Islamophobia? Not on Our Watch, insist the UK's Trembling Israelites

It seems hard to believe (actually, perhaps it doesn't, given today's onslaught on the Judeo-Christian tradition and the consequent neglect in schools of scriptural teaching) that people actually grew up thinking that Islam preceded Judaism and Christianity, but some viewers of this video are claiming just that!

It seems hard to believe, given the zeal with which the Left attacks male sexists of the Western kind, that they, with honorable exceptions, turns a blind eye to such excrescences as these, committed by Muslim men against non-Muslim females.

It seems especially hard to believe that in Britain Jewish leaders, with honorable exceptions, are so lily-livered that they are prepared to undermine one of the most courageous, astute and perspicacious of Jewish commentators on the current scene, namely that wonderful lady Melanie Phillips, in their anxiety not to transgress political correctness.

Cerebral British blogger Edgar Davidson pulls no punches in his indictment of such cravenness.  He calls Jewish Chronicle [JC] editor Stephen Pollard "an idiot", for instance, and thunders inter alia:

'Pollard is part of the elitist clique who think they know what’s best for British Jews (and he’s by no means the worst). We have seen with the recent decision by the Jewish 'leadership'  to demonize and silence Colonel Richard Kemp and Melanie Phillips (see articles by Jonathan Hoffman and David Collier about this), that they will not tolerate anybody who dares raise concerns about Islamic antisemitism and terrorism.

They have bought into the whole "Islamophobia" narrative in an attempt to appease people like Baroness Warsi (who claims to oppose antisemitism while being a vicious enemy of the Jewish state, whipping up antisemitic hatred of it among British Muslims).

 What started with the demonization of Tommy Robinson, Geert Wilders, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer (all true friends of Israel and the Jewish people) and then Katie Hopkins and Douglas Murray, was never going to end with just them. Now they seek to silence anybody on the 'right' of politics who raises these concerns and even accuse anybody who supports them of being 'racists'.  So, while many of the Jewish community's best friends are shunned by the Jewish leadership, that same leadership is happy to work with (and even invite to communal events): Israel-hating agitators like Warsi, antisemitic anti-Israel leftist Muslims like Naz Shah, and any number of left-wing politicians and activists who supported both Corbyn and the boycott campaign against Israel.

The Board of Deputies, The Jewish Leadership Council, CST [Community Security Trust], the JC and even recently the CAA [Campaign Against Antisemitism] are all complicit in the "Islamophobia" narrative. They are failing Britan's Jews.'  [Emphasis added]

It might be added that realists in Australia who tell things as they are (members of the Australian Jewish Association, for example, and distinguished scholars of Islam like the Anglican clergyman Rev. Mark Durie) are also vilified as "Islamophobes" by Jewish "leaders" who should know better.

With regard to Melanie Phillips (see her article here), a thread recently appeared on Twitter, in response to this cri-de-coeur by a Scottish convert revert to Islam, "journalist" (check out the grammar!) Alex Tiffin:

Despite (or perhaps because of) British Jews' well-founded fear of the antisemitism of the hard left exemplified by Corbyn and his henchmen and henchwomen of the hard left, Tiffin attracted such replies as these:

Oh!

I almost forgot to mention that Mr Tiffin is none other than a would-be Labour MP, who caused a kerfuffle north of the Border with threats of violence against infidels a few years ago.

Nor have I yet mentioned that one of the posts above was written by someone who apparently joined in the fun and games when (years ago, on an online forum) a toxic Israel-hater abused me so viciously and in such a defamatory, antisemitic and threatening  manner, posting my contact details on pro-Arab sites, and so on,  that the dear old UK police promised to get on the case, only to botch the entire exercise, doing nothing at all, despite knowing the abuser's identity and exact whereabouts and being provided with a copious amount of screenshots that would have comfortably allowed a prosecution (the Mr Plods sat on these until the expiration of the time period in which such evidence could validly be presented in court!) 

Funny old world innit.

"...Because Our Traitor Class Fears Islam"

Here's an Englishman with a litany of instances of appeasement, by craven dolts, to an determined enemy instead of putting up a fight for the future of our children and grandchildren in "the greatest battle of the 21st century".

 

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

It seems to be a lesson that Britain's Jewish "leadership" might heed: see Edgar Davidson here

Below, former Head of Cobra Colonel Richard Kemp tells the hosts of the Good Morning Britain radio show that the time for platitudes is over ... platitudes about how we must be tolerant and try to understand those who pose a threat to the UK:

“We have the finest intelligence services and finest police services in the world and they have protected us time and time again.  Hundreds of attacks have been stopped, thousands of terrorists have been put in prison.

The problem is that there are 3,000 known jihadists on the streets of the UK today, our intelligence services, our police services, no matter how good they are they can’t monitor all of them, they can’t control all of them....

Every single person who we have intelligence upon, who is known to be involved in terrorism, who is not a UK citizen, and who we cannot prosecute in this court, we deport and send them back to where they came from…”

A French Oleh's Lament: "French journalists practice a disgusting double standard against Israel"

This illustration is taken from the updated edition of Edgar Davidson's superb "Rules and Guidelines for Westerners reporting on Israel".

Here, as an example, is Rule 2:

'Rule 2 (Arab casualties)

If there is any incident either in Israel or near its borders in which there are claims of Arab casualties you must write a report with the following headline:

“Israelis kill X Arab civilians including Y children”

For the numbers X and Y simply choose the highest figures from the following sources:

    Hamas
    Hezbollah
    The Palestinian Authority
    Islamic Jihad
    Syrian State Television
    Islamic State
    Al Jazeera or Press TV
    Any person within 20 miles of the incident who is wearing a kaffiya or a Burka.

You do not need to state the source of your claim. In the unlikely event that an Israeli spokesman claims either a different figure, that the 'victims' were armed terrorists, or that the incident simply did not happen you may end your report with the following:

“An Israeli spokesman claimed, without evidence, that they ‘acted in self-defence’.

Note that there are certain circumstances where Arab deaths from violence should not be reported at all. This is when Arabs themselves openly claim to be the killers. This applies, for example, in the following cases:

Mass slaughter in fighting between different rival groups (Shia v Sunni, Hamas vs PA, Hamas vs Al Qaeda, PA vs Islamic Jihad etc)

 Where the victims are accused of being Israeli collaborators

If news of these killings does leak out into the Western media then simply write a brief statement including the words:

“The underlying cause of the violence was the oppressive Israeli occupation”

Any claims of deaths of Israelis during such incidents can be assumed to be false and hence ignored.

Read all of the Rules and Guidelines here

Of course, it's not only in the English-language press that the media gets the message of such "Rules and Guidelines".

See, for instance, this new article by French oleh Jean Vercors, no stranger to my blog; he's provocatively entitled it "French media: the thought Einsatzgruppen".

Writes Jean Vercors:

Since ancient times, many people have hated the Jews and this is not going to change.

The French journalists practice a disgusting double standard against Israel that constantly stirs anti-Jewish hatred.

Is this because they are affiliated with trade unions close to the Communist Party?  Are they automatically anti-Israel because Israel is supported by the United States or because of or banal hatred of Jews?

My observations of media bias against Israel are a constant source of aggravation.

No matter what happens in the world, Israel is always making the headlines. A morbid obsession. The daily massacre of Copts, Yazidis, Chaldeans, Christians, Assyrians, Kurds, and Africans in Muslim lands are barely mentioned.

In Israel, the press is free. Journalists can cover the news as they wish; they know it and do not hesitate. I can write things here, to express my thoughts in a way that would send me to court if I was in France.

In Israel, journalists are not harassed, assaulted, raped, followed by the police, tortured, intimidated or even beheaded as in Syria or Iraq.

In an article of July 2014, I called the French media scavengers and my opinion has not changed since.

When three young Israelis were kidnapped and killed by local Arab terrorists, rather than blaming the criminals, French media preferred to report how dangerous it is to hitchhike the Gush Etzion area.

Today, with the story of the dead Arab baby in Duma, the mainstream media, with L’Agence France-Presse (AFP) leading the pack, brought out the heavy artillery. No excuse can justify this act proclaims the same media that naturally found excuses for the killing of three Jewish students in July 2014 .  Apologists for the Arabs, not the Jews: double standard.

Then the media accuses "religious extremist settlers" of being the perpetrators even before the police investigation has begun.

The countless assaults by Palestinian Arabs against Jews goes unreported and without condemnation.
Similarly, the UN and EU have a big problem only with the one single attack by a few persons against the Arabs, even though there is no clear proof yet that it was indeed perpetrated by Jews. The entire Jewish nation has already been condemned.

As with the notorious invention that was the al-Dura case, it represents a continuation of the age-old libel of ritual murder of children by Jews.  It is the antisemitic blood libel that Jews murder non-Jewish children for ritual purposes. French journalists did not need evidence to charge the Jews, they lit the pyre and prepared media killings.

In ten years, the Arabs in Palestine killed nearly 180 Israelis, dozens of babies. Where is the outrage of the media?

Are journalists dishonest and hypocrites to that point? Yes definitely.

This hypocrisy was also revealed in October 2014 by an Arab site,Actionpal.org , which identified the number of Palestinian Arabs killed in Syria: 2 512. Not a single line in the media.

The French media practising intellectual terrorism.

Censorship of any idea contrary, any debate, arguments and intimidation methods for preventing the development of harmful ideas, nothing can stop the media, speak with one voice as if it was only one opinion and they had been brainwashed.
This ideological censorship, the font of the word, forbidden to speak of what is beyond the gates of the ruling doctrine.

The thought police uses the techniques of fascism and Nazism to implode Arab propaganda.

Some examples: Alexandra Schwarzbrod Liberation, Mediapart, BFM, ITV, Le Parisien, Le Monde, Courrier International, France 24, La Croix, MetroNews, France 2, Marianne, 20 Minutes, Slate, Nouvel Obs, Le Figaro, The AFP: all decided Jews are the criminals, without leaving their confortable offices and without any confirmatory police report, found Jews to be culpable .

The left rejoices – finally some "proof" for their slanderous accusations of Israel.

The immediate and vociferous world reaction, including that of the Israeli media, was overwhelming. Many claimed that Jewish terrorism happens all the time and is ever present. Time will also tell if it was indeed an attack by Jews. But we do not need to wait to find out who has perpetrated dozens and dozens of attacks against Jews in the last year or two: Palestinian Arabs, driven by their fanatical, antisemitic, Islam-inspired hatred of Jews.

Arabs attacking, maiming and murdering Jews is an almost-daily event.

In France, when reporting police arrests of criminals, journalists always use the conditional, speak of "suspect" until law courts have given their verdicts. In this reportage, however, there are no suspects, there is no use of the conditional: the putative miscreants are guilty for sure, taken for granted to be so because they are Jews.

The kings of the amalgam, finally, it is they, the journalists.

For a well-oiled disinformation process, the disclosure of wrongdoing attributed to some Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria allows for a huge amalgam to stigmatize an entire population
 – that of Israel – and then develop the amalgam to the top of the state, and accuse the Israeli government of ultimate responsibility.

Disseminating slanders against the Jewish state, it is trendy.

Denounce any amalgam against the Muslim community as well.

Intellectual terrorism is not an end in itself, it is a means to steer public debate against the Jews and Israel. Thus, the media, when they talk of Israel became "Einsatzgruppen" of thought.

The media who lie about Israeli assault me. My story, my identity, their refusal to allow me to define myself, is the expression of intellectual terror.

The offspring of right-wing extremists, Nazis, fascists, it's them.

Yes they attack me. We Jews have a hard shell, very solid. Nevertheless, they attack us.

Our real enemies, the Europeans, the Arab worst enemies in the region, attacking us for years not for what we would do or would not do, but for what we are and what we represent.

It does not succumb to the temptations of the oppressors and persecutors worldly, so we give up our history, our values, the faith of our fathers, and worst of all: our identity, the word they hate the most.

We do not accept the deletion they are inflicting to the European people by dilution in Islam, his drowning in immigration. On the contrary!

Recalling Leo Tolstoy's perception of the Jewish People:

“The Jew is that sacred being who has brought down from heaven the everlasting fire, and has illumined with it the entire world. He is the religious source, spring, and fountain out of which all the rest of the peoples have drawn their beliefs and their religious. The Jew is the pioneer of liberty. The Jew is the pioneer of civilization. The Jew is the emblem of eternity.”

"It Is Difficult To Imagine A More Striking Example Of How The So-Called Jewish Leadership In The UK Is Failing The Vast Majority Of British Jews"

On 5 March, as many readers will know, the Cambridge Union debated (and carried) the preposterous motion "This House believes that Israel is a rogue state".

The pre-event publicity material stated:

'The Israel/Palestine crisis has existed since Israel’s formation; with neither side gaining the upper hand despite decades of suffering. In this debate we turn to Israel, and ask whether it is time we declared them a rogue state.'

Speaking in favour of the motion were, again quoting from the publicity material, three prominent Israel-haters:

'Dr Norman Finkelstein is a Jewish American political scientist, activist, professor, and author, whose primary fields of research include the Israel–Palestine conflict. He is currently working on his next book, ‘How to Solve the Israel-Palestine Conflict.’Prof.

 Ghada Karmi is a Palestinian author and academic who was made to leave Jerusalem in 1948. Most of her recent research has been on the Israel-Palestinian conflict and has appeared widely in the media and the press

 Ben White is a freelance journalist, writer, and human rights activist. He is a Cambridge graduate, and has published two books on the Israel-Palestine conflict.'  [See White's triumphant take on the debate here]

And those opposing it?

'Vivian Wineman is currently president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, the representative body of the Jewish community in Britain.

Hannah Weisfeld is the director and one of the founders of Yachad, the UK’s pro-Israel pro-peace movement. Previously she chaired the Jewish Social Action Forum for two years.

Davis Lewin is the Deputy Director & Head of Policy and Research at the Henry Jackson Society, a global think tank that fights for the principles that keep societies free. He is also a former Middle East Director at the Next Century Foundation.'

The Cambridge Union has a channel on Youtube and posts footage of its debates.  Eventually. 

So far the only video of the debate I've found is this one, which shows rather too much of the frightful Finkelstein but does show the jubilant screams of "Free, free Palestine!" that broke out at the debate's end, as well as a bit of a contretemps afterwards.  Have a look at it, and try to forget that Cambridge is an elite institution when you see the word "rogue" spelt "rouge": 

As Douglas Murray has observed inter alia here:

 'The Cambridge Union – the oldest in the country – enjoys debating that motion more than any other. It is a fixture in its termly schedules.

And once again last week the students of Cambridge decided to hold Israel guilty among the nations. Needless to say there is no record of Cambridge students debating whether Pakistan (created in the same year as Israel) is a rogue state. Despite there being far more reasons to do so.

Nor does the Cambridge Union annually denigrate any of Israel’s neighbours in the Middle East. During last week’s Cambridge debate the notorious anti-Israeli activist and discredited academic Norman Finkelstein explained to the students that Israel is worse than North Korea....'

The students agreed with him. Next month the University of Southampton will become the latest university to fix its position on this bandwagon of hate.'

Quite so.  And regarding that forthcoming "bandwagon of hate" see this excellent analysis of the dramatis personae by David Collier (they [hat tip: Nathan of Plaza] include Wollongong's Marcelo ("BDS and blisters") Svirsky, who features in my previous post, plus a range of heavy-duty srael-loathing nasties).

But it's a post by one of my favourite British bloggers,  Edgar Davidson, which should be ringing alarm bells regarding the Cambridge fracas. He observes, inter alia:

'[T]he Israel 'case' was made by two people whose "support" for Israel is at the very best ambivalent:

1.Hannah Weisfeld, the leader of the anti-Zionist Yachad - which is still trying to con British Jews into thinking it is pro-Israel, even though all the evidence suggests that they fully support the motion that their leader was supposed to be arguing against.

2.Vivian Wineman, the useless and discredited Chairman of the Board of Deputies who has devoted his leadership of the Board to developing ties with the Muslim Council Britain (which is the official Muslim Brotherhood organisation in the UK) and to stopping pro-Israel speakers from coming to the UK....

Two-thirds of Anglo-Jews would vote for Bibi

And irrespective  of their views, Weisfeld and Wineman are also both appalling speakers as anybody who has had the misfortune to hear them will know. It is difficult to imagine a more striking example of how the so-called Jewish leadership in the UK is failing the vast majority of British Jews; unlike Weisfeld and Wineman they are strong supporters of Israel and know that failure to properly support Israel (and counter the propaganda lies against it) is fuelling the rise in antisemitism. [Emphasis added]

 I really [his emphasis] would like to know how either of these goons got selected to make the case for Israel. Was it the Cambridge University Jewish Society? Did nobody raise any concerns? The result of the debate (which interestingly was a complete reversal of a similar motion in 2010) shows what a bad decision it was....' 

 Read all of Edgar Davidson's post here and see his many relevant links below it.

Incidentally, poll results regarding who British Jews favour as Israel's prime minister can be seen here

Edgar Maps The Mischief

Photo: Richard Millett

I've referred to Edgar Davidson's British-based blog several times in the past.  Cerebral, original, and sometimes satirical, he's one of my favourite pro-Israel bloggers.  His latest post is a valuable contribution to that small but vital body of internet posts that refute the mendacious, mischievous set of four map that, claiming to show Zionist land thefts of Arab land, constitutes a seemingly ubiquitous graphic corollary to the allegation of a "disappearing Palestine".

The set of maps is, it appears, an essential prop in the equipment of all anti-Israel propagandists, featuring as it does on posters pinned up during Israel-bashing meetings, intended for the sides of buses, given pride of place at Israel-bashing demonstrations (see, for instance, here), and comprising sticky posts on websites such as this one.

Notes Mr Davidson, in what should be required reading for every naive individual snared or likely to be snared by propagandistic anti-Israel malice, but of course won't be:

These maps are based on the completely false premise that, prior to 1947 there was an Arab state of Palestine. In fact the Palestine that was promised to the Jews as part of the Balfour declaration was the British mandate territory that includes what later become the state of Jordan (my map above top left). There was not – and never has been
– an Arab state of Palestine even though, between 1948 and 1967 there was no 'occupied territories' of the West Bank or Gaza since these areas were then under the full control of Jordan and Egypt respectively. The Palestinian Arabs living there during that period never called for an independent state of their own.

Only the Jews of Palestine considered themselves Palestinian before 1948. The Arabs
– most of whom had come to Palestine from Egypt and Syria because of the economic opportunities opened up by the Jews – considered themselves to be Syrian.

 Despite the fact that 80% of mandate Palestine (not shown on the maps that lie) had already been granted to the Arabs exclusively to become the new state of Jordan, the Jews of Palestine accepted the UN partition plan of 1947. The surrounding Arab states did not accept it and launched a war of annihilation against the Jews (during and after which some 1 million Jews from Arab countries were forced to leave
– most of them came to Israel).

The result of the war that was intended to murder every single Jew in Palestine was that the invading Arab armies were defeated and the Jews controlled slightly more territory overall than was part of the 1947 plan; however, they also lost some territory such as the Jewish quarter of East Jerusalem (including Judaism's holiest sites such as the Wailing Wall) and Gush Etzion that even the 1947 plan had not considered to be under Arab control.

The UN accepted the 1949 armistice line as defining the borders of Israel, while calling for East Jerusalem (now under Jordanian occupation) to be 'internationalised'.

The Arab states refused to recognise the State of Israel and have continued to this day to try to destroy it. The Jordanians who occupied East Jerusalem in 1948 expelled every Jew and destroyed every synagogue in the old city. Not a single Jew was allowed to enter Judaism's holiest sites until 1967 when, after the Egyptians, Jordanians and Syrians launched another attempted war of annihilation, Israel regained control over the old city and other areas.

Israel offered to withdraw from all the newly gained territories in return for peace but the offer was rejected by the Arab countries. With the exception of Jewish East Jerusalem Israel has essentially made the same offer over and again ever since but it has always been rejected. Despite this, Israel has returned the whole of Gaza and most of the West Bank to Palestinian control. But the Arabs continue to demand the destruction of all of Israel.

It is also important to show Israel in context with its Muslim neighbours ...

Mr Davidson's synopsis is an excellent model upon which proponents of the Israeli cause can base their responses to those who trot out those offending maps.

But that written refutation is not all.  For he has done yeoman service to the pro-Israel cause in providing a comprehensive set of rival maps, eight in all, which give an accurate overview of what the situation truly was and is.

See (and bookmark!) Edgar Davidson's post here