[I say '2' because the first quasi-related blog post is here]
Today I was looking at the British ‘National Union of Journalists’ website and saw their ‘International Activity’ section. They had a list of all of their international campaigns and I was pleased to see one there for Cuba.
About bloody time. Maybe I had the NUJ all wrong. I thought they were leftist ideological extremists, [actually 'Bonapartists' for those who speak Trotskyite] because of their boycott of Israel.
But running a Cuba campaign, well bravo. As you may know, Cuba has one of the worst records on press freedom in the world. ‘Reporters Without Borders’ ,the world’s premier advocate for press freedom, has a running press freedom tally on their homepage called the “Press Freedom Barometer”. So far in 2007, 47 journalists have been killed, and another 68 cyberdissidents (i.e. bloggers) and 125 journalists have been imprisoned. The largest group of imprisoned journalists are Chinese. The second largest group – Cuban.
Reporters Without Borders deserves endless commendation for its defence of Cuban dissidents. Here is what they say about Cuban rights violations and philocubans:
Cuba has many admirers all over the world, more than any other government. The Cuban revolution retains a deep-seated, romantic appeal many still find hard to resist. Castro fans find reasons to forgive or turn a blind eye to the revolution’s crimes and shortcomings. Many who have never set foot in Cuba see it as a symbol of the struggle against US imperialism and therefore think it should be spared all criticism. Even if that means ignoring its human rights violations.
So getting back to the NUJ. Bravo again for their campaign for press freedom in Cuba. But, I speak too soon. Their Cuban campaign? The National Union of JOURNALISTS isn’t standing up for their imprisoned Cuban journalist commrades, oh no, that would be too close to their mandate. They are standing up for Guantanamo detainees. Their target isn’t the Castros, but Bush.
With that nuance done away with, I geuss I was right in thinking that they are leftist ideological extremists. What then of the NUJ’s ‘Boycott Israel’ campaign referred to above? First if you don’t know, the NUJ wants to boycott Israel for these reasons:
…the slaughter of civilians by Israeli troops in Gaza and the IDF’s continued attacks inside Lebanon following the defeat of its army by Hezbollah.
[and]
…Israeli aggression in Gaza and other occupied territories.
There has to be a unifying principle that would require an organization to support suspected Al Qaeda terrorists in Cuba and call for “sanctions [to] be imposed on Israel by the British government and the United Nations”. I went looking for this principle and as often happens these days, this lead me to Facebook. The National Union of Journalists has a group there, complete with comments.
The group hosts a debate on the boycott. The leading opponent is BBC reporter Rory Cellan-Jones , you can read more about his opposition on his blog. He appears to principally oppose the boycott because it was passed by undemocratic means. Fair play that, but what struck me most was a comment by a countryman of mine and a former journalist for the New Statesman, Leigh Phillips (the group’s admin) in support of the boycott:
The world is currently at war and the heart of the conflict between the West and Al Qaeda is threefold (Al Qaeda’s consistently stated three demands for an end to hostilities): the Israeli occupation, the presence of US troops in the Middle East, and US support for authoritarian Middle Eastern regimes. There can be no end to this war until Israel ends the occupation. What more important battle is there to pick?
In other words, boycott Israel, because it will mollify Al Qaeda. Now, I’ve written about why that won’t work below, so I don’t want to get into the practicality of it. But let me state Phillips’ argument again: “Al Qaeda’s consistently stated three demands for an end to hostilities [are ending] the Israeli occupation, the presence of US troops in the Middle East, and US support for authoritarian Middle Eastern regimes…What more important battle is there to pick? “
And so here is your unifying principle: this member of the National Union of Journalists isn’t just opposing the Blair or Bush governments, but he is supporting the enemy. They’ve gone from dissidence to actual treason.
Is it surprising though? They’ve been there on the other side for a while. Read the Guardian or the Independent and tell me they’re on our side. Don’t believe me? Here’s the Independent:
how come our midgets still pretend they are fighting the Second World War, that Saddam was Hitler on the Tigris, that Nasser was the Mussolini of the Nile (this really was Anthony Eden’s description!), that they are standing up to appeasement, and al-Qa’ida “fascism”? Is there not some way of switching this nonsense off?
Look around and you’ll see that it’s not only the British journalist establishment, but the left in general that has gone turncoat.
Terry Glavin summarized this best when writing about the Canadian ‘anti-war’ movement, but it’s applicable to the British media:
…this is war, and these people are not on our side.
For more on the boycott, take a look at these articles:
+ Front Page Mag – Dershowitz
+ Haaretz – Retaliation!
UNRELATED: Canadian Leftists picket bookstore. It’s owned by the jooooz! you see.
