A Fruitless Dialogue with Anthony Julius, New Chairman of the JC’s Board of Directors

Following is the full text which comprises an exchange of emails between JCWatch and Anthony Julius, all dated 21-24 February, apart from the last 2 communications.

The exchange was initiated by JCWatch who sent Mr. Julius a couple of JCWatch’s Home Page articles, to which he replied, thus inaugurating the dialogue.

Throughout the correspondence, Mr. Julius consistently REFUSED to make even one negative comment about the Jewish Chronicle’s policies in publishing disgusting, defamatory comments about the State of Israel, such as “Nazi State” and “Apartheid State. When we say “refused”, Mr. Julius did not specifically say “I refuse”, but from the exchanges below you can see how he ignored repeated requests to relate to specific items specified by JCWatch.

It is therefore JCWatch’s conclusion that Mr. Julius was selected for the job because he is “easy”, and won’t “make waves”.

Since Mr. Julius is probably England’s foremost expert on anti-semitism, we find his behaviour extremely surprising and most certainly inconsistent with his writings. (Unless, of course, the conclusion of his research on anti-semitism is that you just bend down and let it walk all over you: a typical galut- (exile) -Jew attitude. Nothing learned from the Holocaust.)

Judge for yourselves.

For convenience in wading thru the “ping-pong” of exchanged emails, JCWatch’s emails to Mr. Julius are in blue.

 Dear jcwatch

As you know, I have just been appointed the chair of the JC. Could you please disclose your identites, so that we may have a rationale exchange on the subject of the newspaper? I am troubled by the spectacle of Jew attacking Jew, whatever the context.

 Best

 Anthony Julius

Dear Mr. Julius,

Thank you very much for your reply.

My identity has never for a moment been a secret; from the very first publication of JCWatch a year ago, it has always been openly published at the bottom of JCWatch’s Home Page, as follows:

https://jcwatch.wordpress.com
Avraham Reiss – Jerusalem
Nisan 5770    –    March 10
thejcwatch@gmail.com

I will identify myself further. ————-some personal details removed————–
I browsed the Jewish Chronicle last February (a year ago) and was astounded that a Jewish newspaper could allow such anti-Israeli comments as it then did – calling Israel a Nazi state, an Apartheid state and many other equally offensive terms.
To combat this I created JCWatch. I am happy to say that its influence has been felt – but not sufficiently.
I will be happy to discuss with you in cultured terms whatever your viewpoint is regarding the JC – but I must strongly request   that first you browse the compendium of anti-Israeli comments gathered from the Jewish Chronicle Blogs section – i.e. published by JC readers – as appearing in my JCWatch blog at:

https://jcwatch.wordpress.com/articles/anti-israelisms-an-open-ended-compendium/
– only by reading that article can you begin to estimate the size of the problem that lies before you.

I will be very happy to discuss these matters with you – the ultimate target should be my closing JCWatch because of lack of anti-Israeli material in the JC. I will be very happy to do this.

Most Sincerely,

Avraham Reiss – Jerusalem

 Dear Mr Reiss

 Thank you for your reply. I will indeed look at your site. Do you ever come over to London?

 Best

 Anthony Julius

Dear Mr. Julius,

Thank you for your reply.

After I brought my mother to Israel in 2003, I have no further ties with England, and don’t see any imminent visit there in the near future. (There is some talk of a Reiss family reunion, but it’s in the air at the moment). On the other hand, I would be happy to drive you around Israel on the assumption that sooner or later you will visit here. (A day’s drive thru the Jordan Valley and up to the Golan Heights is something you would not soon forget!)

Further to your email to me of yesterday, I am today sending you two emails, of which this is the first.

In order to dispel the possible illusion that JCWatch is a lone ‘voice in the wilderness’, I am sending you urls of two articles that discuss the Jewish Chronicle’s position of allowing publication of violent anti-Israeli statements in particular, and of holding anti-Israeli stands as portrayed in various JC editorial decisions, in general.

The articles appear on a superb and much-invested blog published by Daphne Anderson. That name is a nom-de-plume for *******  *******, who holds a doctorate, —deleted for purposes of privacy—–  (The identity of  ‘Daphne Anderson’ is not for publication, because of problems with stalkers in the past).

The two urls which it is sugested that you browse in order to ‘flesh out’ your understanding of the problems presented by the JC, are:

http://daphneanson.blogspot.com/2010/12/screwing-right-organ-of-anglo-jewry.html

http://daphneanson.blogspot.com/2010/12/his-masters-voice-from-nifs-mouth-to.html

Should you wish to contact ******* ******* regarding her blog, you can contact her at: <*******@***********> .

I will be writing to you again today to address a specific point for discussion, relating to the dilema of determining the border between Freedom of Speech and Jewish interests.

Most Sincerely,

Avraham Reiss – Jerusalem.

 Dear Mr. Julius,

In my previous email I wrote “Daphne Anderson” instead of what should read “Daphne Anson”.

In any exchange of views between your good self as Chairman of the Board of the Jewish Chronicle, and myself as the proprietor of the JCWatch Blog, which was set up to combat anti-Israeli sentiments published in the Jewish Chronicle by a few of its readers, the chief subject for discussion must – IMHO –  be where to draw the line between Freedom of Speech on the one hand, and Jewish interests on the other.

“Your freedom to wave your fist around ends where my nose begins” – that is the nub of the argument put forward by JCWatch.

The Jewish Chronicle is a sibling of the New Israel Fund (both organisations existing under the Kessler Foundation), the NIF being the organisation which supported organisations who provided some 90% of the anti-Israeli so-called “evidence” to the Goldstone Report on Israel’s “Cast Lead” action in Gaza, which resulted – due to creation of public opinion – in seriously limiting Israel’s military options in the next round in Gaza, which is on the books. Limitation of military options open to Israel creates greater danger for IDF soldiers, two of whom are my 2 younger sons who will be active in any future large-scale operation, so my interest here is not merely academic.

The Jewish Chronicle is currently promoting New Israel Fund ideology, which as detailed in the preceding paragraph, enhances physical dangers to the State of Israel.

I take for granted that you have browsed the Compendium of anti-Israeli statements published by the JC, as it appears in JCWatch, and that there is therefore no difference of opinion between us on the basic fact that the JC in the last year alone has published very many violent anti-Israeli comments.

These statements can be quoted by any genuine anti-semite, who can claim “but the Jews’ newspaper, the Jewish Chronicle, published the same remark!” – how does one combat this claim? This affords world-wide carte blanche to Israel’s enemies, who are not currently in short supply.

The following comment is to my mind the worst ever published by the JC to date, one which I also regard as an open act of treachery against the State of Israel by a so-called “Jew”. It was published by Stephen Pollard (posted by Tom Eisner) on 31 May 10, the day of Israel’s naval activity in enforcing its blockade on Gaza, and relating to it:

“Your loathsome country Israel who we all hate in the rest of the world was founded by terrorists has always been run by terrorists and now neo nazis are in charge. The best thing anyone sensible Israeli can do is leave.”

How does the editor of a Jewish newspaper allow such a comment in a Jewish newspaper? Under the banner of “Freedom of Speech”? Are there no limits?  (In point of fact, JCWatch forced Pollard to remove the comment).

If I wanted to open a restaurant, I would have 2 choices. 1. Start on my own, and take a few years to build up a client-base. In such a case I would be completely independant regarding how I ran my business. 2. Take out a franchise from Wimpy, Burger King, McDonalds etc – in such a case I would have an immediate client-base because the brands are well-known. BUT – in return for use of the brand-name I would have to conform to the way the place is decorated, what is served, what the waiters wear, etc etc etc.

I feel that when a newspaper uses the name “Jewish” in its title, it is in fact franchising. The very name immediately creates a client-base of Jews, but in return one can expect adherence at least to very basic rules of Judaism. Using “Jewish” AND violently attacking the State of Israel is a blatant act of hypocrisy. One could understand Neturei Karta doing this, because their stands are known. But the JC is not and never has been known as a paper with a basic anti-Israeli stand. The problem is with the Blogs section whose rules of moderation require intense examination and alteration. The current behaviour is thus – apart from anything else I have written – immoral!

I end by quoting Sir Winston Churchill, who is quoted by his biographer Martin Gilbert, as saying to a group of Jews: “Be good Jews. A Jew cannot be a good Englishman unless he is a good Jew.” (“Churchill and the Jews”, p. 15). I feel that this is the decisive statement in deciding where Jews should draw the line in Freedom of Speech.

Most Sincerely,

Avraham Reiss – Jerusalem

Dear Mr Reiss

So far as I am aware, the JC has no connection with the NIF; they certainly are not siblings. The abuse directed at the JC and its fine journalists is unwarranted, and is destructive of Anglo-Jewish morale. I fear that by promoting hatred between Jews and Jewish institutions, you are doing our enemies’ work. I am very ready to discuss these issues with you.

 Best

Anthony Julius

 Dear Mr. Julius,

Nicholas Saphir, head of the New Israel Fund-UK is on the Board of the Kessler Foundation, and oversees the JC.

However, the NIF is a side-issue; let’s put it to one side and discuss the anti-Israel comments published regularly by the JC. If you have read my compendium of JC anti-Israeli remarks, as I recommended, you will know my claim is not a false one. I would think that the next stage in our discussion would be your comment and opinion of the contents of that file.

Are you as JC Board Chairman going to ask JC staff why they are allowing such comments, and are you going to take any action which will in future prevent violent anti-semitic/anti-Israeli attacks on the State of Israel and / or its citizens from being published in any form by the Jewish Chronicle? What is your stand regarding Freedom of Speech, vis a vis the opinion on this that I have presented to you?

You wrote:

“I fear that by promoting hatred between Jews and Jewish institutions, you are doing our enemies’ work”  – how do you explain that sentence in the context of the Jewish Chronicle publishing an opinion calling Israel a Nazi or Apartheid State? THIS does NOT promote hatred?

Your accusing me of “doing our enemies’ work” is very insulting, considering where I live and what daily dangers surround my and my families’ lives (my youngest son is an officer in the IDF and currently serving in a dangerous area). When the Jewish Chronicle calls my State a Nazi State, do you expect me to turn the other cheek? When the Jewish Chronicle provides anti-semites with 22 Word file pages of anti-Israeli comments in less than one year, which they can then claim “I read it in the Jews’ paper”, WHO exactly is “doing our enemies’ work”?

When one of your staff (Jenni Frazer) publishes an outright and blatant smear and lie accusing the general religious population of “trying to find excuses for Katzav’s behaviour” is she included in your generalization of “fine journalists”? AFAIK JCWatch has only ever mentioned 2 reporters by name, and the reasons are fully documented. To which other abuse did you refer? And how do you expect me to behave towards a Jewish Chronicle journalist who lies and slanders a complete section of Isralei society, but refuses to provide proof of her slander? It was the JC Editor’s job to censor her, not mine.

Mr.Julius, from the general tone of your latest email I don’t like the direction in which you are pointing. This is an opportunity for you to correct my opinion and show me otherwise.

 And regarding “promoting hatred between Jews and Jewish Institutions”, just read about what hatred the New Israel Fund promotes by brainwashing; the translation I refer you to was originally published by Israeli Maariv lawyer and publicist Ben Dror Yemini, who is totally reliable: view “Shlomit’s letter to the NIF” at:  https://jcwatch.wordpress.com/articles/shlomits-letter-to-the-n-i-f-2/

 Also please see what pornographic anti-Israeli false propaganda is funded by the New Israel Fund – AS REPORTED BY JEWISH CHRONICLE REPORTERS: https://jcwatch.wordpress.com/articles/nif-uk-pornographic-anti-israeli-propaganda/

I do ask you in future comunications to relate to specific points I have raised, or which you wish to raise: our Sages tell us (and you as a lawyer are probably familiar with this): “He who wishes to lie will distance his evidence” (i.e. speak in generalisations). I’m not infering any dishonesty on your part, but generalisations lead nowhere.

Sincerely,

Avraham Reiss – Jerusalem.

Dear Mr Reiss

Do let’s speak.

 Best

 Anthony Julius

Dear Mr. Julius,

I don’t understand your latest email: you say “do let’s speak”, but have not related to any of the points I raised in my last email to you.

 And here I will present another question: you expressed annoyance at my attacking JC journalists. This was most probably prompted by JCWatch’s Home Page statement that runs as follows:

____________________________________________________________

 We note that Third Rate Hack Jenni Frazer was unable to produce proofs of her disgustingly defamatory comment regarding the religious population of Israel. We never expected her to be able to. But she was given the opportunity.  LIAR!

____________________________________________________________

 My question to you is, when you see someone claiming – however rudely – that a JC reporter has published a lie, why did you react to my rudeness but ignored the suggestion that one of your staff has published a lie? Did it occur to you to ask Ms. Frazer what proof she had of her claim? Isn’t honesty relevant here? (So as not to be insulting to you, the previous sentence is rhetoric).

 I do await your comments on the above and also on the number of points that I raised in my previous email to you.

 Most Sincerely

– and Shabat Shalom!

 Avraham Reiss – Jerusalem

 Dear Mr Reiss

 So far as I am aware, Mr Saphir has no place on the Kessler Foundation. Even if he did, that would be a far cry from making the two “siblings.”

 I think the tone of your attacks – really, it is intemperate abuse – is quite wrong. This is not how matters of controversy should be debated. We can leave that kind of thing to our enemies.

 Insults directed to the integrity or honesty of a person, extreme language, the utter denial of the possibility of a legitimate difference of opinion – these will not elicit generous, considered responses.

 All that happens is that whatever decently arguable criticism is contained in this abuse will just be ignored. And this is what has happened here. Jenni Frazer is a a fine journalist. Why should she respond to the email equivalent of a scream?

 I don’t know how many people visit your site, but you are doing nothing, so far as I can see, to advance understanding within the Anglo-Jewish community, or peace among Jews.

 I believe you are aware of my own positions on the questions facing Jewry, and you may even have read my most recent book. I ask you please to discontinue your attacks, which do nothing to advance our cause.

Best

 Anthony Julius

Dear Mr. Julius,

You have either already ‘gone native’, or you were invited to chair the JC Board in the first place because you were ‘convenient’ for them.

Either way, your latest email ends any possibility of dialogue between us, although I will respond in the future to any serious communication from you.

To summarise, you have blatantly refused to relate to any of the points I have raised with you, points that are the raison d’etre of JCWatch.

First and foremost, you have refused to relate to the fact that the Jewish Chronicle in the last year alone, has published more than 22 pages of various defamations of the State of Israel, ranging from Nazi State, thru Apartheid State, to murderers of children. This, despite the fact that I requested you point blank to relate to this phenomenon.

I also told you that Jenni Frazer had published  defaming libel of a very large community in Israel and suggested that you require that she provide proof of her claims – and you refused. In other words, you don’t really care if your reporters publish truth or lies.

In addition, you have not related to the question I put to you – asking for your opinion – on the limits of Freedom of speech. Do you in fact have an opinion at all?

Neither did you relate to the hypocrisy in using the name “Jewish” on the one hand to attract readers, and on the other constantly attacking and defaming  Judaism’s  most prized possession today – The State of Israel.

You also refused to reply to my direct question to you:

“are you going to take any action which will in future prevent violent anti-semitic/anti-Israeli attacks on the State of Israel and / or its citizens from being published in any form by the Jewish Chronicle?”

Regarding your writing to me:

 “I believe you are aware of my own positions on the questions facing Jewry, and you may even have read my most recent book. I ask you please to discontinue your attacks, which do nothing to advance our cause”

– I have to reply:

 1. there is no correlation between your positions on the questions facing Jewry and your (lack of) actions as embodied in your replies to me.

2. JCWatch will continue to respond to attacks of any kind whatsoever as published by the paper for which you are entirely responsible. “attacks which do nothing to advance our cause” – nonsense! JCWatch has forced Pollard quite a number of times to delete ultra-anti-semitic comments, and will continue to do so. JCWatch will also continue to make a laughing-stock of Jenni Frazer every time she writes – until she “puts up or shuts up”, i.e. brings proof or apologizes. You are obviously not man enough to do the job, so we will. Our capabilities in this field are proven. And it wasn’t JCWatch that gave her the nickname “third rate hack” – that was another reader.

One form of JCWatch’s replies to attacks on the State of Israel (and remember, we aren’t talking about constructive criticism, but about “nazi”, “apartheid”, “murderers of children” etc etc) will be to publish the entire correspondance between us so far, so that readers can form their own opinions of who is now standing at the helm of the JC.

As published in JCWatch’s Home Page, I will be out of contact from now until 8-9th March, so if you write to me and I don’t reply, that is the reason.

On a personal note, I fail to understand how someone – anyone – can produce the superb book “Trials ..” that is currently on my desk – and then go seek an honorary title at the head of a paper that has produced 22 pages of anti-semitic comments in less than one year. I know of your recent Guardian connection, but it explains nothing.

Avraham Reiss

 To Anthony Julius:

 “So far as I am aware, Mr Saphir has no place on the Kessler Foundation. Even if he did, that would be a far cry from making the two “siblings”  “

————

http://www.thejc.com/node/29263

 Interview: Nicholas Saphir

The New Israel Fund has been supporting anti-Zionists, claim its right-wing critics. Rubbish, says the organisation’s UK head, we’re just safeguarding democracy

……………

 Saphir, a Sussex-based farmer who is also a trustee of the Kessler Foundation which overseas the running of the JC, rejects any suggestion that the NIF was responsible for 94 per cent of submissions to the Goldstone Committee as asserted by right-wing group Im Tirzu.

 Shabbat Shalom

From Anthony Julius:

He resigned.

To Anthony Julius:

 Thanks for the update. But before he resigned, Saphir certainly turned the JC into an NIF mouthpiece. Stephen Pollard is not anti-Israel, has taken a number of unpopular stands in Israel’s favour, and wouldn’t have permitted alone half the ugliness that he has in fact been instructed to allow.

 From Anthony Julius:

 You’re quite wrong about this too, I’m afraid. The KF / JC connection had no impact on editorial policy. SP is his own person. You recognise his merit, yet you pour abuse on his newspaper.

To Anthony Julius:

I intend to publish on JCWatch the full content of all communications betwen us so far. Your latest communication to me was the “last straw”: You complain that I “pour abuse” on the JC but totally and consistently refuse to relate to why this is so.  You totally and consistently refuse to relate to a minimum of 22 Word-size pages of anti-Israeli comments published by the JC in the last year alone – you won’t say one word against this!

The headline I am currently considering is “JC Chairman Anthony Julius Refuses to Condemn Vast Amounts of Anti-Israeli JC Readers’ Comments (such as “Nazi State”).

 Sub-Heading: “England’s Greatest Expert on Anti-Semitism Prefers to Keep His New Job”.

 ————————————————————————

2 Responses to “A Fruitless Dialogue with Anthony Julius, New Chairman of the JC’s Board of Directors”

  1. jcwmoderator Says:

    Thanks Gina, but Julius won’t do anything. It was probably for that reason that he was selected to chair the JC Board. “No Waves” Julius is how he will be known.

  2. Gina in Golders Green Says:

    Mr Reiss, your view is shared by many. This article backs you up:

    http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=208550

    Let’s hope Mr Julius listens and get the JC back on track to supporting the Jewish State of Israel.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: