I was involved in the organisation of the 50th anniversary commemoration of the liberation of Auschwitz, while First Secretary at the British Embassy in Warsaw. The 50th did not receive anything like the media coverage given to the 70th, of which more later.
Senior British visitors to Poland invariably included a concentration camp on their itinerary, and from escorting people around I visited camps a great deal more often than I would have wished. I found the experience appalling and desolate. The first I ever saw was Majdanek and I recall that I just had to sit helpless and shivering for some time. One thing the experience left me with – including meeting survivors and both Polish and German eye-witnesses, and seeing the architects’ plans for camps – was a contempt for those who claim the whole thing did not happen, or was an accident, or was small scale.
It in no way diminishes the genocidal attack on the Jews to remember that a vast number of Poles also died in the camps, as well as gypsies, homosexuals, the disabled and disparate political prisoners. I tried sometimes to diminish the horror I felt at involvement with the camps, with attempts at humour. I was present at a meeting listing the guests of honour; the President of Lithuania was included. I whispered that he was coming to represent the camp guards. That was offensive, and I apologise. But there is a real problem that to this day Eastern Europe – including Poland itself – has not come to terms with historical truth about collaboration with anti-Jewish genocide and other attacks on minorities. I recommend this website, which tackles these issues very honestly and is well worth a lengthy browse.
It requires bigotry not to be able to understand why nationalist resistance movements against Russian occupation became allied with Germany during World War II. That would be reprehensible only in the same sense that allied collaboration with Stalin might be reprehensible, but for the added factor of enthusiastic collaboration with genocidal and master race programmes and fascist ideology. That is what makes the glorification of Eastern European nationalist figures from this period generally inappropriate.
I fear however that the real reason that the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz received so much more coverage than the 50th is a media desire to reinforce the narrative of the War on Terror and Western policy in the Middle East by invoking the spectre of massive anti-Semitism. There have been isolated but deplorable, apparently anti-Semitic attacks of a small-scale terrorist nature in France and Belgium in recent years. But to conflate this into stories of a wave of popular anti-Semitism in Europe is a nonsense. Maureen Lipman’s claim that she may have to leave the UK is not just silly but disingenuous. I do not believe she feels in personal danger of attack – there is absolutely no reason why she should – she is rather making a political point.
There are two factors which could exacerbate anti-Semitism at present. One is the appalling behaviour of Israel and its indefensible action in continually seizing Palestinian land and using its military superiority to dominate and occasionally massacre Palestinians. Regrettably, there are a very small minority of people who wrongly blame Jews in general for the actions of Israel.
The second factor is of course the terrible economic hardship wrought across the whole world by irresponsible banking practices, and the fact that the bankers luxury lifestyles were maintained at the cost of everybody else. There are still a tiny minority of people stuck in the medieval mindset associating banking with the Jewish community. There is in fact a very plausible argument that if any “race” has a disproportionate influence on the development and character of international banking since the mid eighteenth century, it is the Scots! But those who see banking as a racial issue are nutters.
You could construct an argument from these factors, and you could identify that anti-Semitic people do exist. They certainly do. They dominate the very small category of people who get banned even from this free speech blog. But are their opinions intellectually respectable, promoted in the mainstream or able to be expressed openly without fear of either social or legal consequences? No, no and no. Anti-semites are fortunately a tiny and strange minority. I might add that in my numerous and frequent social contacts in the British Muslim community, I have never encountered anti-Semitism (unlike, say, Poland and Russia where I encountered casual anti-Semitism quite frequently).
The final point, is of course, the conflation of anti-zionism with anti-Semitism. That seems to me the fundamental design of the media campaign exaggerating the scale of anti-Semitism at the moment. Yes, we must always remember the terrible warnings from history and it is right to remember those who died in the concentration camps, Jewish, Polish, Romany, Gay, Communist or any other category. But we should be aware of those who wish to manipulate the powerful emotions of horror thus evoked, for present objectives of the powerful.
Republicofscotland, 6:45
Yes, intelligence agencies operate outside the law. They kill and otherwise abuse people without due legal process. In a court, where legal decisions are made, such photos would not establish identity.
Are you recommending that investigations by members of the public such as Spivey should fall to a level beneath the law? That they should make decisions on as poor evidence as secret services use?
Scouse Billy, are you saying that Jenner’s results can’t be reproduced? That Fred’s experience and my own are… what? Erroneous? Coincidence? Lies? That we’re agents of the New World Order, perhaps?
Or are you treating the whole thing as a football match, where facts don’t matter, only goals?
Republicofscotland, sorry, a faked, denied “terrorist incident”. Since I was using that description with regards to parody, I didn’t feel I had to be entirely explicit. I couldn’t be anyway, as I’m not exactly sure what Spivey was trying to insinuate when he mocked the council’s statement that the incident was “not terrorist related”.
Anyway, where are you? Have you contacted anyone in Glasgow about the incident? Or are you only here for an argument?
“Jenner’s results” ? Are you for real?
Christ, you know nothing – you just parrot your “received wisdom”.
Give me a break and do your own research, at the very least download Wallace’s book and read Chapter XVIII. You might learn a little about Jenner and his “results”. Sorry I have the giggles because I know what the tragic results were – they were well known at the time but somehow all we are left with is a mythology so vastly different from actuality.
Yes, Clarke you too could kill children in your garage using Jenner’s methods ….
Good grief!
Glenn
6:30 pm
You’re welcome.
Please would you point out to me where I said I expected you to expend vastly more effort to look through “my” link and counter it.
Kind regards,
John
RewwpublicOfScotkand
“As for Scouse Billy,… I’d say to Clarke and Glenn, if you don’t like or agree with what he says, or thinks, fair enough, don’t reply to his comments.”
____________________
So why do you keep replying to me, RoS?
Why don’t you follow your own advice, you young fraud?
Scouse Billy,are you seriously suggesting that vaccination can easily be shown to be harmful by using animal experiments? Surely, the benefits have been established many times over. You’re just shitting me, aren’t you?
Glenn and Clark
You’re being led around by the nose by John Spencer-Davis and Republicofscotland respectively.
You do see that, don’t you?
Don’t bother to carry on answering them, they’re just fooling around.
Habbabkuk, I see that Scouse Billy has totally disregarded the video he linked to about ISIS and my comment in reply. Without his anti-science nonsense, you, me and others, maybe even him, could be productively discussing that.
I still hope that John SD and RoS might see sense.
Same here, Habbabkuk. Although I have sinking feelings about the pair of them (JSD & RoS). SB is too far gone to be even an amusing parody.
John SD: Is that even supposed to be a reply? You bragged that it only took 30 seconds to get your supposed rebuff to Ben Goldacre’s piece. But all the rebuff did was attack Goldacre personally – a classic “poisoning the well” fallacy.
It took considerably longer than 30 seconds to read. Are you trying to be obtuse?
Habbabkuk, you may be interested in this…
I suspect that Scouse Billy either doesn’t know, or doesn’t like to advertise, that his sources are anti-Semitic. He’ll follow science when it suits him, but where he claims it is corrupted I’ll bet it is nearly always Jews accused of the corruption. “Jewish science”. I’ve already found that some of his sources trace back to nasty parts of the US right wing.
Glenn, 8:26 pm
That’s not quite fair. He had half an hour to read it before he posted the reply.
“Yes, intelligence agencies operate outside the law. They kill and otherwise abuse people without due legal process.”
_____________________________
So Clarke you’re admitting that the government (intelligence agencies) work outside the law and that they kill and abuse people
I wonder Clarke what else they get up to thats outside the law? don’t you?
Can you think of anything?
“I still hope that John SD and RoS might see sense.”
_____________________________________
Again Clarke you’re being very vague, indeed, what do you mean by sense?….sense of/on what?
“Same here, Habbabkuk. Although I have sinking feelings about the pair of them (JSD & RoS). SB is too far gone to be even an amusing parody.”
_________________________________
Could you elaborate a bit on your above comment Glenn, what exactly do you mean?
“Don’t bother to carry on answering them, they’re just fooling around.”
______________________________
Guido/Habb.
I almost choked on my Lobster Thermidor, when I read the above comment, you Guido decrying anyone for not giving a straight answer is laughable.
Republicofscotland, there is much information on this site about the intelligence services, of various countries. Craig was an ambassador, and diplomatic staff share the embassy with spies. Craig doesn’t like them and regards them as expensive and mostly incompetent. Try putting various terms in this site’s search box to see what Craig has to say.
Personally, I regard intelligence services to operate at least partly outside government. There is so much secrecy, so little oversight and even less that is actually effective, and lots of “outsourcing”, plus double and triple agents; gawd knows who’s working for whom at any given time.
You might also like to check out sites like Wikileaks and cryptome.org, and have a look at Edward Snowden’s material, leaks by Anonymous such as the Stratfor material…
But bin-wagon disasters? Well, I haven’t seen any convincing evidence so far.
NO ONE wants to talk about ISIS…
You see, everyone but me is an agent of disinformation and distraction for some state or other… I’m the only genuine one here. Thank you one and all for trying to direct my narrative away from topics sensitive to national security!
“Personally, I regard intelligence services to operate at least partly outside government. There is so much secrecy,”
_____________________________
Thank you Clarke for your candour, but if as you say there’s so much secrecy, how do we know what’s genuine and what isn’t?
RoS, have you actually been reading my comments? Right back near the start of this conversation I linked to articles about one the killers of Lee Rigby having been led, via a complex plot by MI6, to be tortured at the hands of the Kenyan army. MI6 arranged it.
I said that this nonsense about Rigby’s murder being fabricated helps to cover up the involvement in torture.
You do know why Craig is well known, don’t you?
RoS, we know some stuff to be genuine because of whistle-blowers. Craig is one of them. Not someone who trawls Facebook for similar-looking photographs upon which to base wild speculation.
RoS, most on that list on the Sam Adams Awards post are whistle-blowers. Craig keeps in contact with some of them, lots of them have websites, and journalists* write articles based upon their revelations.
It’s important not to muddy the water with stuff that sounds hot but is just made up. It’s hard enough getting anyone to take notice of this stuff as it is, without wild contrarian theories cluttering everything up.
* Yes, there are a few decent journalists, and no, nobody’s perfect.
I’m confused Clarke earlier on you said this 7.15pm about the “Secret Service”
That they should make decisions on as poor evidence as secret services use?
…………………
Now you’re basing your opinion on the Rigby event on the info the Secret Services use, with your below commentat 9.36pm
RoS, have you actually been reading my comments? Right back near the start of this conversation I linked to articles about one the killers of Lee Rigby having been led, via a complex plot by MI6, to be tortured at the hands of the Kenyan army. MI6. arranged it.
Clarke you seem to be contradicting yourself.
“It’s important not to muddy the water with stuff that sounds hot but is just made up. It’s hard enough getting anyone to take notice of this stuff as it is, without wild contrarian theories cluttering everything up.
* Yes, there are a few decent journalists, and no, nobody’s perfect.”
______________________________
But Clarke if there’s only a few decent journalists (Your words not mine) doesn’t that mean their are many many, not so decent journalist, whose work could be left open to interpretation.
RoS, first, to clarify; I was getting a bit colourful there. The security services are trawling data from everyone like Spivey does from Facebook; they even use face recognition to match Facebook photos, and I was imagining that their results could end up as nonsensical as Spivey’s.
The real danger of the above is the recent introduction of secret courts in the UK – this is one of the reasons Craig wants Scotland to become independent. If some spook can testify that you really did do such-and-such, and he only needs to tell the judge, so the defence don’t have any chance to challenge the evidence – you see the danger?
Propaganda requires another comment of its own…
The corporate media, or the MSM…
Yes, they have legions of poor and mediocre journalists, they’re poorly regulated but there is some regulation, and they’re very keen on war, which makes them money…
They have a few good journalists. Some of the good ones made their reputation in better days, and are hard to get rid of. A few are needed to retain a vestige of credibility – some people out there do have some idea what’s going on.
Here’s Craig averting war with Iran:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2007/04/video_killed_th/
This blog was working overtime getting that message publicised, too.
“RoS, first, to clarify; I was getting a bit colourful there. The security services are trawling data from everyone like Spivey does from Facebook; they even use face recognition to match Facebook photos, and I was imagining that their results could end up as nonsensical as Spivey’s.”
___________________________________
So Clarke,the security services in your opinion, are using the same techniques as Spivey, when trying to identify a threat or event or person.
If that’s the case then Spivey’s work doesn’t seem so fanciful then now does it?
………………………..
“If some spook can testify that you really did do such-and-such, and he only needs to tell the judge, so the defence don’t have any chance to challenge the evidence – you see the danger?”
Clarke, but why would the judge go along with the whole charade? surely you’re not saying that the whole system is corrupt from top to bottom, is it?
If you’re answer is yes, that would mean literally any event is open to question is it not?
The corporate media lead audience attention in the direction they want it to go, which is to themselves, and hence their adverts. They are very keen on war because – you’ve guessed it – circulation is higher when there’s a war.
The audience is the product. It is sold to advertisers. The bigger the audience the more money it is worth. So the MSM legitimise war, and encourage other sensational events. Does the MSM want more or less terrorism?