We offer peace and amity to all the neighbouring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all. The State of Israel is ready to contribute its full share to the peaceful progress and development of the Middle East. (From Proclamation of the State of Israel, 5 Iyar 5708; 14 May 1948)

Monday, 28 February 2011

A Kiwi Witness to a Libyan Pogrom in 1967

There's been publicity recently of the fact that sometime during his ignominious regime, which began in 1969, Muammar Gadaffi ordered the destruction of Jewish graves in Libya, dumping the contents into the sea.  As in Cairo and Tunis, antisemitism has featured during the current unrest in Libya - although you're unlikely to hear about it from media outlets like the BBC.

The grandparents and parents of today's rioters were certainly not immune from "the longest hatred," as a New Zealander's account of a pogrom in Tripoli that took place in revenge for Israel's stunning victory over Arab armies in the Six Day War shows.  Joanne Holland worked as a secretary in Tripoli from 1966-68; some time after returning to London, she shared her reminiscences with a reporter from the Jewish Chronicle.

The pogrom she witnessed entailed a score of murders and the burning to the ground of Jewish homes and businesses.  Miss Holland had known only one Jew, a refugee doctor from Germany, before she went to work in Libya, and there she befriended a number of Jews.

She recalled that one Jew, who having hidden in his house for about a week, ventured outside to discover the fate of the shop he owned.  Arabs recognised him and gave chase, so he ran towards a police car, expecting assistance.  Instead of rescuing him, the police ran him over.

One evening, a jeep-load of armed police led by a colonel led two families from their home on the pretext of taking them to the airport so that they might reach safety.  The families were, in fact, driven out into the desert, where he and his men murdered them all - thirteen persons including two young children.  The colonel later explained that he had "wanted to avenge my Arab brothers" (i.e. for Israel's victory in the Six Day War).

Armed police stood idly by while Jewish-owned shops were broken into, looted, and set alight.  Such premises included a restaurant-cum-liquor store; Arab rioters ran up and down the street swigging the drink from the stolen bottles, and going back for more, while four armed soldiers with grins on their faces looked on.

A Jewish family who barricaded themselves in their apartment for over a week were shocked when their Arab neighbours, whom they'd lived alongside for 30 years, attempted to gain entry and set the place ablaze.
Children as young as eight were among the mob, and Miss Holland was "horrified to see women, under normal circumstances never seen, except occasionally peeping out from behind their veils, standing by and watching the destruction and murder with apparent glee."

What particularly struck Miss Holland when the pogrom occurred was the unwillingness of westerners stationed in Tripoli to intervene and try to help the Jews being hunted down.  What also shocked her was the apathy of contacts in London, to whom she recounted what she'd witnessed.  "[T]hey seemed bored and showed no interest," she said.  "Many Britons still had some romantic concept of the Arabs.  How wrong they were."

She had the distinct impression that in Libya westerners "were madly competing with each other in appeasing the Arabs and expressing their deep sympathies with them in their hatred for Israel and the local Jewish community," to use the phraseology of the Jewish Chronicle reporter (JC, 21 February 1969).

"Then, for the first time," she told him, "I could understand how the Nazis got away with murdering millions of Jews, for people were just not interested in helping them."

The Libyan authorities had finally permitted Jews to leave Libya on temporary travel documents, which prohibited them from taking their belongings or more than £20 with them and would not permit them to return after being away for four months. Those that departed were herded together at dawn by armed soldiers in the forecourt of a hotel, and were surrounded by hostile Arabs shouting and swearing.

Miss Holland herself was several times surrounded by Libyan crowds, and spat at, and once, when visiting a Jewish family, she was almost killed by Arabs wielding iron bars and knives.

Update: See also http://daphneanson.blogspot.com/2011/03/young-hoodlums-in-their-hundreds.html for an eyewitness account of the Tripoli pogrom of November 1945.

Sunday, 27 February 2011

The English Defence League: The Jewry’s Still Out – But What of The Jury?

Frequently characterised in the British media and elsewhere as a thuggish neo-Nazi organisation that must at all costs be ostracised, the anti-Islamist English Defence League was formed following inflammatory – indeed highly despicable – comments and actions of a bunch of Islamic fanatics who in Luton town centre yelled insults and curses at British troops returning from a tour of duty in the Middle East and who carried corresponding placards (“Butchers of Basra”, “British Troops Go to Hell”, and so forth).

The received wisdom in the Anglo-Jewish community is that the EDL is an “extreme right-wing” knee-jerk Islamophobic organisation reminiscent in its tactics and methods of Sir Oswald Mosley’s antisemitic British Union of Fascists, and that its avowed support for Israel – symbolised by blue-and-white flags at its rallies – is bogus and used to bait Muslims, being to them like a red rag to a bull.

The presence of the flags is condemned as offensive, an unwelcome and unwarranted appropriation of the Israeli national symbol for the sole purpose of making trouble in Muslim areas, and giving the impression that Jews are involved. So despite overtures from the EDL, the mass of Anglo-Jewry have given the organisation the cold shoulder.

Nevertheless, the EDL has attracted Jewish supporters in the person of Roberta Moore and her “EDL Jewish Division”.

The English Defence League has repeatedly insisted that its detractors’ portrayal of it as an extreme right-wing organisation is unjustified, and that it is a patriotic organisation that is against not Muslims per se but against Islamic extremism, the encroachment of Islam into the public sphere, and the acceptance of Sharia.

This week the EDL distanced itself from a bloke called Bill Baker and his English Nationalist Alliance – and also from Roberta Moore and her Jewish Division, owing to her associating the Jewish Division with the Kahanist Jewish Task Force, whose head Victor Vancier served five years in prison for bomb attacks against American-based Soviet targets in order to protest against the treatment of Jews in the USSR.

The Jewish Chronicle (25 February) quoted an EDL spokesperson thus:
"The EDL never has and never will have any affiliations with the Jewish Task Force. Unfortunately Ms Moore has caused a great deal of trouble and unrest within the EDL because of her gung-ho attitude."
For the full report see: http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/45704/edl-dismisses-jewish-arm-too-extreme-0?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Explains the EDL in a further statement:
"Some time ago [Baker] decided to engage in a televised debate with a Muslim convert that was then publicised all over the internet. This appearance was not sanctioned by the EDL leadership... We do not appreciate our name being blackened with racist connotations... So we want to make it clear: Bill Baker does not speak for us.
To further compound and exacerbate this situation it has come to light that Bill Baker has links with Nazi groups like Combat 18 and Redwatch. The EDL want nothing to do with such groups. We did not burn a Nazi flag only to get caught up and tainted with the disgusting beliefs of National Socialists. In fact, we have long campaigned against these dinosaurs of an era that history wishes to forget. We do not want to give these dark forces the means to rise up and use the success of our movement to carry something just as depraved and supremacist as Islamism into the 21st century.
Our fathers and our forefathers fought against the tyrannical supremacy of these kind of people in the Second World War...
How can we claim to be fighting against terrorism and at the same time affiliate with known terrorists? This kind of irresponsible stupidity brings its own dangers; it not only makes the EDL look like some kind of duplicitous, conniving and hypocritical outfit, it makes us lose sight of who and what we are, what we strive to be, and most importantly, we stand to lose the moral high ground.
So, sorry Roberta Moore of the EDL Jewish Division –  but we don't approve of your discussions with the JTF. We hope that this was just an error in judgement, but we feel forced to publicise your actions because you have as yet failed to admit to this error, and have instead criticised those who have been forced to renounce the JTF for you....
What is truly astounding is that when we expose those who would wish to exploit the EDL, we get called Anti-Semites, Nazis, BNP, etc, etc. –  all sorts of incredulous and fallacious drivel. Yes, these people are attracted to the EDL, but we work incredibly hard to expose and expel them. It would be nice if the average mosque were so effective. Exposing Nazis, booting them out, and repeatedly denouncing their views (to the media, and to our own members), does not make us the Nazis!....
We support Israel’s right to exist and Israel’s right to defend itself. Now that’s hardly a sentiment shared by Anti-Semites, National Socialists or a faction of the BNP Holocaust-denying community is it?....
The EDL is for everyone, regardless of colour or creed. It is not for people to promote their special interests or their party political beliefs. It’s about something bigger. It’s about unity in the face of radical Islam...."
For the full statement see: http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/45704/edl-dismisses-jewish-arm-too-extreme-0?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

And on a lighter note here's this too: http://englishdefenceleague.org/content.php?240-The-Great-British-Pub-In-Muslim-Occupied-England

Friday, 25 February 2011

The BBC's Willful Blindness towards Antisemitism in the Arab Uprisings and the Jihadism of the Muslim Brotherhood

“The demonstrations have been largely peaceful – in Egypt, sometimes even good-natured,” declared BBC reporter Tim Whewell in a special edition of Newsnight last evening, focusing on the Arab uprisings.

 And so there was nothing in the programme about the brutal and sustained sexual assault on CBS correspondent Lara Logan while her attackers yelled “Jew! Jew!”.

 There was nothing about the antisemitic slogans defacing posters of Mubarak (and, incidentlly, of the supposedly part-Jewish Gaddafi: http://challahhuakbar.blogspot.com/2011/02/libyans-draw-star-of-david-on-photos-of.html).

And there was nothing about the exhortations to Jihad made by the inherently antisemitic Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who is shown in this video bellowing for his countrymen to liberate “Palestine”, while the listening masses in Tahrir Square roar their approval.


And there are plenty more where that came from: http://www.memritv.org/subject/en/362.htm

It’s all part and parcel of Al Beeb’s refusal to acknowledge the true nature and ambitions of the Muslim Brotherhood, and its dismissive attitude towards those who warn of them.

Assad Elepty, a Coptic Christian in Sydney who as well as being an activist in the cause of the Copts of Egypt is also a staunch supporter of Israel (he has campaigned tirelessly against the shameful decision of Marrickville Council to join the BDS brigade), is ever alert to manifestations of Islamism in Egypt, which has cost his co-religionists so dear (and continues to do so, a Coptic priest having been found murdered with 22 stab wounds just the other day).

 Here’s his take on the Muslim Brotherhood's role in the Egyptian revolution:

'Contrary to the misleading and offensive rhetoric given in speeches by members of Sydney’s Muslim community,(during a rally held near the Lakemba Mosque on 31 January 20011), the fall of Mubarak was not as a result of western influence, or that “the US or Britain dropped  their “Arab Puppet”.


(A shortened version is at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJnjIf17OBg )
The reality of the situation is that the Muslim Brotherhood have had a personal vendetta with Mubarak for 30 years. He kept them on a tight leash and came down on them with ruthless force in the lead up to the December 2010 election. They lost every seat in parliament (88), and over 1600 MB members and supporters were arrested and detained.
The revolution was a gift horse “that they never dreamed of”.
I commend Frontline for their report on “the behind scenes role played by the Muslim brotherhood to ensure the demise of Mubarak”



Full transcript: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world/jan-june11/frontline_02-22.html
Commentary:
The revelations disclose members of the Muslim Brotherhood not only actively assisted in organising the revolution; they in fact knew it was coming, “it was the pay back”.
The senior leadership of the MB waited 3 days, before unleashing their well oiled machine and swung into action to ensure the revolution did not loose momentum.
(My question is “Was the Army aware of the pending revolution”?)
Let’s look at the actions of the army and not forget that on the day of the victory celebration, (1 week to the day after the fall of Mubarak)
 The youth that organised the revolution played no role in this momentous occasion.
The Prayers, sermon and victory speech was made by the banned father figure of the Muslim Brotherhood Yusuf Qaradawi.
It was the Army that forced the hand of Mubarak and forced him to step down. Yes it was the army and not any western nation, “switching its allegiance in Egypt that brought down Hosni Mubarak”.
It was also the Army that escorted Qaradawi, guarded him and returned him to his home after the sermon and speech.
It was also the army that refused to appoint a civilian committee to re write the constitution and instead handpicked a 10 man panel to amend certain articles of the constitution exclusive of Article 2.
Egypt's Military Council, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, formed a panel charged with drafting modifications to Egypt's current (albeit suspended) constitution.
In forming this new panel, the Council dissolved another one that was formed in the last days of Mr. Mubarak's rule, which included ten renowned, and 'apolitical,' judges, academics and public personalities.
Instead of relying on those experts, the Council created a new, smaller panel that includes two Islamists. Not only is neither an expert person on constitutional issues, but one is a leading member of the Muslim Brotherhood the other is a theorizer of extremist views, especially regarding the position of non-Muslims in the Islamist state he proclaims.
By excluding from the panel political representatives from all other parts of the political spectrum even those behind or participating in the 'January 25 Revolution' the military is sending an unambiguous message regarding its bias (for whatever reasons) towards the Islamists.'

Thursday, 24 February 2011

“They Stuck a Sword Down his Wife’s Throat”: A Hebron Schoolgirl amid the Arab Riots, 1929

Devorah Schneersohn was born in Hebron, one of the holy cities of Judaism, in 1916, to a family connected with the Chabad movement. Her great-grandfather had moved to Eretz Yisrael, then part of the Ottoman Empire, from Russia, where his father was a famous rabbi. Her grandparents ran an Arab-owned hotel in the holy city of Hebron, and her parents had a dairy.  Here’s her eyewitness account of the bloody Arab Riots that occurred in Hebron in 1929:

‘I remember that I went up in the afternoon on the Friday [23 August] to serve the milk; I used to go on the road to Jerusalem on the main highway; nothing happened when I was walking, but when I was walking back I saw these little groups ... of about ten Arabs here and there, talking. And as I was nearing home, one of them threw a stone at me and hit me in the cheek, and of course I started screaming and ran to the house, and as I ran up the stairs my father opened the door, dragged me in and shut the door again quickly. “We are leaving, we are going to our [i.e. her] grandparents,” he said, which was only down the road actually...

We took few belongings; we didn’t have time.... [M]y father said we were going to the hotel, and sure enough we went through the back way and ran through the different yards, and got to the hotel and there were already different people there. There was an elderly couple that came on holidays ... and the doctor was upstairs, he was staying there; and a few of our friends came and then later I found out there were 33 souls staying there, my aunties and Uncle Sholem and his wife, and so on, and some friends. I’ll never forget, we locked all the doors, and they said we would be safer upstairs, so we all walked upstairs ...

There we were, Esther [her sister] and I, standing at this big window, upstairs in the hotel, and when we were looking out to another house not very far at all, and it was called the Yeshiva School... where Orthodox young men were learning the Torah ... that’s the house where they stayed, where they lived.

And ... we could see the Arabs – they had hardly any guns but there were these long swords – screaming “Kill the Jews, kill the Jews” in Arabic.

And first they opened the doors, and a few minutes later they came out and ... we could see the blood ... on those swords ... Anyway, the next thing, all of a sudden, the Arab who was the owner of the hotel – my grandparents were just running it, of course – and this wonderful man, this Arab, who was in his vineyard with his two wives ... heard apparently of the massacre that was going on, and came running up with his wives ... and said: “Come on, you are not safe here. Come down quickly.” He took us down the back steps to his home. It was one big room and off it were the bedrooms (and whatever other rooms), but we, all 33 of us, went into this room and sat down; and he locked the doors and put his two wives on guard outside the door...

We stayed there a day and a night, and then at one time the Arabs kept knocking and the women would say: “There are no Jewish people here ... just our friends who are so afraid of you, you mustn’t do it.” They went away, lucky us! ...

M]y auntie had a baby, and she had her hand over the baby’s mouth because the baby was just starting to cry, and there were these Arabs standing outside.... You could smell the fear! ... Then ... this voice from outside near the school shouted “Help! Help!” It was our cousin; Slonim was his name. My father jumped up and he was running towards the door and the uncles got up and said to father: “Where do you think you’re going?” He said: “I’m going to help ... they’re killing him.” They said: “You can’t do anything.” It was a really shocking moment.

... [Eliezer Dan] Slonim was the bank manager [the local branch of the Anglo-Palestine Bank], and he had all these people working for him, and amongst them was a friend of his, an Arab, a great friend of his, working there with him. And these Arabs were running up the steps to his home and he came up and saw his friend and he said: “Thank G-d it’s you. Now I feel safe.” And the fellow took a gun and shot him.

Then the others ran in and they stuck a sword down his wife’s throat. The couple had two boys, so they killed one of them, but the other one miraculously survived. They had a neighbour, a very big fat woman, wearing these big, big clothes that were hanging down, and she lay down on top of the other child. His name was Binyamin Slonim, and he is still alive today, somewhere in Israel...

These Arabs went around and killed and killed and massacred. Our baker, our poor darling baker; they lit the primus stove, and they put his head on it, and another was found upside down in the toilet. The toilet was just a hole in the ground; and they just did atrocious things....

[W]e saw bodies lying in different parts of the road. We saw bodies lying on the ground and being picked up, and when we came to the big square in front of the police station, there were so many dead lying around and so many people sitting next to them howling, crying, moaning, holding their heads. It was a terrible picture: there were bodies and blood everywhere, and one poor woman, whose husband was on a stretcher, was on her knees and her dress was all red with blood and she was crying for her husband and the scene was just absolutely shocking.’

(Devorah Schneerson later married, and moved to Australia; the above is extracted from The Australian Jewish Historical Society Journal, vol. 17, 2003.)

See also: http://www.think-israel.org/yidwithlid.1929hebronmassacre.html
and http://bokertov.typepad.com/btb/2005/03/move_the_jews.html

“To the western liberal mind, the only real villains in the Middle East can only ever be Jewish”

An article in yesterday’s Irish Independent by Kevin Myers is a gem that deserves to be widely read outside the Emerald Isle. Entitled “Little Hope of Democracy as Arab Despots Overthrown,” it observes, inter alia:
‘Short-term good seldom results from revolutions. It certainly does not result from revolutions in Muslim societies in which the local imam is usually the font of both civic and criminal law, and where tolerance of others is merely conditional. The fate of the Turkish city of Smyrna after the fall of the Ottoman Empire remains a bloody and terrible warning about the consequences of revolution in a Muslim society: according to Edward Hale Bierstadt of the US Emergency Committee, about 100,000 Christians were butchered, and another 160,000 deported to the interior of Turkey. One of those who managed to escape was an Aristotle Onassis.
That was in 1922, a year after the great Cairo conference, which was intended to settle the Middle East for all time. That gathered 90 years ago this week, with its dispensations expected to be cast in rock. Yet the single institution that has actually survived was actually then the weakest, the house of Ibn Saud. So impoverished was his kingdom that his annual subsidy from Britain of £100,000 actually exceeded the income from all his lands, of which he was both king and imam.
We know his kingdom today as Saudi Arabia. No one could have foreseen the catastrophic consequences of fostering such a creature: for the first Saudi oil concession was only made in 1933. The toxic, fundamentalist creed of Wahabbism, which both Ibn Saud and his heirs subsidised and exported, has since made peaceful civil governance in almost every Muslim country today virtually impossible.
Cairo in the spring of 1921 was therefore faced with a classic case of Donald Rumsfeld's "unknown unknowns": no one had the least idea that beneath the sands of the Ibn Saud's lands lay the largest and most accessible oil reserves in the world.’
Kevin Myers predicts that, “almost certainly,” the future of the secular Arab despotisms now in revolt will be Islam. And he make this very pertinent comment regarding the double standards with which left-liberals in the West treat Israel:

'Had the butchery of Tripoli or Cairo or Yemen taken place in Israel, hundreds of thousands of protesters in European capitals would have been denouncing the cruel Jews.
Had the US journalist Lara Logan been grabbed and sexually violated by a mob of Israeli men, feminists across the world would rightly have been protesting. But she was instead the victim of a frenzied sex attack in Cairo by a score of Arabs, and there is accordingly silence.
In an ever-changing world, some things never change: and to the western liberal mind, the only real villains in the Middle East can only ever be Jewish.'
For the entire article:
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/kevin-myers-little-hope-of-democracy-as-arab-despots-overthrown-2549977.html
And on the subject of Middle East democracies see Melanie Phillips's characteristically marvellous piece here:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/6722819/britain-hymns-middle-east-democracy-except-the-one-it-throws-under-the-bus.thtml
On Egypt's future see Shiraz Maher in Standpoint magazine: http://tiny.cc/tt5qa

University of Pittsburgh Israel Bashers' Video Remixed

Pro-Israel students at the University of Pittsburgh have done a little remixing of a video produced by free speech-denying Israel-bashing counterparts:

Wednesday, 23 February 2011

More video footage of the disruption of an IDF soldier's talk at a Massachusetts college

More video footage of the disruption of a talk at Hampshire College, Massachusetts, made by the juvenile illiberal perpetrators themselves. The choral accompaniment comes from a group of senior citizens who call themselves“The Raging Grannies” (don’t give up the day job, girls!)



As the blogger at tofindtheprinciples notes, the IDF soldier, Sergeant Benjamin Anthony, made a great riposte to an as-a-Jew in the audience:
She thereupon stood up and screamed (6:53-7:02):
“I am Jewish!—I have family that was killed in the Holocaust!—Never again for anybody!”
The Sergeant ... replied,
“Excuse me, the lady who’s Jewish—the lady who’s Jewish—and therefore uses her Judaism as validity for her opinion, could you please give me the title of last week’s Torah portion?”
Read much more here: http://tofindtheprinciples.blogspot.com/2011/02/vampire-strikes-back-hampshire-students.html

The Muslim Brotherhood's Jihad against the Jews and Israel

A chilling and comprehensive report, scholarly and well-documented, has been prepared by Dr Harold Brackman for The Simon Wiesenthal Center. Entitled “Hitler Put Them in Their Place”: Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood’s Jihad Against Jews, Judaism, and Israel,” it is mandatory reading for all who seek to understand the true nature and objectives of an organisation which is being misunderstood and sanitised in so much of the Western media, not least the BBC.

Here’s a taste of the report:

Wishful Thinking in High Places:

“Ayatollah Khomeini will eventually be hailed as a saint.” Former U.S. Ambassador to the UN, Andrew Young (1979)

“[The Muslim Brotherhood is] an umbrella term for a variety of movements, in the case of Egypt, a very heterogeneous group, largely secular, which has eschewed violence and has decried Al-Qaeda as a perversion of Islam.” Director of National Intelligence (DNI), James Clapper (2011)

Sober Warnings:

The Global Threat: “A radicalized understanding of Islam has taken hold, possibly over a wider swathe than at any other time in the fourteen centuries of Muslim history, and it has driven out or silenced every serious
rival.” Director of the Middle East Forum, Daniel Pipes (2002)

The Mistake of “Engagement”: “To think that engaging the Ikhwan [the Brotherhood] will somehow reduce support for extremism is a misplaced notion that is to misunderstand the politics of the region.” Senior Research Associate at the Centre for International Studies, Cambridge University, Alison Pargeter (2010)

A Muslim Assessment: “The Muslim Brotherhood’s problem is that it has no shame. The beginnings of all the religious terrorism we are witnessing is in the Muslim Brother’s ideology of takfir [vilifying other Muslims]. . . . The founders of the violent groups were raised on the Muslim Brotherhood, and those who worked with bin Laden and al-Qaeda went out under the mantle of the Brotherhood.”  Kuwait’s former Education Minister, Dr. Ahmad al-Rab’i (2005)

In Their Own Words:

The Death Cult: “Degradation and dishonour are the results of the love of this world. Therefore, prepare for jihad and be the lovers of death. . . .
Death is an art, and the most exquisite of arts when practiced by the skilful artist.” Brotherhood Founder Hassan al-Banna (c. 1940)

Violence: “History does not write its lines except with [sic]. Glory does not build its lofty edifice except with skulls. Honor and respect cannot be established except on a foundation of cripples and corpses.” Brotherhood Leader and Osama bin Laden’s Teacher, Abdullah Azzam (2003)

Democracy: “Democracy contradicts and wages war on Islam. Whoever calls for democracy means they are raising banners contradicting God’s plan and fighting Islam.” Brotherhood Supreme Spiritual Leader, Mustapha Mashour (1981)

Kill the Jews: “The Versailles Treaty was a disaster for the Germans as well as the Arabs. But the Germans know how to get rid of the Jews. . . . the Germans have never harmed any Muslim, and they are again fighting our common enemy who persecuted Arabs and Muslims. But most of all, they have definitely solved the Jewish problem. Arabs! Rise as one to protect your scared rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. . . . God is with you.” Brotherhood Ally, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammad Amin al-Husayni (1943)

Hitler’s Final Solution: “Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the [Jews] who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them – even though they exaggerated this issue – he managed to put them in their place.” Muslim Brotherhood’s Current Spiritual Head Yusuf el-Qaradawi (2009)

The Future of Peace: “There is no dialogue between us [Muslims and Jews] except by the sword and rifle. . . . [We pray Allah] to take this oppressive, Jewish, Zionist band of people. . . . do not spare a single one of them. . . . count their numbers and kill them down to the very last one.” Muslim Brotherhood’s Current Spiritual Head, Yusuf al-Qaradawi (2009)

Plans for America: “[North America is] a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the all other religions.” Member of the Brotherhood U.S. Shura Council, Mohammed Akram, from a secret memo (1991)

War with Israel: “[We will] continue to raise the banner of jihad against the Jews, [our] first and foremost enemies. . . .  resistance is the only solution against the Zio-American arrogance and tyranny, and all we need is for the Arab and Muslim peoples to stand behind it and support it.
. . . We say to our brothers the mujahideen in Gaza: be patient, persist in [your jihad], and know that Allah is with you.” Current Brotherhood Supreme Leader, Mohamed Badi (2010)

Introduction: 9/11 and 2/11

“9/11” is inscribed in U.S. history for terrible reasons no American will ever forget. In the chronicles of global history, “2/11” is of momentous importance for three reasons. On February11, 1990, Nelson Mandela was released after 27 years imprisonment, mostly in South Africa’s Robben Island Bastille. On February 11, 1979, the Shah of Iran fell, ultimately to be replaced by Ayatollah Khomeini’s dictatorship. And now—on February 11, 2011—a popular Egypt Revolution has toppled President Hosni Mubarak, with ultimate consequences that are still unfolding.

The Muslim Brotherhood (in Arabic, al-Ikhwān al-Muslimūn) – Egypt’s Islamist opposition to the Mubarak regime with a followership probably between 10 and 20 million – contributed an estimated 15 to 20 percent of the demonstrators in Cairo’s Tahrir Square. Fortunately, it played second fiddle to young, overwhelmingly moderate and secular democracy protestors. This contrasts with Iran in 1979 where Ayatollah Khomeini from his exile in France was much better positioned from the first to play puppet master, pulling the strings on what went on in the streets of Tehran.

Yet the Egyptian situation is so uncertain and complicated – with a diverse but inexperienced army of young democracy activists, the real military which controls the transition and is playing its cards close to the vest, and the Brotherhood occupying the third corner of a political triangle – that it would be foolish to rule out the possibility that Egypt’s democratic revolution could also by hijacked by disciplined and ruthless, undemocratic actors. Real friends of peaceful progress cannot afford to allow the Muslim Brotherhood to pose as the heroes of a revolution which they did not make and whose democratic aspirations they do not share.

We should be especially troubled about one parallel between the Muslim Brotherhood and Khomeini’s movement: their shared obsessive hatred of Israel as an anti-Muslim “Zionist conspiracy” and their radical vision of a future apocalypse in which—not only the Jewish state – but Jews everywhere will be wiped from the face of the earth. In this respect, Iranian President [Mahmoud]“Wipe Israel From the Map” Ahmedinajed, is a true son of the Ayatollah Khomeini and potential model for the Brotherhood. This Report will put in context the theme of anti-Zionist, anti-Jewish genocidal paranoia that runs like a central thread though the Muslim Brotherhood’s 80-year history, commencing with its foundation in 1928.

The only thing that exceeds the wide-ranging, global influence of the Muslim Brotherhood – whose reach extends beyond Egypt and the Middle East to Western Europe and North America—is the widespread ignorance about its history and current character and purposes by western political and media elites and public opinion. (In 2006, Jeff Stein of Congressional Quarterly quizzed Congressmen about their knowledge of basic facts about Islam, and found their bipartisan ignorance astounding.)

If we do not want 2/11/11 to replicate 2/11/79 – marking the triumph of another Islamist extremist regime extinguishing the democratic hopes of what initially was “a people’s revolution” – then now is the time that we learn as much as we can about the past and present of the Muslim Brotherhood, its paranoid anti-Zionism and antisemitism, and the extent of the threat it poses to the future of democracy and peace in Egypt and beyond.

http://www.wiesenthal.com/atf/cf/%7B54d385e6-f1b9-4e9f-8e94-890c3e6dd277%7D/HITLER-PUT-THEM-IN-THEIR-PLACE_BRACKMAN_FINAL.PDF

Small Gentleman with Huge Weapon WLTM...

Small gentleman with huge weapon (erecting) would like to meet The Twelfth Imam.

“Mad Dog” Gaddafi ‘s evil regime may now be toppling in Libya, but Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is still in power in Teheran.

It is easy for Westerners to forget, and even easier to dismiss as scaremongering, the fact that Ahmadinejad believes that the central purpose of the Islamic Republic of Iran is to prepare the way – with brimstone and fire – for the return of the Mahdi, or Twelfth Imam, who according to Shia tradition was born over 1000 years ago, is not dead but in hiding, and will one day reveal himself and rule the world.

"Today, we should define our economic, cultural and political policies based on the policy of Imam Mahdi's return," the Iranian president has said.

"We must prepare ourselves to rule the world and the only way to do that is to put forth views on the basis of the Expectation of the Return."
"They [Western nations] have devised all these plans to prevent the coming of the Hidden Imam because they know that the Iranian nation is the one that will prepare the grounds for his coming and will be the supporters of his rule."
According to Shia tradition, the return, and subsequent rule,of the Twelfth Imam will be preceded by turbulence and destruction of apocalyptic proportions. A mighty cataclysm must occur to effect his arrival.

Calls for Israel’s extirpation, and denying the Holocaust, are endemic to Islamism elsewhere in the Middle East – we can see such statements on videos featuring the Egyptian Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi (the one who yesterday issued a fatwa against Gaddafi, incidentally) as well as many other Islamic extremists – but the fact remains that only Ahmadinejad’s Iran is on the threshold of acquiring The Bomb, which as the Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer has observed,
“could do in one afternoon what it took Hitler six years to do: destroy an entire Jewish civilization and extinguish 6 million souls.
Everyone knows where Iran's nuclear weapons will be aimed. Everyone knows they will be put on Shahab rockets, which have been modified so that they can reach Israel. And everyone knows that if the button is ever pushed, it will be the end of Israel.
But it gets worse. The president of a country about to go nuclear is a confirmed believer in the coming apocalypse.... The more devout believers in Iran pray at the Jamkaran mosque, which houses a well from which, some believe, he will emerge.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/15/AR2005121501428.html
As Ariel Sharon warned, the Mahdi, in the view of Ahmadinejad and other radical Iranian Shi’ites
"needs a war. He cannot come into this world without an Armageddon. He wants an Armageddon. The earlier we understand this the better. Ahmadinejad wants nuclear weapons for this!"
There are many who warn of this, but the warnings seem often to fall on deaf ears:


The Mahdi has handmaidens:


The Jerusalem Post (17 January 2011) featured an interview with Israel’s Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon. The exact date when Iran will acquire nuclear weapons is “a moving target,” and “all we know is that this year they will not have a nuclear weapon,” he’s quoted as saying.
“However, in order to ensure that they will not have the weapons in 2014 or 2015, we must not let up. We must continue and not stop the momentum. There is a momentum where the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, the Iranian government, is now in the crosshairs of the international community.”
Well, let’s hope so...

The ex-pat Iranian political analyst and human rights campaigner Jahanshah Rashidian has warned that  despite Ahmadinejad's nuttiness it is a mistake not to take him seriously:
‘His repeated comments suggesting that Israel be "wiped off the map" is stirring international ire, and they even caused some Iranian officials to play down his remarks, saying that Ahmadinejad did not mean to speak in such sharp terms.
Ahmadinejad's bellicose remarks, at a moment when Iran is under increasing world scrutiny for its nuclear programme, suggest that the man does not care about war and catastrophe for his people. His threatening words mirror the similar methods of the unpopular [Islamic Republic of Iran] IRI by creating the shadow of an external threat in order to keep control over its own people. Ahmadinejad serves the survival of the regime, no matter how weird he is, and no matter how he has failed to rally the majority of people. In the absence of democracy, he gains more blind adherents, more Islamist followers in the world, and more apologists for the regime.
Ahmadinejad is putting forward IRI's vision for global Islamic domination. The vision of Islamic domination cannot coexist in any manner with peaceful rhetoric. Ahmadinejad's words are the direct consequences of the regime’s world view, and as such, he is supported by the Leader of the IRI, ayatollah Ali Khameneh’i, the Hojattyeh-sect and some international Islamists, despite his weird attitudes and uncontrolled speeches....
Ahmadinejad needs to seek refuge in his unreal world. He views himself the direct vassal of the Twelfth Imam, the Mahdi, of Shi’ites, for whom he prepares the reappearance after more than a thousand years of occultation. He propagates the idea that he is in permanent contact with him and receives advice from him.
Whatever one may think of Ahmadinejad, any perceived insanity or instability can be best explained by his unshakeable belief in the ethos of the Shiite sect – with a messianic idea of world catastrophe leading to the coming of the Twelfth Imam and Islamic rule over the world. If one analyses this religious belief, his words make perfect sense but only within the strict context of this belief system. When he believes the Mahdi protects him with a "halo of light", then his words must mirror this belief.
The belief in the imminent return of the Mahdi has not only influenced Ahmadinejad's words and attitudes, but also driven his foreign policy brinksmanship. According to him, "a historic war between the oppressor, non-Muslims, and the world of Islam" is under way, and the IRI is on the front lines. Thus, as Ahmadinejad told a closed-door session of the "Majles" (Iranian parliament) foreign policy and national security committee in January 2006, Iran must abandon its decade-and-a-half-old policy of "detente" with the West in favour of confrontation.’http://wwwdamavandsafa.blogspot.com/

See also: http://daphneanson.blogspot.com/2010/09/ahmadinejad-bomb-and-twelfth-imam.html

Tuesday, 22 February 2011

“Israel is under the most profound, even existential siege... We, the world’s civilians, are now all Israelis.”

Professor Emerita Phyllis Chesler, who’s a well-known op-ed columnist, gave an interview to Israel National News New York correspondent Fern Sidman on 16th February in Toronto, where Dr Chesler was attending the conference entitled “When Middle East Politics Invade Campus,” organised by Advocates for Civil Liberties. The conference focused on the continuing demonization of Israel on campus and in the media.

Here’s what Phyllis Chesler told Fern Sidman:

‘As I first wrote in 2001-2002, the new antisemitism also consists of a rather frightening, genocidal anti-Zionism. The global demonization of Israel has gathered such speed and force that it could, potentially – it is certainly meant to – delegitimize and destroy the Jewish state. In 2005, Iran’s Ahmadinejad said that Israel must be “wiped off the map.” In 2006, he said that the Middle East would be better off “without the existence of the Zionist regime” and that Israel would “soon be wiped out.” No one did anything.

Now, in 2011, signs and placards in Cairo, including the many effigies of Hosni Mubarak, bore Stars of David; Mubarak was accused of being a Zionist – the worst epithet imaginable. President Ahmadinejad congratulated the triumphant Egyptians. saying: “Despite all the West’s complicated and Satanic designs…a new Middle East is emerging without the Zionist regime and U.S. interference..."

Israel is under the most profound, even existential siege.

On February 13, 2011, the Israeli government urged Israelis to return home from the Sinai for fear “that the peninsula will become a launching pad for terror attacks as Egyptian police abandon their posts.” Thus, Israel is now surrounded by Hamas in Gaza, Iran’s Hizbullah in Lebanon, potentially the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, and the various Islamist and jihadist groups on the West Bank.

In addition, let’s not forget that in the early years of the Intifada, Israeli civilians were murdered and maimed in huge numbers. Had the equivalent happened in the United States it would have instantly launched World War IV.

Please remember that the women in Tahrir Square were mainly wearing serious hijab and even niqab. They are already pro-Islamist. According to a June 2010 Pew Research opinion survey of Egyptians, it stated that, “Fifty nine percent said they back Islamists. Only 27% said they back modernizers. Half of Egyptians support Hamas. Thirty percent support Hizbullah and 20% support al Qaida. Moreover, 95% of them would welcome Islamic influence over their politics….Eighty two percent of Egyptians support executing adulterers by stoning, 77% support whipping and cutting the hands off thieves. 84% support executing any Muslim who changes his religion."

What will it mean that such a population can vote? Will the vote be any different than the vote which elected Hamas in Gaza? Without the necessary precursors: the rule of law, a constitutional system of checks and balances, the separation of mosque and state, freedom of religion, a free press, education, women’s rights, human rights, a modern economic base, etc. the vote does not mean that democracy as we know it exists.

The [western] campuses have become increasingly and aggressively anti-Israel and pro-Islam. Today, anti-Zionism is the new antisemitism. “Brownshirt” behavior rules the day. Muslim and ex-Muslim dissidents are met with menace, if they are invited to speak at all and pro-Israel truth tellers are not even invited to speak.

Israel is not an apartheid nation. Muslim countries persecute non-Muslim minorities, Israel doesn't persecute non-Jews. The Arab Middle East is “judenrein,” Arab Christians are under siege there. Say this on most campuses, as I have, and you will be jeered, booed, possibly physically menaced, certainly demonized afterwards as a “racist” and “Islamophobe.” You will lose your publishing contacts and your former feminist political world. You will not be invited to speak by Women’s Studies programs.

My work on Islamic gender apartheid has been attacked in these quarters. But Islamic gender apartheid is a human rights violation and cannot be justified in the name of cultural relativism, tolerance, anti-racism, diversity, or political correctness. The battle for women's rights is central to the battle for Europe and for Western values. Radical feminists prefer not to see it..

Based on an American population of approximately 310 million, the Israeli civilian death count [at the hands of radical Islamists] is the equivalent of 48,700 Americans killed by terrorists on our own soil, in pizza parlorus, on buses, at Passover sedorim, in our beds. According to the Israeli Foreign Ministry, between 2001 and 2007, 8,342 Israelis were wounded by terrorist attacks, including 5,676 civilians.This is the equivalent of 340,000 wounded Americans.


The politically correct line is that Israel, tiny Israel, is the “Nazi, Apartheid state.” Only Orwell would understand this misuse of language, this reversal of logic, which is meant to confuse and brainwash people. Such brainwashing has worked. Sixty years of Soviet and Arab League activism and Saudi monies have accomplished the unbelievable. Israel is not only the “bad guy,” it is the “very worst bad guy” in the entire universe.

We, the world’s civilians, are now all Israelis. The same world which refused to stop the airplane hijackings and suicide killers which blew up countless Israeli civilians has now inherited this whirlwind. As they say: It may start with the Jews but it never ends there.’
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/news.aspx/142432

Monday, 21 February 2011

Anti-Israel Broadcasts in Britain Spread Their Malign Influence – and How!

That fine British blogger Edgar Davidson, who always has something important, profound, and often original, to say, begins his post entitled Anti-Israel indoctrination in the UK” thus:

‘If you need to know the depth to which the British media has indoctrinated the public with anti-Israel feelings, then I can give no better example than the following:

My daughter, who goes to an orthodox Jewish school, tells me that, when the subject of Israel is discussed in their Jewish studies GCSE class, students routinely state things like "the Jews have no right to Israel because they stole the land from the Palestinians".

In making statements like that, those regular 15-16 year old Jewish kids, are simply repeating what they are told relentlessly in every part of the media (as I have regularly reported on this web). In the midst of the big story of revolution across the entire Arab world (funny how the media is suddenly realising that these Arab countries were abusing their citizens for decades - they have been telling us all along that is is Israel that is the pariah state in the region) the BBC and Channel 4 has gone into overdrive ... to demonize Israel. Just a few examples of the anti-Israel tsunami engulfing British TV ...’

See the rest of Edgar Davidson’s post here: http://edgar1981.blogspot.com/2011/02/anti-israel-indoctrination-in-uk.html

Al Beeb Still Stroking Those Fluffy Muslim Brotherhood Pussycats

Seemingly, the BBC is still fighting a desperate propaganda war on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood's essential niceness, to bolster the insistence of inept Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen (pictured) that the Brotherhood (“mistrusted in the West”) is a “moderate” organisation.

Tarik Kafala – who was, and perhaps still is, editor of the Middle East section of its news website (which is often arguably more outrageously biased against Israel than even Al Beeb’s radio and television broadcasts) – has an article on its website entitled “Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood promotes moderate path.”

Reports Kafala:

‘With its conservative Islamist agenda and its historical links to radical and sometimes violent groups, it is feared and mistrusted in the West and to some extent in Egypt.
Its many critics fear it will seek to come to power through the ballot box and institute Sharia Islamic law, moving Egypt in a far more conservative and anti-Western direction.
Dr Issam al-Arian, the Muslim Brotherhood's spokesman, is himself a medic. He runs his own private medical lab and volunteers three days a week at the Islamic Medical Association.
"The worry about us in the West is the result of bias and double standards," Dr Arian says.
The movement, he says, wants to be a party representing all kinds of Egyptians.
"We will serve Muslims, Christian, men and woman, young and old. Many friends - Christians I am talking about - are asking us when we will form a party."
He insists the movement is genuinely democratic, and will have to compete with emerging parties for the votes of Egyptians.
"The West should respect this, and after elections respect the wishes of the Egyptians.
"It is in the West's interest to honestly pursue its own interests in the Middle East. The main demand of our revolution was for democracy, and this cannot be put this on hold across the region because of the fears of six million Israelis."’ [My emphasis]
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12504820
Frankly, I’m surprised that Al Beeb, which is always careful to give short shrift to the views of those who don't subscribe to its agenda, hasn’t presented Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the elderly Egyptian cleric and Muslim Brotherhood stalwart sometimes depicted as a “moderate,” as a champion of women’s rights. After all, in matters of Jihad and martyrdom he’s an “equal opportunity” cleric. Just look at this inquiry he received, and his answer (fatwa) to it (and see him justifying genocide in the video at the end):

"Question: I would like to ask about the ruling of Palestinian women carrying out martyr operations. Fulfilling this mission may demand that they travel alone, without a mahram [male relative who acts as a woman's mandatory chaperone] and they may need to take off their hijab, the matter which may expose part of their 'awrah [the part of the female body, in effect most of it, that must ordinarily be concealed according to imams]. Would you please comment on this? I'd prefer Dr. Qaradawi to answer this urgent question, if you please.
Dr. Qaradawi answers: The martyr operation is the greatest of all sorts of jihad in the cause of Allah. A martyr operation is carried out by a person who sacrifices himself, deeming his life [of] less value than striving in the cause of Allah, in the cause of restoring the land and preserving the dignity. To such a valorous attitude applies the following Qur'anic verse: "And of mankind is he who would sell himself, seeking the pleasure of Allah; and Allah hath compassion on (His) bondmen." (Qur'an, 2: 207)
But a clear distinction has to be made here between martyrdom and suicide. Suicide is an act or instance of killing oneself intentionally out of despair, and finding no outlet except putting an end to one's life. On the other hand, martyrdom is a heroic act of choosing to suffer death in the cause of Allah, and that's why it's considered by most Muslim scholars as one of the greatest forms of jihad.
When jihad becomes an individual duty, as when the enemy seizes the Muslim territory, a woman becomes entitled to take part in it alongside men. Jurists maintained that when the enemy assaults a given Muslim territory, it becomes incumbent upon all its residents to fight against them to the extent that a woman should go out even without the consent of her husband, a son can go too without the permission of his parent, a slave without the approval of his master, and the employee without the leave of his employer. This is a case where obedience should not be given to anyone in something that involves disobedience to Allah, according to a famous juristic rule.
In the same vein, the public welfare should be given priority to the personal one, in the sense that if there is a contradiction between the private right and the public one, the latter must be given first priority, for it concerns the interest of the whole ummah [Muslim community]. Given all this, I believe a woman can participate in this form of jihad according to her own means and condition. Also, the organizers of these martyr operations can benefit from some, believing women as they may do, in some cases, what is impossible for men to do.
As for the point that carrying out this operation may involve woman's travel from [one] place to another without a mahram, we say that a woman can travel to perform Hajj [pilgrimage to Mecca] in the company of other trustworthy women and without the presence of any mahram as long as the road is safe and secured. Travel, nowadays, is no longer done through deserts or wilderness; instead, women can travel safely in trains or by air.
Concerning the point on hijab, a woman can put on a hat or anything else to cover her hair. Even when necessary, she may take off her hijab in order to carry out the operation, for she is going to die in the cause of Allah and not to show off her beauty or uncover her hair. I don't see any problem in her taking off hijab in this case.
To conclude, I think the committed Muslim women in Palestine have the right to participate and have their own role in jihad and to attain martyrdom." http://www.meforum.org/646/the-qaradawi-fatwas

Hat tip for video: reader Roger
For more on Qaradawi see: http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/2011/02/egypt-qaradawi-worlds-leading-islamist.html
 http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.8354/pub_detail.asp

Sunday, 20 February 2011

Showing the BDS movement up for what it is!

Check out this new kid on the block: http://pacbi.com/
It begins:

Pathetic Assholes Conspiring to Boycott Israel


Welcome to PACBI.com, the leading web site in the growing BDS movement!!
Here we tell you everything you need to know about anti-Zionism and BDS! Just what is BDS?
BDS stands for Bigots, Dingbats and Scoundrels. BDS-ers come from the goosestepping Neo-Nazi Right, from the bedwetting radical Left, from the "anarchist" anarcho-fascist movements, from the various front groups for the "International Solidarity Movement" or ISM (which stands for "I Support Murderers").

(Hat tip:Yisrael Medad)

Naturally, there is no connection with www.pacbi.org/

Enjoy!

"To Jerusalem We Go, Martyrs in the Millions"

Thus chant two million protesters in Tahrir Square...

And the BBC insists there's  been no anti-Israel rhetoric among the Egyptian protesters.
Jeremy Bowen better eat his words.

Mad Dogs and Englishmen – UK Universities Give the Go-Ahead to Hate-Spewing Extremists on Campus

Islamic extremists spewing out hatred on UK campuses have become a grim  feature of life on many British campuses, especially in London. In addition to the implications for public safety generally, this situation has created an atmosphere of intimidation and fear for Jewish and pro-Israel students.

For such Islamists, it’s effectively a case of “Carry On Hate Speaking,” courtesy of the authorities who, despite expectations, have in a newly published report announced by Professor Malcolm Grant, Provost and President of University College London (UCL) ,signally failed to grapple meaningfully with this issue.

Professor Grant chaired the working group of the umbrella body of university chiefs, Universities UK, and can be seen in the video below. “Views expressed within universities ... may sometimes appear to be extreme or even offensive, “ he explains. “However, unless views can be expressed they cannot also be challenged.” Thus the report gives the go-ahead to universities to continue inviting extremists onto campuses in order to “engage” with them.

Not surprisingly, the Union of Jewish Students maintains that Universities UK has accordingly “failed to provide any clear, practical guidance to the sector on the issue of hate speech and extremism on campus. The report provides no answers whatsoever.”


The following is a cross-post on the subject by Jonathan Hoffman, co-vice-chair of the UK Zionist Federation, entitled “University Hate Speech Report: A Whitewash”. (It also appears at http://www.thejc.com/blogpost/university-hate-speech-report-a-whitewash):

After it was revealed that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab – who tried to blow up a plane on Christmas Day 2009 – had been President of Islamic Society at UCL, Universities UK – under pressure from the government – set up an Inquiry into Extremism on Campus. It was clear from the start that it was going to be a whitewash: http://www.thejc.com/blogpost/campus-extremism-university-heads-are-taki...
And so it ha proved. The members of the Inquiry – headed by Professor Malcolm Grant of UCL – very quickly changed its focus from "extremism" to "guaranteeing free speech” – a laughable inversion of what the Inquiry was supposed to be about.
Its Report has just been published:http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/Publications/Documents/FreedomOfSpeechOn...
There is no list of hate speakers and events which have caused offence. And the recommendations are a fudge. For example there is no mention of compulsory filming by university authorities of hate speech meetings.http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/29079/hate-war-campus-be-stamped-out
The universities have proved themselves abjectly incapable of setting their own house in order. The time is long overdue for David Willetts – the Universities Minister – to step in.
(See also: http://www.thejc.com/node/45437
http://www.thejc.com/node/44355
http://www.thejc.com/node/44348)

And as wise commenters on the Guardian's notorious Comment is Free website observe, in response to a typical "weaselly"Al Grauniad article on the subject:
'Hamza Andreas Tzortzis will address the University College London Islamic Society ...
Mr Tzortzis, ... was a trustee of Green Crescent, a British charity placed under investigation ... for links with Islamist terrorism.
Mr Tzortzis ... is a former researcher for the hardline Hittin Institute and chaired the launch event of iERA, an umbrella organisation hosting many well-known British Muslim extremists who preach opposition to democracy and hatred against homosexuals and Jews. He also has links to the extremist and separatist group Hizb ut Tahrir ....
At UCL's Islamic society's Islamic Awareness Week in February 2008 invited speakers included Abu Mujahid, who has incited Muslims to condemn homosexuals because Allah "hates" them.
Murtaza Khan, who was filmed in a television documentary delivering a diatribe against Jews, Christians and "filthy non-Muslim doctors", was invited to speak at the another event ... in December 2007.'
and
'Universities have a duty to protect students who come to study in them. If speakers speaking at the invitation of certain societies engage in hate speech or speech verging on hate speech - eg against Jews or non-Muslims, gays etc, then no University could justify inviting the speaker.
The same would go for extreme right-wingers who might aid in creating an atmosphere which was intimidating to ethnic students.
But somehow when extreme anti-liberal, racist, sexist, homophobic views are expressed by extreme Islamists, Universities - if this article is anything to go by - tend to excuse them in the name of "openness" in a way which would probably not apply to extreme right-wing speakers.
The idea that those views contribute to "openness" when they relate to closed-mindedness is very strange.'
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2011/feb/18/ucl-student-extremism-constructive-engagement)

Saturday, 19 February 2011

Getting Ahead as a Jewish Dhimmi in Old Morocco ...

In May 1906 a British writer and traveller called J. Budgett Meakin gave a talk on his impressions of Moroccan Jewry to the East London Communal League at the East London Synagogue. He revealed that he was not as interested in the Moroccan Jews whose Sephardi ancestors had migrated from Europe, and who tended to be merchants and traders in coastal areas, as in the older Moroccan Jewish community of the interior, whose forebears had lived in the country for over one thousand years. These were the Jews who fascinated him most. Their ancestors had fought the invading Muslim conquerors of North Africa; some had been converted to Islam themselves.

 'The Berber Jews,’ he explained, as recorded in a Jewish Chronicle report (18 May 1906),
‘dare not travel , dared hardly do anything except under the protection of some powerful Sheikh or other important personage in the locality. Everyone was practically the serf of someone who protected him. Without this protection the life of the Jew would not be safe, and yet a few dollars might sometimes be considered sufficient “blood-money” for them. Not only could the Jew not leave the place in which he resided unless under this protection, but he was not allowed to take his wife with him under any circumstances; she was kept as a sort of hostage until his return home. Until recent years the sultans of Morocco allowed no Jewesses to leave the country.”
Budgett Meakin went on to say:

“There had long been intimate relations between the Jews of Morocco and Palestine ; quite a number of the most famous rabbis of Jerusalem had been supplied by the schools of Fez (which contained the main Jewish settlement in Morocco) and other parts of the country. Up to that time the Jews of Morocco had ... refused to accept many of the teachings of the rabbis [i.e. the Talmudic sages] ... and had for this reason been compared by some scholars with the Karaite Jews. It was not until a later period that they came into contact with the Talmudic section of the country [the Sephardim].”
They were subject to discrimination by their Muslim overlords:

‘None of the men were allowed to wear bright colours, and though there was a time when the sultan decreed that they should all wear costumes of bright yellow, they were now only allowed to dress in black; they had to wear a black fez, in contradistinction to the red of the Moors. In some of the districts the men had the curious custom of wearing tufts of their hair on either side of their forehead, and it was a curious fact that one of the tribes reported to be of Jewish origin (the Udála) wore precisely similar “sheaves” on their foreheads. The Jewish costume consisted of a black robe, or gabardine, and black slippers. The women were allowed to wear what they liked, although in the streets in the interior, they covered themselves up; the Jewesses, however, unlike the Moorish women, had no objection to their faces being seen ... He regretted to say that the Jewesses on the coast, whom they were used to see going about in becoming costumes, had taken to the hideous Paris fashions which Western Europeans were compelled to adopt.... The time to observe the sumptuous costume of the Jews was at the family festivities .... [At weddings] everybody who cared to walk in and partake in the festivities was perfectly welcome; and the spread of good things was quite unique. It was the custom for the guests who were quite unable to consume all the delicacies allotted to them to sweep them off the table and carry them away in their pockets! Music was being played while the guests assembled, and there was a general atmosphere of luxury. The ladies invested as much of their money as they could in jewellery, brocade, and other ornaments, which they wore on these occasions. The elaborate dresses, which were of silk and velvet, were decorated with real gold braid; and were handed down from generation to generation.
A Jewish Wedding in Morocco, by Eugene Delacroix
Unlike the homes of Muslims, whose passageways had a bend in them so as to prevent passers-by looking into the courtyard and seeing the women, the homes of Jews had no such restrictions. The mellahs (Jewish quarters) tended to have poor drainage, and since refuse piled up in the streets, “the roads in the Mellah were always increasing in height – sometimes the middle of the street was a couple of feet higher than the sides.”

The gates of the mellahs were shut at sunset:

“This was not only awkward for the people, but it was also a protection in times of trouble, when it is as well that the Jews should be safe in their quarters. As the Jews contributed a great deal towards the regular and irregular taxation – of which latter there were plenty – and were important traders and successful in commerce generally, they were regarded with jealousy by the Moors, and there was no love lost between them, feeling running sometimes very high. Once or twice when a new sultan had come to the throne, in order to reward the populace and secure their favour, he had issued an edict that a general pillage of the Jews might take place. The last time such an event had occurred was a hundred years ago... but if the present dynasty were upset, or if any of the fanatics were to overthrow the present condition of things in Morocco, the first to feel its effects would be the Jews, who had accumulated great wealth, and thus offered opportunities for pillage.”
Budgett Meakin went on to explain that those Moroccan Jews who were not agents for European commercial interests (and therefore not under the protection of European powers) suffered many legal disabilities in Morocco, such as not being permitted to give evidence against a Muslim, and being forbidden to strike a Muslim, even in self-defence.

In this state of dhimmitude there was one way to get ahead:

‘When anyone was decapitated, the Jewish butchers were forced to pickle the head in salt, that was why the Mellah got the name of “salted place,” but it was also known as the “saltless” or “rotten” place.'
Oy!

Friday, 18 February 2011

“Sentenced to life for a moment of patriotic rage, instead of being honoured for it” (video)

On 13 March 1997, to the chagrin of the late King Hussein, who apologised in the name of his country, Jordanian soldier Ahmad Daqamseh (or Ahmad Al-Daqamsa) opened fire on an Israeli school bus on an excursion to the Jordan Valley, killing seven 11-year-old girls and badly wounding others. He received a life sentence in Jordan for the outrage.
His mother later declared that he remains defiant, quoting him as saying: "The only thing that I am angry about is the gun, which did not work properly. Otherwise I would have killed all of the passengers on the bus."

The Jordanian Justice Minister, Hussein Mujalli, has now demanded Daqamseh’s release, echoing demands of demonstrators. “I support the demonstrators' demand to free Ahmad Dakamseh,” said Mr Mujalli. “He's a hero. He does not deserve prison."

In this video from a Lebanese television station, dating from 2009, a Jordanian lawyer, a Jordanian human rights activist, and a female Lebanese reporter speak in favour of Daqamseh. His “patriotic” killing of the “Zionist girls” from the “entity” that is “occupied” is presented as an heroic, even glorious, act and a defining moment for Arabs and Muslims


Liberal Rabbis on the Wrong Side of History

Recently, on the Jewish Chronicle website, Rabbi Aaron Goldstein drew attention to a composite sermon produced by him and his two rabbinical assistants at London’s Northwood and Pinner Liberal Synagogue. He asked whether they could produce “the longest sermon in history”.

Since some of my best friends are Liberal rabbis – I had tea and scones with one yesterday afternoon – and since I’m inevitably drawn to matters historical, I decided to check it out.
http://www.npls.org.uk/Sermons/New/Civic%20Service%202011.html

I was most disappointed, and indeed perturbed, by the contribution to the sermon – a well-meaning but hopelessly rose-tinted celebration of multiculturalism in Britain – that one of Rabbi Goldstein’s colleagues, a young South American-born rabbi, had made. With what might seem a cavalier disregard for fairness towards the ethos and traditions of his adopted country, and a strange selection of "facts", Rabbi Hillel Athias-Robles opined, inter alia:

“British colonialism tried to anglicise and homogenise the different constituents of the Empire, and its missionaries sought to replace native religions with Christianity. UK Sodomy laws were exported to cultures that traditionally had more tolerant attitudes to sexual diversity. In 1864 the Anthropological Society of London concluded that Blacks were a separate species more akin to the ape, even though this was more than three decades after the Slavery Abolition Act was passed.... In the media and political discourse we constantly hear the tenets of multiculturalism come into question. We feel multiculturalism crumble as Islamophobia becomes more socially acceptable. The All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into anti-Semitism reported a sharp increase in anti-Semitic attitudes and incidents.
....Giving up on multiculturalism is not the solution to our social wrongs. It is in fact multiculturalism that prevents our social wrongs from deteriorating even further.”
It was not so much the last part of this quoted passage that I found objectionable, although I agree with Jonathan Hoffman’s observation:

‘What politically correct drivel. Even Trevor Phillips said that multiculturalism is not working. And "Islamophobia becomes socially acceptable" is the PC liberal way of saying "It's wrong to point out Islamic extremism." No it's not.’ http://www.thejc.com/blogpost/can-3-rabbis-produce-longest-sermon-history(Mr
(Mr Hoffman would no doubt have added David Cameron’s name to that of Trevor Phillips, who chairs Britain’s Human Rights and Equality Commission, had the former’s Munich speech already been given.  And see the following by the great Melanie Phillips: http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/6699875/hemming-the-lemming.thtml)

What I really deplore is the disparaging of Britain by Rabbi Athias-Robles, with the totally invalid implication that it is an endemically racist society. This picture shows some of "the great and the good" of Victorian Britain at a rally on behalf of persecuted Russian Jewry  – one of a number of such rallies held in Britain during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries to demand justice for oppressed Jewries; the participants came from all political parties, and from all branches of the Christian church, with "liberals" and Protestants predominating.  Many of the people at the nineteenth-century rallies had been active in the fights against slavery, for penal reform, for factory reform, and for Jewish parliamentary emancipation.

I’ve shown in other blogposts that post-Reformation England provided a climate conducive to philosemitism, and the rabbi’s assertion that British “missionaries sought to replace native religions with Christianity” is mischievously misleading. It was only animists – heathens – that such missionaries attempted to proselytise; they did not, and this was a matter of deliberate policy, interfere with the religions of the peoples of the British Raj, although as is well-known they did attempt to outlaw thuggee and suttee.

Disappointingly, the rabbi ignores Britain’s liberal tradition, he ignores the abolition of the slave trade and the Royal Navy’s proud record in enforcing abolition by intercepting slaver vessels and returning their human cargos to Africa, he ignores Britain’s lack of persecution of Jews (in contrast to the Continent) and the gratitude Jews showed in consequence for being in the land of freedom.  He ignores the great Wilberforce and instead invokes a bunch of obscure ratbags of the 1860s.  For he appears to have ingested the "received wisdom" of the self-hating British chattering classes that everything the British Empire did was automatically wrong, and that everything its subject peoples did was automatically right.  He ignores the fact that Britain exported parliamentary democracy to its colonies, and he has evidently imbibed the fiction that all cultures are created equal.

He implies that multiculturalism changed British attitudes from illiberalism to liberalism – when in truth some of the cultures represented are as hostile to liberalism as it is possible to get – hating secular democratic values, despising women, genitally mutilating girls, practising “honour” killings, persecuting gays, pursuing animist witchcraft that involves child sacrifice, indulging in explicit and often violent Jew-hatred, and delegitimizing Israel.  (The accompanying photos speak for themselves.)

In some ways, the rabbi's indictment of Britain is reminiscent of absurdities to be found on the website of the London-based Muslim Public Affairs Committee:

'Western States the real terrorists – not Muslims....
One must remember, it was not the Muslims that were responsible for such heinous crimes as the slave trade. [Their history is as dodgy as his!!!] ....
[ W]hen Britain went into India, ruling it for 200 years, massacring and imposing their rules upon the people, never integrating, never learning their languages and forcibly trying to convert its people to their customs and religion....
Much death and destruction has been committed by the British Government, yet it is British Muslims who label each other as terrorists, seeking to disassociate ourselves from fellow Muslims. It is not for us to disassociate ourselves from anyone, but rather British Muslims and the wider British population at large should hold their Government accountable over their foreign policies. We should be putting pressure upon our leaders to ensure such crimes against humanity are not repeated and that all forms of exploitation are ceased with immediate effect. It is not just for British Muslims to apologise....
We should not be seeking to apologise for anything, it is these war criminals that need to apologise to us and hang their heads in shame – not us.’ http://www.mpacuk.org/story/150211/stand-united-against-pimps-misery.html#ixzz1E94hkIfS
Elsewhere, Rabbi Athias-Robles has observed:

“You might have noticed that many of the sermons Rabbi Aaron [Goldstein] and I deliver have to do with the situation in Israel. Perhaps some might see them as political – beyond the remit of our task as a rabbi. Sometimes, it may seem that we mention to Israel too much. A few weeks ago I posted on my Facebook profile a link to an article about the enforced loyalty oath the Israeli government recently introduced for non-Jews seeking Israeli citizen, who are asked to pledge their allegiance to Israel as a Jewish state – an oath aimed mostly at Palestinians who marry Arab Israelis. Many people replied to the article I posted– some people who are usually very liberal wrote things like: It’s so easy to criticise Israel from abroad – if you want to change the country move there and vote, followed by a whole rant against Arab countries and Arab intolerance to Jews. On a similar note, when Mick Davis, head of the Jewish Leadership Council and a Zionist leader, decided to break the silence and speak out about the moral issues of the peace process, including the rights of minorities, settlements, etc. a wave of attacks ensued – he was using the language of our enemies, he was delegitimizing Israel, he had no right as a Diaspora Jew to speak out against the choices of the Israeli government. As Jews, we are expected to stay quiet – the raising of concerns equals a hateful attack against Israel”
And predictably goes on to defend his position. http://www.npls.org.uk/Sermons/New/Vayechi%205771.html

The unelected Mick Davis, by the way, is at it again, with the zealous cooperation of the Jewish Chronicle, in thral to the New Israel Fund.  (Robin Shepherd deals with this situation – and the Israel-is-an-apartheid-state canard – very nicely at http://www.robinshepherdonline.com/tag/mick-davis/)

Unlike most of their counterparts in Australia, Britain’s Liberal rabbis seem to have an ambivalent attitude towards the Jewish State. They seem to have a nineteenth-century mindset in some respects: Ma Yomru ha-Goyim? ("What will the non-Jew say?").  They have taken on the mantle of the "Gentlemen of the Mosaic persuasion".  Their full-bodied sense of Yiddishkayt is missing. And they seem to think that being left of centre religiously obligates a person to be left of centre politically. Israel is under existential threat, yet too many of them join the chorus of snipers. Their criticism, like Mick Davis’s, should be done in private, for their public condemnations serve the heinous purpose of Israel’s foes.

They remind me, indeed, of the Jacobin, famously described by George Canning as:
"A steady patriot of the world alone.  A friend to every country but his own."

Recently, British journalist Julie Burchill, known for her robust championship of Israel, revealed that she’s abandoned plans to convert to Judaism under the auspices of the Liberal movement. She’d been attending the Brighton Progressive Synagogue, but, as she explained in her final regular column for the Jewish Chronicle, the rabbi’s agenda drove her away:

‘You should know that the reason I'm stepping away for a while has nothing to do with the hysterical levels of abuse that greet any Gentile who expresses support for Israel; on the contrary, I very much enjoy a bit of a verbal scrap.
But don't get me wrong, my admiration for the Jews and Israel came first; the nasty name-calling is just a side benefit....
I realised that it wasn’t a Jew that I wanted to be, so much as a Zionist....
I began attending a shul, and took the first steps towards converting to Judaism, then threw in the towel on both.
Basically, I don't go to a synagogue on a Saturday morning to be preached at about how Islam is the equal of Judaism, and yet that's what I got the last time I was there – from a female, gay rabbi, already!
I'd love to see her walk into a mosque and tell the worshippers that Judaism was the equal of Islam, that women should be just as able to be preachers as men and that homosexuality is every bit as valid a personal choice as heterosexuality.
I wonder how many minutes she'd last?
Which makes my point completely: an intolerant religion is not the equal of a tolerant religion. And to say that it is, is surely pretzel logic of the most twisted kind.
I've also been back to Israel three times since my initial visit in 2004, and each time I have marvelled at the beauty and rudeness of its people.
At home I have witnessed the self-loathing Stockholm Syndrome of what my hero Howard Jacobson fingered in his Booker Prize-winning The Finkler Question as the ASHamed Jews, and came to the conclusion that it wasn't a Jew that I wanted to be so much as a Zionist.
And I can do this by helping to buy fire engines for frontline Israeli towns like Sderot, and by donating a good whack of cash each year to send care parcels to lone IDF soldiers - and still stay in bed with my husband of a Saturday without having to schlep off to a shul and receive lectures on the wonders of Islam.
Sorted!
Toffs For Terrorism or We Are All Hizbollah Now, Yah? Back in the summer I turned on the TV the day after the flotilla was floored, and there was a man called Lort-Phillips, bewailing the plight of his sister, one Alexandra Lort-Phillips.
A few days later a piece turned up on the society page of the Daily Mail explaining that Lort-Phillips is the great-niece of Dame Frances Campbell-Preston, a woman of the bedchamber (not as fun as it sounds) and friend of the late queen mother of England, who inexplicably claimed, "I am very proud of her. She is standing up for her principles."
Wow, from royalty-flunky to Hamas-groupie in two generations - that's the spirit that made this country great! At least, though, the old broad had the excuse of being 91 years old to spout such twaddle.
What was everyone else's excuse for sailing on the Ship of Fools?
The Jews: The Greatest Story Ever Told. You pick your team and you stay with them, through good times and bad. I may not be writing this column for awhile - but I'm not going anywhere.
L'hitraot!' http://www.thejc.com/comment-and-debate/columnists/42900/my-loyalties-wont-fade-away