Eretz Israel is our unforgettable historic homeland...The Jews who will it shall achieve their State...And whatever we attempt there for our own benefit will redound mightily and beneficially to the good of all mankind.(Theodor Herzl, DerJudenstaat, 1896)
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) With a liberal democratic political system operating under the rule of law, a flourishing market economy producing technological innovation to the benefit of the wider world, and a population as educated and cultured as anywhere in Europe or North America, Israel is a normal Western country with a right to be treated as such in the community of nations.... For the global jihad, Israel may be the first objective. But it will not be the last.(Friends of Israel Initiative)
Showing posts with label Antisemitism in Europe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Antisemitism in Europe. Show all posts
I've stumbled across this video from earlier this year, on Jews in Norway, which I think deserves a look.
'TV 2 Norway investigate Norwegian anti-Semitism. The word “Jew” is a
common insult in many communities in Norway. What role does the
neo-Nazis’, muslim immigrations and the – BDS (boycott Israel) movement
play – if any? And: Can old prejudices be joked away?'
In the wake of events in Charlottesville, the current issue of the Australian Jewish News (AJN) contains the results of an online poll among its readers: "Are you concerned about the rise of the far right?"
Those results, given in percentages, are 58 per cent responding in the affirmative, and 42 per cent in the negative.
Since in practice anyone can respond to these AJN polls (anti-Israel lefties sometimes alert their followers to them on social media, the better to distort the results) this may or may not represent a true cross-section of communal opinion.
At the same time, as an indication of communal vox populi, the oral answers of five named and photographed Jewish members of the public to the question posed in the poll are given on that same page. All five are indeed concerned about the rise of the far right, which is fair enough, but two of the five respondents appear to be somewhat confused:
"Yes I am. It is happening in Barcelona ..."
"It does concern me, but in Australia it's not as bad as the USA or Europe."
Such naivity. Such ignorance. Evidently, those respondents are unaware of the findings of the recently-published study by University of Oslo academic Dr Johannes Due Enstad entitled Antisemitic Violence in Europe, 2005-2015, which finds Muslims, not the far right, chiefly responsible for antisemitic hate crimes in every country except Russia.
'....Who is responsible for the attacks on Jews? In every country studied, except for Russia, the perpetrators are disproportionately of Muslim backgrounds. A British study cited in the University of Oslo report notes that the proportion of Muslim perpetrators increases in the wake of “trigger events” in the Middle East.
In what might be considered a clumsy attempt to downplay anti-Semitism, German authorities do not classify anti-Israeli incidents as anti-Semitism. This results in absurdity. A Muslim firebombing of a synagogue can be classified as an anti-Israeli event, but not anti-Semitic. If any country should know better, it should be Germany. Is Kristallnacht going to be reinterpreted as not anti-Semitism, but a demonstration for racial purity?
The only country where anti-Semitic incidents are not disproportionately perpetrated by Muslims is Russia, and it is the only country in the University of Oslo study where Jews do not fear to express their Jewish identity when appearing in public. This appears to perplex the study’s author, as Russia contains both large Jewish and Muslim populations.
Yet the issue is easily resolved. In Russia, the large Muslim and Jewish populations live in the same country, but are generally separated by a vast expanse of land. Most Muslims live in the Eurasian Caucasus region. Most Jews live in Moscow and Saint Petersburg....'
In 2015 no less than 10,000 Western European Jews made aliya, and many more are thinking of emigrating. The reason is not far to seek.
Below, a 78-minute video re antisemitism in the 21st century, and a 48-minute one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynktmneLRi4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5SjRxHJCQw
As so often, the depth of the burgeoning threats to European civilisation posed by replacement demography is excellently and articulately expressed by the courageous Douglas Murray; in this worthwhile 13-minute video he reminds his audience (approx. 5:04) that he has no Israel to which to escape:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=523UhYqYX_g
It is a lesson that, for their progeny's sake if not for their own, all Europeans (and other free peoples) should heed.
On 26 September former Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks delivered this magnificent keynote address entitled 'The Mutating Virus: Understanding Antisemitism" at the start of a conference on the future of Jewish
communities in Europe hosted by Martin Schulz, President of the European
Parliament. .
"Antisemitism is not about Jews. It is about antisemites. It is about people who cannot accept responsibility for their own failures and have instead to blame someone else....
The appearance of antisemitism in a culture is the first symptom of a disease, the early warning sign of collective breakdown. If Europe allows antisemitism to flourish, that will be the beginning of the end of Europe. And what I want to do in these brief remarks is simply to analyze a phenomenon full of vagueness and ambiguity, because we need precision and understanding to know what antisemitism is, why it happens, why antisemites are convinced that they are not antisemitic.
First let me define antisemitism. Not liking Jews is not antisemitism. We all have people we don’t like. That’s OK; that’s human; it isn’t dangerous. Second, criticizing Israel is not antisemitism.
I was recently talking to some schoolchildren and they asked me: is criticizing Israel antisemitism? I said No and I explained the difference. I asked them: Do you believe you have a right to criticize the British government? They all put up their hands.
Then I asked, Which of you believes that Britain has no right to exist? No one put up their hands. Now you know the difference, I said, and they all did....
The new antisemitism has mutated so that any practitioner of it can deny that he or she is an antisemite. After all, they’ll say, I’m not a racist. I have no problem with Jews or Judaism. I only have a problem with the State of Israel. But in a world of 56 Muslim nations and 103 Christian ones, there is only one Jewish state, Israel, which constitutes one-quarter of one per cent of the land mass of the Middle East. Israel is the only one of the 193 member nations of the United Nations that has its right to exist regularly challenged, with one state, Iran, and many, many other groups, committed to its destruction.
Antisemitism means denying the right of Jews to exist as Jews with the same rights as everyone else. The form this takes today is anti-Zionism.
Of course, there is a difference between Zionism and Judaism, and between Jews and Israelis, but this difference does not exist for the new antisemites themselves. It was Jews not Israelis who were murdered in terrorist attacks in Toulouse, Paris, Brussels and Copenhagen.
Anti-Zionism is the antisemitism of our time. [Emphasis added, here and below]
In the Middle Ages Jews were accused of poisoning wells, spreading the plague, and killing Christian children to use their blood. In Nazi Germany they were accused of controlling both capitalist America and communist Russia.
Today they are accused of running ISIS as well as America. All the old myths have been recycled, from the Blood Libel to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The cartoons that flood the Middle East are clones of those published in Der Sturmer one of the primary vehicles of Nazi propaganda between 1923 and 1945.
The ultimate weapon of the new antisemitism is dazzling in its simplicity. It goes like this.
The Holocaust must never happen again. But Israelis are the new Nazis; the Palestinians are the new Jews; all Jews are Zionists. Therefore the real antisemites of our time are none other than the Jews themselves.
And these are not marginal views. They are widespread throughout the Muslim world, including communities in Europe, and they are slowly infecting the far left, the far right, academic circles, unions, and even some churches.
Having cured itself of the virus of antisemitism, Europe is being reinfected by parts of the world that never went through the self-reckoning that Europe undertook once the facts of the Holocaust became known.
How do such absurdities come to be believed? This is a vast and complex subject, and I have written a book about it, but the simplest explanation is this. When bad things happen to a group, its members can ask one of two questions: “What did we do wrong?” or “Who did this to us?” The entire fate of the group will depend on which it chooses.
If it asks, “What did we do wrong?” it has begun the self-criticism essential to a free society. If it asks, “Who did this to us?” it has defined itself as a victim. It will then seek a scapegoat to blame for all its problems. Classically this has been the Jews.
Antisemitism is a form of cognitive failure, and it happens when groups feel that their world is spinning out of control. It began in the Middle Ages, when Christians saw that Islam had defeated them in places they regarded as their own, especially Jerusalem. That was when, in 1096, on their way to the Holy Land, the Crusaders stopped first to massacre Jewish communities in Northern Europe. It was born in the Middle East in the 1920s with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Antisemitism re-emerged in Europe in the 1870s during a period of economic recession and resurgent nationalism.
And it is re-appearing in Europe now for the same reasons: recession, nationalism, and a backlash against immigrants and other minorities. Antisemitism happens when the politics of hope gives way to the politics of fear, which quickly becomes the politics of hate.
This then reduces complex problems to simplicities. It divides the world into black and white, seeing all the fault on one side and all the victimhood on the other. It singles out one group among a hundred offenders for the blame. The argument is always the same. We are innocent; they are guilty. It follows that if we are to be free, they, the Jews or the state of Israel, must be destroyed. That is how the great crimes begin.
Jews were hated because they were different. They were the most conspicuous non-Christian minority in a Christian Europe. Today they are the most conspicuous non-Muslim presence in an Islamic Middle East. Antisemitism has always been about the inability of a group to make space for difference. No group that adopts it will ever, can ever, create a free society.
So I end where I began. The hate that begins with Jews never ends with Jews. Antisemitism is only secondarily about Jews. Primarily it is about the failure of groups to accept responsibility for their own failures, and to build their own future by their own endeavours. No society that has fostered antisemitism has ever sustained liberty or human rights or religious freedom. Every society driven by hate begins by seeking to destroy its enemies, but ends by destroying itself.
Europe today is not fundamentally antisemitic. But it has allowed antisemitism to enter via the new electronic media. It has failed to recognize that the new antisemitism is different from the old.
We are not today back in the 1930s. But we are coming close to 1879, when Wilhelm Marr founded the League of Anti-Semites in Germany; to 1886 when Édouard Drumont published La France Juive; and 1897 when Karl Lueger became Mayor of Vienna.
These were key moments in the spread of antisemitism, and all we have to do today is to remember that what was said then about Jews is being said today about the Jewish State.
The history of Jews in Europe has not always been a happy one. Europe’s treatment of the Jews added certain words to the human vocabulary: disputation, forced conversion, inquisition, expulsion, auto da fe, ghetto, pogrom and Holocaust, words written in Jewish tears and Jewish blood. Yet for all that, Jews loved Europe and contributed to it some of its greatest scientists, writers, academics, musicians, shapers of the modern mind.
If Europe lets itself be dragged down that road again, this will be the story told in times to come. First they came for the Jews. Then for the Christians. Then for the gays. Then for the atheists. Until there was nothing left of Europe’s soul but a distant, fading memory.
Today I have tried to give voice to those who have no voice. I have spoken on behalf of the murdered Roma, Sinti, gays, dissidents, the mentally and physically handicapped, and a million and a half Jewish children murdered because of their grandparents’ religion. In their name, I say to you: You know where the road ends. Don’t go down there again.
You are the leaders of Europe. Its future is in your hands. If you do nothing, Jews will leave, European liberty will die, and there will be a moral stain on Europe’s name that all eternity will not erase.
Back in January, in the immediate wake of the Charlie Hebdo and kosher supermarket bloodshed in Paris, this rabbi from Paris made a heartfelt commentary on the situation facing Jews in Europe, that is in his view so dire that he feels ill.
Comparing the source of antisemitism in Europe in our day to its source in the "Devil's Decade" of the 1930s, he warns that history seems set to repeat itself. It is not the majority that decides human history and the fates of nations, he maintains, but the minority. And what does a minority require in order to impose its will and its regime upon the majority, he asks: why, it requires the majority to cower, silent and supine.
His recommendation? I think you can guess.
This is a video that deserves watching (or listening to, for it consists entirely of a talking head) in its entirety. Rita, the translator, who is herself a blogger (see the credits at the beginning of the video) has done an outstanding job in providing the subtitles.
As for antisemitism in today's Europe, there's an interesting new article here
I read that article, and this by Marvellous Melanie, and shortly afterwards I saw this snap of keffiyeh-wearing Israel-hating Scottish lads and lassies, below. And the phrase "useful idiots" immediately and inexorably came to mind.
The quoted words in the header are those of Swedish Jewish community leader Lena Posner-Körösi, against the background of increased fears for the safety of her country's Jews following the recent violence in Paris and Copenhagen.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1u3faty5frs)
Meanwhile, writes veteran international Jewish leader and Jerusalem Post columnist Isi Leibler:
'Successive Israeli governments have failed miserably to meet the challenge of global anti-Semitism, not providing the leadership demanded of a Jewish state in these turbulent times and leaving Diaspora Jews to their own devices.
The global anti-Semitic tsunami, an unprecedented surge of feral hostility compounded by the Internet, emanates from a combination of factors: rabid Muslim anti-Semitism and violence, demonical anti-Israelism of the Left, and traditional cultural and radical Jew-hatred of the Right. It has impacted on Jewish communities everywhere but ironically is most acute in Europe, the continent drenched with Jewish blood during the Holocaust....
In the United States, the Goldene Medina, despite the strong public and congressional support for Israel, many Jews are stunned by the anti-Israeli hysteria generated by the Left and some liberal media and shocked by the toxic levels of anti-Semitism displayed on many college campuses.....
.Overall, Diaspora Jews are under enormous stress, confused and frequently divided as how to respond to the upsurge of anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic onslaughts.
The global Jewish bodies purporting to combat these vicious trends all have limitations and have proven unable to provide the necessary direction on a global basis....
It is now crucial to create an umbrella organization to serve as an ongoing forum to exchange views, provide direction, and determine and coordinate global strategies against anti-Semitism....
But this project should not merely be perceived as a support for Diaspora Jewry. Israel itself has a major vested interest in creating such a global consultative body. We are currently being overwhelmed in the war of ideas and it is incumbent upon us to identify the anti-Semitic elements in the campaigns that seek to demonize us.
As severe as it is, anti-Israelism and anti-Semitism in Europe and most countries is more rampant at the grass-roots level than is currently reflected in government policies. Should we fail to reverse the tide, governments pressured by their Muslim communities and other constituents increasingly radicalized against Israel will inevitably lead to a further downgrading of relations with Israel...."
(Incidentally, I've moved my "blog archive" from towards the bottom to towards the top of my sidebar.
I've done this because I occasionally write more than one blogpost per day, and sometimes the earlier post of the day tends to get overlooked in favour of the later one.
It's propoganda [sic], that's what it is', is the dismissive remark on social media by one of Australian Jewry's little clique of leftist Israel-bashers, referring to an excellent brief overview that the Executive Council of Australian Jewry's research officer, Julie Nathan has written regarding antisemitism in contemporary Europe.
In common with so many of his ilk (I'm not going to bother supplying him with oxygen by mentioning his name) this bloke seems much more interested in items that talk up "Islamophobia" in Europe, and indeed in rapping over the knuckles those who maintain that mass Muslim immigration to the West is not good for the Jews.
In her article, Julie Nathan reminds readers of the antipodean J-Wire site of the kinds of events that have made Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu remind the Jews of Europe that Israel offers them refuge.
As many Jews have been quick to point out, on social media and elsewhere, headlines such as that pictured in the London newspaper Metro (see right), which is given away free outside Tube stations,ironically place more emphasis on the furore Netanyahu's remarks have fomented than to the vicious,growing Jew-hatred which prompted his remarks.
Articles such as this one in the Financial Times, which argues that Bibi's call is alarmist, and that there is a false analogy between the situation in Europe today and Europe in the "Devil's Decade" might well be right, but they err if they take too complacent and sanguine a view, whether towards the extent of antisemitism in certain countries or towards the will and the capability of certain countries to protect their Jewish citizens.
The man who made the video below did not choose to make aliya. He and his family headed across the Herring Pond instead. But his words, combined with the accompanying images, convey so very graphically the circumstances which have convinced a Jewish lover of the land of his birth to leave it, despite a heavy heart, for the sake of his family:
Observes Julie Nathan:
'Seventy years after the Holocaust, the
antisemitic virus has re-emerged from the extreme margins of society to
which it had been banished after the Holocaust. Not only is antisemitism
out in the open, it is brazenly public and proud. The main difference
between 1930s antisemitism and the 21st century strain is that in the
1930s it was governments and politicians which incited the hatred and
perpetrated the murder. Today, the perpetrators are a combination of the
far Right, the anti-Zionist Left, and major segments of Europe’s Muslim
population....
Having been predominantly either bystanders or
perpetrators during the Nazi attempt to murder every Jew in Europe,
Europeans are again in a situation where their Jewish citizens are on
the edge of another great abyss. The question remains: How will they
respond this time? Will they acquire the backbone to defend and protect
their Jewish citizens against murderous anti-Jewish ideologies? Or will
they take the easy, but self-destructive, route and excuse the
antisemites, appease the murderous ideology at work in Europe and
elsewhere, and watch silently as the Jews are driven from Europe’s
shores over the coming decade? '
She writes, inter alia:
'The Danish Prime Minister, Helle Thorning-Schmidt, has condemned the
attack on Jews as an attack on democracy. The French Prime Minister,
Manuel Valls, last month expressed concern at the growing numbers of
Jews emigrating from France as they flee antisemitic violence. Even the
British Home Secretary, Theresa May, expressed concern that Jews, no
longer feeling safe in Britain, are preparing to leave. Other countries
in Europe are also facing growing antisemitic violence and are having
difficulty protecting their Jewish citizens against harassment, assault,
bombings and murder.
In Belgium, the Jewish Museum in Brussels
was attacked and four people murdered in May 2014. In 2013, the last
remaining Jewish school in Brussels instructed its students to remove
their kippot (Jewish religious head covering) on their way to and from
school, and only wear it safely within the confines of the fortress-like
school building, due to the threat of physical attack.
In
Holland, in late 2010, Frits Bolkestein, a prominent Dutch politician,
advised Jews to leave Holland as it is no longer safe for Jews to live
there. Earlier that year, the police in Holland had instituted a system
of décoy police, where Dutch policeman dressed up as Orthodox Jews and
walked the streets, in a bid to arrest or deter those who would assault
Jews.
In Denmark in 2009, a school refused to enrol Jewish
students as it could not protect them from harassment and assault. Other
Danish school principals supported the move. In Norway, a survey by the
Oslo Municipality in 2011 found that 33% of Jewish students in the town
were physically threatened or abused by other high school teens at
least two to three times a month. The groups that suffered the next
highest amount of bullying were Buddhists at 10%, “Others” at 7%, and
Muslims at 5%.
In Sweden, the Mayor of Malmo, where many Swedish
Jews live, blamed the Jews themselves for assaults on Jews and
firebombings of synagogues. Last year, a planned city walk by Jews and
non-Jews to protest antisemitism in Sweden had to be cancelled due to
security threats and the inability of police to ensure their safety.
France
has experienced the most egregious acts of antisemitic violence in
Europe since World War Two. In 2006, a young French Jew, Ilan Halimi, of
North African background was kidnapped and tortured for three weeks for
being a Jew. He died of his injuries. His attackers were French
Muslims, also of North African background. In Toulouse in 2012, a rabbi
and three Jewish children, aged under nine, were shot dead at a Jewish
school by Mohammed Merah, a French Muslim of North African background.
Jews comprise only 1% of the French population, yet 50% of racist
attacks in France are against Jews....
A study in Europe in 2013 found that “26% of Jews
have suffered from antisemitic harassment at least once in the past
year, 34% experienced such harassment in the past five years, 5%
reported that their property was intentionally vandalized because they
are Jewish, about 7% were physically hurt or threatened in the past five
years.” These figures do not include the acts of violence and vandalism
of synagogues and other Jewish communal institutions.
Despite
the focus on Islamophobia by the media and in political discourse over
the last fifteen years, the reality is that attacks against Muslims are
significantly less frequent than attacks against Jews. The evidence
produced through studies by anti-hate organizations, police reports on
hate crimes, and monitors of internet hate, show that the major targets
of abuse and violence in Europe are Jews....
In Britain, the
Scottish government compiles extensive reports on hate crimes from
police records. Hate crime statistics in the Religion category shows
high levels of attacks on Catholics (57-58%) and Protestants (36-40%),
and much lower levels against Muslims (2-2%) and Jews (1-2%) over the
2011 and 2012 periods. However, these overall percentages, in the 2012
statistics for example, translate into quite a different picture when
the population numbers of each religious category in Scotland is taken
into account.
These figures show that there is one anti-Jewish
hate incident for every 461 Jews, one anti-Muslim hate incident per
2,240 Muslims, one per 1,579 Catholics, and one for every 6,080
Protestants. Thus, Jews are subject to a much higher rate of attack.
Jews are several times more likely than Muslims to suffer hate
incidents, and are twenty times more likely than Christians to suffer
hate incidents.
The International Network Against Cyber Hate
(INACH) conducts a country by country review and report on racist and
religious bigotry on the European internet. According to INACH’s
studies, prior to 2002, antisemitism had been the largest single type of
hate on the European internet. After the terrorist attacks of 11
September 2001, there was an increase in anti-Muslim content; but there
was a much larger increase in anti-Jewish content. From 2002,
antisemitism became the absolute largest category of hate on the
European internet. Incidents of anti-Jewish hate outweighed the combined
aggregate of every other form of hate.
INACH’s study showed that
up until the second half of 2000 virtually all antisemitism reported
online was from ‘classical’ sources of antisemites and/or racists (eg
neo-Nazis). By 2002, most antisemitism and Holocaust denial no longer
came from ‘classic’ antisemites but from Muslim and left-wing web
forums....'
And she maintains:
'The watchword is Toulouse. When
three French soldiers (two of North African background and one of
Caribbean background) and four Jews (three of them young children) were
murdered in March 2012, the French people came out in their thousands to
protest the murders. A massive anti-racist banner read: “In France, we
kill Blacks, Jews, and Arabs”. However, when the murderer was found to
be Mohammed Merah, a French Muslim of North African background, the
protests and anti-racism banners disappeared. While ever the murderer
was believed to be an indigenous French person, of Right-wing racist
politics, the masses of France were eager to protest against murderous
racism in France. However, once the murderer was identified as a Muslim
jihadist, the protesting masses melted away unable or unwilling to
condemn murder when committed by a Muslim jihadist.
In a perverse
response to Merah’s murders, there was an exponential increase in
physical assaults on French Jews, with several being hospitalized.
Bashings with iron bars and other assaults were perpetrated against
Jews. The initial shock and horror of the murder of little Jewish
children were transformed into a mania by Islamist extremists to emulate
Merah, to give him hero status and to glorify his murderous deeds.
After
this latest murder in Copenhagen, and the murders in Paris only last
month, it remains to be seen whether Europe makes a decision to defend
and protect its Jewish citizens. Many Jews fear that European
governments will instead cave in to threats and appeasement and watch
their Jews pack their bags and leave.'
"Not antisemitism", huh? Stuttgart, Germany, this July
This week marks the 75th anniversary of the outbreak of the Second World War, and with that in mind Arsen Ostrovsky observes, inter alia, in the Times of Israel:
'When chants of “death to the Jews” or “Jews get out” are common, violent
assaults are rising and there are increasing calls for boycotts against
Israeli and now kosher products, one cannot but help compare the
situation with the 1930’s....
The difference ... is that today’s anti-Semitism is being waged against not only Jews as individuals, but also in the vilification and assault on Israel’s legitimacy, as the Jew among the nations, with false claims and malicious distortions of truth cloaked as acceptable criticism of Zionism and Israel....
In fact, for today’s anti-Semite, the term ‘Jew’ and ‘Israeli’ are interchangeable. They are one and the same. This was demonstrated perhaps most aptly by a recent pro-Palestinian protestor in Geneva, who charged at a Synagogue, with a sign exclaiming “Every Synagogue is an Israeli Embassy.”
Many Jews across Europe are now increasingly being forced to change their way of life, hide their identities and separate from their Judaism out of fear of anti-Semitism. Some are even openly questioning: is there even a future still left for them in Europe? ...'
Consequently, Ostrovsky offers a five-way strategy to counteract the problem (read his article here)
Below is a video regarding antisemitism in Europe.
It shows the American Jewish Committee's Director of International Jewish Affairs, Rabbi Andrew Baker (from whose introduction comes the quotation in my header) moderating a panel discussion featuring the consuls general of Spain (Juan Martinez Salazar), Sweden (David E.R. Dangoor), Hungary (Karoly Dan) and Poland (Ewa Junczyk Ziomecka).
It's a serious discussion and a long one, and probably best listened to in installments, while doing the dishes, the ironing, polishing the car, or soaking in the bath.
And see this disturbing (much shorter) video on antisemitism on American campuses here
Meanwhile, for an intriguing assessment of who came out best from Operation Protective Edge, see Elliott Abrams's substantial article here
Here's the highly articulate and characteristically forthright veteran international Jewish leader and Jerusalem Post columnist Isi Leibler in conversation with Rabbi Mark Golub on Shalom TV. The topics range from the kidnapping of the three teenage Israelis in the West Bank, to the New York Metropolitan Opera's planned restaging of the despicable opera "The Death of Klinghoffer", to the crisis of European antisemitism (on which Leibler wrote so perceptively recently here) and the head-in-the-sand attitude of what passes for the Anglo-Jewish leadership.
As Golub remarks, "Isi ... nobody says it like you do".
And talking of European antisemitism, there is a disturbing report here
The "Aussie Salute" (for the benefit of the uninitiated) is the swift sweeping gesture in front of the face frequently made on hot days Down Under by persons desperately attempting to ward off flies.
This picture shows a grinning trio making a salute outside the Sydney Jewish Museum that is definitely not the Aussie Salute.
Fun in the sun: a sinister new twist on an ugly old theme
While the arm motion made by this trio is undoubtedly inexplicable to most onlookers it appears that it is, as the Times of Israel explains here, an abominable racist gesture that has recently caught on bigtime among Jew-haters in Europe. It is the "quenelle signal," we're told,
'a neo-Nazi gesture, regarded by anti-Semitism researchers as a modern day Nazi salute, is rapidly spreading among anti-Semites in Europe and is being used by individuals to fly under the radar of strict anti-hate speech laws in parts of the continent.
The “quenelle” signal, extending one’s right hand toward the ground while the left hand grasps the shoulder, was devised by Dieudonné M’bala M’bala, a controversial French comedian who has been condemned in court several times for anti-Semitic remarks.
Over the past two months, the trend has gained popularity, prompting hundreds of Europeans to post online pictures of themselves performing the “heil” like salute. Many of the images were taken at sensitive sites such as in the Auschwitz concentration camp, the Anne Frank House and even the Western Wall....'
The photo that I've reproduced above is one of the truly shocking collection shown herewhich demonstrate the depths of depravity to which some people will sink in order to mock and vilify the Jews.
It's becoming shriller, the morally bankrupt insistence of the repellent Israel-demonising Left and its cheerleaders of all stripes that their rabid hostility to the State of Israel does not constitute antisemitism.
And with antisemitism significantly on the rise in Europe, as shown in this BBC synopsis of the European Union Fundamental Rights Agency's [FRA's] just released major report (to which it gives the link), it's little wonder that Israeli parliamentarian Dr Shimon Ohayon, who chairs the Knesset's Lobby for the Struggle Against Antisemitism, has been stressing in meetings with representatives of the European Union, including members of the European Parliament and the EU's deputy envoy to Israel, that the EUMC Working Definition of Antisemitism (text here) should be fully implemented by all European agencies.
"Antisemitism in Europe is at its greatest peak since the end of the
Second World War and there are now places on the continent where Jews
can no longer live and many others where no outward expressions of
Jewishness are tolerated. Europe needs to
deal more seriously with this rise in hate which is creating an
untenable situation for the Jews of Europe. However, to really fight
Antisemitism, the European Union first needs a fundamental definition
which law enforcement agencies and judicial bodies can use to prosecute
those who target Jews and Jewish institutions.
I call
on all relevant European agencies to recognize and legally ratify the
Working Definition of Antisemitism as adopted in 2005.
It's back in Germany
The lack of a
unified and vigorous definition means that anti-Semites will continue to
act with impunity knowing that their actions can not be prosecuted,” MK
Ohayon. “We must not allow anti-Semites to define hate. [Emphasis added]Jews need
protection before the law and the law needs guidance or it will be
rendered useless and irrelevant.
There are many
anti-Semites who have been fighting against the ‘Working Definition’ for
many years so they can continue their attacks on Jews and the Jewish
State. The European Union needs to tell these people that their racism
and hatred will no longer be acceptable and their actions will be
punishable before the law."
Ohayon's call has been echoed by the Simon Wiesenthal Center. In a letter to the EU's Foreign Affairs chief, Baroness Ashton, written from Paris on 6 November, the Center's director for international relations, Dr Shimon Samuels, points out:
In the land of L'Affaire Dreyfus
"The BBC Trust, in addressing a complaint, had upheld the definition, in characterizing as anti-Semitic, a broadcaster’s critique of comments on Israel made by a Member of the UK Parliament. The Trust has now, apparently, reversed its ruling following the Definition’s removal, claiming:
‘A press officer at the FRA has explained that this was a discussion paper and was never adopted by the EU as a working definition, although it has been on the FRA website until recently when it was removed during a clear-out of non-official documents. The link to the FRA site provided by the complainant in his appeal no longer works.’
.... [He recalled the] hard work in negotiating the document and the delay in its publication. Nevertheless, its acceptance and dissemination represented an achievement for the EU in the struggle against anti-Semitism. Indeed, its removal is even more disconcerting just as the FRA is about to issue a further study of the worrying rise in anti-Jewish attacks across Europe."
A dark sentiment in Edinburgh
Emphasising how 'especially disturbing it is to read the satisfaction of [the despicable website] “Electronic Intifada” that the Jews seem to have been robbed of an EU defence mechanism [example by Ben White here],' he remarked pertinently:
"One can only speculate the reaction to a similar move related to Islamophobia."
Adding his voice to the demand is Dr Moshe Kantor, president of the European Jewish Congress, who, notes the BBC synopsis, states:
A darker one still on a north London pavement
"the fact that a quarter of Jews are not able to express their Jewishness because of fear should be a watershed moment for the continent of Europe and the European Union.
The Jewish reality in Europe is of great concern and the authorities need to deal with incidents of hate and intolerance in a holistic manner, to really combat these manifestations before it is too late.
We would like to see concrete steps being taken, including creating legislation to specifically deal with anti-Semitism and racism, bolstering law enforcement agencies and ensure a zero-tolerance approach to anti-Semitism, even, and perhaps specifically, when opinion-shapers and decision-makers engage in these forms of hate."
When, incidentally, will the BBC, so politically correct in most things, adopt this spelling of antisemitism, one that, favoured by the Vidal Sassoon Centre, has been in use for a number of years, and which expresses the fact that since there's no such force as "semitism" there is no counter to that non-existent force?
Ben White reacts ...
(Regarding the rise of antisemitism as revealed by the FRA, Jonathan Sacerdoti has a well worth reading article here)
'For years, some Jewish leaders entertained delusory expectations concerning the rise of Islam in Europe. Some believed that a more religiously diverse Europe would conduce to an even more secure place for Judaism in the long term. Others thought that by joining the fight against such conventionally defined evils as “anti-immigration bigotry,” “anti-Arab racism,” and “anti-Islamic prejudice,” European Jews would earn the affection and gratitude of Islam at large and perhaps even contribute to peace between Israel and its neighbors. Still others were of the view that Muslims would gradually become integrated and assimilated into the European mainstream, just like Jews in the past.
Such hopes are long gone. The sad fact is that many European Muslims subscribe to the unreconstructed forms of anti-Semitism that are prevalent in the Muslim world at large, and are impervious to any kind of Holocaust-related education. In today’s Europe, hard-core anti-Jewish and anti-Israel activity, from harassment in the street or at school to arson and murder, is mostly the doing of Muslims.'
So writes French journalist Michel Gurfinkiel, in an absolute stunner of an essay asking whether there is a long-term future for Jews in Europe.
He continues:
'Another, opposite set of delusions is also gone: namely, that European Jews could easily or safely take part in a broad alliance against radical Islam. True, there is no doubt that most ethnic Europeans feel as threatened by Islam as do most Jews. A Tilder/Institut Montaigne poll released in April this year found that, with one exception, all religions in France are regarded positively; the one outlier, Islam, is regarded negatively by fully 73 percent of Frenchmen. According to another poll, by Ipsos/Le Monde, 74 percent find Islam “intolerant” and 80 percent believe it is “forcing its ways on French society at large.” A parallel poll conducted in Germany last year yielded similar results, with 70 percent associating Islam with “fanaticism and radicalism,” 64 percent calling it “prone to violence,” and 60 percent citing its penchant for “revenge and retaliation.” In addition, 80 percent of Germans think Islam “deprives women of their rights” and 53 percent foresee a battle between Islam and Christianity.
Is there any comfort to be drawn by European Jews from such findings, on the grounds that, for a change, a different minority has been singled out for aspersion? Alas, there is none. For a variety of reasons and out of a variety of motives—one might list among them the upsurge of an undifferentiated European xenophobia, combined in this case with a felt need to deflect the fear and resentment of Muslims onto an easier target— many ethnic French, Germans, and other Europeans are now of the opinion that Judaism, too, is an alien creed, and must be duly countered or curtailed. In surveys, they point to external similarities between Jews and Muslims: related Semitic languages, insistence on ritually processed food and ritual slaughtering, circumcision, and gender separation. Two-fifths of Britons and up to three-quarters of Germans now oppose circumcision. Last year, after a medical mishap involving a Muslim circumcision, a German court banned the practice altogether for minors; it took parliamentary action to make it legal again.
Ritual slaughtering, kosher as well as hallal, is likewise under threat in Europe. Almost three-quarters of Frenchmen disapprove of it, and almost one-half of Britons advocate a complete ban. Indeed, the practice is already prohibited in five European countries. The most recent to join the ranks is Poland where, only a few months ago, a sparkling new Museum of the History of the Polish Jews opened to great acclaim in Warsaw. “When [Poles and Jews] look in the same direction,” gushed a Polish Jewish businessman at the lavish inauguration ceremonies, “it’s great for [Jews], great for Poland, and great for the world.” Now, in a bitter irony that Samuel Sandler would recognize and appreciate, Poland has effectively banned the production of kosher meat.
Some political figures have rushed to condone and encourage these developments. Last year, François Fillon, the prime minister of France in the conservative Nicolas Sarkozy administration, urged both Muslims and Jews to renounce “ancestral traditions with not much meaning nowadays,” like kosher and hallal slaughtering. Marine Le Pen, the leader of the far-right National Front, who came in third in the 2012 French presidential race, suggested in Le Monde that both the Islamic female veil and the Jewish male kippah (yarmulke) should be banned in public. In a TV interview on the same day, she conceded that the kippah is “not a problem” in France, but pressed Jews to adjust to its banning anyway as “a small sacrifice” since “laws must apply to all.”
But evenhandedness in these matters is absurd, and wholly unjust. Punctiliousness in ritual observance is far more central to traditional Judaism than to Islam, and there are already many instances where, as the researcher Dov Maimon has detailed, the religious rights of Jews have been set aside by European governments. Above all, putting Jews in the same category as Muslims in order to appear evenhanded requires pretending that they are two of a kind when it comes to the problems each presents to civic and social life in Europe, to democracy, and to Western values. This way lies surrender to blackmail and, eventually, conflict without end.
Even worse scenarios may be contemplated. Real life is often circular: the farther you travel in one direction, the closer you come to those traveling in the opposite direction. What about a nightmare fusion, at some point in the future, of an anti-Semitic Left, an anti-Semitic Right, and an anti-Semitic Islam? In the case of France, there are ominous precedents: many Frenchmen who started out as fierce anti-German patriots in the late-19th century ended as pro-German activists or collaborationists in the 1930s and early 40s. “Better Hitler than Blum,” went a slogan of French pro-German appeasers at the time of Munich (the reference was to Léon Blum, a Jew and then the socialist prime minister of France). Many right-wingers might feel closer today to the stern creed of Islam than to either Zionism, globalism, or the flaccid morals of liberal democracy.
Alternatively, many prewar left-wing anti-racists and philo-Semites were eventually seduced by Hitler’s “socialist” credentials, and accepted anti-Semitism as part of the package. Following the same pattern, today’s European Left and far Left tend to cultivate Muslim voters at any cost in order to gain an edge over the Right. And indeed, in the 2012 presidential and parliamentary elections, 86 percent of French Muslims voted for the Left, probably enough to ensure a win in both races. In another exquisite irony, a cottage industry of European academics and intellectuals has taken to promoting Muslims as Europe’s “new Jews” and indicting present-day Jews for betraying their “universalist” mission on earth by “regressing” to a reactionary ethnocentrism.
As for Muslim anti-Semitism, it has been intimately connected with classic European anti-Semitism for more than a century, and has massively borrowed the latter’s doctrines and tropes, from the blood libel to Holocaust denial to the crazed conspiracy-mongering of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The two brands share a common language, and each sees in the other a mirror image of itself. Much money has also circulated between them. Just as fascist and Nazi funds helped Arab and Iranian anti-Jewish activists in the past, so Arab and Iranian money has been lavished on all stripes of European anti-Semites in our time....'
Read (and contemplate) the entire article here and the response by Daniel Johnson here
"In May 2007 a small group of religious leaders met in the E.U.
headquarters in Brussels with the three most significant leaders of
Europe: Angela Merkel, German Chancellor and at the time president of
the European Council; Jose-Manuel Barroso, president of the European
Commission; and Hans-Gert Pöttering, President of the European
Parliament.
The meeting was one of those semiformal occasions at which little is
said, and a great deal of time taken in saying it. Concerned at the
return of anti-Semitism to Europe within living memory of the Holocaust,
I decided that the time had come to break protocol and speak plainly,
even bluntly.
I gave the shortest speech of my life. Sitting directly opposite the
three leaders, I said this:
"Jews and Europe go back a long way. The
experience of Jews in Europe has added several words to the human
vocabulary -- words like expulsion, public disputation, forced
conversion, inquisition, auto-da-fe, blood libel, ghetto and pogrom,
without even mentioning the word Holocaust. That is the past. My concern
is with the future. Today the Jews of Europe are asking whether there
is a future for Jews in Europe, and that should concern you, the leaders
of Europe"....
So recalled the Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of Britain and the Commonwealth, Lord Sacks, earlier this year, against the backdrop of Germany's assault on circumcision. He went on:
It's back, in Budapest
"I have argued for some years that an assault on Jewish life always
needs justification by the highest source of authority in the culture at
any given age. Throughout the Middle Ages the highest authority in
Europe was the Church. Hence anti-Semitism took the form of Christian
anti-Judaism.
In the post-enlightenment Europe of the 19th century the highest
authority was no longer the Church. Instead it was science. Thus was
born racial anti-Semitism, based on two disciplines regarded as science
in their day: the "scientific study of race" and the Social Darwinism of
Herbert Spencer and Ernst Haeckel. Today we know that both of these
were pseudo-sciences, but in their day they were endorsed by some of the
leading figures of the age.
Since Hiroshima and the Holocaust, science no longer holds its
pristine place as the highest moral authority. Instead, that role is
taken by human rights. It follows that any assault on Jewish life -- on
Jews or Judaism or the Jewish state -- must be cast in the language of
human rights. Hence the by-now routine accusation that Israel has
committed the five cardinal sins against human rights: racism,
apartheid, ethnic cleansing, attempted genocide and crimes against
humanity. This is not because the people making these accusations
seriously believe them -- some do, some don't. It is because this is the
only form in which an assault on Jews can be stated today."
This week, coincidentally not long after a rabbi was brutally attacked (by youths of Arab origin) on a Berlin street and his six-year-old daughter threatened with murder, the second phase of research undertaken online towards a major study of
antisemitism in Europe gets underway.
Says Ioannis Dimitrakopoulos, who heads the Department for Equality and Citizen’s
Rights at the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), which commissioned the research,:
"Antisemitism
remains an issue of concern today, not only to Jews, but to everyone in
the EU. The ways in which it manifests itself vary according to time
and place, and it affects Jews living in the EU in different ways. The
FRA is conducting this survey to collect reliable and comparable data on
antisemitism. This type of robust evidence will assist EU institutions
and national governments in taking the necessary measures that will
ensure that the rights of Jewish people are fully respected, protected
and fulfilled across the EU, and the survey has been specifically
designed with this goal in mind."
Adds Jonathan Boyd, Executive Director of the UK-based Institute for Jewish Policy Research (JPR), which is conducting the survey in partnership with Ipsos MORI, and with the involvement of well-known experts in Britain, Israel, and elsewhere:
"It
is clear to all observers of contemporary Jewish life that antisemitism
continues to be a major preoccupation and worry in Jewish communal
circles. If it is ever to be effectively tackled, it is essential to
have shared, reliable data. This survey is designed to provide that
data: this is an important and unique opportunity for thousands of
European Jews to share their experiences and voice their concerns with
policy makers working at the highest European and national levels."
In the heart of Auld Reekie
The survey, whose results will be published next year, will involve respondents in Belgium, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Romania, Sweden and the UK. It's looking at "first-hand examples of antisemitic
harassment and violence, as well as the extent to which Jews feel safe
and secure in Europe today, how they characterize antisemitism, and
whether or not they perceive it to be a growing threat" and it also investigates "how and whether incidents are being reported, and levels of
awareness among European Jews about their legal rights."
Data collected "will provide important evidence both for European Union and national policy makers, as well as for national and European Jewish organisations concerned with security and antisemitism" and will be used by all these "to tackle discrimination and hate crime against Jews, as well as rights awareness and under-reporting of incidents".
For further information (including, it appears, in Hebrew and Russian), and to participate in the online survey, see here
"The Palestinian population of the West Bank and Gaza Strip has long had some of the highest growth rates in the world, due to a combination of high fertility and low mortality. Although fertility has recently declined, the age structure of the population implies that the brisk population growth will continue over the coming years."
No, that's not a partisan of the Zionist Entity talking. The words (which convey the truth) are those of the authors of a report produced under the auspices of Fafo, an anti-Israel NGO in Norway, the country whose political elite is arguably the most antisemitic in Europe. Given those circumstances, I guess there's no better confirmation of the facts than that.
Yet. despite that thriving demographic situation, a belief has taken hold among a significant percentage of Europeans that Israel is engaged in a "war of extermination" against the Palestinian Arabs.
A newly issued survey of 1000 Europeans in each of eight countries (8000 persons in toto), undertaken by the German-based Friedrich Ebert Foundation and entitled Intolerance, Prejudice and Discrimination, shows that about 40 per cent of respondents believe the extermination myth. The breakdown by country ranges from 63 per cent of respondents in Poland to 38 per cent in Italy. Other percentages are: Portugal 49, Germany 48, Britain 42, Hungary 41, Holland 39.
For further information about the results of the survey (which also shows attitudes to Muslims, by the way) see here and here.
Clearly, the results relating to Israel indicate that the constant demonisation of Israel in the mass media is having a baleful effect.
The authors note that "the data ... shows antisemitism often appearing in the guise of criticism of Israel" and that
"Antisemitic criticism of Israel comes close to majority support in all European countries.
In that context we also need to discuss whether secondary antisemitism – refusal to acknowledge the crimes of the Holocaust – has taken the place of traditional antisemitism."
The leftwing Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz is to be condemned for the putrid if unwitting part it plays in fuelling all of this, as glimpsed in this example.
This is a probing look at contemporary European antisemitism. Among the experts interviewed are Professor Robert Wistrich, who points out that Jewish communities feel more anxious now than at any time since the Holocaust, Dr Manfred Gerstenfeld, who speaks of "the new antisemitism against the collective Jew, Israel" that has been stirred by leftists and Muslims, and Melanie Phillips, who cites the contribution the media has made, with its constant demonisation of Israel. The video includes disturbing images and facts.
Recently, Berlin-based journalist Benjamin Weinthal, a Fellow of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, observed, in an article entitled “Dangers of Ignoring the contrasts in Euro hatreds," which appeared in last week's Jewish Chronicle, that
Eurabian Plights: A Scene in Brussels
‘It is now a commonplace in Europe to regard antisemitism and the more recent phenomenon, "Islamophobia", as much of a muchness. Yet there are important historical distinctions between the hatred of Jews and anti-Muslim prejudice. While European Muslims are without question subject to discrimination and violence, no reasonable observer could claim that they face the prospect of a Final Solution-style extermination plan....
Last month, Richard Herzinger, of the German daily Die Welt, neatly captured the wrongheadedness of Europe's new political conviction when he stated that "it is not 'Islamophobia' that is the antisemitism of the 21st century, but antisemitism."
Writing in Libération last November, the French philosopher Pascal Bruckner noted that the idea of Islamophobia originated in revolutionary Iran. In Bruckner's view, allegations of Islamophobia allow Islamic radicals to blunt criticism of extremist Islam and rationalise the rejection of secular Western values. In short, "Islamophobia" is a gagging order. But ... Bruckner and the few journalists and academics who question the rhetoric of Islamophobia are a minority.
Eurabian Plights: A Message from Copenhagen
The fact is, European societies have gone to great lengths to stifle any expression of anti-Islamic sentiment – even, some might say, at the expense of freedom of speech.
In 2008, for instance, the right-wing extremist Pro Cologne political party organised an anti-Islam conference. Thousands of demonstrators from all walks life took to the streets in protest against this "Stop Islam" event, prompting the city of Cologne to pull the plug on it.
By contrast, when four years earlier Walter Hermann set up his so-called ‘Cologne Wailing Wall’ exhibit – which includes a cartoon of a man wearing a Star-of-David bib and an American flag while devouring a Palestinian boy and holding a knife that bears the word "Gaza", alongside him a glass filled with blood – in Cathedral Square, the bustling pedestrian zone in the middle of the city, it was allowed to stand without protest.
Eurabian Plights: In Old London Town
.... Writing in the weekly Freitag, journalist Sabine Pamperrien recently described critics of the equating of Islamophobia with antisemitism as Winkeladvokaten – loosely translatable as "shyster lawyers", a term that the Nazis used to degrade Jewish lawyers during the Third Reich.
The same description was applied to the German left-wing politician, Gregor Gysi, by an Austrian neo-fascist and convert to Islam, Robert Schwarzbauer, who specifically branded Gysi a "shyster lawyer of Zionism" for his efforts to combat his party's anti-Israeli platform.
A significant contrast between antisemitism and Islamophobia – which the merging of them dangerously ignores – is that the former manages to bring together such uneasy bedfellows as radical leftists, fanatical Muslims and right-wing extremists.
.... German-Jewish philosophers Theodor W. Adorno and Max Horkheimer argued that the crimes of the Holocaust created such profound guilt among some Germans that they tend to ignore antisemitism, blame the Jews for the Holocaust, and hold Israel to moral standards they apply to no other country.
A University of Bielefeld survey last year found that 57 per cent of Germans questioned agreed with the statement that "Israel is conducting a war of extermination against the Palestinians".
Conflating antisemitism with anti-Muslim thinking may serve as a release for German guilt. But it has dangerous consequences for European Jews and undermines the legitimate fight against radical Islamic terrorists who threaten Europeans of all faiths and backgrounds.’
I can think of other reasons why conflating antisemitism and “Islamophobia” is invalid. Jews, who have have been part of European society for over a millennia, have always abided by the tenet that “The Law of the Land is the Law,” have never allowed their religious beliefs and observances to encroach upon the public domain, do not proselytise, and needless to say there is no equivalent of Jihad in Judaism. The "new antisemitism" of the nineteenth century – the rise of political antisemitic movements culminating in the obscenity of Nazism – was predicated on the perception of Jews as agents of modernity, whereas "Islamophobia" is predicated on the perception of Muslims as agents of pre-modernity. And of terror.
It’s a cardinal principle of democratic societies that all citizens – no matter what their religion or ethnicity – must be subject to a single corpus of law: the same law must govern all. When Jews, who established a surreptitious communal presence in England during Tudor times, broke cover during the Cromwellian Protectorate and successfully requested toleration, which they did also following the restoration of the monarchy in 1660, there was no question that they would be exempt from the legal system of England and Wales. To be sure, there are religious courts – batei din – that determine certain issues in accordance with Jewish law (Halakhah) but these function within the framework of religion – and in no way impinge upon the public sphere or rival the law of the United Kingdom.
In Britain and in other pluralistic democracies, religion is a matter of private conscience; it does not equate with citizenship, nor with nationality. The Church of England may still be the Established Church, but apart from the requirement that monarchs and their spouses, must belong to it, the days when members of other faiths were impeded by their non-Anglicanism from participating equally in public life, have long gone. Nonconformists and Roman Catholics were emancipated in the 1820s, and Jews finally won the right to sit in Parliament in 1858. Jews could already serve as municipal office-holders and as commissioned officers in the armed services, and all impediments to their civic equality had gone by 1891.
The situation on the Continent was different. There, Jews faced specific discriminatory and disabling legislation that had not existed across the Channel since the reign of Edward the First (who of course expelled all Jews from his realm in 1290). On the Continent, Jews had to win freedom from compulsory ghettos and from draconian debarring laws in order to take their places as citizens.
Before Napoleon would grant citizenship to the Jews of France, their leaders had to satisfy him that they deserved it – they had to demonstrate that their beliefs and practices were commensurate with modernity. For example, he required – and obtained – their assurances that they did not practice polygamy and animal sacrifices, and that they felt an overwhelming loyality to France. (What would he make of this video, I wonder!)
On Sunday, in handing over the reins of the Front National to his daughter Marine, that crude old racist, Jean-Marie Le Pen, could not resist an antisemitic jibe about a Jewish reporter who’d complained about being ejected from the party’s gala dinner, beaten, and racially abused. Racism, as in that case, from the French Right, has a long tradition extending back to the ultramontain anti-Dreyfusards and to Charles Maurras and Action Française.
Not that the French Left have been any better – witness their constant baiting in the National Assembly and in their press (with insults such as “dirty tolerated alien”) of the haute bourgeois René Mayer (1895-1972; pictured), a pro-American industrialist and banker related by marriage to the Rothschilds, who was Prime Minister of France in 1953, a director of Air France, a champion of the colons of Algeria, and – though very much an assimilated, patriotic Frenchman – loyal to Judaism (his grandfather was Grand Rabbin of Paris) and involved in Jewish communal affairs.
In an article in a recent issue of the London Daily Mail, that fearless – I could almost add “peerless” – journalist Melanie Phillips, author of that alarming window on the growth of militant Islam in present-day London, Londonistan, reiterates yet again the alarming degree of islamisation that is taking place in Britain with the apparent connivance of a supine government (driven, as I blogged this week, by anti-Israel weaklings within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office).
“Because our political and security establishment has defined extremism as involving violence, it is blind to the steady process of Islamisation that is taking place”, she writes. “Astonishingly, it is tolerating – and even encouraging - the relentless incursion of Islamic religious law. Yet this is inimical to British values – and not just because it denies the human rights of women, homosexuals or anyone who wants to renounce Islam.”
For, she continues, Islam
“does not recognise the superior authority of the law of the land, against which it therefore asserts itself.
.... [B]lind eyes are being turned to Sharia courts meting out not just family law judgments that oppress women, but even criminal sanctions, too.... [T]here has been ... an enormous growth of Islamic banking - despite the fact this serves as an umbrella for the financing of Islamic terrorism and is a vehicle for putting yet more pressure on British Muslims to subject themselves to Sharia law.
Almost every week, more examples surface of the way in which British culture is giving way to Islamic practices. As a recent BBC Panorama programme demonstrated, some Muslim schools are teaching their pupils to hate ‘unbelievers’ – all under the nose of Ofsted.
And a growing number of education authorities serve halal meat to all pupils – without even informing the public of this minority faith practice [Incidentally, halal meat was also served to an unsuspecting House of Commons!]. London hosts three Muslim TV channels — all with ties to fanatical Islamic organisations or regimes.
In short, Britain is being steadily Islamised – and the establishment appears paralysed like a rabbit caught in the headlights.
Four years ago in my book, I delivered a warning. A country that can’t even bring itself to name the nature of the enemy it faces will be defeated by that enemy.
The Stockholm bomber is but the latest export from Londonistan - and unless the Government gets up off its knees and changes its disastrous strategy, I very much fear he will not be the last.’
‘Europe is vulnerable. It abuts directly against ancient Muslim homelands at several points, has a substantial and unintegrated Muslim population, has offered active Jihadis sanctuary within its borders, has pursued reckless immigration and security policies, and has supped with the Devil through its open support of Saddam Hussein (paid for with Iraqi oil funds) and Muslim terror organizations such as Al Fatah and Hamas.
Many observers believe it’s already too late, that Europe is one with Sumeria and Byzantium, that all that remains is the funeral procession. They point to the numbers of native births – below replacement level of 2.1 children per couple in almost every country—compared to those of Muslim immigrants, which are two to three times higher, and echo Bernard Lewis’s now-famous prediction, “Europe will be Muslim by the end of the century.”
Europe in also unfortunate in that its overall government, the European Union, has established itself, in defiance of the experience of the past century, as the kind of managerial superstate proven unfeasible just about everywhere else on earth.’
Ironic, isn’t it? Napoleon had to be certain that Jews did not pursue polygamy or other practices at odds with modernity – yet in Europe today, such practices by Muslims are allowed.
In Britain, any non-Muslim married to more than one wife would be charged with bigamy if found out – but, so long as he contracts polygamous unions in countries in which polygamy is lawful, a Muslim may bring his multi-wives to the UK. And they’ll receive state benefits into the bargain! Moreover, the tolerance of "arranged marriages" – something that the dhimmitudinous, Londonistan-loving British Ambassador Frances Guy enthused about in her speech last year at the Beirut Arab University, to which I referred in my penultimate post – has resulted in the immigration to Britain of many Muslims from conservative, reactionary societies, and the consequent negation in the raising of their offspring of the influence of their British marriage partners of more "anglicised" mores.
These are the perilous realities of Europe's unrestrained "multiculturalism", driven by the EU elites but not by the populace.
And Jews and Israel are prominent among the losers.