WelI should point out that not all the British press is anti-Israeli. If you read the Telegraph you'll see mostly (though not entirely) sympathetic coverage. The Telegraph is the most right wing of the quality papers though, so you'd expect that. The Times is pretty balanced and neutral towards both sides, but you won't have read any of their stuff because of the paywall. It's the 'liberal media' over here which is very hostile to Israel. This includes the BBC of course, which likes to think it's scrupulously neutral but quite clearly isn't, and which is the dominant player in UK news output.

I have a personal theory which may or may not have any validity. Anti-Israeli sentiment has always been there on the British left, but it seems to have really kicked off in earnest since the Iraq war in 2003. My theory is that the huge anti-war movement that happened at the time has taken over the British left, which has had a number of knock-on effects. One of these is a kneejerk cynicism about the motives of the west in any dealings we have with the arab world. Israel is seen as an American puppet, and is involved in an asymmetric conflict with what are widely perceived to be defenceless arabs. As such I don't find it terribly surprising that a whole generation of left-leaning Brits who first got passionate about politics when they joined the anti-war movement have naturally taken up the Palestinian cause in a big way. I may be reading too much into this, but I think there's definitely something there. Anti-Zionism strikes me as very much an extension of anti-Americanism.

A little easier to be more sympathetic to the Palestinians when you don't know relevant history....http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/01/ ... 4920070119
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -beer.html

I have a hard time believing that if a person is unsure if the Holocaust happened they are going to have detailed knowledge about the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.
I am starting to feel better about the US educational system...

It's almost certainly complete bollocks though, so I wouldn't worry about that. Hitler is a compulsory part of our history syllabus.

Freeman - I would not be so quick to come to conclusions. A 20 year old study showed that Americans were more ignorant of the Holocaust and more likely to think it was possibl e that the Holocaust never happened.

http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/public ... /45031.pdf

There is, in any population, a large minority of people who don't know basic facts, and even ten to twelve years of compulsory schooling will not break through.

This ADL survey from a few months ago showed roughly similar (and low) rates of anti-semitism in the US and UK.

http://global100.adl.org/public/ADL-Glo ... ummary.pdf

I amalso not sure Sass has show evidence that the BBC showed much bias. For example on 8 August I see two headlines about the end of the ceasefire. One is "Gaza ceasefire ends as Israel reports rocket fire" (and the article makes clear the rockets are from Gaza). One later in the day is "Israel air strkes resume in Gaza amid rockets" (and again the first paragraph makes it clrear that Israel did so after eockets were fired).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-28699741

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-28702394

I would say that the British left did not suddenly switch in 2003 - and that the movement of views is far older and slower than Sass suggests. In the late 40s and early 50s, Isarel was seen as the underdog against the vestiges of Empire, and also a socialist experimet worthy of support in the kibbutz system etc. In 56 there was the Suez crisis in which Israel teamed up with a perfidious Anglo French alliance (with the left opposing Eden's actions rather than Israel's). Since then, however, and parricularly post 67 with occupation, the invasions of Lebanon, the growth of settlements and the success of Likud and the more extreme right wing nationalist and religious parties, the left has seen the Palestinian as the underdogs and victims (not the only ones, but the main ones). Also, a more overt alignment by Israel with the US - and the US right in.particular does indeed make it related to anti-Americanism, but again this predates Iraq II.

While there are more Muslims in the UK, and they are more politically active than they used to be in terms of "Muslim" issues (as opposed to the common minority issues that immigrant groups face), to a certain extent I think it is not really a direct factor - I suspect it is more that the left (and not just the left, but it was the left who defended their rights as ethnic minority) are less likely to be pro-Israel and so there is a marriage of convenience. Some political figures have used that over the years - Tariq Ali in the 70s onwards, George Galloway more recently), and they may be more influential in this trend.

Danivon:

This ADL survey from a few months ago showed roughly similar (and low) rates of anti-semitism in the US and UK.

http://global100.adl.org/public/ADL-Glo ... ummary.pdf

Wow, this is worth a read. If you take a look at page 15 you'll learn that 65% of those surveyed in the Middle East and North Africa believe that Jews are responsible for most of the world's wars. It also says that of the 38% of people in that region who have heard about the Holocaust 63% believe that it is a myth or an exaggeration. Presumably the 38% of the people who have heard about it are more educated than the 62% who have not.

Owen. I guess it depends on what conclusion you mean. You're right--it is almost always shocking to see the level of ignorance about basic history on a much higher percentage of the population than one would suspect (whether the polling is in the UK or the USA). So, I agree that the polls do not mean anything in explaining why the UK would be more sympathetic than the US to the Palestinians. And perhaps the US is even more historically ignorant than the UK (there are other reasons the US is overall biased towards Israel) That does not mean that historical ignorance does not play a part in many people in the UK being more sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinians.

freeman3 wrote:Owen. I guess it depends on what conclusion you mean. You're right--it is almost always shocking to see the level of ignorance about basic history on a much higher percentage of the population than one would suspect (whether the polling is in the UK or the USA). So, I agree that the polls do not mean anything in explaining why the UK would be more sympathetic than the US to the Palestinians. And perhaps the US is even more historically ignorant than the UK (there are other reasons the US is overall biased towards Israel)

There are a few other reasons why we may not be as ready as the Americans are to be sympathetic to Israel come what may.

1) We have had more of a history of anti-semitism in the UK. Jews were officially banned for three and a half centuries until Cromwell, although some fleeing Inquisitorial oppression did find their way to London before then. There was definitely an antisemitic drive in society in the 1920s and 1930s, both among the conservative upper classes and a generally xenophobic section of the lower classes.

2) We saw Zionist terrorists killing British troops in the 1940s. Particularly at the King David Hotel, but that was not the only instance. While we also lost men to Arab insurgencies at the time, that merely leads to a 'plague on both your houses' attitude.

3) Suez saw Israel and our idiot ruling class conspire to start a war to benefit them both. That did not play well. The US did not see that so much, and obviously Eisenhower was the guy who slapped Eden and De Gaulle around the chops and told them to quit.

4) The pro-Israel lobby is far less active in the UK than in the USA, partly because we have fewer such 'lobbies' anyway, but also because we don't have the same kind of presence of vocal and rich and connected Jewish figures to promote it - and those that are here tend to be more reserved.

That is before we get to the 'underdog' thing, or the evolution in the link between pro-Arab politics and Left politics (

That does not mean that historical ignorance does not play a part in many people in the UK being more sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinians.

I never said it didn't. I just cautioned on the drawing of conclusions, particularly from a single poll of a single country.

Of course, some people may be less sympathetic towards Israel even well understanding the history of anti-semitism that culminated in the Holocaust, precisely because they detect in Israel (from parts of society and from certain government actions) a similarity with treatment of Arabs.

That is not to say that it is the same as everything the Nazis did, but that there is some oppression there, and some may - insensitively, perhaps - assume that a people who have felt oppression may be loathe to oppress others.

I think that is all fair, but I don't think you can ignore the fact that the U.K. has a growing Muslim population. It's perfectly normal to feel kinship for those with whom you have a common faith. How can that not influence how you perceive the conflict?

There may be something to the familiarity breeds acceptance arguement ray. However:
The two minorities represent pretty small percentages in both countries
In the US there are 6.7 million jews representing 2.11 % of the population and 2.6 million muslims representing 0.8% of the population.

in the UK only 290,000 jews representing 0.46% of pop and 2.8 million muslims representing 4.6% of the population. So people in the UK do have the chance to encounter more muslims every day . Especially in the owners seats at Football games.

I would suggest that the greater affiliation for Israel in the US comes as a reesult of AIPAC and of the fundamentalist Christians affinity for the Holy Land and the biblical Israel. And fundamental Christians are 27% of the population...

Muslims in American media aren't often represented as you find them in successful muslim dmocracies like Indonesia or Turkey but rather stereotyped negatively. A reaction to the events of 9/11 and subsequent wars... Understandable, but not accurate .

Israelis have had a good public image as an underdog winning conflicts against overwhelming odds from 47 to 82). And as the most western of middle eastern nations,
However, Israel is the middle easts most powerful nation today. They hold nuclear weapons and have the strongest military . The underdog image isn't all that accurate anymore.
The relationship between Israel and Gaza, and Israel and the West Bank is seldom presented in the media as that of occupier and occupied. And thats what it is....

Ray Jay wrote:I think that is all fair, but I don't think you can ignore the fact that the U.K. has a growing Muslim population. It's perfectly normal to feel kinship for those with whom you have a common faith. How can that not influence how you perceive the conflict?

I guess it probably does - not having a faith it's not something that sways me much. Of course, there are Christian Arabs and Palestinians who oppose Israel's occupation and are active in the PLO/Fatah/PA, but that does not seem to motivate many Christians in the West.

Ray Jay wrote:It's perfectly normal to feel kinship for those with whom you have a common faith.

Well, it depends on how common the faith is. Shia and Sunni are killing each other, and even within Judaism, there is serious friction between ultra orthodox and liberal Jews. Heretics are often hated more than those who completely different, so you may be making a leap with that assumption.

geojanes wrote:

Ray Jay wrote:It's perfectly normal to feel kinship for those with whom you have a common faith.

Well, it depends on how common the faith is. Shia and Sunni are killing each other, and even within Judaism, I there is serious friction between ultra orthodox and liberal Jews. Heretics are often hated more than those who completely different, so you may be making a leap with that assumption.

I have never heard of the Jews killing each other over religious differences. Does that occur?

geojanes wrote:

Ray Jay wrote:It's perfectly normal to feel kinship for those with whom you have a common faith.

Well, it depends on how common the faith is. Shia and Sunni are killing each other, and even within Judaism, I there is serious friction between ultra orthodox and liberal Jews. Heretics are often hated more than those who completely different, so you may be making a leap with that assumption.

That all reminds me of the Arab saying:

“I against my brother; I and my brother against my cousin; I and my brother and my cousin against the world.”

http://eppc.org/publications/i-and-my-b ... my-cousin/

The number of people killed by the police in the US each year is at least 400 (probably more but it's not going to be that much more)http://fivethirtyeight.com
That works out to be 1 for every 750,000 people .
The number of people living in Gaza is about 1.8 million people. If the number of Palestinians killed was 1,500 that works out to be 1 per 1,200 people.
For the number of people killed by police in the US to reach the level of 1/1200 people it would take 625 years...
Another way to look at is for the number of people needed to be killed in a war in the United States to be equal to 1/1200 you would need 250,000 dead
US war dead in WWII/ pop =405K/130 mill=1/300
UK war dead in WWI / pop=705K/45 mill=1/64

What does this all mean? Nothing really except casualties cause ripple effects in communities and I was seeing how the casualties in Gaza scaled to other things.

freeman3 wrote:The number of people killed by the police in the US each year is at least 400 (probably more but it's not going to be that much more)http://fivethirtyeight.com
That works out to be 1 for every 750,000 people .
The number of people living in Gaza is about 1.8 million people. If the number of Palestinians killed was 1,500 that works out to be 1 per 1,200 people.
For the number of people killed by police in the US to reach the level of 1/1200 people it would take 625 years...
Another way to look at is for the number of people needed to be killed in a war in the United States to be equal to 1/1200 you would need 250,000 dead
US war dead in WWII/ pop =405K/130 mill=1/300
UK war dead in WWI / pop=705K/45 mill=1/64

What does this all mean? Nothing really except casualties cause ripple effects in communities and I was seeing how the casualties in Gaza scaled to other things.

Your math is off on the U.S., but in any case I think the point that 2,000 deaths in a population of 1.8 million or roughly 1 in 1,000 is relevant. That does influence the entire population for the future.