Jewish Chronicle rows quietly back from claims rabbis’ Corbyn-support letter is fake

jc uohc 3.png

On Monday, the SKWAWKBOX published a letter signed by twenty-nine Orthodox rabbis denouncing ‘irresponsible’ claims that Jews are ‘outraged’ toward ‘respected’ Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn or that Jewish citizens are considering leaving the UK because of him.

The rabbis of the Union of Orthodox Hebrew Congregations said that they wished to,

clarify that we have no connection whatsoever with these irresponsible remarks.

The entry of the letter appeared to cause consternation in some circles and various claims were made that the letter was a fake – including an article yesterday in the Jewish Chronicle (JC).

The article originally stated that the letter had been ‘condemned as fake’ and a ‘forgery’, as well as claiming that the UOHC – the rabbis’ umbrella body – had said that it was ‘fake news’.

The article, while acknowledging that the letter had been posted in Orthodox synagogues, also quoted a statement from a ‘nascent’ Jewish community group in London that,

We would like to confirm and clarify this letter is fake and bears no authority from any of the assigned names.

The JC appears to use software to prevent any archiving of its pages. However, a screen capture of the article is below:

jc uohc 1

The original Jewish Chronicle article

In the twenty-four hours or so since the original article was published, things appear to have changed considerably – and so has the article, though without any notice that it had been corrected or changed.

It now bears a completely different title:

Organisations distance themselves from ‘letter from Charedi rabbis’ defending Corbyn.

But it also includes a number of other changes compared to the original:

A letter defending Jeremy Corbyn, signed by 28 leading Charedi rabbis, has been circulated in London’s strictly-Orthodox community – although some have argued the rabbis were misled over its content.

The letter, circulated in Hebrew over the High Holy Days, railed against “those who are spreading reports that the Jews in Britain are united against” the Labour leader.

But after it became public, the Union of Orthodox Hebrew Congregations (UOHC), an umbrella organisation representing Charedi shuls, distanced itself from the letter.

Three rabbis – Rabbis Eliyakim Schlesinger, Azriel Schechter and Ze’ev Feldman – confirmed to the JC they had signed it, although a senior official at the UOHC described the letter as “fake news”.

Naftoli Friedman, a member of the Charedi community who was involved in acquiring signatories, said the letter was real.

He was speaking after the Jewish Community Council of North London (JCC), a nascent community group based in Stamford Hill, tweeted: “We would like to confirm and clarify this letter is fake and bears no authority from any of the assigned names.”

The SKWAWKBOX spoke to the representative of the well-known Orthodox Jewish group who first provided the letter to this blog and who said,

This is a sad state of affairs and a commentary on the lengths to which some people will go. Of course the letter is genuine.

A PDF of the content of the article as it now stands can be downloaded here.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.

20 responses to “Jewish Chronicle rows quietly back from claims rabbis’ Corbyn-support letter is fake

  1. Perhaps we should demand that those opposing LP leadership should adopt a policy of not attacking anyone of any faith for their political or religious views. Demand Sacks go on anti-socialist education course and apologise for the venom poured on socialists by him and his supporters…

  2. Does this mean that the Jewish Chronicle has finally had to accept that not all Jews are Zionists.

  3. A copy of the letter was sent to me by Miko Peled – Jewish Israeli writer, Corbyn supporter and Palestinian rights campaigner. He has since confirmed that it is genuine.

  4. The letter was of course genuine, but a lot of people in the Jewish community will now believe that it was fake, and I don’t suppose they even heard about the letter prior to the “fake letter” story. Like millions of other people (and tens of millions if you include the BBC), they pay the wages of the people who lie to them and deceive them – ie the wages of the black propagandists who infest the MSM and beyond.

  5. Google cache has a copy of the original JC “condemned as fake” version of the article, even though the main archive sites hadn’t caught it. I’ve uploaded it to archive.org for posterity:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20180913192550/https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:2AFNJddtSQ4J:https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/charedi-rabbis-jeremy-corbyn-antisemitism-fake-letter-rabbi-jonathan-sacks-1.469566+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-b

  6. Just happened to come across the following a bit earlier (which was linked to in a comment on Craig Murray’s website):

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4utEI2EU64

    And as for the two suspects in the alleged Skripal poisoning, the CCTV “evidence” has them arriving in Salisbury (on March 4th) just before midday and, if we are to believe the official narrative, they then went to Sergei Skripal’s house and coated the handle of the front door with Novichok. Right, so they somehow knew in advance that Sergei Skripal wouldn’t be there – ie that he would be out – or that he wouldn’t happen to come back whilst they were there? And how would they know that he didn’t have security cameras? NOT that the two suspects seemed to have gone out of their way to avoid CCTV in and around Salisbury.

    All very profesional of course, and not remotely implausible!

  7. And how on Earth did it take five months to identify them! The first thing investigators would be doing is checking passenger flight lists FROM Moscow and BACK to Moscow (and I wouldn’t have thought there were very many flights from Moscow, or to Moscow each day). And it goes without saying that investigators would simultaneously be checking all and any CCTV in the area surrounding Mr Skripals house AND within a more-or-less specific timeframe. Given that there were 250 police etc investigating the matter, in the Real World it would have taken a couple of weeks maximum to establish when these two guys flew in and out AND that they were also in Salisbury during that period.

    But then WHY did they leave it until some five months later to tell us they had now identified two suspects. Well one thing that occured to me just today – and I say this from the perspective of believing the whole episode was staged, as I have done pretty much from the outset – is that in this day and age, it seems highly unlikely that there wouldn’t have been a number of households (in the streets immediately around where Sergei Skripal’s house is located) that had security cameras, and so these two guys would HAVE to be on the recordings of any such properties they walked passed. But if it was all staged – and there are no real culprets – then you avoid any mention of the Skripals and DS Bailey being contaminated at the house for as long as possible (three-and-a-half weeks as it transpired), during which time any security cams in households in the area would not now have footage from that day.

    And if the two suspects didn’t arrive in Salisbury until just before midday, and if Mr Skripal and his daughter arrived in Salisbury town center at 1.30pm (and we have to assume of course that the two suspects would not have coated the handle of the front door if Mr Skripal’s car was parked in the driveway), then THAT means that the two guys went to his house more-or-less immediately after arriving in Salisbury, then coated the door handle with Novichok and left, and then shortly afterwards Mr Skripal and his daughter happened to return home (although we’ve never been told where they were for the previous couple of hours or so), and then left again shortly after THAT to go into Salisbury town centre. AND, in the process of coming home for a while and then going out again, they BOTH just happened to touch the handle on the outside of the front door!

    Funny how we’ve never been told at any point since first one and then the other (supposedly) recovered, WHERE they were that Sunday morning after going to the cemetary, and even odder that our great British media have never thought to enquire!

      • Yes, I happened to come across the article earlier today, but didn’t have time to read it at that point, and had forgotten about it until I just saw your post. Anyway, I just skimmed through it very quickly – and will read it again properly when I have time – but it’s odd how this has just come to light NOW. And it’s also very odd how the article starts off by saying the following:

        ‘The Dutch government expelled two alleged Russian spies this year after they were accused of planning to hack into a Swiss chemicals laboratory where novichok nerve agent samples from the Salisbury attack were analysed, it has emerged.’

        And then later in the article it’s relating how the two ‘suspects’ (in the Salisbury affair) said in their interview that they had visited Switzerland a couple of times (the Guardian actually says that they “admitted” they had visited Switzerland a couple of times, which is just propaganda tosh). So the Guardian article is, in effect, trying to link the two ‘suspects’ to what happened in Switzerland, and yet if the Dutch government expelled “two alleged Russian spies”, as it says at the beginning of the article, then they MUST have seen them of course and know what they look like, and IF it WAS the two Salisbury suspects, they would of course have said so.

        As I say, I’ll read the article again properly at some point, but WHY on Earth would (alleged) Russian spies want to hack into the laboratory where the (alleged) Novichok samples from Salisbury were being analysed. Doesn’t make any sense whatsoever to me, except from the perspective that the Dutch are helping out their British buddies in this pathetic nonsense – ie the so-called ‘Salisbury Poisoning’ – so as to try and (additionally) frame Putin and ‘Russia’.

        Afterthought: Given all that allegedly happened (people being poisoned and Novichok all over the show in Salisbury supposedly), I find it inconceivable that THIS episode re the laboratory wouldn’t have been all over the MSM at the time that it happened, or very, very shortly thereafter. Totally inconceivable. Oh right, no doubt it was top secret. Until NOW!

  8. Pingback: Centrist fake-news site still claiming rabbis’ letter fake long after proven genuine | RedZine·

  9. Pingback: Orthodox activist’s unpublished statement to Jewish Chronicle questions ‘representative’ groups’ credentials | The SKWAWKBOX·

  10. Pingback: Orthodox activist’s unpublished statement to Jewish Chronicle questions ‘representative’ groups’ credentials | RedZine·

  11. Pingback: SKWAWKBOX emails Jewish Chronicle with evidence. ‘Coincidence’ follows like lightning | The SKWAWKBOX·

  12. Pingback: SKWAWKBOX emails Jewish Chronicle with evidence. ‘Coincidence’ follows like lightning | RedZine·

Leave a Reply