Curious dead horse flogging from Lynne Featherstone yesterday, which I’m rebutting here in a vain attempt to stop yet another conspiracy theory gaining ground:
But there is one point that has struck me as valid – why do we keep on being told Lord Levyâ€™s middle name? Itâ€™s Abraham â€“ and so telling us his middle name in a news report emphasises, deliberately or not, that heâ€™s Jewish.
All a bit rum. Iâ€™m very loathe to leap to the assumption that people in the BBC and elsewhere in the media are being deliberately anti-Semitic, and Iâ€™d like to think that even a charge of inadvertent anti-Semitism can be explained away, but Iâ€™m stumped for a decent explanation for the repeated use of “Abraham”.
As I pointed out on her comments, the explanation is pretty mundane. Look up Levy in Dod’s and you’ll find his full name listed as “Michael Abraham Levy”. I suspect it is listed in the same way in Who’s Who. Levy has control over both of these entries. Ruth Turner is certainly not listed in the former, and, given its snootiness regarding ordinary people without titles, lots of money or a high profile media career, presumably not included in the latter.
being lazy working to tight deadlines, rely on such sources to quickly find out biographical information about people. In short, if you choose to have yourself listed as “Michael Abraham Levy,” then you are bound to find people call you “Michael Abraham Levy.” If Levy preferred to call himself “Michael Levy,” that would be a different matter, but he doesn’t.
But the most bizarre thing about this claim is that the man is called Levy, which is about as Jewish a name as you can get. If you’re intention is to make him ‘sound’ Jewish, why would you emphasise Abraham, a prophet recognised by the Christian and Islamic traditions? Should we now be restricted to calling him Mike, just to make sure we don’t offend anyone?