend their fallen militants (terrorists) are innocent civilians. All the case studies highlighted a clear bias. As with the UN - these organisations can only be a sum of their parts. I'd find it odd that anyone here would suggest we should use China, Syria, Russia, Libya or Saudi as our guide on Human Rights - so perhaps someone could explain why we should pay attention to the UN Human rights council - which is just a body made up of these types of nations. It is known the UN is grossly biased against Israel - even UN chiefs have admitted it - so I find an attempt to dismiss my opinion because I stated the obvious - is a little lame.
7. I did not claim the Board of Deputies is hard-left. This is just another empty smear. In fact MVD - the current Chair is someone I admire. I have quite a few friends who are deputies. I have said there are elements in the BoD - who are hard-left - but that isn't the same thing at all. Of course as always my claims came with case studies and hard evidence. It seems accuracy to some here is expected of others whilst not practised on a personal level.
8. Apparently the BoD have nothing to do with me. This lie above is used to suggest I am an extreme right winger. Except of course they do have lots to do with me. I'd imagine those few hard-left Deupties do not like me much but as stated I am in close contact with several Deputies, including those in official positions.
I think that just about covers it. It would have been nice, instead of reducing the thread to mindless empty smears - if the actual content of my post had been covered - but hey - I can only respond to what is here.
Have a great 2021....
