The Board of Deputies have let the mask slip

by Martin Odoni

As I have indicated previously, I do not like the Board of Jewish Deputies. As a body, it falsely claims to ‘represent’ British Jews, but hardly ever consults any of us before arriving at its official position on any matter. They no more represent Jews than Mary I represented the people of England.

Voice of Israel, not Jews, in the UK

The usual manner in which the BoD conducts itself is good politics, but definitely politics i.e. not very honest. It likes to project an image of itself as a besieged body of brave, dignified, scholarly defenders of a vulnerable people. This projection of absolute dignity, combined with the undoubted history of oppression against Jews, often allows the Board to get away with making absolutely outrageous fake accusations.

Just sometimes though, the mask does have a tendency to slip. Journalist Rachel Shabi tweeted a brief response to an article by Karen Pollock of the Holocaust Education Trust, appearing in The Times. She disagreed with Pollock’s assertion (relating to the Gary Lineker furore) that it was inappropriate to make Holocaust comparisons to current events.

This is plainly wrong. A key tenet of Holocaust education is never again, for anyone. The Holocaust is unique, but "never again" is universal. Drawing out similarities and parallels is critical and part of the education https://t.co/d5fbRRQJ5E

— rachel shabi (@rachshabi) March 11, 2023

Reasonable point of discussion, I would say

Now, you might agree with Shabi or with Pollock on that; I agree with Shabi, most particularly in light of the many, many examples, during eight years of anti-Semitism hysteria directed at the British Left, of wildly hyperbolic and irresponsible Holocaust comparisons being misused – think of Margaret Hodge – to which the HET ‘mysteriously’ never responded. (Once again, the outrage only follows when the comparisons are made with the modern British Right.) But such comparisons can be accurate, and the horrid rhetoric the current Tory Party are using when discussing asylum seekers is indeed barely distinguishable, at least in tone, from the sort of anti-Semitic propaganda that was omni-present in Nazi Germany in the 1930s.

However, even if you take Pollock’s position on this, Shabi’s point of disagreement was hardly an outrage.

But guess who decided to reply with outrage, and personal abuse?

The mask slippeth

Now, I make no attempt to pretend that I do not use occasional bad language on social media myself, but one thing that is usually involved when I do is that the person I am arguing with has said something pretty vile to provoke me. All Shabi said was that the lessons of the Holocaust need to be applied universally, and not exclusively to the Jewish people. I repeat, you might think otherwise (though I am quite unsure why you might; any racial or ethnic group can be persecuted by the arbitrary standards of racial prejudice, and more than one people was targeted in the Holocaust), but even so, what Shabi said was hardly offensive or brutal. It was just a perfectly fair objection that you might agree with or disagree with. Nothing to get angry or abusive about. But the BoD decided to call her an “asshole” just for not slavishly agreeing with everything Pollock said.

The BoD seems to have realised that this response was foolish and drew attention to how ridiculously hysterical and territorial their accusations often are. They took the tweet down and published an apology, but the way it was worded has caused a number of eyebrows to be raised.

Late last night there was a tweet issued in error from the Board of Deputies’ Twitter account directed to @rachshabi. This tweet used inappropriate language, for which we unreservedly apologise. The tweet was immediately removed. We have also reached out privately to apologise.

— Board of Deputies of British Jews (@BoardofDeputies) March 12, 2023

“In error”?

WAIT A MINUTE!!!

“Issued in error”?

The BoD are saying they “accidentally” published crude personal abuse on social media? Does that not really mean that they wrote what their real feelings are, and failed to redraft them into something more ‘dignified’ (see above) before tweeting it?

This, by the way, is the digital communications officer of the BoD (thanks to Left Phoenix for the screencaps) and therefore presumably the individual responsible for wording the tweet; –

If the Labour Party tweeted something abusive, especially about someone right wing and Jewish, the BoD would demand his immediate resignation. As far as I can tell, Ma’anit’s job remains perfectly secure. Make of that what you will. Including, if you wish, that it demonstrates the “shamelessness of the assholes” at the BoD.

I just wish the media would stop taking the Board seriously. They are not representatives of the Jewish people, they are not dignified scholars, they are just yobs in skullcaps.

_____

POSTSCRIPT:

Ma’anit has some interesting (read: naueseating) contacts on his Facebook. Many of them are part of the notorious “GnasherJew” network on Twitter. Again thanks to Left Phoenix, who has been stalked by the Zionist who designed the BoD’s website.

Luke Stanger? Frances Weetman? Euan Sparks AKA Euan Phillips? Almost the cast of an episode of Who’s An Hysterical Zionist Pig?