David Icke - 'Racist attacks' and a blatant conflict of interest
|
Time
Text
Every year, figures are issued by an organisation in Britain.
Claiming to detail the number of anti-Semitic attacks that have taken place in the previous 12 months.
And every year the media report those figures and politicians respond to those figures without putting the source of the figures into context.
So I'd like to put that right for once.
Here's one story.
From this week. Anti-Semitic attacks highest in 34 years after Labour row.
Attacks on Jewish people have hit record levels amid high profile claims of anti-Semitism within Labour, a report said yesterday.
I'll get to the source of that report very shortly.
It's a charity and it said that this increase, this big increase in anti-Semitic attacks Followed unprecedented publicity over incidents involving Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party.
Coverage of anti-Semitism within Labour was likely, it's said, to have emboldened offenders while making victims more aware of reporting incidents, it said.
And here's the source. The Community Security Trust, the CST, which monitors anti-Semitic abuse, recorded 1,382 hate crimes in Britain last year.
Background, reasons, credibility, just believers.
3% more than in 2016.
It's the highest figure since statistics were first kept 34 years ago.
And it's always kind of increasing.
And the figure's always the worst than ever before.
So let's put this CST into some kind of context.
This is from its own website.
CST is a community security trust, a charity that protects British Jews from anti-Semitism and related threats.
CST received charitable status in 1994 and is recognised by police and government as a unique model of best practice.
Well, we'll take your word for that.
Maybe. CST has over 65 full-time and part-time staff based in offices in London, Manchester and Leeds.
And in May 2014, it was revealed, this is from other reports, that the chief executive of the CST is the highest paid of all charity leaders within the British Jewish community, earning between £170,000 and £190,000 And the income of the CST in 2017 is reported to be £30.4 million.
The founding chairman of the organisation is Gerald Ronson.
The Ronson that was one of the Guinness Four, so named for his involvement in the Guinness share trading fraud of the 1980s.
He was convicted in August 1990 of one charge of conspiracy.
Well, there are no conspiracies.
Two of false accounting and one of theft and was fined five million pounds and given a one-year jail sentence of which he served six months.
Now, here's the question. The CST is based on the fact that Jewish people are threatened with attacks.
People, organizations, contribute to the CST on the basis of supporting an organization protecting Jewish people from attacks.
Do the CST benefit from the figures saying no, attacks against Jewish people are falling, or do they benefit from figures that say they are rising?
And this is the point I'm making here.
If you're going to issue figures for the number of anti-Semitic attacks and you're going to take them as read and you're going to make political statements about them, then you've got to put into context where they come from and the fact that there is a major potential benefit from the organization issuing the figures and compiling the figures on The figures going up year on year.
In fact, the The Jewish press has questioned the CST. In 2011, a number of articles appeared in the British weekly newspaper, the Jewish Chronicle, that sought to question the work and functioning of the CST. Dr Gilbert Kahn of Keene University in the USA took the view that British Jewry did not need a CST because British Jews paid taxes to the state for their physical protection and could therefore depend on the police.
On 15 April, the newspaper's columnist, Professor Jeffrey Alderman, argued against the CST on the grounds that its leadership and funding were neither transparent nor accountable, even though it's a charity, and therefore that should be a gimme.
Alderman returned to the subject on June 10th when he speculated that his doubts about the CST and its work were more widely shared.
And so we'll come back to this story from this week, which is...
Because it's an anti-Labour newspaper, it's targeting the Labour Party as a reason for these figures going up, with no context of what the CST is, the job that it does, and why people fund it.
And here we have David Delu of the CST saying, hatred is rising and Jewish people are suffering as a result.
He said prosecutions need to be more visible and more frequent.
And of course, the more that it's highlighted, the more that Jewish people fear being attacked, the more that the CST is likely to benefit in terms of donations as a result.
And then we've got the Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, welcoming the report without any context and adding even one incident is one too many.
Well, yes, it is. But why are we taking figures from an organisation that benefits from the perception of Jewish people in Britain being in danger?
Why aren't we having...
Then done by an independent organization that does not have any benefit from whether the figures go up or down.
Then we have Andrew Gwynne, the shadow community secretary, the opposition party, and of course this virtue signaling is everywhere you look.
He called the findings extremely concerning.
Hate has no place in our country and we must root out anti-Semitism whenever and wherever it takes place.
Virtue signal, virtue signal, virtue signal.
But no context.
And then finally in the report, Stephen Silverman.
Of the campaign for or against anti-Semitism.
And Silverman's organization has tried again and again to have my voice silenced.
Because freedom of speech is the enemy.
He said that the rise, the rise on the basis of the figures from the CST... Well, Mr. Silverman and your colleagues at the campaign against anti-Semitism, campaign against free speech,
Why, if you are so keen to have this exposed about conspiracy myths, as you call them, why won't you debate with people like me?
So you can put your view, and I'll put mine, and then we'll see what people think of it.
Why are you frightened of open debate?
Because this is not about protecting Jewish people.
It's about protecting the agenda of those who claim to protect Jewish people.
An agenda that is at its core simply about silencing any criticism, not of Jewish people, but of Israel and its far-right Netanyahu regime.
And To have these figures parroted by the media and politicians when they come from an organization that benefits from the concept, the perception of there being a danger to Jewish people is absolutely outrageous.
And the reason an alternative media is desperately needed An alternative media.