Amnesty International, MEMO and the Palestinian writer who calls Jews 'kikes'

Michael Weiss

Two weeks ago, I pointed out how Amnesty International was due on 23 May to give over its Human Rights Action Centre in London to a discussion of Zionist control of the media co-hosted by Middle East Monitor Online (MEMO), a Hamas-friendly publisher of anti-Semites. I knew then that I’d draw a colourful response. I had no idea just how colourful.

In the course of making my case for MEMO’s lack of credibility, I cited one of its regular contributors, Khalid Amaryeh, who for good measure has got the front-page story in Monday’s edition on Israel’s “mendacious” prime minister. In the past, Amaryeh had written in MEMO that Israelis were “pathological liars from Eastern Europe”. Amaryeh was quite upset at me for quoting his words back to him and denounced me as a “Zionist propagandist” and so on. Par for the course. But then he grew less pleasant and slightly more uncorked in the comment thread of a blog run by Richard Millett, who raised the same questions I did about Amnesty’s lapsed standards for invited guests.

I quote from one of Amaryeh’s contributions to the thread, for which he was good enough to use his full name. He’s referring to another contributor to the thread:

At least you don’t feel confident enought to admit your Jewishness.

Anyway, I don’t give a damn whether you are a kike or not.
well, you seem to lie as often as you breathe. Fow how could you enslave, torment, savage, persecue and deny millions of people freedom while you claim to love freedom? you are simply fornicating with language. If you were a woman, you probably would be a whore.

you are obviously a burden upon youself, your family, and upon the Jews.

I’ve checked this with Millett, who corresponded with Amaryeh via email and can confirm that the commenter to his blog and the MEMO essayist are indeed one and the same. Moreover, the IP address used by “Khalid Amaryeh” is registered to the Palestinian Territories, where the true nutter doth dwell.

Amaryeh later “apologised” for the “Kike thing” (such are his ethical standards) but insisted that in matters of Zionist appeasement, he remains unbowed.

Amnesty was also made uncomfortable by my intervention. A spokesperson told the Jewish Chronicle shortly after my piece appeared: “Providing space for an event does not mean that we necessarily agree with all of the views of participants. The key point is that free debate takes place.”

Quite. I eagerly await Amnesty’s Human Rights Action Centre being turned over to the BNP for a debate on how changing demographics in England are depleting national pride.

On 5 May, MEMO and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, which is co-hosting this grim confab, published a clarifying statement on both their websites stating that despite the Telegraph’s best efforts, the show will go on “as an external event in Amnesty’s building in London”. That sounds a lot less like NGO sponsorship than what was originally suggested by MEMO’s advertisement flogging the event.

But I ask again: Why is Amnesty covering itself in such slime? And will MEMO finally stop publishing Khalid Amaryeh?