It appears that those who work for the Washington Post don’t read the publication’s articles.
On Tuesday afternoon, the Washington Post sent out a tweet in which they defended Britain’s left leaning Labour Party. The party, under leader Jeremy Corbyn has been accused of being anti-Semitic on a number of occasions.
But the Washington Post being the publication that they are, of course, stood up for the party against these calls of anti-Semitism. No, the Labour Party isn’t anti-Semitic, according to the Post, but is instead for Palestinian rights.
However, quickly read the short article and you’ll run into several paragraphs that seem to point to the fact that members of the Labour Party may not be into Jews after all.
For instance, from the article are the following:
Last year, Corbyn revealed that a review of online posts among Labour members uncovered “examples of Holocaust denial, crude stereotypes of Jewish bankers, conspiracy theories blaming 9/11 on Israel, and even one individual who appeared to believe that Hitler had been misunderstood.”
And then there’s this:
Corbyn himself has been criticized for hosting a 2010 panel where Israelis were compared to Nazis. In 2012, he defended an artist’s “freedom of speech,” but failed to condemn the London mural that depicted Jewish bankers playing monopoly on a board balanced on the bent backs of the workers. In 2013, he suggested that “Zionists” do not understand “English irony,” even after living in Britain for years.
Since 2017, a dozen Labour members of parliament have quit the party, in part over its handling of anti-Semitism (alongside Corbyn’s leadership and the party’s leftward tilt).
If those paragraphs aren’t proof that members of the Labour Party aren’t the biggest fans of Jews, I’m not sure what else those who run the Washington Post’s social media accounts need.