Tag: Aliyah


Who Owns the Holocaust?: Ben Cohen, JNS, Feb. 5, 2018— Who owns the Holocaust?

The Dutch and Their Jews: The Never-Ending Shame of the Netherlands: Abraham Cooper & Manfred Gerstenfeld, Algemeiner, Jan. 17, 2018— Last month, a video showing a man waving a Palestinian flag and smashing the windows of a kosher Amsterdam restaurant went viral.

France: Migrant Crisis Spirals Out of Control: Soeren Kern, Gatestone Institute, Feb. 6, 2018— Hundreds of Africans and Asians armed with knives and iron rods fought running street battles in the northern port city of Calais on February 1, less than two weeks after French President Emmanuel Macron visited the area and pledged to crack down on illegal immigration.

Aliya from Western Countries: Isi Leibler, Jerusalem Post, Feb. 7, 2018— The founders of modern Israel originated from contrasting ideological movements.


On Topic Links


Poland’s Shoah Policy – Precursor to a New Holocaust Revisionism?: Shimon Samuels, Jerusalem Post, Feb. 5, 2018

Poland Slams the Door on Holocaust Dialogue: Sohrab Ahmari, Commentary, Feb. 6, 2018

The Widespread Anti-Israelism in the UK: Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld, Arutz Sheva, Feb. 9, 2018

The Jews Vs. Hitler: An Interview with Author Rick Richman: Elliot Resnick, Jewish Press, Jan. 31, 2018




Ben Cohen

JNS, Feb. 5, 2018


Who owns the Holocaust? That, ultimately, is the key question posed by the impending legislation in Poland that will criminalize any discussion, or investigation, or mere mention, of incidents of Polish collusion with the Nazi occupiers during World War Two. My goal here is not to look into the details of the Polish dispute – save for noting that Warsaw’s impassioned claim that its ire is driven by the phrase “Polish death camp” to describe Auschwitz is actually a straw man argument. Nearly all reputable scholars of the Holocaust – including those at Yad Vashem, Israel’s Holocaust memorial – have repeatedly said, over several years, that this form of words is insensitive and inaccurate. It should be purged from our Shoah lexicon, but through education, not legislation.


This dispute is about who sets the parameters for our understanding of what the Holocaust was and what it represented – and it is a problem that extends far beyond Poland’s borders. On a purely conceptual level, molding a particular historical event to fit a particular interpretation always involves simplification. Look at our own Civil War 150 years later – as we often do, and with great anger – and we still see it as North against South, a society of free individuals against a society built on slavery. All that is basically true, and yet it doesn’t easily explain why there were so many Northern Democrats more loyal to Jefferson Davis than Abraham Lincoln, or why the citizens of Eastern Tennessee threw in their lot with the Union.


This is why the study of history is only possible in free societies where all avenues of inquiry are open, and where knowledge is “owned” by all. Here in the West, our understanding of the Holocaust’s complexities has been hugely enriched by the histories, bibliographies, oral testimonies and images patiently collected and interpreted by scholars in Israel, the U.S. and Europe. But in the nations that were until 1989 under the boot of the Soviet Union, like Poland, the situation is the exact opposite; over there, “Holocaust education” for decades consisted of lies, distortions and shameful cover-ups.


It began with the Soviets, for whom there was no ideological or political room for something called the “Holocaust” in their account of the “Great Patriotic War.” In his monumental poem “Babi Yar” – a searing critique of the official Soviet representation of the Nazi massacre of 33,000 Jews by a ravine in Kiev in September 1941 – the Russian poet Yevgeny Yevtushenko summoned up the ghosts of native Russian anti-Semitism when he imagined himself as young Jewish boy in the midst of a pogrom. (“To jeers of ‘Kill the Jews, and save our Russia!’/My mother’s being beaten by a clerk.”) Yevtushenko’s goal was to remind his readers of the difficult, painful truth that the Communist Party’s enforcers sought to suppress. The Holocaust was defined by the anti-Semitic legislation, persecution and eventual genocide – under the gaze and sometimes with the active participation of their non-Jewish neighbors – that defined the fate of the Jews under Nazi rule.


But just as the Communists sought to undermine this core truth at every turn, so do today’s ultranationalists. It’s not just Poland, after all. Croatia, Hungary, Slovakia and Latvia are just a handful of the other European countries where similarly ugly disputes have arisen, always involving ultranationalist political leaders promoting the deceitful rewriting of history. In all these cases, the end has been the same: to portray the occupied non-Jewish populations as facing exactly the same trials and perils as their Jewish neighbors, and thereby launder their own soiled records of past Nazi associations. Here, I believe, is where the rub lies. The Holocaust scholarship engendered in the open societies of the west is robust enough to withstand these political campaigns to rewrite history. In that sense, the current Polish dispute is just a particularly nasty example of a clash we’ve seen before, and not much more than that. The real losers in all this are the very people these ultranationalists claim they represent.


Consider the following sentences. “The conditions in those trains defy coherent language…They were packed in a standing position in sealed, windowless, and unheated cattle wagons, for a winter journey of thousands of miles.” You might well think that the subject here is the deportation of the Jews, but in fact, it is the eminent historian Norman Davies’ description of the 1940 deportations of thousands of Poles by the Soviet NKVD to gulags in Siberia. So, as we see plainly here, the historical record rarely gives comfort to our preconceived notions and prejudices.


If the Polish government’s goal was simply to encourage greater awareness and education about Polish suffering under the Nazis, that would be a laudable goal. But by tying that aspect of Nazi rule so explicitly to the mass enslavement and extermination of the Jews, and by willfully misrepresenting documented evidence of Polish anti-Semitism and collaboration with the Nazis as a slander upon the Polish nation as a whole, they are engineering their own deserved failure, to the detriment of Poland’s people.


For instead of enlightening the world about how the Soviets and the Nazis collaborated to crush the Polish national movement – and why that matters especially today – Poland’s leaders are disgracing themselves by uncomplicatedly claiming three million Holocaust victims murdered because they were Jews for the general record of Polish wartime suffering. You’d have thought that the Soviet Union was the last country they would want to emulate.                                 





Abraham Cooper & Manfred Gerstenfeld

Algemeiner, Jan. 17, 2018


Last month, a video showing a man waving a Palestinian flag and smashing the windows of a kosher Amsterdam restaurant went viral. Thereafter, two policemen — who stood by during the vandalism — overpowered the attacker. Two days later, the attacker was freed by the police with a warning that if he committed additional crimes, he would be rearrested. Later, it became known that the perpetrator is a Palestinian-Syrian asylum-seeker who’s lived in the Netherlands for several years. He reportedly promised not to repeat his hate/terror crime in Amsterdam. The prosecution also withheld several salient facts from the public — for example, that the man was an ex-combatant in Syria’s civil war.


When the restaurant owner’s lawyer released this additional information, the prosecutor’s office said that it would seek disciplinary action against the lawyer. While the Palestinian Syrian was being investigated, the kosher restaurant was vandalized for a second time. Also, on New Year’s day, a rock destroyed the windows of the Chabad House in Central Amsterdam. When the perpetrator of that attack came before the court, it was decided to request a psychological examination, which will take several months. In the meantime, the attacker will remain free. Michael Jacobs, a Jew, wasn’t so lucky. He was arrested for holding an Israeli flag on Amsterdam’s main square last summer because he stood too close to a pro-Palestinian demonstrator. Jacobs remained in jail for a full week. Yet there is nothing in the Dutch legal system which forbids his action.


Apparently, the Dutch judicial system doesn’t have its act together. In the previous government, two successive ministers of justice had to resign. And as far as Jews and Israel are concerned, the rot runs deeper. There are unique aspects of Dutch antisemitism. First, the Netherlands is the only European Union country with Muslim parties in parliament and some municipal councils. Their representatives make extreme remarks about Jews and Israel. One Hague councilman, Abdoe Khoulani, called visiting Israeli schoolchildren “Zionist terrorists in training” and “future child murderers and occupiers.” The public prosecutor decided that this was legal. In Rotterdam last year, an international congress of Hamas front-groups was allowed to hold its meeting after neither the Muslim (Labour Party) mayor, nor the Dutch security services, acted to block the gathering — despite information publicly available from German security services about the organizers’ links to Hamas.


The second specific Dutch antisemitism characteristic has bizarre origins.  The extreme fans of Ajax, the leading Amsterdam Soccer Club — all gentiles — call themselves “Jews.” For more than 20 years, they have been welcomed in several other Dutch stadiums with songs like, “Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas.” Such slogans have spread into the public arena. At the beginning of this century, two Socialist Party parliamentarians participated in an anti-Israel demonstration in Amsterdam; one was caught on a video shouting, “Intifada, intifada.” During the 2014 Gaza War, some anti-Israel demonstrations had a pro-Hamas character. At one protest, when a Green Left Party Euro parliamentarian started to make negative remarks about Hamas — after she had criticized Israel — she was shouted down. Such attitudes confirm that for some, tolerance includes tolerating evil.


Meanwhile, Kajsa Ollongren, the current minister of the interior, on behalf of the anti-Israeli center party, D66, declared on TV that the horrible attack on the kosher restaurant was related to Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. As if an Amsterdam Jewish restaurant owner has anything to do with Trump’s decision. In Parliament, the most extreme anti-Israel speakers are often former foreign office officials. For instance, in an answer to parliamentary questions, the previous foreign minister from the Labour Party played down payments by the Palestinian Authority to murderers of Israeli Jews.


The Dutch government has for many years subsidized Dutch organizations that finance Palestinian hate mongers. The previous foreign minister supported the labeling of Israeli goods. And without a second thought — just like other Western European countries — the Netherlands opened its doors wide to immigrants from Muslim countries where antisemitism is rife. When a small Christian party managed to get a parliamentary motion passed that Israel should not be discriminated against in the UN, the Netherlands nevertheless voted in favor of the anti-US motion on Jerusalem. The Netherlands is also the only country in Western Europe that has never admitted the major shortcomings of its World War II government, even though new studies clearly show the collaboration of the Dutch police with the German occupiers in hunting Jews; the cooperation of notaries in the theft of Jewish assets; and the total negligence of the Dutch Red Cross headquarters toward the Jews.


Not even the legacy of Anne Frank is safe. The writer of a new play on Anne Frank’s diary, Ilja Pfeiffer, transformed one of the people in hiding who was murdered in the Holocaust, Fritz Pfeffer, from a victim to a perpetrator of violence. Several Dutch media outlets reviewed the play rather positively. The Anne Frank Foundation in Basel is suing the author, but a play in which a Holocaust victim’s memory is sullied is just one more example of a society that will not treat its Jews fairly — not even in death.   




Soeren Kern

Gatestone Institute, Feb. 6, 2018


Hundreds of Africans and Asians armed with knives and iron rods fought running street battles in the northern port city of Calais on February 1, less than two weeks after French President Emmanuel Macron visited the area and pledged to crack down on illegal immigration. The clashes plunged Calais — emblematic of Europe's failure to control mass migration — into a war zone and reinforced the perception that French authorities have lost control of the country's security situation.


The mass brawls, fought in at least three different parts of Calais, erupted after a 37-year-old Afghan migrant running a human trafficking operation fired gunshots at a group of Africans who did not have money to pay for his services. Five Africans suffered life-threatening injuries. Within an hour, hundreds of Eritreans, Ethiopians and Sudanese took to the streets of Calais and attacked any Afghans they could find. More than a thousand police officers using batons and tear gas were deployed to restore order. Two dozen migrants were hospitalized.


French Interior Minister Gérard Collomb described the level of violence in Calais as "unprecedented." He attributed the fighting to an escalating turf war between Afghan and Kurdish gangs seeking to gain control over human trafficking between Calais and Britain, which many migrants view as "El Dorado" because of its massive underground economy. Each day around 40 ferries depart Calais for Britain. Vincent de Coninck, director of the charity Secours Catholique du Pas-de-Calais, said that rival gangs were trying to secure control over access to the port of Calais in order to induce payments of €2,500 ($3,100) from migrants seeking to stow away on trucks crossing the English Channel. De Coninck added that the situation in Calais had deteriorated since January 18, when Macron and British Prime Minister Theresa May signed the so-called Sandhurst Treaty, in which May pledged to speed-up the processing of migrants hoping to travel to Britain from Calais.


According to de Coninck, Macron and May failed adequately to explain the contents of the new treaty. This failure, he said, had created false hopes among migrants from Africa and elsewhere that the treaty would improve their chances of reaching Britain. De Coninck further said that hundreds of new migrants had arrived in Calais during the two weeks since the treaty was signed. The surge of new arrivals, he said, had created an "imbalance" between Africans and Asians — thereby increasing inter-ethnic tensions.


François Guennoc, vice-president of the Calais charity L'Auberge des Migrants, echoed the view that the new treaty had created false expectations. "It gave people hope to reach England," he said. "People arrived suddenly, about 200, mainly underage people and women who arrived in Calais because they thought that the Home Office said they could go directly to England. Then they thought the Home Office was lying. People were upset. It was crazy." Europe's migration crisis has emerged as the first major test facing President Macron, who appears to be seeking out a middle-ground compromise position on the issue: he has promised to pursue "humanitarianism" by speeding up the processing of asylum requests while also pledging to pursue "firmness" by deporting those who do not qualify.


During the presidential campaign, Macron, who ran as a centrist, repudiated the anti-immigration positions of his opponent, Marine Le Pen. He campaigned on a platform of open borders and promised to establish France as "the new center for the humanist project." Since assuming office on May 14, 2017, however, Macron appears to have incorporated many of Le Pen's ideas. In an essay published by Le Monde on January 2, 2017, Macron wrote that German Chancellor Angela Merkel's decision to allow in more than a million migrants from Africa, Asia and the Middle East had "saved the collective dignity" of the European people. He added that he would not tolerate the "rebuilding of walls in Europe" and criticized the "abject simplifications" made by those who say that "by opening the borders to migrants, the chancellor exposed Europe to severe dangers."


On July 27, 2017, however, after less than three months in office, Macron warned that 800,000 migrants in Libya were on their way to Europe. He announced a plan to establish immigration centers in Libya to vet asylum seekers there. He said his plan would stem the flow of migrants to Europe by discouraging economic migrants from embarking on the Mediterranean crossing to Europe. "The idea is to create hotspots to avoid people taking crazy risks when they're not all eligible for asylum," Macron said. "We'll go to them." In that same speech, though, Macron appeared to encourage migrants to make their way to France. He pledged housing for all newcomers "everywhere in France" and "from the first minute."…

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]                




Isi Leibler

Jerusalem Post, Feb. 7, 2018


The founders of modern Israel originated from contrasting ideological movements. Since their dispersion into exile, Jews who for centuries endured Christian and Muslim persecution maintained spiritual (and in a few cases physical) links with their barren Jewish homeland, praying for their return to Zion and the advent of the Messiah.


In the late 19th century, the East European secular utopians who sought to escape persecution and murderous pogroms came to Palestine with the objective of engaging in agriculture and transforming the Jewish homeland into a socialist haven. The British conquest of Jerusalem and the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire ushered a series of mass migratory movements, and for the first time, large numbers of Jews in distress turned to Israel as a haven. The Russian civil war and the bloody pogroms associated with it were followed by the rise of Nazism which led to a growing immigration of Eastern European and subsequently German refugees, which, apart from a trickle of illegal immigration, was frozen in 1939 until the end of the British Mandate.


The mass immigration of Holocaust survivors was augmented after the War of Independence by the airlift of Jews fleeing persecution in Muslim countries. They were subsequently joined by other, smaller communities such as the Ethiopians, climaxing with an influx of over a million Jews from the former Soviet Union. Since the establishment of the State of Israel, kibbutz galuyot – the ingathering of the exiles – as predicted in the Bible, has been realized at a dramatic pace. From a fledgling community of 600,000 in 1948 when the state was proclaimed, Israel’s population has increased more than tenfold. It is now unquestionably the most successful and powerful state in the region, despite being an oasis in a turbulent Middle East engulfed in a brutal civil war in which hundreds of thousands of civilians have been butchered like animals.


However, more than half of the world’s Jewish population remains in the Diaspora – the bulk in the United States but with smaller communities in Canada, Europe, Australia, South Africa and Latin America. While there has always been a trickle of highly motivated, largely idealistic and religious Western immigrants, kibbutz galuyot was hardly a feature of the more affluent and less discriminated-against communities. But today the time has come for Jews in these communities to objectively re-evaluate their position.

It is clear that the majority will not pack up and come to Israel, even if there is a significant deterioration of their condition and dramatic escalation of antisemitism.


But committed Jews must ask themselves one basic question: is Jewish continuity important to me and my children? Sadly, unless the response is positive, there is little further contemplation. But those remaining in the Diaspora must recognize that even with the best of intentions, the chances of their grandchildren remaining Jewish are slim. In today’s open society, suffused with post-modernism, it is almost impossible to build solid barriers against acculturation. Any objection to intermarriage that is not based on religious grounds is condemned as racist. Many young people identify Judaism exclusively with liberalism and universalism, and are totally ignorant of core Jewish values.


In addition, the cost of Jewish education has skyrocketed in recent years and only the most committed are willing to sacrifice their standard of living to provide their children with a decent Jewish education. Not surprisingly, the level of Jewish education in the US and most Diaspora Jewish communities has never been so abysmally deficient. With the passage of time, the Holocaust no longer impacts on the identity of youngsters as it did with their parents. It has been reduced to unemotional historical statistics devoid of contemporary relevance. Likewise, support for Israel, which served as the greatest unifying element, has declined steeply among those with little or no traditional Jewish upbringing. Some even consider it socially advantageous to regurgitate the anti-Israeli agenda promoted by the liberal media.


In this environment, it is not surprising that intermarriage figures have escalated dramatically. Today, over 70% of unions among non-Orthodox Jews involve a gentile partner, with the overwhelming majority of children from such mixed marriages remaining, at best, Jews in name only. Clearly, the likelihood of Jewish continuity among non-observant Jews is minimal. Today, even the Orthodox minority is becoming affected. The statistics indicate that, other than the strictly Orthodox, Diaspora Jewish communities will significantly shrink…[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]


CIJR Wishes All Our Friends & Supporters: Shabbat Shalom!




On Topic Links


Poland’s Shoah Policy – Precursor to a New Holocaust Revisionism?: Shimon Samuels, Jerusalem Post, Feb. 5, 2018—In November 2011, the Palestinians entered UNESCO, thus beginning a period of mayhem in the form of Jewish and Christian ID theft.

Poland Slams the Door on Holocaust Dialogue: Sohrab Ahmari, Commentary, Feb. 6, 2018—The legacy of the Shoah in Poland, John Paul II said, is “a wound that has not healed, one that keeps bleeding.” The Polish government’s new Holocaust law rubs salt into the wound and renders healing that much more elusive.

The Widespread Anti-Israelism in the UK: Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld, Arutz Sheva, Feb. 9, 2018—Various studies have shown how widespread the dislike of Israel and anti-Israelism are in a number of European countries. The University of Bielefeld, for instance, published a widely publicized report of seven EU countries in 2011.

The Jews Vs. Hitler: An Interview with Author Rick Richman: Elliot Resnick, Jewish Press, Jan. 31, 2018—A Jewish army fighting Hitler? The idea sounds wild, but Zionist leader Vladimir Jabotinsky – and, to a lesser extent, Chaim Weizmann and David Ben-Gurion – thought it achievable. Jabotinsky envisioned an army of 100,000 fighting the Nazi menace, placing Jews in a perfect position after the war to demand a Jewish state.







Problematic Candidates for France’s Presidency: Manfred Gerstenfeld, Jerusalem Post, Feb. 7, 2017— The four main candidates in the upcoming presidential elections in France have all taken problematic positions concerning Israel, the country’s Jews, or both.

The French Inquisition: Yves Mamou, Gatestone Institute, Feb. 7, 2017— An important red line in France has just been crossed.

A German Court Rationalizes an Attack on a Synagogue: Joseph Bottum, Weekly Standard, Jan. 26, 2017— On January 13, 2017, a German regional court ruled that a lower court had been correct to find no anti-Semitism in the attempt by a group of Muslim men to burn down a synagogue in the city of Wuppertal.

An Answer to Paris: The ‘Gentile Aliya’ Epidemic: Nathan Lopes Cardozo, Jerusalem Post, Jan. 23, 2017— Israel will be facing an unprecedented crisis that will shake its very foundations.


On Topic Links


Poisoning Palestinian Minds (Interview With Hillel Heuer): Wall Street Journal, Feb. 8, 2017

British Prime Minister May Calls On Opposition Leader Corbyn to Join Her in Denouncing Muslim Discrimination Against Israeli Passport-Holders: Barney Breen-Portnoy, Algemeiner, Feb. 1, 2017

Testing Europe’s Values: Editorial, New York Times, Feb. 3, 2017

Beautiful Friendship: Caroline Glick, Jerusalem Post, Feb. 9, 2017                                                                                                                                        



PROBLEMATIC CANDIDATES FOR FRANCE’S PRESIDENCY                                                                       

Manfred Gerstenfeld

Jerusalem Post, Feb. 7, 2017


The four main candidates in the upcoming presidential elections in France have all taken problematic positions concerning Israel, the country’s Jews, or both. The first round of the elections will take place on April 23. If no candidate obtains the majority, the two candidates with the highest votes will have a run-off in the second round on May 7.


Polls for the past months indicate that Marine Le Pen, the leader of the extreme right-wing National Front Party, will pass to the second round. This is a rather safe prediction, as polls show that many of those intending to vote for her are unlikely to change their opinion before the election. Yet, at the same time, polls also indicate that the other candidate who makes it to the second round, whether it is former prime minister Francois Fillon of the right-wing Republican Party, or the independent centrist Emanuel Macron, will easily defeat Le Pen.


Marine Le Pen stresses that her party’s positions have evolved since she has taken charge. Her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, the founder of the party, is a notorious Holocaust distorter and antisemite. He has repeatedly called the gas chambers “a detail of history.” Marine Le Pen has distanced herself from him and had him expelled from the party in August 2015. She has also condemned a terrorist attack in Jerusalem and has come out against anti-Israel boycotts. Yet in 2010 she criticized the Israeli blockade of Gaza. Furthermore, in 2012 when calling for a ban on Muslim headscarves in public, she said that kippot should also be included. She repeated that statement this month.


The Jewish community has maintained its long-term negative attitude toward the FN. Then president of the Jewish umbrella organization CRIF, Roger Cukierman, said in 2015 that there was no cause to reproach Le Pen herself. He remarked, however, that “behind her are all the Holocaust-deniers, the Vichy-adherents and the followers of [Nazi collaborator] Petain.” He concluded that the FN “was a party to avoid even if it did not commit violence.”


Fillon, the Republican candidate, is under pressure because the satirical weekly Le Canard Enchaine published that his wife Penelope has received 900,000 euros over the years as his parliamentary assistant. The claim is that she has done little to justify these payments. A poll showed that the great majority of French do not believe Fillon, who says that she produced value for money. As his support in polls declines, Fillon may well withdraw his candidacy. Fillon attacked Halal and kosher slaughter in 2012. He said that Jews and Muslims must drop their ancestral traditions of slaughter, which are not very relevant nowadays. The Jewish umbrella organization CRIF came out against him on this issue.


Centrist Macron was economics minister from 2012 to 2014 in the Socialist government of prime minister Manuel Valls. He has said that more and more parents send their children to religious schools, which teach them hatred of the [French] republic. He added that they teach mainly in Arabic or elsewhere the Torah without teaching basic knowledge. The large French Jewish Social Organization (FSJU) came out with a press release saying that Macron’s statement was “profoundly offensive, incorrect and a caricature.” Its president, Ariel Goldman, said that “private Jewish education follows the school program established by the national ministry of education.”


The FSJU also pointed out that the growth of enrollment in Jewish schools is the result of the increased antisemitism in public schools. Macron’s staff claimed that his words had been wrongly interpreted. Macron has visited Israel and said afterwards: “In Israel there is a culture of risk, which sometimes has been forgotten in France’s genes. There should be a capacity to revive this taste for risk. Without it we cannot do anything. We should go fast because our country cannot wait.”


The Socialist candidate, Benoit Hamon, who defeated Valls in primaries, is in fourth place in the polls. He was, for a short time, education minister and belongs to the extreme Left of the party. Hamon is the most negative candidate as far as Israel is concerned. He has a substantial record of anti-Israel remarks. After the Gaza flotilla, he accused Israel of having caused a bloodbath. He was one of the main instigators of the recognition of the Palestinian state in the French parliament in 2014. Most recently, he expressed his happiness about the anti-Israel UN Security Council resolution 2334. There have been several additional anti-Israel statements over the years. Hamon’s position can be summarized as: being anti-Israel is a very good way to recover French Muslim voters lost during the Hollande presidency.


The current Socialist government frequently takes pro-Palestinian positions. It initiated the useless Paris Middle East Peace conference and aggressively condemns building in the territories, including east Jerusalem. From an Israeli viewpoint, a hypothetical president Hamon is far worse than a president Le Pen. Yet the Israeli government avoids contact with the FN party. It does not want to legitimize a far-right movement with fascist origins. From the above, it can also be seen that the candidates’ attitudes toward Israel and toward local Jews are not necessarily parallel. In the long term, this may create a rift between Israel and a portion of France’s Jews. Overall, as said, all candidates are problematic, which reflects the general situation for Jews in France and the attitude of its governments toward Israel.






Yves Mamou

Gatestone Institute, Feb. 7, 2017


An important red line in France has just been crossed. In true dhimmi fashion, in a move reminiscent of both the Inquisition and the Dreyfus Trial, all of France's so-called "anti-racist" organizations have joined a jihad against free speech and against truth. On January 25, 2017, France's "anti-racist" organizations — all of them, even the Jewish LICRA (International League against Racism and anti-Semitism) — joined the Islamist CCIF (Collective against Islamophobia) in court against Georges Bensoussan, a highly regarded Jewish historian of Moroccan extraction, and an expert on the history of Jews in Arab countries. Not only did the Islamist CCIF and the Jewish LICRA unite against him, but also the French Human Rights League, SOS Racism and MRAP (Movement against Racism and for Friendship with People).


Bensoussan is being prosecuted for remarks he made during a "France Culture" radio debate, about antisemitism among French Arabs: "An Algerian sociologist, Smaïn Laacher, with great courage, just said in a documentary aired on Channel 3: It is a shame to deny this taboo, namely that in the Arab families in France, and everyone knows it but nobody wants to say it, anti-Semitism is sucked with mother's milk."


The documentary that Bensoussan was referring to was called "Teachers in the Lost Territories of the Republic," and was aired in October 2015, on Channel 3. In this documentary, Laacher, who is a French professor of Algerian origin, said: "Antisemitism is already awash in the domestic space… It… rolls almost naturally off the tongue, awash in the language… It is an insult. When parents shout at their children, when they want to reprimand them, they call them Jews. Yes. All Arab families know this. It is monumental hypocrisy not to see that this anti-Semitism begins as a domestic one."


No complaint was filed against Laacher. But as soon as Bensoussan, in the heat of a radio debate, referred to Arab anti-Semitism as "sucked in with mother's milk", CCIF, followed by all anti-racist associations, brought Bensoussan to supposed justice. Their accusation was simple: "mother's milk" is not a metaphor for cultural anti-Semitism transmitted through education, but a genetic and "essentialist" accusation. It means: "all Arabs are anti-Semitic" — in other words, Bensoussan is a racist. Professor Smaïn Laacher, of the University of Strasbourg, denied the quote and told the website Mediapart. "I have never said nor written that kind of ignominy". He filed a complaint against Bensoussan, but later withdrew it. Judgment will be rendered March 7.


This witch-hunt against Bensoussan is symptomatic of the state of free speech today in France. With the leading Islamist CCIF stalking "Islamophobia", intellectual intimidation is the rule. Complaints are filed against everyone not saying that Muslims are the main victim of racism in France. In December 2016, Pascal Bruckner, a writer and philosopher, was also brought to court for saying in 2015, on Arte TV, "We need to make the record of collaborators of Charlie Hebdo's murderers". He named people in France who had instilled a climate of hatred against Charlie: the entertainer Guy Bedos, the rap singer Nekfeu, anti-racist organizations like The Indivisibles, or the journalist Rokhaya Diallo and the supremacist movement for "people of color" known as Les Indigènes de la République ("The Indigenous of the Republic").


It was not the first time that Islamists filed complaints against people they dislike. Charlie Hebdo was twice brought to court by Islamist organizations. Twice, the accusations of Charlie's Islamist accusers were dismissed. But with the Bensoussan trial, we are entering in a new era. The most venerable, the most authentic anti-racist organizations — some of them are older than a century — are, shamefully, lining up with Islamist organizations.


This tipping point was initiated in the 1980s by with SOS Racism. This organization, founded to organize young Muslims and help them to assimilate into French society rapidly, became a political movement, manipulated by the Socialist Party. SOS Racism and its slogan, "Don't hurt my buddy", rapidly became a new direction to the working class. With the working class attracted by the far-right party Front National, the Socialist party needed a new "clientele". They chose Muslims, especially young Muslims, as the new revolutionary labor class. It did not matter that most of them were unemployed: they were "victims"…

[To Read the full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]






Joseph Bottum

Weekly Standard, Jan. 26, 2017


On January 13, 2017, a German regional court ruled that a lower court had been correct to find no anti-Semitism in the attempt by a group of Muslim men to burn down a synagogue in the city of Wuppertal. The failed firebombing attack had occurred in 2014, during the Israeli conflict with Hamas in Gaza. In 2015 the lower court found that the men had intended their actions as a protest against Israel—with the result that the adults in the group deserved to have their sentences suspended, freeing them from jail time. And now, after review by a superior court, the German legal system has affirmed that German synagogues are legitimate targets of protest against Israel.


Remember this moment, for the German courts have exposed the mechanism by which opposition to Israel proves indistinguishable from opposition to Jews. Perhaps at one point, a distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism was notionally possible. But those days have been gone for many years, lost in the mists. And now, even the attempt to make the distinction becomes a way of insisting on a Jewish difference. "Anti-Zionism is the new dressing for the old passion of anti-Semitism," as the French writer Bernard-Henri Lévy tried to tell a New York audience on January 11—and it is perhaps worth noting that the synagogue in Wuppertal was built on the site of a previous synagogue, destroyed by the Nazis on Kristallnacht in 1938.


To see the logic at play, suppose that three white men had attacked a traditionally black church in Birmingham, Alabama, scrawling graffiti and trying to set the church on fire. Caught and convicted, they were sentenced to a year in jail—with the jail time suspended. Yes, the judge explained, they had been unlawfully violent and thus deserved to be convicted. But he suspended their sentences because their purpose in attacking the African-American church had not been to harm Americans but to protest the failure of the Nigerian government to halt the kidnapping of schoolgirls by the radical African militia Boko Haram.


Or suppose something similar, but this time in Manila. After a court in the Philippines convicted several citizens of defacing a local mosque, the judge suspended their sentences—on the grounds that, however illegally they had behaved, they were engaged in legitimate political protest over the oppression of Christian guest workers by the Islamic government in Saudi Arabia. And then suppose that three men in Germany were arrested for throwing a Molotov cocktail at a synagogue. After their conviction, however, their sentences were suspended—again on the grounds that their admittedly illegal violence was motivated by a desire not to hurt German Jews but by a legitimate wish to protest the policies and actions of the foreign state of Israel. They were, as the court explained, trying to draw "attention to the Gaza conflict" and so had not been motivated by anti-Semitism.


Only the last of these three events is true, of course. But more to the point, only the last is even imaginable. Black citizens of the United States are never taken as symbolic representatives of African governments. For that matter, imagine the outcry if a judge condoned violence against the places of worship of native citizens who happened to be Muslim—because a distant government was doing something objectionable. And then we have the Jews. If trying to set fire to a local synagogue is merely a criticism of Israel, then every Jewish house of worship is a symbolic embassy of a foreign power: a stand-in for the nation-state of Israel. And Germans prove not to be Germans when they attend a synagogue. The salient fact is instead that they are Jews.                                                                           





AN ANSWER TO PARIS: THE ‘GENTILE ALIYA’ EPIDEMIC                                                    

Nathan Lopes Cardozo

                                 Jerusalem Post, Jan. 23, 2017


Israel will be facing an unprecedented crisis that will shake its very foundations. No, it won’t be caused by the recent Paris Conference or other forms of blatant antisemitism that are overtaking Europe. It’s much worse than that. World leaders are completely oblivious to it, and even the Israeli government has no clue. Israel will soon have to expand its borders far beyond its wildest dreams – not for the benefit of the Jews, but at the request of millions of Europeans, and possibly many other gentiles who will wish to come on aliya.


As Europe is disintegrating before our very eyes, it’s only a matter of time before more and more Europeans will be seeking safer havens. And where else would they want to go but Israel? It is obvious that such emigration is drawing near. Since the Holocaust, Europe has been going downhill. It allowed the murder of six million Jews, thereby destroying many of its most dedicated citizens, a large part of its culture and some of its most gifted physicians, scientists, artists, thinkers and business people who contributed to its flourishing culture as well as to its domestic and international trade. Millions of its gentile inhabitants were wiped out as well, and what remained was an impoverished and miserable continent. There is merit to the claim made by some that Europe died in Auschwitz.


In its attempt to rebuild itself, Europe worked hard to revive its economy and reinvent its culture. It tried to turn the tide and remove from its midst any form of racist ideology. To accomplish this, it had to become multicultural and put nearly no limits on its immigration quota.  With noble intentions, Europeans have accepted many emigrants from war-torn and impoverished countries, thus unwittingly allowing Islamic State (ISIS) and other radical organizations to settle in their cities and organize terrorist attacks with the clear goal of bringing Europe to its knees. Motivated by panic and fear of retaliation, European leaders have lost all sense of proportion and are now doomed to pay the price.


Paris suffered a series of terrorist attacks in November 2015, Amsterdam and London will soon face their own onslaughts, and no European will be able to walk the streets safely. Just over a year ago, Brussels shut down its metro system, shops and schools, warning people to avoid crowds because of a “serious and imminent threat of coordinated, multiple attacks by terrorists.” Five months later, in April 2016, its airport and a metro station were targeted in three coordinated bomb attacks. Clubs, cafes and restaurants closed their doors. It won’t be long before we see large army battalions walking through every major city in Europe, followed by the shutting down of airports and other major public venues.


Eventually, all normal life will be disrupted, and societies will no longer be able to function. The United States did not learn its lesson from 9/11 and has paved the way for the Iranian nuclear bomb. Only several days before the Paris attacks, president Barack Obama informed the world that ISIS was contained, if not totally defeated. The most astonishing fact is that the Israeli government has been alerting the world for years that this would happen. It warned that if terrorist organizations such as Hamas, Hezbollah and others in the Middle East were not completely neutralized, their lethal intentions would be carried out in Europe and the United States, after which they would spread their deadly tentacles to all corners of the earth.


But instead of heeding these words, many world leaders have decided that the only way to stop the terrorists is for Israel to cease building a few housing projects in Judea and Samaria. Were it not so tragic, with catastrophic consequences, it would be laughable. These leaders refuse to admit that the Palestinians would have had their state years ago had they simply stopped indoctrinating their children with hate against Jews and accepted the tiny, peaceful State of Israel that dwells in their midst. On top of that, Europe has decided to boycott Israeli products coming from what it refers to as “the occupied territories.” Fooling themselves into believing that this is the solution to all the devastatingly lethal global problems, they use it as a pretext to cover up their own horrendous mistakes, and it has now become standard procedure. It doesn’t seem to bother the Europeans in the least that their boycotts harm the Palestinians working in the West Bank more than they harm the Israelis.


Europe continues to live in peace by tranquilizing itself – this time, by hiding behind the Paris conference. Out of a desperate need to deny the truth, it has utterly misconstrued the nature of its enemies and has by now exposed its countries to dangers so deadly that it will be impossible to stop them by any means. Unfortunately, Europe will not fight back, no matter how many times they announce their intentions to create a so-called “global front.” Everyone knows that once things calm down – nothing more than a tactic on the terrorists’ part – they will decide that no further action is necessary and will return to their former comatose state, only to be awakened when disastrous events, much greater than the ones they have experienced until now, suddenly befall them, shocking their leaders and overwhelming all of them by causing heavy casualties.


When that happens, Europeans will throw up their hands in despair and look for an alternative place to live. They will come to the conclusion that of all the Western countries in the world, only in Israel will they find the tranquility they desperately desire. The reason is obvious: Israel is the only country possessing the combination of know-how and willingness to fight its enemies head-on and is prepared, if necessary, to go all the way. Precisely because of Israel’s long and ongoing experience with terrorism, there is a smooth-running synergy between its citizens and security forces when terrorists strike. With rare exceptions, people maintain equilibrium under immense pressure. For this reason, Israel is safer than many other countries.


And so, to everyone’s surprise, Israel will be the destination. As when an epidemic strikes, people will want to pack their bags and move here. But this will require a major shift in the European attitude toward Jews. Instead of hating us, Europeans will investigate their lineage and by hook or crook will suddenly “find” that they are actually of Jewish descent, as in the case of the many anusim (conversos) today in Spain and Portugal. Millions will apply to Israeli embassies and claim that on the basis of the Law of Return they have a right to live in Israel. Even committed antisemites will “discover” their Jewish ancestry, and an entire black market of Jewish pedigree documents will appear…Paris can make its recommendations, or even try to force Israel into an impossible settlement policy. But when many of its own citizens and others Europeans will actually arrive in Israel, they will ask for more Israeli land on which to build their future. The world will be shocked, the Jews will smile and the Israeli gentiles, fighting to prove that they are Jewish, will laugh with delight.


Nathan Lopes Cardozo is a CIJR Academic Fellow

CIJR Wishes All Our Friends & Supporters: Shabbat Shalom!




On Topic Links


Poisoning Palestinian Minds (Interview With Hillel Heuer): Wall Street Journal, Feb. 8, 2017—UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer on how a rogue U.N. agency turns a blind eye to terror.

British Prime Minister May Calls On Opposition Leader Corbyn to Join Her in Denouncing Muslim Discrimination Against Israeli Passport-Holders: Barney Breen-Portnoy, Algemeiner, Feb. 1, 2017—British Prime Minister Theresa May called on Wednesday on Opposition Leader Jeremy Corbyn to join her in denouncing the discrimination displayed by some Muslim-majority countries against Israeli passport-holders.

Testing Europe’s Values: Editorial, New York Times, Feb. 3, 2017—When the European Union and Turkey reached a deal last year to lessen the flow of refugees into Greece, the priority was on defending borders, not the humanitarian crisis. Sadly, that remains Europe’s priority as it turns its attention to halting the flow of people from Libya to Italy.

Beautiful Friendship: Caroline Glick, Jerusalem Post, Feb. 9, 2017—Less than a week after he was inaugurated into office, President Donald Trump announced that he had repaired the US’s fractured ties with Israel. “It got repaired as soon as I took the oath of office,” he said. Not only does Israel now enjoy warm relations with the White House. When Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrives in the US capital next week, he will be greeted by the most supportive political climate Israel has ever seen in Washington.                              














Toronto Event


Mordechai kedarMordechai Kedar

Post-Election Israel in a
Dangerous & Turbulent Middle East

Dr. Mordechai Kedar, an Israeli scholar of Arabic literature & lecturer at Bar Ilan University.  Dr. Kedar served for 25 years in the IDF Military Intelligence, where he specializes in Islamic groups, the political discourse of Arab countries, the Arabic press & mass media &  the Syrian domestic arena. 
Jan 27, 2013 @ 7:30 PM
Temple Sinai,  210 Wilson Ave. 

Admission: $10  –  Students: Free
RSVP:   Tel: 1-866-303-5544;      cijr@isranet.org


Download Today's Isranet Daily Briefing.pdf 




(Please Note: articles may have been shortened in the interest of space. Please click link for the complete article – Ed.)


Bucharest Kristallnacht – January 21 – 23, 1941: Baruch Cohen—Seventy-two years later the echo of the Bucharest pogrom is still with me today. The “night of broken glass”, the burned-down synagogues, the number of dead, still uncounted…January 21 – 23, 1941. I lived it then, and I live it today!


Italian Jewish MP Quitting Politics, Making Aliya: Benjamin Weinthal, Jerusalem Post, Jan. 18, 2013—Fiamma Nirenstein has had a distinguished career as a legislator and a deputy. She has gone to great lengths to combat terrorism in Europe, as well as anti- Semitism and racism. Nirenstein, who has been a frequent visitor to Israel, summed up her commitment to Zionism: ”Love for life in Israel is everywhere.”

Israel Welcomes 2,000th India Bnei Menashe Oleh: Laura Kelly, Jerusalem Post, Jan. 17, 2013—"This has been my peoples' dream for thousands of years," says 18-year-old Mirna Singsit upon her arrival.

Jihad in America: The Grand Deception, Steve Emerson on Fox News: Steve Emerson, Investigative Project on Terrorism, January 4, 2013—The documentary is called The Grand Deception and it describes what the film makers call the dual nature of the Muslim Brotherhood. To the outside world it tries to present a moderate image, claim the film makers, all the while hiding more radical goals including goals for America.


On Topic Links


What Judea & Samaria Mean to the Jewish People: Brandon Marlon, Jewish Press, Jan.17, 2013


Is Israel’s Electoral System Just Fine the Way it is?: Raphael Ahren, Times of Israel, January 18, 2013

Ariel Mayor Ron Nachman Dies at 70: Elad Benari, Arutz Sheva, Jan. 18, 2013

‘Dear Abby’ Advice Columnist Dies at Age 94: Steve Karnowski, Times of Israel, January 18, 2013






January 21 – 23, 1941

Baruch Cohen

In memory of beloved “Malca” – z”l


Seventy-two years later the echo of the Bucharest pogrom is still with me today. The “night of broken glass”, the burned-down synagogues, the number of dead, still uncounted…January 21 – 23, 1941. I lived it then, and I live it today!


Emil Dorian in his book The Quality of Witness – a Romanian Diary of 1937 -1944 (p. 138-139)


What happened in Vacaresti, Dudesti and surrounding neighbourhoods is indescribable [my emphasis].  A madness of destruction and crime descended on the ghetto. Everything that could be carried out of the house was stolen, the owners beaten, some murdered. A synagogue has been destroyed to the ground. They set it on fire with cans of gasoline placed in four corners and the looters danced by the flames! On the road to Jilava dozens of corpses have been found, their identification papers scattered about….


Mihail Sebastian in his book, Journal 1935-1944, writes:


In its hooliganistic, antisemitic excess, the pogrom could be said to be Romania’s equivalent to Germany’s Kristallnacht. (p. 15, “Introduction”)


            January 24…I heard from Alice that Vacaresti and Dudesti districts (the Jewish neighbourhoods) had been set on fire and looted during the night. The same seems to have happened in Calea Rahovei and many other parts of the city. (p. 308)


Zachor! Remember!: January 21 – 23, 1941, Bucharest



Top of Page






Benjamin Weinthal

Jerusalem Post, Jan. 18, 2013


The vice president of the Committee on Foreign Affairs in the Italian Chamber of Deputies, Fiamma Nirenstein, on Thursday announced her decision to make aliya. Nirenstein said she doesn’t plan to run again in the Italian elections and in addition to making aliya, will return to her career as a professional journalist.


“I am going back to journalism and to Israel,” said Nirenstein, adding that these were “the two best things” in her life Asked by the Italian newspaper Il Giornale about her plans, Nirenstein said: “I want to come back to Israel and also to apply for citizenship.”


She said she plans to make her application for citizenship on January 27 because it marks International Holocaust Remembrance Day. She noted that “everybody can see that unfortunately anti-Semitism is still growing worldwide, and Israel is the only warm homeland for the Jewish people.”


Nirenstein has had a distinguished career as a legislator and a deputy. She has gone to great lengths to combat terrorism in Europe, as well as anti- Semitism and racism. She has pursued legislation and queries with a view toward pushing the European Union and the Italian government to ban Hezbollah and Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps within the EU’s territories. And she has advocated that the IRGC and Hezbollah be listed as terror groups on the EU list of outlawed terrorist entities.


During Operation Pillar of Defense in November, Nirenstein, who served as parliamentarian for Berlusconi’s People of Freedom party and was elected to office in 2008, spoke at a large pro-Israel demonstration in the heart of Rome.


She was born in 1945 in Florence, and is a prolific author of books and articles on the Jewish people, democracy, Israel and anti-Semitism.


Nirenstein told the Italian paper that she believes “that Israel is today the best country able to offer culture, sociality, democracy, morality; a country where people adopted a lifestyle simple and natural,” and where its people are united as a family in “their fight for survival, and in their great love for their country.”


Nirenstein serves as chairwoman of the International Council of Jewish Parliamentarians. Pro-Israel advocates say her passionate activism has helped strengthen the alliance between the EU and Israel on core security and economic matters. Nirenstein, who has been a frequent visitor to Israel, summed up her commitment to Zionism: ”Love for life in Israel is everywhere.”



Top of Page





Laura Kelly

Jerusalem Post, Jan. 17, 2013


Israel welcomed its 2,000th member of the Bnei Menashe community on Thursday, when a flight carrying 53 of the tribe’s members from Manipur, India, touched down at Ben-Gurion Airport. The Bnei Menashe claim descent from one of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel, sent into exile for more than 27 centuries. The community has always observed Shabbat and kept kosher.


Today the Bnei Menashe numbers around 7,000 and resides in India’s northeastern border states of Manipur and Mizoram. Prior to the current aliya, there were 1,725 Bnei Menashe in Israel. Most of the community resides in Acre and Migdal Ha’emek.


“I’m so very happy right now,” said 18-year-old Mirna Singsit, who was presented with a certificate acknowledging her as the 2,000th Bnei Menashe oleh. “Not only has this been my dream since I was born, but it has been my peoples’ dream for thousands of years.”


Singsit came to Israel with her parents and three brothers, but left behind a grandparent, four uncles and two aunts. She hopes to continue her education in Israel, studying for her bachelors degree in political science. Singsit wants to live in Jerusalem, “the Holiest place on earth,” she said.


After a five year hiatus, the Bnei Menashe aliya program was restarted following a unanimous decision by the Israeli cabinet last October, a move which was championed by Immigrant Absorption Minister Sofa Landver, who pushed for its approval.


The aliya program was frozen in 2007 by the Olmert government after members of the cabinet, in particular interior minister Meir Sheetrit, opposed it. Over the past month, immigrants arrived on five flights facilitated by Shavei Israel, a nonprofit organization aimed at strengthening ties with Jewish descendants around the world. “This is an emotional day for all of us,” said Shavei Israel chairman Michael Freund. “But we will not rest until all the remaining Bnei Menashe still in India are able to make aliya as well.”


Top of Page


Steve Emerson

Investigative Project on Terrorism, January 4, 2013

Fox News Anchor Megyn Kelly: Well there's a new film coming out that takes a look at a group called the Muslim Brotherhood and its influence around the world and here at home. The documentary is called The Grand Deception and it describes what the film makers call the dual nature of the Muslim Brotherhood. To the outside world it tries to present a moderate image, claim the film makers, all the while hiding more radical goals including goals for America. Here's a clip from the trailer. (Watch trailer here)


Nathan Garrett: The Muslim Brotherhood is an international movement the goal of which is to create an Islamic state universally all over the world.


Mamoun Fandy: In my mind the Muslim Brotherhood is the mother of all
Islamic organization of the 20th century including Al Qaeda.


Abdel Malik Ali: Democracy does not equal freedom. No, we don't want to democratize Islam, we want to Islamize democracy.


Abdur-Rahman Muhammad: They believe that Western civilization is corrupt, is evil, is decadent and they want to dismantle it.


Kelly: Joining me now is the film's producer, Steve Emerson. He's also the founder of the Investigative Project on Terrorism. Steve, welcome back to the program. So what is this about? Is it about the Muslim Brotherhood in America or around the world?


Emerson: Well it's primarily about the Muslim Brotherhood and other radical Islamic offshoots in the United States that hide under the moniker of being 'civil rights groups' or innocent religious groups, but in fact have an ulterior agenda and are members of the larger Muslim Brotherhood infrastructure. In fact all we did was to video secretly behind closed doors radical rallies of Muslim Brotherhood organizations in the United States and capture their statements in which they talk about supporting jihad, supporting taking over the United States, supporting terrorism, calling the United States an anti-Muslim power, and claiming that all arrests since 9/11 were fabricated. And then publicly before the news cameras, before the New York Times or on television they claim that they're against terrorism, they claim they're for peace and for love and that they're for moderation. But in fact it's a grand deception. And the reason I call the movie The Grand Deception is that it actually comes from an FBI wire tap of radical Islamic members of Hamas secretly meeting in Philadelphia in 1993 in which they openly talk about the use of deception to fool the American public into making the public believe that they're actually moderate when they really are supporters of Hamas, a notorious terrorist group.


Kelly: There is a sound bite in the film from the director of the Islamic Society of North America that speaks to the points you just raised. I want to play that for the viewers now. This is sound bite number three. Clip:


Sayyid Syeed: Our job is to change the Constitution of America.


Doug Farah: There is a systematic plan to establish an Islamist beach head in the United States with the eventual goal of watching the United States crumble from within and establishing the Islamic rule in this country.


Kelly: Is this present day, Steve?


Emerson: Absolutely. Look, they know they have to clean up their act and they did since 9/11, since the language they were using before 9/11 was too incendiary and they didn't think anybody was watching. Now they know people are watching. But we still go behind closed doors. My organization, the Investigative Project on Terrorism, sends in dozens of informants every month to record secretly what goes on behind closed doors, and the proof is in the pudding. The man who just said we have to change the Constitution is speaking at a rally actually, where the head of the American Muslim Council, a man named Mr. Alamoudi, who for 13 years was invited to the White House, the CIA, the FBI, he testified at Congress, and yet in 2003 he was arrested for a conspiracy involving Al Qaeda to murder the head of Saudi Arabia. And in the indictment, it showed that for the previous eight years while he had access to the White House, while he had access to the FBI, while he was sent abroad by the State Department, he was secretly a member of and a courier for Hamas and Al Qaeda. This is the deception.


Kelly: I want to talk to you about one of the more shocking clips in the documentary of this man who was giving the invocation before the US Congress and then shortly thereafter talks about the US being a garbage can. Clip:


Siraj Wahhaj: In the name of God, most gracious, most merciful, guide the leaders of this nation who have been given a great responsibility in worldly affairs, guide them and grant them righteousness and wisdom.


Siraj Wahhaj: You want to defend this country. You know what this country is? It's a garbage can. Filthy, filthy and sick.


Kelly: Who was that guy?

Emerson: Siraj Wahhaj is a major imam from Brooklyn who was the first Muslim to open the invocation in Congress in 1991, but in fact is a very, very radical militant Muslim cleric who has called for jihad, he has supported terrorism. In fact he was an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing case. And believe it or not, despite all that has come out including his unindicted status, to this very day he is still being invited to and paid for by US government agencies to speak at counterterrorism conferences. This is just one example in the film. There are dozens of other examples where radical Islamic groups, and when I say radical Islamic groups or Muslim Brotherhood groups, it's not me defining them. We're using the words that they themselves use.


Kelly: Is there a difference because we are told that the Muslim Brotherhood, some factions of it, are much more moderate. This I give you from the New York Times – “it is at its core a middle class missionary institution led not by religious scholars but by doctors, lawyers and professionals.” We were told over in Egypt that that's what the Muslim Brotherhood looked like, not so much these radicals.


Emerson: In fact they are doctors and lawyers and engineers. They are the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood is made up mostly of its leaders – Dr. Ayman al Zawahiri, the number two of al Qaeda after the deceased Osama bin Laden, was a pediatrician, a surgeon. So in fact the Muslim Brotherhood is a totalitarian regime. There's no doubt about it. It's what they say themselves, what they say on their web sites, what they say in speeches that we have on the film. But then before the New York Times which pretends that they are simply political and moderate, they present themselves with a façade of being peaceful. Nothing could be further from the truth and that's the basic essence of the film is to show the duplicity of how these groups pretend to be moderate but behind closed doors are as radical as the Ku Klux Klan.



Top of Page




Is Israel’s Electoral System Just Fine the Way it is?: Raphael Ahren, Times of Israel, January 18, 2013—In a new 165-page book, “It’s Not the Electoral System, Stupid! Or: Why the Israeli Electoral System Is No Worse Than Others and Should Not Be Changed,” Einat Wilf, formerly Shimon Peres’s foreign policy adviser, engages in an eye-opening study of comparative politics that challenges the accepted notion that things would be so much better if only Israel would amend its voting process.


What Judea & Samaria Mean to the Jewish People: Brandon Marlon, Jewish Press, Jan.17, 2013—For Jews, the ancient tribal territories of Judah, Benjamin, Ephraim, and west Menasheh – a.k.a. Judea and Samaria or the West Bank – form the very heartland of the homeland. Sadly, ceding these central areas to the Arabs remains a political possibility and far too many Jews who are disconnected from their history and heritage are wholly unaware of what these crucial regions of the Land of Israel mean to Jewry collectively.


‘Dear Abby’ advice columnist dies at age 94: Steve Karnowski, Times of Israel, January 18, 2013—Pauline Friedman Phillips, the daughter of Russian Jewish immigrants, gave advice on love to readers of 1,000 newspapers worldwide. Phillips, who as “Dear Abby” dispensed snappy, sometimes saucy advice on love, marriage and meddling mothers-in-law to millions of newspaper readers around the world, has died. She was 94.


Ariel Mayor Ron Nachman Dies at 70: Elad Benari, Arutz Sheva, Jan. 18, 2013—Ariel mayor Ron Nachman died on Friday after a long battle with cancer. He was 70 years old. Nachman, one of the most prominent Jewish leaders in Judea and Samaria, was elected to the 13th Knesset as part of the Likud party and was a member of the Finance Committee and the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee.




Visit CIJR’s Bi-Weekly Webzine: Israzine.

CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing is available by e-mail.
Please urge colleagues, friends, and family to visit our website for more information on our ISRANET series.
To join our distribution list, or to unsubscribe, visit us at http://www.isranet.org/.

The ISRANET Daily Briefing is a service of CIJR. We hope that you find it useful and that you will support it and our pro-Israel educational work by forwarding a minimum $90.00 tax-deductible contribution [please send a cheque or VISA/MasterCard information to CIJR (see cover page for address)]. All donations include a membership-subscription to our respected quarterly ISRAFAX print magazine, which will be mailed to your home.

CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing attempts to convey a wide variety of opinions on Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world for its readers’ educational and research purposes. Reprinted articles and documents express the opinions of their authors, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the Canadian Institute for Jewish Research.



Ber Lazarus, Publications Editor, Canadian Institute for Jewish ResearchL'institut Canadien de recherches sur le Judaïsme, www.isranet.org

Tel: (514) 486-5544 – Fax:(514) 486-8284 ; ber@isranet.org








La bande de Gaza n'est pas la clé, le couloir de Philadelphie l'est

Daniel Pipes

National Review Online, 27 novembre 2012

Adaptation française: Anne-Marie Delcambre de Champvert


La deuxième guerre entre le Hamas et Israël du 10 au 21 novembre a inspiré un vaste débat sur les droits et les torts, avec chaque côté lançant un appel au grand bloc indécis (19 pour cent des Américains selon CNN/ORC, 38 pour cent, selon Rasmussen). Israël est-il un Etat criminel qui n'a pas le droit d'exister, et encore moins de déployer des forces? Ou est-ce une démocratie libérale moderne avec la règle de droit qui protège à juste titre des civils innocents? La morale conduit ce débat.


Pour toute personne sensible, il est évident que les Israéliens sont à 100 pour cent justifiés de se protéger contre les attaques gratuites. Une caricature de la première guerre Hamas-Israël de 2008-09 montrait symboliquement un terroriste palestinien tirant de derrière un landau de bébé contre un soldat israélien se tenant, lui, devant un landau de bébé.


Plus difficile est la question de savoir comment empêcher de nouvelles guerres entre Israël et le Hamas. Un peu d'histoire: si les Israéliens sont à 100 pour cent justifiés de se protéger, leur gouvernement assume également la totale responsabilité pour la création de cette crise qu'il s'est infligée à lui-même. Plus précisément, il a fait deux retraits unilatéraux peu judicieux en 2005:


 •De Gaza: Ariel Sharon a été réélu au poste de Premier ministre en janvier 2003, en partie en se moquant d'un rival qui avait demandé le retrait unilatéral de tous les habitants et des soldats israéliens de Gaza; puis, inexplicablement, en novembre 2003, il a adopté cette même politique et l'a mise en vigueur en août 2005. J'ai baptisé ceci à ce moment-là, "l'une des pires erreurs jamais réalisées par une démocratie."


 •Depuis le couloir de Philadelphie: Sous la pression américaine, en particulier de la secrétaire d'Etat américaine, Condoleezza Rice, Sharon a signé un accord en septembre 2005, intitulé «Dispositions convenues», à savoir que les forces israéliennes se retiraient du couloir de Philadelphie,une zone de 14 kms de long et 100 mètres de large entre Gaza et l'Egypte. La malheureuse "Mission d'union européenne de surveillance à la frontière au point de passage de Rafah" (EUBAM Rafah) a pris leur place.


Le problème était que les autorités égyptiennes avaient promis dans leur traité de paix de 1979 avec Israël (III, 2) d'empêcher les «actes ou menaces de belligérance, d'hostilité ou de violence», mais en fait elles avaient autorisé la contrebande massive d'armements à Gaza via les tunnels. Selon Doron Almog, un ancien chef du Commandement Sud d'Israël au début de 2004, «la contrebande a une dimension stratégique» car elle implique des quantités suffisantes d'armes et de matériel «pour transformer Gaza en aire de lancement pour des attaques de plus en plus profondes contre Israël même.»


Almog a estimé ces politiques «un pari risqué» de la part du régime de Moubarak et un "profond danger stratégique" qui pourrait "mettre en péril l'accord de paix israélo-égyptien et menacer la stabilité de toute la région." Il a attribué le laxisme égyptien à un mélange de vues anti-sionistes parmi l'administration et à des sentiments anti-sionistes du public égyptien prêts à ce qu'on leur donne libre cours.


Sharon avec arrogance a signé les «arrangements convenus», contrairement à la forte opposition de l'establishment de la sécurité d'Israël. Bien sûr, en enlevant cette épaisseur de protection israélienne, une "augmentation exponentielle"» dans l'arsenal de Gaza de façon prévisible a suivi, aboutissant aux missiles fajr-5 qui ont atteint ce mois-ci Tel-Aviv.


Pour permettre à des soldats israéliens d'empêcher de façon efficace l'ensemble des armes d'atteindre la bande de Gaza, David Eshel de Defense Update a argumenté pour la reprise par l'armée israélienne du couloir de Philadelphie et l'augmentation de ses dimensions en en faisant une «ligne de sécurité complètement stérile d'environ 1.000 mètres», même si cela signifie avoir à faire déménager environ 50.000 habitants de Gaza. Fait intéressant, Ahmed Qurei de l'Autorité palestinienne, en privé avait approuvé des mesures semblables en 2008.


Almog va plus loin: notant la profonde implication de l'Iran dans la bande de Gaza, il préconise de faire du couloir de Philadelphie un no man 's land en l'élargissant d'à peu près 10 kms. Ce qui serait parfait, m'écrit-il, le corps des ingénieurs de l'armée des USA construirait cet obstacle de lutte contre la contrebande et l'armée américaine aurait un rôle continu de police de la frontière. Deuxième choix, les Israéliens font cela seuls. (L'accord Gaza-Jéricho de mai 1994 encore opérationnel établit une «Zone d'installation militaire» sous le contrôle total d'Israël – en fait, le couloir de Philadelphie – qui fournit à Jérusalem la base juridique pour reprendre cette frontière cruciale.)


En revanche, Michael Herzog, ancien haut fonctionnaire au ministère de la Défense d'Israël, me dit qu'il est trop tard pour Israël pour reprendre le couloir de Philadelphie; que la pression internationale sur l'Egypte pour arrêter le flux d'armes vers la bande de Gaza est la solution. De même, l'ancien ambassadeur Dore Gold soutient les «arrangements» américano-israéliens pour écarter les nouvelles armes.


Je suis sceptique quant à un rôle américain efficace, militaire ou diplomatique; seuls les Israéliens sont incités à terminer définitivement les transferts d'armes. Les gouvernements occidentaux devraient signaler au Hamas qu'ils encourageront Jérusalem à répondre à la prochaine attaque de missiles en reprenant et en élargissant le couloir de Philadelphie, de cette façon empêchant plus d'agression, de tragédie humanitaire et de crises politiques.


Quelques anniversaires du Grand Jour des Palestiniens

Caroline Glick

upjf.org, 5 décembre 2012


Avec les nations d’Europe et le reste du monde alignés pour soutenir la demande de l’OLP de recevoir le statut d’Etat non membre à l’Assemblée Générale de l’ONU, il vaut bien la peine de noter deux anniversaires d’évènements liés mais oubliés. Bien sûr, chacun connaît évidemment l’anniversaire – le 29 novembre 1947 était le jour où l’Assemblée Générale des Nations Unies (UNGA) adopta le plan recommandant la partition du Mandat Britannique sur la Palestine en un Etat juif et un Etat arabe. Les Juifs acceptèrent le plan. Les Arabes – aussi bien localement et régionalement – le rejetèrent. Les Arabes locaux qui ne devinrent désignés comme « Palestiniens » que 25 ans plus tard, répondirent à la résolution 181 de l’UNGA par une guerre terroriste contre les Juifs. Leur guerre était commandée par des maîtres terroristes irakiens et libanais et soutenue par l’armée britannique et sa Légion Arabe de Transjordanie.


Le 15 mai 1948, cinq armées arabes étrangères envahirent l’Etat juif tout juste déclaré dans l’intention ouverte d’annihiler tous les Juifs. Voyons maintenant une paire d’anniversaires moins connus.


Les 28 novembre 1941, le chef religieux et politique des Arabes palestiniens et l’un des dirigeants les plus influents du monde arabe, Hadj Amin el Husseini rencontra Adolf Hitler à Berlin. Husseini avait courtisé les nazis juste après que ceux-ci parvinrent au pouvoir en 1933. Husseini fut obligé de fuir le Mandat Britannique en 1937 quand il élargit sa quatrième guerre terrorisfte contre les Juifs, qu’il entama en 1936 pour y entraîner les Britanniques aussi.


Il s’enfuit au Liban, puis en octobre 1939, il s’enfuit en Irak. En avril 1941, il fomenta un coup d’Etat pro-nazi en Irak. Alors que les Britanniques – avec l’assistance discrète des Juifs du territoire d’Israël – étaient enclins à entrer à Bagdad pour restaurer le gouvernement pro-britannique, Husseini lança le Farhud, un pogrome de trois  jours contre les Juifs de Bagdad, qui se tint pendant les fêtes de Shavouot. 150 juifs furent assassinés. Un millier fut blessé et 900 foyers juifs furent détruits.


Avec son coup d’Etat manqué et les Juifs assassinés, Husseini s’échappa en Iran  pro-nazie à l’époque, puis en octobre, en Allemagne via l’Italie. (Il fut exfiltré d’Iran sur un vol de la force aérienne italienne, et fut fêté par Mussolini quand il atterrit en Italie).


Il  arriva à Berlin et deux semaines et demie plus tard, il eut un long entretien en privé avec Hitler. Là, le 28 novembre 1941, deux mois avant la Conférence de Wanseee, lorsque le haut commandement allemand reçut les premiers ordres d’annihiler la communauté juive d’Europe, Hitler dit à Husseini qu’il avait l’intention d’éradiquer le Peuple juif de la surface de l’Europe.


Husseini resta à Berlin jusqu’à la fin de la guerre et servit d’agent nazi. A Berlin, il diffusait des diatribes quotidiennes vers le monde arabe sur la radio allemande à ondes courtes. Husseini exhortait particulièrement à tuer les Juifs au nom d’Allah et faisait cause commune avec les nazis qui les délivreraient des Juifs, des Britanniques et des Américains.


En 1943 Husseini organisa la Division SS ‘Hazhar’ des musulmans bosniaques. Sa division exécuta le massacre de 90 pourcent de la communauté juive bosniaque de 12,000 âmes.


In 1920 Husseini inventa personnellement ce qui fut plus tard connu sous le nom de mouvement national palestinien. Il dessina son identité sur la seule motivation de détruire la présence juive sur la Terre d’Israël.


Pendant la guerre, Husseini utilisa ses émissions pour former la conscience politique et religieuse du monde musulman en fusionnant la haine islamique antijuive avec l’antisémitisme annihilationiste nazi. Alors que la plus grande part de l’idéologie antisémite nazie a été discréditée dans l’Europe de l’après-guerre, elle demeurait le thème ayant la plus grande résonance dans la politique arabe depuis la Deuxième Guerre Mondiale.


En 1946, alors que ses compagnons criminels nazis étaient jugés à Nuremberg, Husseini fit un retour triomphal en Egypte où il fut accueilli comme un héros de guerre par le roi Farouk, les ‘Frères Musulmans’ et les jeunes officiers de l’armée égyptienne qui opérèrent la fusion du national socialisme nazi avec l’islamisme des ‘Frères Musulmans’ et s’emparèrent du pouvoir en Egypte après avoir déposé le roi Farouk en 1951.


L’attachement farouche du fondateur du nationalisme palestinien au génocide de la communauté juive nous amène au second anniversaire notable mais oublié que nous avons traversé ce mois-ci.


Le 12 novembre 1942, les Britanniques dirigeaient des forces  – avec le soutien massif mais jamais rapporté d’un commando juif et d’unités du génie de la Terre d’Israël –  et vainquirent ‘l’Afrika Corps’ conduit par le général Rommel dans la seconde bataille d’El Alamein. Avec cette défaite allemande, le spectre de l’occupation allemande du Moyen-Orient était écarté. Husseini et Himmler avaient planifié que sous l’occupation allemande, les Arabes étendraient l’Holocauste aux 800.000 Juifs du monde arabe et aux 450.000 Juifs de la Terre d’Israël. A cette fin, les Allemands avaient organisé l’unité Afrika des Einzatzgruppen rattachée à l’armée de Rommel. Sous le commandement du lieutenant colonel Walter Rauff, elle avait pour tâche d’assassiner les Juifs vivant dans les zones qui devaient passer sous occupation allemande.


Il tombe bien qu’hier, pour l’anniversaire de la réunion entre Hitler et Husseini, l’Allemagne ait annoncé qu’elle ne s’opposerait pas à la tentative des héritiers de Husseini de recevoir la reconnaissance de l’ONU d’un Etat palestinien qui cherche la destruction d’Israël. 


Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.



L’imposture Mahmoud Abbas

Guy Millière

menapress.org, 2 décembre 2012



Voici quelques jours à peine, Israël recevait une pluie meurtrière de roquettes et de missiles lancés depuis Gaza. Qu’ils n’aient pas fait davantage de morts et de destructions relève des capacités de défense d’Israël et non de la volonté de ses ennemis. L’Etat hébreu a répliqué comme il le fallait, en détruisant les caches d’armes dont disposaient les tireurs.


Israël s’est, bien sûr, attiré la réprobation du reste du monde, et les diplomates européens et américains se sont rendus à Jérusalem et au Caire afin que cessent les hostilités.


Le Hamas a bénéficié d’un armistice dont il sort conforté, puisque, désormais, des négociations sont menées avec lui et qu’il a obtenu des aménagements quant aux contrôles stricts exercés par Israël sur Gaza.


Mohammed Morsi, qui a joué les entremetteurs entre diplomates occidentaux et dirigeants du Hamas, est lui aussi sorti renforcé de la situation. Il s’est, depuis, arrogé les pleins pouvoirs en Egypte, et les émeutes qui en ont résulté ne recevront aucun soutien des Occidentaux, cela va de soi.


Mahmoud Abbas et l’Autorité Palestinienne ont été décrits comme affaiblis, ici ou là. Et il est exact qu’ils incarnent une version de la lutte contre l’existence d’Israël qui n’a pas semblé prédominante ces derniers temps.


Mais il ne faut pas en rester aux apparences : on peut compter sur le président de l’AP pour jouer sa propre partition.


Et il faudrait se décider à en finir avec le discours ressassé à l’envi, selon lequel Abbas et l’Autorité Palestinienne seraient les gentils « modérés » avec lesquels il serait possible de s’entendre, alors que le Hamas incarnerait le méchant « radical ».


Le Hamas est une organisation djihadiste, islamiste, terroriste, génocidaire, prônant la destruction d’Israël et l’anéantissement du peuple juif, c’est entendu. Mais Mahmoud Abbas et l’Autorité Palestinienne valent-ils mieux ?


Ils ne sont pas djihadistes et islamistes, tout au moins pas officiellement.


Ils n’ont rien contre le terrorisme et n’ont cessé de le pratiquer jusqu’à ce que, grâce à la barrière de sécurité, que les gauchistes européens détestent tant puisqu’elle les empêche de jouir du spectacle quotidien d’enfants juifs assassinés, les attentats suicides deviennent quasiment impossibles. 


Ils sont génocidaires et usent simplement d’une stratégie différente : celle de la diabolisation d’Israël. Ils utilisent pour cela tous les moyens de propagande dont ils peuvent se doter et recourent à tous les relais dont ils peuvent disposer. Et ils rencontrent, grâce à cette stratégie et ces relais, un succès certain.


La plus récente étape de ce succès a été l’obtention, jeudi 29 novembre dernier, à l’Assemblée générale des Nations Unies, du statut d’Etat observateur, statut depuis lequel ils peuvent espérer obtenir davantage.


Ils ont reçu l’assentiment des deux tiers des pays de la planète, dont celui de la plupart des Etats européens, y compris de la France, qui s’est placée en chef de file.


Ils peuvent s’appuyer sur une horde imbécile de journalistes pratiquant docilement l’aveuglement volontaire, mais aussi sur un ramassis d’intellectuels « antisionistes » ou adeptes hypocrites d’un « processus de paix », qui, au fil des ans, s’est soldé par une guerre redoublée contre Israël.


Ils n’ont, faut-il le rappeler, jamais reconnu l’existence d’Israël en tant qu’Etat du peuple juif et n’ont jamais renoncé au « droit au retour » de « réfugiés » partis cinq cent mille il a soixante-cinq ans et qui veulent revenir cinq millions, ce qui signifierait la fin d’Israël.


Ils n’ont jamais abandonné ce qu’ils appellent la « résistance » et la « lutte armée ». Et nombre de rues de Ramallah portent le nom de « martyrs ».


Ils ne sont pas djihadistes et islamistes, certes. Mais ils sont aussi laïques que je suis bonne sœur et comptent dans leurs rangs une organisation appelée, précisément, la Brigade des martyrs d’al Aqsa. 


Leurs media, presse écrite, radio, télévision, ne cessent d’appeler à la haine antijuive et au meurtre.


Les discours de Mahmoud Abbas, comme ceux des autres dirigeants de l’Autorité Palestinienne, sont porteurs d’une falsification de l’histoire selon laquelle le « peuple palestinien », qui n’a existé et n’a été cité nulle part avant la fin des années 1960, aurait été chassé de sa terre lors de la renaissance d’Israël. Ils emploient, pour désigner la naissance d’Israël, le mot naqba, calqué délibérément sur le mot Shoah, aux fins d’établir un répugnant parallélisme entre le sort des Juifs à Auschwitz et le sort du « peuple palestinien ».


Ni Mahmoud Abbas ni l’Autorité Palestinienne ne veulent d’un Etat à côté d’Israël. Lorsqu’ils disent paix en anglais, ils emploient un autre mot en arabe, le plus souvent houdna, qui ne signifie pas paix, mais désigne une trêve avant que le combat ne reprenne. 


Sur les cartes géographiques de l’Autorité Palestinienne, Israël n’existe pas, sur son emblème non plus. 


Ce que veulent Mahmoud Abbas et l’Autorité Palestinienne n’est même pas, sans doute, un Etat à la place d’Israël. Ils mènent leur entreprise de démolition et entendent continuer sur cette voie. Ils sont grassement rémunérés et subventionnés pour cela. 


Ils sont même reçus avec les honneurs à Paris, à Washington et ailleurs, ce qui n’est pas le cas, pour le moment, des dirigeants du Hamas.


Il existe entre eux et les dirigeants du Hamas une vieille hostilité. Mais il existe aussi une forme de complémentarité. Le Hamas a joué le rôle du méchant « radical », et on l’a apaisé ces derniers jours. Mahmoud Abbas et l’Autorité Palestinienne sont affublés du rôle de gentils « modérés », et on vient de les apaiser aussi. Mais ils ne sont ni gentils ni modérés.


Mahmoud Abbas et l’Autorité Palestinienne servent, à ceux qui sont emplis de la haine des Juifs et d’Israël, à se doter d’un artifice qu’ils s’efforcent de décrire comme présentable.


Mais Mahmoud Abbas et l’Autorité palestinienne s’avèrent, en réalité, loin d’être pas présentables. Ils sont aussi ignobles et aussi hideux que les dirigeants du Hamas.


Ils ont entretenu des relations conflictuelles avec le groupuscule terroriste, mais si l’islam radical continue à s’étendre au Proche-Orient, et il est très vraisemblable qu’il en soit ainsi, je ne serais pas surpris si les deux entités venaient à se rapprocher.


Après les propos gravissimes du Grand Rabbin de France,

l’émigration en Israël n’est plus une option, c’est une  conclusion !

Arnold Lagémi

ICRJ, 3 novembre 2012


Sur « France info », Gilles Bernheim est sorti de la réserve habituelle des Grands Rabbins de France, pour tenir des propos d’une extrême gravité : « La sécurité des Juifs de France est de plus en plus menacée. »


Ces paroles ont le mérite d’être claires, sans équivoque et sans ambiguïté. Elles vont à contre-courant des habituels reproches adressés aux rabbins, durant des périodes cruciales,  en critiquant leur indifférence aux dangers immédiats menaçant les Juifs.


Que Bibi Netanyaou insiste sur la nécessité de la Alyah, n’est pas surprenant parce que,  c’est le « parcours obligé » pour un Premier Ministre Israélien en visite dans les communautés de l’exil.


Mais que le Grand Rabbin de France, Chef spirituel de la deuxième Communauté juive du monde, confirme que les conditions d’existence en France ne sont plus en mesure de garantir et protéger la sécurité des Juifs, est d’abord un constat d’incapacité des divers gouvernements, obligeant à douter, non de la volonté de l’exécutif de remédier à cet état de faits, mais de son pouvoir réel à modifier cette réalité,  sans  recourir à des moyens coercitifs que, pour diverses raisons, il ne mettra pas en œuvre.


Prenons conscience que les divers Grands Rabbins de France n’ont jamais tenu, même à la veille de la Shoah pareils discours ayant valeur de mise  en garde.


Saluons le courage, voire l’audace de cet homme, pourtant  discret qui, cependant, n’a pas hésité  à considérer que la situation des Juifs de France,  relevant du Pikouah Nefech, aucun motif ne pouvait justifier que le Grand Rabbin se tût. (Pikouah Nefesch : permission de suspendre l’application des règles de la Thora quand la vie est menacée.)


Une information de cette importance énoncée par le « Premier Juif de France » transforme radicalement l’appréciation des faits, en supprimant l’aspect optionnel de la Alyah pour le transformer en obligation.


NB/ A cette rencontre, Mr François Hollande, Président de la République, devait affirmer une inquiétude qui authentifie les propos de Gilles Bernheim: « La sécurité des Juifs est une « cause nationale. » Peut-on être plus clair?