Tag: Muslim anti-semitism

EUROPEAN ANTISEMITISM, ESPECIALLY MUSLIM, RISES, BUT DECLINES IN US; FAR RIGHT REPRESENT “NEGLIGIBLE MINORITY”

Europe Begins to Appreciate the Reality of Islamic Terrorism: Isi Leibler, Jerusalem Post, Aug. 28, 2017— Until recently, most European governments avoided confronting the reality and true nature of Islamic terrorism.

Anti-Semitism in Europe: New Official Report: Bruce Bawer, Gatestone Institute, Aug. 25, 2017— To some of us, it is hardly a secret that anti-Semitic violence is on the rise in Europe, or that the chief perpetrators are Muslims.

Antisemitism in US Superseded by 400-Year-Old Civic Foundations: Yoram Ettinger, Algemeiner, Aug. 30, 2017 — Contrary to European antisemitism, the recent episodes of antisemitism in the US — such as hundreds of white supremacists bearing torches and giving the Nazi salute — represent a negligible American minority, religiously, socially, ethnically and politically.

The Basel Congress’ Unexpected Result, 120 Years Later: Judea Pearl, Jewish Chronicle, Aug 30, 2017— One hundred and twenty years ago, on Sept. 3, 1897, a Viennese journalist named Theodor Herzl wrote in his diary: “In Basel I founded the Jewish state.”

 

On Topic Links

 

Anti-Semitism is an Integral Part of European Culture: Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld, Arutz Sheva, Aug. 6, 2017

Merkel's Historic Folly: Daniel Pipes, Achse des Guten, Aug. 22, 2017

Sarah Halimi: Beaten, Tortured and Killed — Yet France Turned a Blind Eye: Michel Gurfinkiel, Jewish Chronicle, Aug. 24, 2017

Undone Dunkirk: John Podhoretz, Weekly Standard, Aug 07, 2017

 

 

 

EUROPE BEGINS TO APPRECIATE THE REALITY OF ISLAMIC TERRORISM

Isi Leibler

Jerusalem Post, Aug. 28, 2017

 

Until recently, most European governments avoided confronting the reality and true nature of Islamic terrorism. The usual government response after each terrorist incident was to appease Muslim constituents by playing down the fact that it was inspired by Islamic fanatics and repeatedly chanting the mantra that “Islam is a religion of peace.”

 

Although all religions include both peaceful and aggressive components, an attempt to portray the dominant features of Islam today as peaceful is simply denial. While most Muslims living outside Islamic-controlled nations are lawful citizens, a significant proportion endorse the terrorist cause and only a handful pay lip service to condemn and distance themselves from the radicals. Genuinely moderate Muslims require great courage as they are not merely treated as pariahs but frequently face violent reprisals from their own kinsmen.

 

For many years, Muslims in Europe have resided in self-imposed ghettos where, in many cases, they have become a law unto themselves and police are fearful to intervene. Prior to the current mass migration, all efforts to integrate them had failed. Indeed, a good proportion of indigenous Muslim terrorists were second-generation offspring radicalized by local imams, many of whom, far from being impoverished, were educated and had decent jobs.

 

The problem escalated when Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel, in what many considered was a symbolic atonement displaying Germany’s remorse for the Holocaust, provided a haven and virtually unlimited entry to millions of Syrian and North African refugees. This backfired because the clear majority were more radical, anti-democratic and antisemitic than the existing Muslim communities. In addition, those who were rejected asylum were, in the vast majority of cases, never deported, which encouraged Islamists and economic migrants to come in ever-increasing numbers. Many with terrorist records operated freely. For example, Abdelbaki Essati, the imam who orchestrated the Barcelona and surrounding area attacks, had previously been convicted of terrorism and drug dealing. Yet an order for his expulsion was overturned by a judge in 2015 and he freely pursued his terrorist objectives.

 

Not only are massive numbers of Muslims pouring into Europe, but their birth rates are considerably higher than those of the host population and threaten to alter the demography of Europe. Now with Islamic State virtually defeated on the ground, the situation is likely to deteriorate further. The organization can be expected to intensify efforts to send large numbers of its murderous disciples, initially as sleeper cells, to await orders to perpetrate acts of terrorism in Western cities.

 

Aside from suffering terrorist incidents, many Western Europeans have been shocked at the extent to which their quality of life has been undermined by these refugees. Violent crime, rape and theft abound, especially in Germany, France, the Benelux countries and the UK. Yet, every effort has been made to understate the fact that this crime wave emanates overwhelmingly from the “refugees” and pressure has been exerted to prevent public discussion of the issue. Anyone criticizing practices in Islamic states, whether the oppression of women, execution of homosexuals, stoning of adulterers, honor killings, child marriages or female genital mutilation will immediately be accused of Islamophobia. The same applies to those condemning the behavior of local Muslims. The far Left, which claims to champion human rights but which has paradoxically allied itself with the Islamists, refuses to acknowledge and condemn their barbaric practices.

 

Muslims in Europe now represent a formidable force and have become politically influential in many key electorates, pressuring their representatives to promote their interests and frequently promoting Sharia law. Needless to say, the intensified epidemic of terrorism has finally obliged Europeans and the West overall to confront the fact that they are now on the front lines facing barbaric Islamic militancy. Until now, they criticized Israel for defending itself and fawned over terrorist leaders Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, even giving the former standing ovations at the United Nations.

 

It may now be dawning on them that as Europeans, they too must fight to retain the civilization they nurtured and that Israel is justified in its self-defense. Indeed, the wave of terrorism currently pervading Europe is an extension of the Palestinian terrorism against Israel, understated by most Europeans and referred to as “resistance.” They are now beginning to recognize that the threat from militant Islamic fundamentalism is a far greater danger to their way of life and even their survival than other sources of tension such as Russia, whose territorial ambitions cannot compare to Islamic extremism seeking global domination and threatening to undermine humanity…[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]   

 

 

Contents

ANTI-SEMITISM IN EUROPE: NEW OFFICIAL REPORT

Bruce Bawer

Gatestone Institute, Aug. 25, 2017

 

To some of us, it is hardly a secret that anti-Semitic violence is on the rise in Europe, or that the chief perpetrators are Muslims. But many politicians and news media have been so indefatigable in their efforts to obscure this uncomfortable fact that one is always grateful for official — or, at least, semi-official — confirmation of what everyone already knows.

 

It is a pleasure, then, to report that a new study, Antisemitic Violence in Europe, 2005-2015 — written by Johannes Due Enstad of the Oslo-based Center for Studies of the Holocaust and the University of Oslo, and jointly published by both institutions — is refreshingly, even startlingly, honest about its subject. Enstad notes that while anti-Semitic violence has declined in the U.S. since 1994, it has been on the rise worldwide. That, of course, includes Europe — most of it, anyway.

 

Examining statistics from France, Britain, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Russia, Enstad points out that one of these seven countries "clearly stands out with a very low number" of anti-Semitic incidents despite its "relatively large Jewish population"; the country in question, he adds, "is also the only case in which there is little to indicate that Jews avoid displaying their identity in public." In addition, it is the only one of the six countries in which the majority of perpetrators of anti-Semitic violence are not Muslims. Which country is Enstad referring to? Russia.

 

That Russia is relatively free of anti-Semitic violence may sound surprising to anyone familiar with the words Cossack and refusenik, but it actually makes sense. Would-be Jew-bashers in Russia know that if they're arrested for committing acts of violence, the consequences won't be pretty. In western Europe, by contrast, the courts are lenient, the terms of confinement short, and the prisons extremely comfortable. And while Muslims know that they are a protected class in Western Europe, able to commit all kinds of transgressions with near-impunity, that is far from being the case in Putin's Russia.

 

If Muslims do not dominate the anti-Semitic crime statistics in Russia, who does? The answer: right-wing extremists. Although politicians and the media in Western Europe like to talk as if Jews (and others) in their countries are principally endangered by the far-right, Russia is, in fact, the only one of the seven countries in Enstad's study in which that group does play a significant role in anti-Semitic acts.

 

What about the other countries? Denmark has few Jews, and Norway even fewer, so these two countries play a relatively minor role in Enstad's study. That leaves Germany, Britain, France, and Sweden. Nearly 10% of French Jews say they have been physically attacked for being Jewish during the past five years; in Germany and Sweden the figure is about 7.5%, in Britain nearly 5%. Asked how often they "avoid visiting Jewish events or sites" for fear of danger, 7.9% of Jews in Sweden say they do so frequently, followed by their coreligionists in France, Germany, and Britain (where the number is only 1.2%). Asked if they "avoid wearing, carrying or displaying things" in public that would identify them as Jews, 60% of Swedish Jews say they do so "all the time" or "frequently," with, again, France, Germany, and Britain following in that order. Almost 50% of French Jews have considered emigrating because they feel imperiled in their own country; for Germany the figure is 25%, and for Sweden and Britain it is just under 20%.

 

Enstad weighs official statistics from all of the countries under examination, but finds that while those from most of the countries essentially jibe with the results of independent studies, those published by both Germany and Sweden are fishy, in some cases betraying an apparent effort by officials to massage the numbers to avoid certain uncomfortable facts. While an independent survey, for example, concludes that right-wing extremists make up a small minority of perpetrators of anti-Semitic violence in Germany, German police statistics blame most such violence on just right-wingers. Enstad, in his polite way, suggests that this discrepancy is the result of "a categorisation problem." Could it be possible, Enstad wonders, that "German police considers antisemitism a right-wing type of ideology and thus categorises most anti-Semitic attacks as right-wing, regardless of the perpetrator's ethnic or religious background?" Another problem is that German officials categorize some incidents — including the fire-bombing of a synagogue — as anti-Israeli, not anti-Semitic…

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

 

 

Contents

ANTISEMITISM IN US SUPERSEDED BY 400-YEAR-OLD CIVIC FOUNDATIONS                                               

Yoram Ettinger                       

Algemeiner, Aug. 30, 2017

 

Contrary to European antisemitism, the recent episodes of antisemitism in the US — such as hundreds of white supremacists bearing torches and giving the Nazi salute — represent a negligible American minority, religiously, socially, ethnically and politically. These episodes defy the civic, moral and religious foundations of America, as well as the US political, media and civic discourse, which has demonstrated high esteem for Judaism from the era of the early Pilgrims through the Founding Fathers until today.

 

The Colonial Origin of the American Constitution, by University of Houston Prof. Donald Lutz, highlights “the continuity from the [November 11, 1620] Mayflower Compact to the American state and national constitutions of the late eighteenth century, [which] clearly evolves from basic symbols in the Judeo-Christian tradition… Protestants writing [constitutional] documents viewed their work as equivalent to the Jewish biblical covenants… between God and his chosen people… The political compact eventually evolved into what we now recognize as the American form of constitutionalism.” For example, the 1641 Massachusetts Body of Liberties — the first modern day compilation of civil and religious liberties — which inspired the 1791 US Bill of Rights, “drew heavily on the Pilgrim Code of Law proposed by John Cotton in 1636, which was based on Mosaic principles.”

 

In fact, this week’s Torah portion (“Shoftim,” Deuteronomy 16:18 — 21:9) inspired a cardinal distinction of the US constitution: a government of laws, not of men. Moreover, the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy inspired the 1629 Salem Covenant, the 1637 Providence Agreement, 1650 Connecticut Code of Laws, the 1680 New Hampshire General Laws and Liberties, the 1701 Pennsylvania Charter of Liberties and additional codes of civil liberties compiled by the early Pilgrims, setting the Founding Fathers on the constitutional course.

 

In 2017, conservative Republican Vice President Mike Pence revealed that his faith is largely guided by the Jeremiah 29:11 verse, which hangs above his mantle: “For I know the plans I have for you, plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.” In 2014, liberal Democratic President Barack Obama quoted Exodus 22:21 (“You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt”), in order to justify his decision to act unilaterally in deferring deportation of up to five million illegal immigrants.

 

In 2017, there are eight statues and carvings of Moses and the Ten Commandments in the US Supreme Court, in addition to similar monuments in the chamber of the House of Representatives, the National Archives and additional government offices throughout the country. The Library of Congress features Micah 6:8 in its main reading room: “What doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy and to walk humbly with thy God.”

 

The Story of Hebrew, by Dartmouth University Prof. Lewis Glinert, indicates that the first book written and printed (in 1640) in the British North America, in Cambridge, Massachusetts, was Bay Psalm Book, a translation of the book of Psalms, documenting the prominent stature of the Old Testament and Hebrew among the early Pilgrims. “Familiarity with Hebrew was quite common among the intelligentsia and the better-trained of the clergy… Harvard’s first two presidents were Hebrew scholars, as were the first president of King’s College (later Columbia) and Ezra Stiles, the first president of Yale… a world-renowned intellectual, the leading American-Hebraist of the era and a prominent supporter of the American Revolution… The study of Hebrew marched hand-in-hand with the enlightenment principles of the American founding… [President Stiles] learned much about Hebrew from his friend, Rabbi Hayyim Carigal from [the original] Hebron.”

 

While there is only one Hebron in the Land of Israel — King David’s first capital — there are 18 Hebrons in the US, representing the thousands of locations across America bearing Biblical names.  This reflects the state of mind of the early Pilgrims and the Founding Fathers, who considered themselves to be “the modern-day Chosen People” and viewed the New World as “the modern-day Promised Land.” They established the 400-year-old foundation (since 1620) for the special affinity of the American people for the Jewish state, and America’s high esteem for the Old Testament, which dwarf the significance of supremacists and any other form of anti-Israel or antisemitic sentiments.

                                                                                   

Contents

THE BASEL CONGRESS’ UNEXPECTED RESULT, 120 YEARS LATER                                                

Judea Pearl

Jewish Chronicle, Aug 30, 2017

 

One hundred and twenty years ago, on Sept. 3, 1897, a Viennese journalist named Theodor Herzl wrote in his diary: “In Basel I founded the Jewish state.” He then added a curious note: “If I were to say this out loud today, everybody would laugh at me. In five years, perhaps, but certainly in fifty, everybody will agree.” This was two days after he returned from Basel, Switzerland, where, against all odds, he managed to put together the First Zionist Congress — the event that symbolizes the Jewish claim to self-determination.

 

Herzl had good reasons to feel elated about Basel: 208 delegates from 17 countries, the elite of European press, all dressed in solemn tuxedos, packed Basel’s casino to discuss his proposed solution to the “Jewish Problem.” For three days, delegates listened to fiery speeches, debated and finally came up with as clear a definition of Zionism as one can possibly articulate: “Zionism seeks to establish for the Jewish people a publically recognized, legally secured homeland in Palestine.”

 

Sure enough, upon returning to his office at the Neue Freie Presse newspaper in Vienna, Herzl’s co-workers greeted him with obvious mockery, as the “future head of state.” But that was the least of the problems Herzl had to face; skepticism, sarcasm and opposition loomed all over the world. The Vatican issued a letter protesting the “projected occupation of the Holy Places by the Jews.” (Sound familiar?) The Ottoman authorities had their suspicions aroused and began to restrict the manner in which Jews were acquiring land in Palestine, especially near Jerusalem.

 

But the worst opposition came from fellow Jews. Orthodox rabbis condemned Herzl’s attempt to hasten God’s plan of redemption, while Reform rabbis saw it as interference with their vision of becoming a moral light unto the nations by mingling among those nations. Baron Edmond de Rothschild, the French philanthropist who supported Jewish agricultural communities in Palestine since the 1880s, was adamantly against efforts to obtain international legitimization of Jewish national claims. He feared (justifiably) that such efforts would lead to tougher Ottoman restrictions, and that Jews like him would be subject to charges of dual loyalty.

 

Ahad Ha’am, the most influential Jewish intellectual of the time, wrote about his time in Basel that he felt  “like a mourner at a wedding feast.” His motto was, “Israel will not be redeemed by diplomats, but by prophets.” He could not forgive Herzl for luring the world jury with false hopes of a diplomatic solution. But the cleavage between Herzl and Ahad Ha’am was much deeper. Ahad Ha’am claimed it is futile and possibly harmful to argue the Jewish case in diplomatic courts when the Jewish people are spiritually unprepared for the task. What must be done first, he wrote, is “to liberate our people from its inner slavery, from the meekness of the spirit that assimilation has brought upon us.”

 

Herzl, on the other hand, understood that the very act of bringing the Jewish question to the international arena, regardless of its outcome, would change the cultural ills of the Jewish masses and rally them to the cause. In retrospect, he was right. There were several forerunners of Jewish self-determination (for example, Moses Hess, Yehuda Alkalai, Leon Pinsker, Eliezer Ben-Yehuda and Ahad Ha’am himself), but their writings were directed inward,  toward the intellectual cliques in the Jewish shtetl; their overall impact was therefore meager. Bringing the Jewish claim to an international court created the cultural transformation that Ahad Ha’am yearned for — the shtetl Jew began to take his own problem seriously and the Zionist program became one of his viable options.

 

History books make a special point of noting that Herzl’s predictions were miraculously accurate. Israel was declared a state on May 14, 1948, 50 years and eight months after Herzl wrote: “In Basel I founded the Jewish state.” However, I believe Herzl in effect founded the Jewish state much earlier. True, Herzl’s specific plan to persuade the Ottoman sultan to allocate land for a Jewish state was sheer lunacy and led to painful disappointments. But transforming Jewish statehood into an item on the international political agenda was a monumental achievement — it maintains this position today.

 

Moreover, the idea that Jews are reclaiming sovereignty by right, not for favor, completely changed the way Jews began to view their standing in the cosmos. It transformed the Jew from an object of history to a shaper of history. This new self-image was the engine that propelled history toward a Jewish statehood already in the early 1900s. The 40,000 Jews who made up the Second Aliyah (1904-1914) were different in spirit and determination from the 35,000 Jews who came earlier with the First Aliyah (1882-1903). At their core, they knew they were building a model sovereign nation and that Zionism is the most just and noble endeavor in human history. They established kibbutzim, formed self-defense organizations, founded the town of Tel Aviv and turned Hebrew into a practical spoken language. This spirit of hope, purpose and immediacy emanated from the Basel Congress, not from the utopian “in time to come” Zionism of Ahad Ha’am.

 

The diplomatic efforts that led to the Balfour Declaration and the subsequent ideological immigration of the Third Aliyah (1919-1923) all were direct products of the Zionist movement and made statehood practically inevitable. The miracle of Israel was planted indeed in 1897…

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

 

CIJR Wishes All Our Friends & Supporters: Shabbat Shalom!

 

 

Contents

On Topic Links

 

Anti-Semitism is an Integral Part of European Culture: Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld, Arutz Sheva, Aug. 6, 2017—The recent visit of Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to Budapest – the first visit of an Israeli Prime Minister since the fall of communism – received much international publicity.

Merkel's Historic Folly: Daniel Pipes, Achse des Guten, Aug. 22, 2017—I expect that when the evolution of European civilization is studied in the future, August 2015 will be seen as a key moment. The decision to allow unlimited immigration into Germany has had profound implications for Europe by raising this issue in a more acute way than ever before, creating divisions both among native Europeans who are for and against large-scale immigration and between native and new Europeans.

Sarah Halimi: Beaten, Tortured and Killed — Yet France Turned a Blind Eye: Michel Gurfinkiel, Jewish Chronicle, Aug. 24, 2017 —Almost five months ago, on April 4, a 65-year-old Orthodox Jewish woman called Lucette Attal-Halimi and known by her Hebrew name, Sarah Halimi — a retired doctor and the head of a kindergarten — was attacked in the middle of the night at her home on Vaucouleurs Street, in Paris’ 11th arrondissement, apparently tortured to death and finally thrown out of a third-floor window.

Undone Dunkirk: John Podhoretz, Weekly Standard, Aug 07, 2017—There are few events in the history of war comparable to the evacuation of the British Expeditionary Force from the French beach at Dunkirk in the late spring of 1940.

 

 

 

EUROPE ACKNOWLEDGES HISTORICAL CRIMES, BUT FAILS TO CONFRONT CURRENT ANTISEMITIC VIOLENCE

France Finally Admits to its History of Jew Hatred. What About the Present?: Barbara Kay, National Post, July 25, 2017 — July 16 marked the 75th anniversary of the infamous 1942 mass roundup of French Jews in Paris’s Velodrome d’Hiver (“Vel d’Hiv”), when 13,152 Jews were deported to Nazi death camps.

The Three Germanies: Manfred Gerstenfeld, Jerusalem Post, July 29, 2017— Contemporary Germany manifests itself in three ways: old Germany, new Germany and “mutant” Germany.

Hitler’s Secret Weapon Was Coercing Jews to Destroy Themselves: Shmuley Boteach, Tablet, July 17, 2017 — These days have been emotionally challenging.

Documents Reveal Canadian Citizen Julius Kuhl as Holocaust Hero: Mark MacKinnon, Globe & Mail, Aug. 8, 2017Al Jazeera's support for terrorism goes far beyond on-air cheerleading.

 

On Topic Links

 

VIDEO: Geert Wilders on Europe’s Suicide in the Face of Islam: Israpundit, 2017

Jewish Artist Takes on Twitter for Enabling anti-Semitism: Times of Israel, Aug. 8, 2017

Sarah Halimi, Sisyphus and the Denial of Antisemitic Violence: Simone Rodan-Benzaquen, JNS, July 28, 2017

Researcher Gives Seal of Approval to 53 Biblical Characters’ Existence: Rich Tenorio, Times of Israel, Aug. 4, 2017

 

FRANCE FINALLY ADMITS TO ITS HISTORY OF JEW HATRED.

WHAT ABOUT THE PRESENT?

Barbara Kay

National Post, July 25, 2017

 

July 16 marked the 75th anniversary of the infamous 1942 mass roundup of French Jews in Paris’s Velodrome d’Hiver (“Vel d’Hiv”), when 13,152 Jews were deported to Nazi death camps. Benjamin Netanyahu’s motorcade arrival at the commemoration ceremony, his limousine sporting gold-fringed Israeli flags, was an electric moment for French Jews, representing the first inclusion of an Israeli head of state in the event’s annual commemorative history.

 

In a moving address to the 1,200 (mostly) Jews in attendance, including Holocaust survivors in their 90s, France’s President Macron did not mince his words, assigning full blame for Vel d’Hiv to the Vichy government (“not a single German participated”), another first, and therefore rebuking previous leaders who have accepted only partial blame. The depth of Macron’s feeling, evident in the cathartic physical embrace he and Netanyahu shared following his speech, brought the audience to a pitch of passionate applause. This was a moment of genuine reconciliation unlike any that had gone before.

 

In a work of fiction, the hug between the French and Israeli heads of state would have signified triumph over a long history of French anti-Semitism. Real life is rarely so obliging. Macron understood he had to address the painful reality of the new French anti-Semitism. He therefore referred in his speech to the murder, 12 days earlier, of Sarah Halimi, a 65-year old Orthodox Jewish doctor, battered to death by her Mali-born neighbour Kobili Traoré. Traoré had reportedly referred to Halimi as a “dirty Jew,” and shouted “Allahu Akbar” as he threw her off her apartment balcony.

 

The indictment filed against Trahoré did not categorize the killing as a hate crime, let alone an act of terrorism, as many believe it should be. It became a political hot potato. Macron announced that “the judiciary must as soon as possible provide maximum clarity on the death of Sarah Halimi.” Second-guessing clarity would be welcome, but irrelevant to the larger problem: the entrenched pathology of Jew hatred in France’s Muslim community. The Vichy government is gone, but its Jew-loathing spirit has returned in, as Macron put it, “the cancerous spread of militant Islam.”

 

In a 2015 interview with Times of Israel journalist David Horovitz, former Paris policeman Sammy Ghozlan paints a bleak picture of the situation for Jews in France. As an Algerian Jew, Ghozlan was a natural liaison between the Jewish communities and law enforcement. He grew concerned by the tendency he saw in his colleagues of managing the growing social problem of Muslim anti-Semitism by minimizing its root causes. (“The cops would say, if a synagogue went up in flames but nobody was hurt, ‘it’s a criminal act, not a hate crime.’”) Hate incidents ramped up with the Second Intifada in 2000. It was then that Ghozlan created the National Bureau for Vigilance Against Anti- Semitism (BNVCA French acronym) to record anti-Semitic attacks on synagogues, schools and public transportation (851 in 2014), which he distributed to reporters, police and concerned citizens.

 

Murders make the news, but pervasive low-level Muslim violence against Jews is barely registered. “If people leave religious objects — a kippa, tefillin — in a car, the car will be attacked,” Ghozlan says. “Jewish homes find swastikas on their mailbox. White powder sent in envelopes.” Hamas and Islamic State flags have been tolerated in demonstrations, where the cry of “kill the Jews” rings out without consequence. Jewish children in France believe it is normal for soldiers to guard their parochial schools, never having known it to be otherwise.

 

Ghozlan sees a “direct connection” with anti-Semitic violence and the left’s obsessive anti-Zionism. Arabs and Africans would not be as bold in their anti-Semitism, he says, “if they didn’t have the sense that they were encouraged by political movements and opinions in France that incited them to behave in this way.” In the media, Israel and Israelis are portrayed as detestable, as Nazis. Consequently, Ghozlan asserts, “the French public doesn’t care when the Jews get attacked,” claiming that if in January, 2015, the Hyper-Cacher (kosher) market massacre of Jews had not been linked to the Charlie Hebdo massacre, it “would not have been a big deal in France.”

 

Macron’s Vel d’Hiv address was magnificent; the embrace with Netanyahu was genuine; the audience’s appreciation was wholehearted. But what are good intentions against righteous hatred of so few by so many? A 2014 “Day of Rage” march by 17,000 (mostly) Muslims was dominated by the slogan, “Juif, la France n’est pas à toi” (Jew, France does not belong to you).” The families of the four victims of the Hyper-Cacher massacre took them at their word. French citizens, they made the sadly reasonable decision to bury their dead in Israel, to ensure their graves would not be desecrated.        

 

Barbara Kay is a CIJR Academic Fellow

           

Contents

THE THREE GERMANIES

Manfred Gerstenfeld

Jerusalem Post, July 29, 2017

 

Contemporary Germany manifests itself in three ways: old Germany, new Germany and “mutant” Germany. Many events in Europe have aspects of relevance for Israel, Jews and/or understanding the impact of the Holocaust. In Germany this is more often the case than in other European countries. The recent extreme violence in Hamburg by anarchists from a variety of countries before and during the G20 meeting of world leaders is a case in point. Already prior to the meeting rioters started fires, torched cars, shattered shop windows and threw firebombs. Almost 600 policemen were wounded.

 

One wonders whether the 20,000 policemen deployed to the area, who were later supported by additional forces, could not have prevented this violence by employing more forceful actions against the rioters. In Germany where the crimes of the Holocaust are often present in the conscious and probably even more so in the subconscious, it is preferred that citizens suffer from public disturbances rather than risk killing a rioter by mistake. Strengthened by radically diverse experiences, Israel handles these matters differently. Six million Jews were killed by Germans in the Second World War. The Israeli government prioritizes the security of its soldiers above that of those who attack them.

 

At first sight the German attitude toward rioters is not unique. During the looting riots of autumn 2005 in France by immigrant youth from Muslim countries, the government lost control for several days. Thugs burned cars, shops and public buildings. However, the reason the French government was careful in its actions against the hooligans was different from that of the Germans. If a rioter had been killed, additional mobs of youngsters might have joined the violence and looting. In Hamburg, however, even though there was sympathy for the hooligans in various left-wing circles, the rioters had no significant back-up forces.

 

The major recent immigration of refugees mainly from Muslim countries into Germany has “Holocaust impact” and Jewish aspects as well. By bringing in to Germany more than a million mainly Muslim refugees, German Chancellor Angela Merkel tried to show the world that there is a new Germany. The message was clear: in contrast with the old Germany that murdered the Jewish minority, the new Germany welcomed large numbers of another minority, Muslims. There is, however, a catch. Many of these new immigrants came from countries where there is widespread extreme indoctrination of Jew-hatred. The new Germany thus facilitated the massive immigration of antisemites. That is not the only price paid. During 2015-2016 New Year’s Eve celebrations, immigrants from Muslim countries sexually attacked hundreds of women in various German cities. The same also happened in a few other European cities.

 

One should thus examine the new Germany a bit more closely. The welcome in past decades for Russian Jewish immigrants is an indicator of a new Germany. So are the many Holocaust memorials around the country. Yet bringing in huge numbers of antisemites among the immigrants throws a shadow on this new Germany. The behavior of the most extreme Muslims may cause the emigration of some German Jews. Some new versions of old Germany also remain. A small percentage of the population are neo-Nazis. These are not only classic antisemites, they also hate Israel. Beyond that there is another important group, which one might call “mutant Germany.” These people have replaced the demonization of Jews with that of Israel.

Seven studies between 2004 and 2015 carried out respectively by the University of Bielefeld and the Bertelsmann Foundation investigated the percentage of Germans who agreed that Israel acts toward the Palestinians like Nazis behaved toward the Jews. In the 2004 poll, 51% agreed. By 2015, the percentage was 41%. German media has played a key role in this demonization of Israel. More than 70 years since the Holocaust there are sufficient indications that contemporary German democracy still has huge dark spots.

 

The defining of three different Germanies is by nature a broad categorization. Yet as a tool it can be helpful to clarify – or at least ask well-defined questions about – many disparate events which occur in the country. For instance, among Muslims there are segments which are close to the old Germany. Their most visible hatemongers march every year on Al Quds day in Berlin. This demonstration is an invention of the Iranian ayatollahs’ regime and aims for the disappearance of Israel, which can only be achieved through genocide.

 

Another example is a study by the British think tank Chatham House which shows that 51% of Germans want the country to stop accepting Muslim immigrants. One can reasonably assume that the “old Germans,” i.e. neo-Nazis, are part of those opposing immigration. However, it would be enlightening to have an opinion poll conducted which would show how many of the remainder are closer to the “new Germany” and “mutant Germany.” These are just two examples where the analytic tool of the three Germanies comes in handy. One does not risk much by predicting that there will be many other events in the coming years where using this classification will enable analysts to better understand them.           

 

Contents

 

HITLER’S SECRET WEAPON WAS COERCING

JEWS TO DESTROY THEMSELVES

          Shmuley Boteach                                                                              

Tablet, July 17, 2017

 

These days have been emotionally challenging. For the past two weeks, in preparation for a planned anti-genocide center, I’ve traveled with my family on an educational journey through the killing fields of Germany and Eastern Europe, the idea being to truly immerse myself in the dark, hallowed sites of the Holocaust so as to better understand genocide, its psychology, and its causes. And beyond every consideration, there is that of memory, of never forgetting the lost martyrs of my people.

 

We began in Berlin where we visited the Wannsee House, where Nazi leaders sat over caviar and cigars to fine-tune the details of the Final Solution and enact the extermination of European Jewry. From there we traveled to Prague, where we saw the wistful remains of a mighty Jewish community ravaged by Reynard Heidrich during his time as Reich-protector of Bohemia (an ironic title if ever there was one). We continued eastward into Poland, where we visited Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Majdanek, where 43,000 Jews would be killed in the Holocaust’s largest single day, single camp massacre on Nov.15, 1944.

 

We visited Bialystok, where we saw the skeleton of the city’s once-legendary synagogue, beneath which 2,000 Jews were burned alive. We visited Tykocin, where the village’s Jews, possessed of a 400-year-old synagogue, were marched into the woods and massacred. We visited the ghettos of Warsaw, Lodz, and Krakow, cities that still flutter with the ghosts of the multitudes lost from within. From there we went to Kosice, from which my wife’s family stems, and the last place her great-uncle was seen before he, too, was murdered by the Nazis in an unknown location in Poland. We went to Austria, where in Linz we saw Hitler’s childhood home, his parents’ burial plot, and, not far from there, the Mauthausen concentration camp.

 

I knew this trip wouldn’t be easy, but I could never have known just how gut-wrenching it could be. The true sense of hopelessness that haunts the air over these sites can be felt only when one is actually present. The Holocaust remains a crime that boggles the imagination, a tragedy that is as mysterious as it is horrifying. I’ve read dozens of books on the subject, most recently Lawrence Rees’s outstanding work, The Holocaust. Taken together, these thorough studies map out the figures, methods, and very mechanics of the Nazi slaughter. But what I failed to grasp even after such extensive reading was a profound understanding of just how the Nazis believed they could actually succeed in slaughtering an entire nation across an entire continent— all while at war with much of the known world. How could they possibly have set out on a plan of murder so vast that it defies all logic? How did they think they even had the wherewithal to pull it off?

 

Though tormenting in the extreme, I believe this journey has given me a clue. The Nazis, I have come to understand, would eradicate the Jewish nation by always holding out the possibility that, against most of the evidence, some might still live. The Jews were led to believe that if they just cooperated, their children would survive. They could not believe that Hitler would be hateful enough to eradicate an entire nation which could be used for labor in a time of war. A hatred this extreme and so utterly self-destructive had no precedent in world history. Cognitive dissonance played a further role, and the Jews could simply not accept that the Nazis intended their total annihilation.

 

At almost every step of the way, the Jews were forced into cooperating with the very plans drawn up to exterminate them. The Jews, the Germans thought, could provide the manpower the Nazis lacked only if they could be persuaded that if they went along with the program they would be put to productive work. Knowing that the Jews were simply trying to live, the Nazis would dangle the possibility of survival before Jewish eyes at every turn. Thus would the Jewish communities of Poland and Eastern Europe be forced into obeying Nazi orders to herd themselves into ghettos, administrate their cordoned-off ghetto communities, and board their families at the threat of rifle butts and bullets onto cattle-cars. The Nazis would bring these Jews to their deaths all by exploiting their most elemental desire for them, and especially their families, to live.

 

The Nazis forced the Jews to create their own self-administering councils, Judenrats, in the ghettos. When visiting the Lodz Ghetto, I stood at the exact spot where Chaim Rumkowski gave his notorious “Give Me Your Children” speech in September of 1942. As chairman of the Lodz Judenrat, Rumkowski had decided to turn the ghetto into a factory, believing that only by being useful to the Nazis could its inhabitants be spared. However, the Nazis began to demand quotas of Jews to be deported to their deaths—quotas Rumkowski himself was forced to fill. In September 1942, he begged the mothers of the ghetto to give up their children, whom, in being unproductive, he expected to be killed in any event. Though the mothers refused, Rumkowski and his Jewish agents rounded up 24,000 Jews under 10 and over 65, forced at the pain of death to do much of the Nazis’ work for them. Untold numbers of suicides followed his speech.

 

Of course, it was all deception. The entire Lodz ghetto would be liquidated beginning in August of 1944, and of the 223,000 Jews who had lived there, only 877 would remain by the time the Red Army arrived in January 1945. The rest would be sent to their deaths in the gas chambers at Chelmno and Auschwitz. Rumkowski himself would be deported to Birkenau. He, however, would not make it to the gas chambers. He was, upon arrival, beaten to death by his fellow inmates, at least according to prevailing eye-witness accounts. In the camps themselves, the Jews were forced into Sonderkommando units, where Jewish inmates were put to work disposing of the millions of bodies left lifeless in the gas chambers. They too were threatened with constant death, yet were twinned with a chance at life so long as they complied with the Nazi program. This too was a lie. The Nazis had a policy at their death camps of gassing the entire corps of Sonderkommando every three months. Unbeknownst to the incoming ranks of the desperate Sonderkommando, the first victims they’d be asked to incinerate would be the generation that had worked there before them…                                                                                                                                      

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

 

Contents

                

DOCUMENTS REVEAL CANADIAN CITIZEN                                                      

JULIUS KUHL AS HOLOCAUST HERO                                                                          

Mark MacKinnon                                                                                                            

Globe & Mail, Aug. 8, 2017

 

Julius Kuhl arrived in Toronto shortly after the Second World War with his young family and a suitcase full of Swiss watches that he hoped to sell. He was also carrying a story of bravery and sorrow that he shared only with those close to him – one that might have made him an international celebrity had he chosen to tell it.

 

Mr. Kuhl's death in 1985 made no headlines in Canada or beyond. But documents stored in Switzerland, Jerusalem and Washington…reveal Mr. Kuhl's role as a saviour of hundreds, perhaps thousands of fellow Jews during the Holocaust. It is a story that deserves to be considered alongside those of famous Holocaust heroes such as Oskar Schindler and Raoul Wallenberg. Described by his family as a short, devout and gregarious man who was constantly puffing on a cigar, Mr. Kuhl was a low-level diplomat at the Polish legation in Bern, the Swiss capital, during the Second World War. He was also the centre of a network that manufactured fake Latin American passports that were then smuggled into Nazi-occupied Europe.

 

Personal letters, diplomatic cables and Swiss police records show that, starting in 1941, Mr. Kuhl acquired thousands of blank passports from the consuls of Paraguay and other South and Central American countries in Switzerland. He and a colleague then entered by hand the names and dates of birth of European Jews – including many who were trapped inside the Warsaw Ghetto – before pasting in their black-and-white photos. The effort continued for two years – until Swiss police, anxious to avoid irritating Hitler's Germany, broke up the fake documents ring. They brought Mr. Kuhl and his collaborators in for questioning and demanded that the Polish legation, which represented the London-based government-in-exile of Nazi-occupied Poland, dismiss Mr. Kuhl.

 

"He should be as well known as Schindler, because he saved as many lives as Schindler," said Markus Blechner, who worked for years to collect the documents proving the tale he heard as a child about Mr. Kuhl and the life-saving passports. Mr. Blechner, the grandson of Holocaust victims, took up the cause of preserving Mr. Kuhl's story after Mr. Kuhl attended his bar mitzvah as an honoured guest shortly after the war. Mr. Schindler protected more than 1,000 Jews by employing them at his factory in Nazi-occupied Poland. Mr. Wallenberg saved almost 10,000 Hungarian Jews by issuing them protective passports identifying them as Swedish citizens.

 

One of the reasons Mr. Kuhl's story isn't as widely known is that his passport scheme was only partly successful. Mr. Blechner, who now serves as the honorary Polish consul in Zurich, says thousands of fake passports were distributed via Mr. Kuhl's network, but only a minority of the recipients are believed to have survived the Holocaust. Jews holding passports from neutral countries were considered exempt from Nazi laws that confined Jews to ghettos and mandated that they identify themselves by wearing yellow stars on their clothing. Those third-country passports allowed many Jews to flee ahead of the mass exterminations that followed.

 

While some of the Jews who received passports produced in Switzerland used them to escape from Nazi-occupied Europe, the majority were sent to internment camps – many, apparently, to a camp in Vittel, in Vichy France. Mr. Blechner says the Nazis' original plan was to hold the "Latin Americans" until they could be traded for German citizens detained in camps in Canada and the United States. But the sheer number of Latin American passport holders in occupied Poland eventually raised suspicions. As Swiss police moved to shut down Mr. Kuhl's passport ring in the fall of 1943, Germany demanded that Latin American countries verify that the passport holders were really their citizens…

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

 

CIJR Wishes All Our Friends & Supporters: Shabbat Shalom!

                                                                       

Contents

 

On Topic Links

 

VIDEO: Geert Wilders on Europe’s Suicide in the Face of Islam: Israpundit, 2017

Jewish Artist Takes on Twitter for Enabling anti-Semitism: Times of Israel, Aug. 8, 2017—An Israeli-German artist best known for his “YOLOCAUST” project, which combined selfies taken at Berlin’s Holocaust memorial with images of concentration camp victims, released a video Monday targeting Twitter’s failure to address online anti-Semitism and racism, with a series of offensive tweets drawn on the ground at the social media giant’s offices.

Sarah Halimi, Sisyphus and the Denial of Antisemitic Violence: Simone Rodan-Benzaquen, JNS, July 28, 2017—It took too long for the French people to recognize the Jewish victim of a brutal April 4 murder by name. After weeks of indifference by media outlets and politicians, French President Emmanuel Macron finally demanded that the judiciary shed light on the nature of the crime.

Researcher Gives Seal of Approval to 53 Biblical Characters’ Existence: Rich Tenorio, Times of Israel, Aug. 4, 2017—Thanks to a researcher’s unique system, 53 individuals in the Hebrew Bible have been proven as genuine historical characters through material evidence of their existence. The system’s creator, Lawrence Mykytiuk, an associate professor of library science at Purdue University, calls it “a way to develop historicity.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

AS JEWS REMEMBER KRISTALLNACHT, REFUGEE CRISIS STOKES RENEWED ANTISEMITISM IN EUROPE

 

YITZHAK NAVON, ISRAEL’S FIFTH PRESIDENT, DIES AT 94 Yitzhak Navon, Israel’s fifth president, diplomat, key adviser to David Ben-Gurion and respected Labor politician, died Friday night at the age of 94. Navon, the scion of a long line of renowned Sephardi rabbis, was born on April 9, 1921. He was the first Israeli president to be born in Jerusalem, where his family had lived for more than 300 years. Navon served as the head of the Arab section of the Haganah, the forerunner to the IDF, in the years running up to the establishment of the state. He then served as an Israeli diplomat in Latin America, before becoming personal secretary to Israel’s first foreign minister, Moshe Sharett, from 1950-1952. Navon then took a position as a political adviser to David Ben-Gurion, a post he held for more than a decade, becoming one of the first prime minister’s most trust aides. (Times of Israel, Nov. 7, 2015)

 

Jew Hatred, Throughout the Ages: Barbara Kay, National Post, Nov. 5, 2015 — During the Second World War, civilization as we knew it perished in the fires of the Holocaust.

From Kristallnacht to the Kindertransport to, Finally, America: John H. Lang, Wall Street Journal, Nov. 8, 2015— Monday, Nov. 9, marks the anniversary of Kristallnacht in 1938, when Nazi hordes ran wild throughout Berlin, as well as in other German cities.

Middle East Refugees, Anti-Semitism, and the Challenge to Europe’s Democratic Values: Rabbi Abraham Cooper  Town Hall, Oct. 29, 2015 At the beginning of the emotional debate sparked by the huge influx of refugees, leaders of the small vulnerable Jewish communities in Europe did not dare express their fears, lest they be painted as racists or Islamophobes.

A Mass Migration Crisis, and It May Yet Get Worse: Rod Nordland, New York Times, Oct. 31, 2015— They arrived in an unceasing stream, 10,000 a day at the height, as many as a million migrants heading for Europe this year…

 

On Topic Links

 

Munich Marks This Kristallnacht by Making Room For Boycotters of the Jewish State: Rabbi Abraham Cooper and Harold Brackman, Jewish Journal, Nov. 6, 2015 

Europe’s Feeble Fight Against Anti-Semitism: Manfred Gerstenfeld, Jerusalem Post, Oct. 14, 2015

Germany’s Gathering Clouds of Discontent: Jochen Bittner, New York Times, Oct. 29, 2015

Germany: "20 Million Muslims by 2020": Soren Kern, Gatestone Institute, Nov. 1, 2015

                                      

                                      

JEW HATRED, THROUGHOUT THE AGES

Barbara Kay                                                         

National Post, Nov. 5, 2015

 

During the Second World War, civilization as we knew it perished in the fires of the Holocaust. The fires were stoked by a hatred whose ferocity had no precedent in human history. Shocked to the core, we thought we would never see its like again. We are seeing it again, but we are shy to call it by its name, lest we be forced to admit that there is no atrocity so egregious it cannot serve as inspiration elsewhere.

 

The night of Nov. 9-10 will mark the 77th anniversary of Kristallnacht, the 1938  “night of broken glass,” when a general pogrom against Jews was incited by the Nazi government. Like the current “knife Intifada” in Jerusalem, the violence in Germany had the superficial air of spontaneity, but was in fact well orchestrated by authorities endorsing mass barbarism as a permissible outlet for culturally long-simmering Jew hatred.

 

Many critics will say that this is a false analogy. They will say the Jews of Germany did nothing to deserve their punishment, but that the Palestinians’ murderous rage is justified by the “occupation” or by the “settlements.” But the analogy is correct. Jew hatred in the Middle East is old news and predates the occupation and the settlements. The hatred ebbed and flowed across the centuries, of course, and there were periods of relative peace and harmony. But no credible observer of the Middle East suggests that the anti-Semitic cancer afflicting the Arab world’s body politic today suddenly sprang forth after Israeli forces captured Jerusalem in 1967.

 

Nov. 10 also marks the 532rd anniversary of Martin Luther’s birth. It is no accident that Kristallnacht coincided with Luther’s birthday. Luther was one of the world’s great haters. You would be hard pressed to choose between the papacy and the Jews as the target for the more passionate of his rants, so virulent was his loathing for both, and both so extensively documented. Luther describes the Pope, cardinals and bishops as “the whole brood of Sodom,” and suggests people attack the Church “with every sort of weapon and wash our hands in its blood.” Anticipating Charlie Hebdo, in 1545, Luther produced a book in collaboration with the painter Lucas Cranach featuring obscene depictions of the Pope involving animals and excrement. Leaving a Lutheran Council, he made a sign of the cross and called to the crowds, “May the Lord fill you with hatred of the Pope.”

 

When the Jews did not convert to his new faith, Luther boiled with rage against “this depraved and damned people,” urging civil authorities to “set fire to their synagogues or schools” and “throw brimstone and pitch upon them.” Sounds a lot like Kristallnacht. Indeed, according to Pinchas Lipide, a scholar of relations between Jews and a succession of Popes, “Hitler’s henchmen found a complete blueprint for their Aryanization project in Luther’s writings.” Later, at his 1946 trial in Nuremburg, Hitler’s chief Reich propagandist, pederast Julius Streicher, would attempt (unsuccessfully, happily) to use Luther’s Jew hatred, as expressed in his tract, Of the Jews and Their Lies, as a defence for promoting genocide.

 

Powerful and consequential as it has been, Islam’s prophet Mohammed’s hatred for the Jews, as expressed in the Koran, wasn’t a patch on Luther’s. Which, given the long view of history, can offer a glimmer of hope. For, outrageously bilious as he was, Luther cannot be blamed for the Holocaust. After all, Lutheranism spread to many countries, becoming the official religion of Sweden, for example. And though a fat streak of anti-Semitism runs throughout Swedish history, Sweden was not infected by the deadly toxin of murderous anti-Semitism that swept Germany, and in fact welcomed Jewish refugees escaping closing Nazi nets in Norway and Denmark.

 

Today, there are 72 million Lutherans in the world, one Christian branch amongst many others, and there are probably few amongst them who are even aware of the extreme Judeophobia their religion’s founder espoused. Hateful sentiments can be vanquished. Realistically, we will not see a similar transcendence in the Islamic world in our lifetime. Too many of them still want their Holocaust. But they won’t get it. Perhaps their great-grandchildren will refuse to hate. When Muslims will it, it will be no dream.   

                       

                                                                       

Contents                                                                                      

   

FROM KRISTALLNACHT TO THE KINDERTRANSPORT

TO, FINALLY, AMERICA                               

John H. Lang                   

Wall Street Journal, Nov. 8, 2015

 

Monday, Nov. 9, marks the anniversary of Kristallnacht in 1938, when Nazi hordes ran wild throughout Berlin, as well as in other German cities. Jewish houses of worship were desecrated and then set afire. Thousands of Jews were rounded up, some beaten to death, others sent to concentration camps. Jewish-owned businesses and homes were looted.

 

I will never forget seeing the unimaginable horror of the night and the following day 77 years ago. By luck, my parents were not in Berlin. I was at my grandmother’s. Through the window I could see my beautiful synagogue engulfed in flames as desperate screams rose from the street below. Each knock on our apartment door brought terror, followed by incredible relief. By some miracle, two of my uncles made it to my grandmother’s seeking safety from the savagery of this night.

 

The next morning as I wandered through my neighborhood, I saw shards of plate glass everywhere, as every Jewish-owned shop had been looted and painted with vile Jew-hating slogans. Uniformed Nazis and their sympathizers were having fun as they surveyed their brutality. One group looked at a large stain on the street that was said to be the blood of a Jew. Even now I can hear their laughter. At that moment, I was an 8-year-old who had suddenly turned 18. My every thought turned to survival. When my parents returned, I told my father that I would never live to see my ninth birthday. He took my hand and told me that he would always protect me and that nothing would happen to our family—because he had been a decorated front-line soldier during the 1914-18 World War.

 

Though reports of Kristallnacht—called the night of broken glass—were circulated world-wide, there was no forceful reaction by the world powers, although the U.S. ambassador to Berlin was recalled to Washington for consultations. In retrospect this became a rehearsal for the Holocaust to come. Although my parents already had applied to immigrate to the United States, they were informed by the U.S. Embassy in Berlin that our quota number would not be reached for several years. There was no escape.

 

After I got into a fight with a member of the Hitler Youth, I sensed a new level of desperation by my parents. It was then that England, with an act of Parliament, threw a lifeline to Germany’s Jews, agreeing to admit 10,000 unaccompanied children. It was an act of kindness and humanity that I will never forget. Parents had to make agonizing decisions to send their children to safety and possibly never see them again. The Kindertransport trains started in December 1938 and continued to the start of World War II on Sept. 1, 1939. Farewells were filled with hugs and tears as children separated from their parents. In retrospect we could see how at that moment, all such parents became supreme heroes.

 

I will never know how my parents secured a spot on one of the early Kindertransport trains for me, but I left Berlin in January 1939. Toward the end of 1940, much earlier than I would have believed, the American Embassy in London informed me that my quota number had been reached and I could now proceed to the United States. I left London with its nightly heavy bombing and its brave, resolute citizens. The North Atlantic voyage was perilous, and we never knew whether we might be torpedoed by a German submarine, as so many other ships has been. My parents ultimately escaped Germany too, but not without trauma.

 

After nearly 75 years in the U.S., I still am stirred by the thought of American freedom—so precious and thrilling that I cannot imagine life without it. In the shadow of the Kristallnacht anniversary, I see that the Christian communities of the Middle East are being savaged by Islamic terrorists. Men are publicly beheaded, women condemned to acts of depravity, and churches destroyed. Who in our government has forcefully spoken out to stop this human tragedy? Who will throw the Christians of the Middle East a lifeline? I pray that our nation will. As I recall my past and revel in my American freedom, I think of my favorite film, “Casablanca.” A couple, celebrating at Rick’s café as they prepare to depart for the United States, raise their glasses in a toast. They jointly say: “To America,” and so do I.                                                               

                                                                       

Contents

   

MIDDLE EAST REFUGEES, ANTI-SEMITISM, AND THE                                           

CHALLENGE TO EUROPE’S DEMOCRATIC VALUES

Rabbi Abraham Cooper

Town Hall, Oct. 29, 2015

 

At the beginning of the emotional debate sparked by the huge influx of refugees, leaders of the small vulnerable Jewish communities in Europe did not dare express their fears, lest they be painted as racists or Islamophobes. At that point the dominant voices in Western Europe not only favored the intake of all refugees, but bullied many early critics into silence. Nor did Jews dare ask an obvious question: do European leaders have a responsibility to incorporate concerns of Jewish communities already reeling from anti-Semitic threats and attacks often emanating from radicalized Muslims?

 

Now, as European leaders seek to recalibrate their policies toward the continuing huge influx from the Middle East, several Jewish leaders have begun to speak out. Oskar Deutsch, chairman of the Jewish community in Vienna, wrote in the Austrian daily Kurier that his community has helped many refugees over the years. However, the arrival of 20 million Muslims in Europe over recent decades has led to increased physical anti-Semitic attacks and migration of Jews. Deutsch added that refugees arriving now from Syria and Afghanistan come from societies where anti-Semitism is a staple in their schoolbooks, media and social networks. Terror against Israelis, Muslim attacks on Jewish schools, synagogues, museums and other institutions are often glorified in these countries.

 

A coalition of Dutch Jewish groups reacted with alarm as hundreds of refugees are being housed next to a Jewish neighborhood in the Amsterdam suburb of Amstelveen. It is the only place in the Netherlands with a visible Jewish community with multiple synagogues, Jewish schools, kosher restaurants and shops.

 

Their fears are based in reality. A newly published report by the Fundamental Rights Agency elaborates on the sizable increase of anti-Semitism in Europe A Jewish defense organization in France reported that almost all attacks on Jews are carried out by Muslims. In the Netherlands this is true for over 60% of all anti-Semitic attacks. There are strong indications that many anti-Semitic incidents go unreported. All this has led the Vice-President of The European Commission (EC), Frans Timmermans, to assign separate coordinators to track anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. Germany is the key player in this unfolding drama, because of the sheer number of new refugees taken in from Arab and Muslim countries. There are other reasons as well. After the Nazi Holocaust, Germany's Jewish community remained small until Germany welcomed sizeable Jewish immigration from the former Soviet Union. Russian Jews make up the great majority of the 230,000 Jews currently living in Germany.

 

In a country which committed the ultimate crime against Jews in the previous century, the presence of a large number of Jews is a psychological indicator that German democracy is functioning. Chancellor Angela Merkel's government underscored its sensitivity to Jewish concerns when it intervened rapidly with corrective legislation after a Cologne judge banned the core Judaic (and Muslim) practice of circumcision in 2012, a prohibition which had wide public support. Now, Josef Schuster, President of Germany's Central Council of Jews, has expressed his worries during a meeting with Chancellor Merkel that many now seeking refuge in Germany come from countries where Israel is considered the prime enemy. He remarked that these people grew up with a very hostile image of Israel and frequently transfer these negative feelings to all Jews.

 

It is also likely that the massive refugee influx will lead to greater support of the extreme right wing, whose ideology poses yet another danger to Jewish communities. Jews are left to wonder whether anyone else will express concerns that Germany could be welcoming some among the new arrivals who take the Koran literally and believe that Jews are pigs and monkeys. In the 20th Century, dehumanization of Jews was a centerpiece of German Nazi ideologies, which classified Jews as vermin or bacteria and paved the way for the Holocaust.

 

The German constitution has been translated into Arabic so it could be read by new immigrants. This is a beginning, but far from adequate. In view of what has happened in the past, all newcomers should be asked to sign a declaration accepting Democratic Values. Just as it has lead the way in opening its borders and hearts to refugees, Germany will do itself, the rest of the continent and the new class of refugee/migrants a great service by demanding each new immigrant to commit to democratic values of peace, justice, non-discrimination and mutual respect. Failure to require refugees to embrace civil society will likely lead to Jewish emigration, as is already has in France. It will also generate further mainstream support for xenophobic political parties and see a moral decline of a society that with much effort built a new democracy on the ruins of the Nazi Third Reich.                                                   

                                                                       

Contents                                                                            

   

A MASS MIGRATION CRISIS, AND IT MAY YET GET WORSE                                                                        

Rod Nordland                        

New York Times, Oct. 31, 2015

 

They arrived in an unceasing stream, 10,000 a day at the height, as many as a million migrants heading for Europe this year, pushing infants in strollers and elderly parents in wheelchairs, carrying children on their shoulders and life savings in their socks. They came in search of a new life, but in many ways they were the heralds of a new age.

 

There are more displaced people and refugees now than at any other time in recorded history — 60 million in all — and they are on the march in numbers not seen since World War II. They are coming not just from Syria, but from an array of countries and regions, including Afghanistan, Iraq, Gaza, even Haiti, as well as any of a dozen or so nations in sub-Saharan and North Africa. They are unofficial ambassadors of failed states, unending wars, intractable conflicts. The most striking thing about the current migration crisis, however, is how much bigger it could still get.

 

What if Islamic State militants are not beaten back but continue to extend their brutal writ across Iraq and Syria? What if the Taliban continue to increase their territorial gains in Afghanistan, prompting even more people to flee? A quarter of Afghans told a Gallup Poll that they want to leave, and more than 100,000 are expected to try to flee to Europe this year. There are between six million and eight million people displaced in Syria, along with more than four million Syrian refugees in Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan.

 

Egypt’s five million or more Copts, the Middle East’s last remaining major Christian sect, are deeply worried about their future in an unstable and hostile country. Ancient minority groups like the Yazidis of Iraq are already homeless, as are many small communities of Assyrian, Nestorian and Chaldean Christians from northern Iraq. While Yemenis have yet to abandon their homeland in substantial numbers, their plight is worsening daily amid wartime shortages of food and medicine and persistent bombardment by Saudi warplanes. Yemen is not much farther away from Europe than Eritrea, now the biggest source of African refugees, just across the Red Sea, and at some 25 million it is as populous as Afghanistan.

 

Nor is it only the Middle East and North Africa that European leaders need to consider. The Gallup Poll, based on data compiled from more than 450,000 interviews in 151 nations from 2009 to 2011, found that in Nigeria, which already has double the population of Germany, 40 percent of people would emigrate to the West if they could. And the lesson of 2015 — for them and much of the world — is that they can.

 

While the flow of migrants to Europe this year already represents the biggest influx from outside the Continent in modern history, many experts warn that the mass movement may continue and even increase — possibly for years to come. “We are talking about millions of potential refugees trying to reach Europe, not thousands,” Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, said in a recent Twitter posting.

 

Many of the migrants are fleeing persecution, poverty, ethnic and religious strife and war, but these afflictions are often symptoms of more profound changes. In the Middle East and Africa, borders drawn by Ottoman dynasts and European colonialists are breaking down as the autocratic Arab states that enforced a grim peace for generations continue to implode. As traditional lines of authority break down, militant groups like the Islamic State and Boko Haram, in Nigeria, seek to fill the vacuum while minority sects and ethnic groups suffer unspeakable treatment at their hands.

 

Climate change, too, is roiling societies across the Middle East and Africa. Syria was in the grip of a prolonged drought when war broke out, and large areas of sub-Saharan Africa are becoming uninhabitable. With rising sea levels, a single typhoon in the Bay of Bengal could drive millions of Bangladeshis from their homes in low-lying coastal areas and render that land uninhabitable, too. Europe has spawned mass movements of refugees in the not-too-distant past — 700,000 from the breakup of Yugoslavia in 1993, 1.1 million from Eastern Europe as the Iron Curtain was torn down in 1989 — but what is new now is not just the scale of the arrivals, in such large numbers over such a short period of time. It is also the sheer number and variety of problem places they are leaving behind.

 

Many migrants are from countries where the West has tried to intervene and failed spectacularly — Iraq and Afghanistan, in particular. There are now some two million Iraqi refugees, many bound for Europe. Among them are people like Muhammad Basher, a young Kurdish doctor from Iraq, who took his life savings of $2,000 and had spent nearly all of it by the time he reached the Croatian border — $1,200 just for a seat in a rubber dinghy on a dangerous sea crossing to Greece. “Better to die quickly there, than slowly in Iraq,” he said. Sayid Karim Hashimi, 23, a native of Kunduz, was among the Afghans recently crossing the border out of Serbia. “There is no future in Afghanistan,” he said.

 

Libya represents another failed intervention, by the French and British, with American support. Although few Libyans have been prompted to join the exodus, the chaos in their country has made it easier than ever before for other African migrants to flee to Europe through northern Africa. While most of the migrants have been from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, those who came through villages like this last summer could have arrived from almost anywhere. Two women from Haiti and a young girl, the daughter of one of them, passed through in early October, according to officials here representing the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. They had flown to Turkey from Haiti, then joined smugglers’ routes through the Balkans.

 

Others come from places like Eritrea, where young men are fleeing a brutal dictatorship that offers them the prospect of a lifetime of unpaid military service, and little else. Some are escaping civil war in the Democratic Republic of Congo or poverty in nations like Gambia or Senegal. Many, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, are motivated by elemental problems like spreading desertification. Others are looking for economic opportunity. Ibrahim Isahaq, 18, from Ghana, was among those migrants who came through Serbia in October, attracted by news of how easy passage had become. He was simply fleeing a family feud over a disputed inheritance. Youssou, 25, from Senegal, said his father was a commander in the little-known Casamance separatist movement, but he seemed more interested in business prospects in Europe. “There was no life for me in Senegal,” he said…

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

 

                                                                                     

On Topic

 

Munich Marks This Kristallnacht by Making Room For Boycotters of the Jewish State: Rabbi Abraham Cooper and Harold Brackman, Jewish Journal, Nov. 6, 2015 —The worldwide Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) Movement is the twenty-first century’s highest profile anti-Israel global campaign that meets the “three D” ( Double standard, Deligitimization, and Demonization) litmus test for crossing the line between legitimate criticism of the Jewish state and toxic anti-Semitism…

Europe’s Feeble Fight Against Anti-Semitism: Manfred Gerstenfeld, Jerusalem Post, Oct. 14, 2015 —Earlier this month, the Fundamental Rights Agency – an official European body – published a review of anti-Semitism in Europe over the period 2004-2014. Perhaps the most significant observation on studying the document is that no data was supplied by several member countries, and that the quality of data collected differs greatly from country to country.

Germany’s Gathering Clouds of Discontent: Jochen Bittner, New York Times, Oct. 29, 2015— It’s getting darker and colder here in Germany, and it’s not just because winter is coming.

Germany: "20 Million Muslims by 2020": Soren Kern, Gatestone Institute, Nov. 1, 2015 — Germany's Muslim population is set to nearly quadruple to an astonishing 20 million within the next five years, according to a demographic forecast by Bavarian lawmakers.

 

Paul Merkley: THE PRESENT “TRUCE” IN THE WORLDWIDE “JIHAD”

 

 

 

The Muslim Attitude Towards the State of Israel

 

Why does the presence of the miniscule State of Israel, with its population of eight and one-quarter million, cause such derangement of life in its own neighborhood, where the descendants of Ishmael have 22 nations today with  a population of about 144 million, and where they occupy almost five million square miles — a landmass 450 times that of the Jewish state?

 

Why is it that the issue of Israel and her relationship with her neighbours is such an obsession at the U.N., where during its 2013 session the General Assembly adopted a total of 21 resolutions criticizing Israel directly but only 4 resolutions criticizing all the other nations in the rest of the world?

 

How is that secular “progressives,” hand-in-hand with  the leaders of “mainline” Christian denominations throughout our part of the world are signing-on today enthusiastically and with display of virtue to the proposition that removing Israel from the company of decent and legitimate nations will, at a stroke, remove the largest impediment to peace that exists in the world, allowing the lion to lie down with the lamb?

 

The bottom line here is that Israel’s offense follows not from any of the properties which Westerners (Christian or secular) imagine they can measure (size, population, wealth); nor does it follow from any of the categories of moral evaluation that they use when reckoning the rights and wrongs behind other current political issues. Israel’s offense follows from the pretensions of Islam – which follow from the message of its Prophet, Muhammad. It is because Israel is the only non-Muslim sovereign state in the heart of the Muslim world that Muslims cannot be at peace with it.  Israel has accomplished what is theologically impossible and impermissible. She has taken a portion of the Muslim world into the world of non-Islam.

 

Since 1969, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), with fifty-seven members, “the collective voice of the Muslim world” as it calls itself, has dealt the largest bloc of votes at the United Nations and in many other world bodies. The 140-odd non-Muslim nations, divided among themselves on all the other issues of the day, have learned to reap great rewards for displaying solidarity with the Muslim bloc. For example, thanks to their loyalty to the Muslim bloc, China, Russia, Cuba, and Venezuela have gained the necessary support for their inclusion on UN Human Rights Council, where they enjoy exemption from criticism for their own records while gleefully passing resolutions denouncing nations like Canada for theirs.

 

The Unforgivable Offense For Which Israel Must Answer.

 

The Qur’an states that, for their refusal  to heed the prophet, “humiliation and wretchedness were stamped upon them [the Jews] and they were visited with wrath from Allah.” (Sura II:61; cf., Sura III:112.)  Muslims understand this as an eternal judgment on the Jews. The creation of the State of Israel is an intolerable reversal of this judgment, an assault on the credibility of Islam which  cannot be permitted to stand. A Muslim contributor to  a Conference  of  the Life and Peace Institute of Uppsala (which “seeks to contribute to justice, peace and reconciliation through research, seminars and publications”) explained “the Muslim perspective” on the history of modern Israel to his  mainly Christian audience in 1992:

 

With the Balfour Declaration,] Britain granted Islamic land, which did not belong to Britain, to people who did not live on the land, and had no relation to it except a religious connection …  In the year 1967, Israel invaded and declared war on neighbouring Arab countries, and occupied all of Palestine. The West Bank, Gaza, the Sinai Desert, and the Syrian Golan Heights, and all Islamic holy places and shrines fell under Israeli military authority, most notably the Al-Aqsa Mosque, the 1st Qibla for Muslims.

 

The Qibla is the fixed point in the Mosque which indicates the direction in which to pray, which in every Mosque in the world today is towards Mecca. This  recital bears out the Islamic view that Muhammad’s original intention to pray towards Jerusalem, later corrected by himself in response to the Jews, “mockery” of his claims, now is to be understood as fixing the exclusiveness  of Islam’s claim to this Holy site no less than its claim to Mecca and Medina.

In Islam, nothing, once possessed, is ever  given up to the other side.  When, in June, 1967,  the combined Arab forces failed to save the “Holy Places of Islam”  from Israeli armies, “the responsibility for liberating the Mosque, as well as the Islamic land was transferred from their hands to the Islamic nations.”

 

Nothing will delay its liberation when a leader such as Saladin appears to call for struggle and gather Arab countries  … We lived on this land since the beginning of its existence.  We have never left it  … The occupation of Palestine left a deep wound in every Muslim’s heart  … In Islam, peace is the foundation upon which relations are built, according to God’s word.  All believers should participate and share in peace  … But Islam calls upon and orders Muslims to own all means of power and superiority as the Quranic verse says: “You have to prepare power by all means so as to  frighten your enemy.”

 

In Muslim eyes, Israel is the ultimate impediment in the way of the  ultimate subjection of us all to a worldwide regime of  under the direct rule of Allah.

 

Worldwide Jihad.

The Pakistani Muslim scholar Mawlana Abul Ala Mawdudi, the founder of the version of Muslim absolutism to which the principal terrorists appeal today, puts their hope before us in these terms:

 

Islam is not a normal religion like the other religions in the world, and Muslim nations are not like normal nations. Muslim nations are very special because they have a command from Allah to rule the entire world and to be over every nation in the world. . . .  Islam is a revolutionary faith that comes to destroy any government made by man. Islam doesn’t look for a nation to be in better condition than any other nation.  Islam doesn’t care about the land or who owns the land.  The goal of Islam is to rule the entire world and submit all of mankind to the faith of Islam.  Any nation or power in this world that tries to get in the way of that goal, Islam will fight and destroy. In order for Islam to fulfill that goal, Islam can use every power available every way it can be used to bring worldwide revolution. This is jihad. [From Jihad in Islam, as quoted by Mark Gabriel, Islam and Terrorism, pp. 81-82.]

 

Among the six fundamental duties which Muhammad imposed on all Muslims was that of jihad, Holy War, [Reuven Firestone, Jihad: The Origins of the Holy War in Islam (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999)] which Muhammad describes in his Qur’an  as follows:

Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. Lo, Allah loveth those who battle for his cause [Qur’an,II:190 –191]

When you meet the Unbelievers in fight, smite at their necks; at length when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them); thereafter is the time for either generosity or ransom, unless the war lays down its burdens. [XLVII: 4]

 

The recent video-images of lines of young Christian men being paraded in bonds prior to their decapitation under the sword of their ISIS captors should leap to all minds.

 

Apologists for Islam who work in our local vineyards (rather than in locations at the heart of Islam, where their irenic declarations might actually do some good) ) strive heroically to persuade us that these bloody-minded injunctions and countless others  scattered throughout the Qur’an and among  the ahadith do not, of course, mean what they plainly mean. Many of these apologists find support from the eminent translator of the Qur’an and commentator, A  Yusuf Ali scholar, who explains, in exegesis of Qur’an IX:20:

 

The essence of Jihad … consists in … a true and sincere Faith , which so fixes its gaze on God, that all selfish or worldly motives seem paltry and fade away… Mere brutal fighting is opposed to the whole spirit of Jihad,  while the sincere scholar’s pen or preacher’s voice or wealthy man’s contribution may be the most valuable forms of jihad. (The Holy Qur’an: Text, Translation and Commentary, Brentwood Maryland, Amana Corp, 1983., page 444.]

 

I submit that this prissy view is simply incompatible in word and spirit with the texts just cited. Nowhere in these texts do we find the least hint of the pen being mightier than the sword.

 

***dar-al-Harb and dar-al-Islam.

Under the doctrine of jihad, we find everything we need to know about where human affairs are tending and how it will all end. The world is divided into two irreconcilable camps: (i) the dar-al-Harb (the territory of War) and (ii) the  dar-al-Islam, the territory which has been taken irreversibly out of the dar-al-Harb  and is now submitted eternally to Allah. In the dar-al-Islam, Islam rules everything. In the dar-al-Harb, Islam rules nothing  (which does not contradict the other reality, that Allah rules over everything.)

 

Islam forbids that there should ever be peace for Muslims so long as any part of Allah’s world withholds submission (which is what “Islam” means.)  Reconciliation between dar-al-Islam and any part of dar-al-Harb is not envisioned for a moment. A state of truce is permitted, so long as it is modeled on truces with the infidels which the Prophet promoted from time to time in his lifetime – the exemplary instance being the Treaty of Khudaibiya (628AD). The story here is that transitory weakness in fighting numbers forced Muhammad to enter into truce with the local Jewish armies – a truce that from the first he fully intended to violate — and did violate, without notice, Muslim notions of truthful speaking being what they are,  when his side became stronger than that of the Jews. (Yasir Arafat and his successors in the PA brazenly invoke this Treaty of Khudaibiya when challenged by Arabs to explain why they feel it necessary to negotiate from time to time with the Israelis.)

 

Whether we  recognize it or not, the non-Muslim world — that includes us! — exists today under a truce like that under which non-Muslim Arabia existed in the days when Muhammad set out on conquest of the world for Allah.

Manfred Gerstenfeld: Muslim anti-Semitism in Western Europe

 

Muslim anti-Semitism in Western Europe

Manfred Gerstenfeld

Tundra Tabloids, Feb. 20, 2013

http://tundratabloids.com/2013/02/muslim-anti-semitism-in-western-europe.html

 

European governments often avoid exposing Muslim anti-Semitism. In colonial times, Western racism far exceeded any other discrimination. With these guilt feelings, to accuse an immigrant minority group of having a high percentage of people who hate another minority – i.e., the Jews – is not done. This is the more so as there is also discrimination of Muslims in Western societies. Furthermore officially accusing large parts of the Muslim community of anti-Semitism could ‘upset’ social peace.

 

Thus detailed data on Muslim anti-Semitism in Western Europe is very limited. The few existing studies all point in one direction. In 2011 Mark Elchardus, a Belgian sociologist published a report on Dutch-language elementary schools in Brussels. He found that about 50% of Muslim students in second and third grade could be considered anti-Semites, versus 10% of others. It is logical to assume, in view of the age of these children, that their parents have imbued them with Jew hatred.

 

In the same year Günther Jikeli published his findings from the 117 interviews he conducted with Muslim male youngsters of an average age of 19 in Berlin, Paris and London. The differences in attitudes between the cities were minor. The majority of the interviewees voiced some, or strong anti-Semitic feelings. They expressed them openly and often aggressively.

 

In 13 Amsterdam trade schools a pilot project with Moroccan students was carried out about the Second World War and the Middle East conflict. The purpose was to fight their discriminatory attitudes and in particular, anti-Semitic expressions. The findings showed a decrease in such attitudes after the project. Before thirty-two percent of the Moroccans thought Jews were “as nice as other people.” Afterwards this increased to 50%.

 

A study in France in 2005 showed that anti-Jewish prejudice was prevalent particularly among religious Muslims. Forty-six percent held such sentiments compared to 30% of non-practicing Muslims. Only 28% of religious Muslims in France were found to be totally without such prejudice.

 

These projects and much anecdotal information uncover that anti-Semitism among substantial parts of Muslim communities is much higher than in autochthonous populations. As it manifests itself from a very young age onward, only the extremely gullible will believe that it will disappear in coming decades.

 

A second important aspect is that some Muslims stand out compared to autochthonous anti-Semites in committing extreme anti-Semitic acts. This is particularly clear in France. The 1982 attack on the Jewish Goldenberg restaurant in Paris was carried out by Arab terrorists from abroad. Six people were killed.

 

In this new century, Muslims living in France committed vicious murders of Jews. In 2003, Sebastian Selam a Jewish disc jockey was killed by his neighbor Adel Amastaibou. In 2006, a young Jewish man Ilan Halimi was kidnapped and tortured for 24 days and killed by a Muslim gang. Its leader Youssouf Fofana shouted when the court trial began in 2009, “Allahu Akbar.” (God is Great) Last year, Mohammed Merah, a Frenchman of Algerian origin killed a teacher and three children in front of their Jewish school.

 

In 2009 during Israel’s Cast Lead campaign in Gaza, the largest anti-Semitic riots in Norway’s history took place in Oslo. All participants were Muslim. Attackers wounded a Christian who attended a pro-Israel demonstration. Life-threatening projectiles were thrown at demonstrators.

 

Sweden’s third largest city Malmö, is often mentioned as “the capital of European anti-Semitism.” The perpetrators of many physical and verbal attacks there are all, or almost all, Muslims. A record number of complaints about hate crimes in this city in 2010 and 2011 did not lead to any convictions.

 

In Copenhagen, all main assaults on Jews were perpetrated by Arabs. The Jewish community complained in vain about the inaction of the authorities. In 2012 Stephan J. Kramer, General Secretary of the Central Council of Jews in Germany said that the “willingness to be violent in the Muslim camp is comparable with that in the extreme right wing camp.”

 

Many European authorities must be blamed two-fold for their attitudes to the Jews in this matter. Firstly, they allowed immigrants into their countries in a non-selective way without examining the cultural differences, or considering how these people would be integrated into their societies. They should have known that actively promoting anti-Semitism was part and parcel of the cultures these people came from. Allowing them in unselectively can thus be considered an indirect type of state-promoted anti-Semitism.

 

Secondly, over the years it has become clear that while far from all Muslims are anti-Semites, a large percentage are, and from a young age. Some of them openly admit that they are willing to commit violent acts. Authorities in European countries have intentionally neglected to investigate this matter in depth. The non-selective immigration of Muslims has been the most troubling development for European Jewry in the last 50 years. This is not only the fault of part of the immigrants, but also of European authorities.

 

Manfred Gerstenfeld is a Board member and former Chairman of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (2000-2012).

Dr.Manfred Gerstenfeld: Has The Netherlands Gone Mad On Jewish Issues?

Dr.Manfred Gerstenfeld: Has The Netherlands Gone Mad On Jewish Issues?

Manfred Gerstenfeld 

Tundra Tabloids, Apr. 5, 2013

http://www.tundratabloids.com/2013/04/dr-manfred-gerstenfeld-has-the-netherlands-gone-mad-on-jewish-issues.html

 

One has to wonder…….

 

HAS THE NETHERLANDS GONE MAD ON JEWISH ISSUES?

 

In February the Dutch national media “forgot” to report on a mainstream TV broadcast in which a number of Dutch Turkish youngsters praised Hitler, the Holocaust and the killing of Jewish babies. On the English language web the issue got far more attention. Thereupon the Simon Wiesenthal Center wrote to the Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte asking him to investigate anti-Semitism in the Netherlands.  This letter finally started a debate in the media and parliament. In the meantime the interviewer of the youngsters, himself a Dutchman of Turkish descent, had to go into hiding after receiving death threats.

 

The reply of Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte to the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s letter has now been published. Rutte writes that the statements by the youngsters were “shocking and reprehensible.” He promises a detailed series of action and investigations. It would be important for the Simon Wiesenthal Center to check back later this year and examine which of the Prime Minister’s promises have materialized. Over the past few years, there have been three discussions held on anti-Semitism in the Dutch Parliament. They have however, hardly led to any concrete results in the battle against the country’s anti-Semitism.

 

Negative news coming out of the Netherlands which has impacted upon Jews has continued in the past few weeks. The municipality of the village of Bronckhorst has decided that its official delegation on National Memorial Day this 4th of May, will also honor fallen soldiers of Nazi Germany who are buried in the village, in addition to the Dutch dead during the Second World War. Last year, a judge prevented this, but a Higher Court has since lifted the prohibition.

 

A new report prepared for the Anne Frank Foundation showed that complaints about severe anti-Semitic acts received by police have increased from 19 in 2010, to 30 in 2011. The total number of complaints about anti-Semitic incidents has remained about the same at 2,700. This large number of complaints is but a fraction of what goes on, as many people do not report to the monitoring organizations.

 

MDI, an organization which tracks discrimination on Dutch internet sites found that in 2012, anti-Semitism/Holocaust denial was again by far the chief category of internet hate at 28 percent. It is followed by expressions of hatred of Muslims at 19%. This is against a background where the Muslim population in the Netherlands is around 1 million – at least 20 times the number of Jews. MDI concludes that contemporary anti-Semitism has been mainstreamed in the Netherlands. MDI also reported that the Dutch government has eliminated funding for them claiming that this was due to budget considerations.

 

Last month, Parliamentarian Dion Graus of the Freedom Party led by Geert Wilders put forward a motion to forbid all ritual slaughter, whether stunned or not. There is no majority support for this position, yet it is another indication of the Dutch obsession with animal rights, which can be contrasted with the “benign” neglect of the country’s anti-Semitism problems.

 

It has now become known, more than 65 years after the Second World War, that the city of Amsterdam fined hundreds of Jewish Holocaust survivors for tax avoidance when they were held in concentration camps or hiding from the Nazis.

 

All this comes against a background in which the Dutch government has consistently refused to apologize for the failure of the Dutch government in exile in London during the Second World War to meet its responsibilities toward its persecuted Dutch Jewish population. Almost all other European governments have since apologized or admitted guilt for the conduct of their authorities under Germany’s occupation.

 

As far as Israel is concerned, the Dutch government wants to pass legislation which will impose labeling on all products from the disputed West Bank territories. No such law has been proposed for the Turkish occupation in part of Cyprus and the parts of the Sahara occupied by Morocco.

 

The leader of the second largest Dutch party Diederik Samsom attacked Israel at his party’s first congress on the Middle East. He said that Israel transgresses international law. Samsom “forgot” to mention that the Netherlands itself doesn’t obey international law.  Despite it being a signatory of the U.N Convention on Genocide, it has not tried to bring Iran before an international court.

 

If the Dutch government is indeed finally committed to act against anti-Semitism, it will first have to investigate its sources and nature in great detail. Particular emphasis should be placed on the Muslim population, as there are many indications that anti-Semitism there is far wider spread and has more severe expressions than within the autochthonous population.

 

Additionally, all of this must be seen in the context of the extreme demonization of Israel. Almost 39% of the Dutch population believes that Israel intends to exterminate the Palestinians. These data have been concealed by the Dutch media.[13] Any investigation into anti-Semitism in the Netherlands should also examine how this diabolical viewpoint has been arrived at, and who exactly ascribes to it.

ANTI-SEMITISM: IN EUROPE, SPREAD OF MARXIST-ISLAMIST AXIS; IN TORONTO, “AL-QUDS DAY”

Contents:

 

No Future in France: Dire Times for French Jews
Al-Quds Day is Just a Soapbox for a Hatefest
In Egypt, Anti-Semitism Is Back in Fashion
The Sinister Alliance of the Islamist-Marxist Axis

On Topic Links
________________________________________________________________________

 NO FUTURE IN FRANCE: DIRE TIMES FOR FRENCH JEWS

Michel Gurfinkiel
PJ Media, August 12, 2012  

 

"Any time young people approach me in order to get married, I ask them various questions about their future. Eighty percent of them say they do not envision any future in France." This is what one rabbi in Paris told me last week. I heard similar statements from other French rabbis and lay Jewish leaders: "We have a feeling the words are on the wall now," one leader in the Lyons area confided to me. "It is not just our situation in this country deteriorating; it is also that the process is much quicker than expected."
 
Even the chief rabbi of France, Gilles Bernheim, may be sharing that view now. A philosopher (holding a prestigious French agrégation degree in philosophy), a graduate of the French Rabbinical School in Paris, and a former student at some of the most orthodox yeshivoth (Talmudic academies) in Jerusalem, Bernheim was until recently very eager to reconcile traditional Judaism with Europe's "open society." He has just devoted a book to France as a nation and how Jews can contribute to France's public debates (N'oublions Pas De Penser La France), and in 2008, the year he was elected chief rabbi, he coauthored a book on Judeo-Christian dialogue (Le Rabbin et le Cardinal) with Cardinal Philippe Barbarin.
 
Despite all that, Bernheim suddenly warned Jewish leaders a few weeks ago about a growing "rejection" of Jews and Judaism in France, something he linked to the global passing of "Judeo-Christian values" in French society as a whole.
 
The immediate reason for Jewish pessimism in France and for Bernheim's change of heart may be the Toulouse massacre last March: the murder in cold blood of three Jewish children and a Jewish teacher by Mohamed Merah, a Muslim terrorist, on their school's premises. This crime, instead of instilling more compassion and understanding towards the Jewish community, has actually generated more anti-Jewish violence and hate talk, as if Merah was not seen as a vile thug but rather as a model by parts of the population.
 
There were no less than six cases of aggravated assault on Jewish youths or rabbis in France from March 26 to July 5, including one case in Toulouse again. According to the Representative Council of French Jewish Organizations (CRIF), anti-Semitic incidents of all sorts have increased by 53% compared to the same period last year.
 
President François Hollande and Minister of the Interior Manuel Valls must be credited for taking the present anti-Semitic crisis seriously, a noted departure from the ambivalent attitude of the last socialist administration of Prime Minister Lionel Jospin ten years ago. On July 22—on the seventieth anniversary of the "grande raffle" ("great round-up") of Jews by the Vichy government police in 1942 —Hollande drew a parallel between the Toulouse massacre and the deportation and mass murder of Jewish children during the Holocaust. As for Valls, he not only repeatedly acknowledged that "there was an upsurge of anti-Semitism in France," but on July 8 went so far as to stigmatize the "most stupid, most dangerous new anti-Semitism" brooding among "young and not-so-young people" in the "neighborhoods" (a code word for Muslim enclaves). Quite a bold statement, since the Socialist party and the Left at large primarily derive their present electoral edge in France from the Muslim vote. Valls and his staff may also have inspired several no-nonsense reports on anti-Semitism that were recently published in the liberal, pro-socialist press.
 
The connection between Muslim immigration—or Muslim-influenced Third World immigration—and the rise of a new anti-Semitism is a fact all over Europe. Muslims come from countries (or are culturally attuned to countries) where unreconstructed, Nazi-style Jew-bashing dominates. They are impervious to the ethical debate about the Holocaust and the rejection of anti-Jewish stereotypes that were gradually incorporated into the European political discourse and consciousness in the second half of the 20th century (to the point that lessons on the Holocaust are frequently dropped from the curriculum at schools with a plurality or a majority of Muslim pupils), and are more likely than non-Muslims to engage in assaults, attacks, or harassment practices directed at Jews. Moreover, Muslim anti-Semitism reactivates in many places a dormant, but by no means extinct, non-Muslim European anti-Semitism. Once Muslims are unopposed, or at least unprosecuted, when they challenge the historical veracity of the Holocaust or when they refer to the The Protocols of the Elders of Zion as an authentic document, a growing number of non-Muslims feel free to do the same.
 
Muslim immigration is nurturing European anti-Semitism in more surprising ways as well. One unintended and ironic consequence of European Islam's demographic growth is that Jews are frequently amalgamated with Muslims. Many people use a widespread concern about a growing influence of Islam in Europe as a way to hurt Jews as well, or to hit them first.…
 
A 2009 poll shows a 72% rejection of "ritual slaughtering" writ large. And Marine Le Pen, the far-right presidential candidate, dwelled on that issue for a while.… In an even more ominous instance, Judaism has been singled out in a protracted intellectual debate in France since early June, as the fountainhead, past and present, of totalitarianism and political violence and thus as a more dangerous religion than radical Islam.…
 
The second half of the 20th century was a golden age for French Jews, both in terms of numbers (from 250,000 souls in 1945 to 700,000 in 1970 due to population transfers and natural growth) and in terms of religious and cultural revival. There was only one shadow: the French government's anti-Israel switch engineered by Charles de Gaulle in 1966, in part as a consequence of a more global anti-American switch. The 21st century may however be a much darker age. After a first wave of anti-Jewish violence in the early 2000s, some Jews left for Israel or North America. Emigration never really ceased since then, and may soon reach much more important proportions.
(Top)
________________________________________________________________________


AL-QUDS DAY IS JUST A SOAPBOX FOR A HATEFEST
George Jonas
National Post, Aug 18, 2012

 

In 1979 the Ayatollah Khomeini designated the last Friday of Ramadan as Al-Quds Day to signify the Islamic world’s aspirations for Jerusalem. Some say it was just an expression of piety, but whatever the founder of theocratic Iran intended, Al-Quds Day has become an annual hate-fest and expansionary symbol for vocal Islamists around the world.
 
Hate-tourists gather in cities with significant Arab and/or Muslim populations such as Toronto to denounce what they call “world Zionism” and express loathing for Israel. During the 2011 Al-Quds Day rally held outside the Ontario legislature, demonstrators brandished the flag of Hezbollah, while a featured speaker, Zafar Bangash, delivered himself of the view that “Allah willing, I see that day when we, the Muslims, will march on Palestine and liberate Palestine for all the people in the world.”
 
What the speaker saw and proclaimed last year from Queen’s Park, the grounds of Ontario’s provincial legislature, wasn’t some namby-pamby two-state solution, but the demise of the Jewish State. While he expounded on his vision, someone behind him waved the flag of a terrorist organization, which is what Hezbollah is in the view of Canada’s government. Little wonder that this strikes a person like Sayeh Hassan, a dissenter who fled the theocratic tyranny of Iran in 1987, as “a cynical abuse of Canadian pluralism and accommodation.” This week Hassan wrote an online Post column jointly with David Spiro of the Greater Toronto’s Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, denouncing Al-Quds Day for being “nothing less than a pep rally for an abhorrent, hate-filled ideology.”
 
It certainly is, I agree—but I’m not sure about cynical abuse. I think Bangash & Co. are simply using Canadian pluralism and accommodation as the manufacturer intended, which is what’s wrong with the multicultural model. Chances are they—or like-minded colleagues—will use it this year again, despite protests from Jewish organizations or Muslim dissidents, shocked at hearing the very voices they’ve tried to escape coming at them from the legislative grounds of their new country. As I’m writing this, Legislature Sergeant-at-Arms Dennis Clark has approved the use of Queen’s Park once again to the organizers of Al-Quds Day. In effect, Clark told the media that he realized the demonstrators went a little overboard last year, waving terrorist flags and all, but he approved because this year the organizers promised to behave.
 
“You’re big on free speech—what do you say now?” someone asked me triumphantly. He was so sure he got me, I almost felt sorry to disappoint him. I had to, though, because I’m still big on free speech. I’m just not big on providing soapboxes. I’ve always had an issue with expropriating public spaces for private or sectarian purposes (other than the annual Santa Claus parade, perhaps). Much as I abhor what Mr. Bangash is saying, I would go to the barricades for his right to say it. What I question is Sergeant-at-arms Clark’s decision to lend the grounds of Ontario’s Parliament to the ayatollahs’ agenda.
 
What’s free speech? It’s freedom to speak my mind on any topic about which I have an opinion. It means I can say what I like regardless of how demonstrably false it may be; how much it may grate on the sense or sensitivity of others; how profoundly it may irk or offend the powerful and the fashionable, or how painfully it may hurt the feelings or self-esteem of the impoverished. Freedom of speech protects both speech and speaker from being silenced or censored because of what others may regard as requirements of social harmony, good taste, decorum, history, science, political correctness, or the truth itself—but can’t protect anyone from being regarded by contemporaries as unpleasant, indecorous, shrill, uncouth, hysterical, tasteless, false, ignorant or stupid.
 
Freedom of speech isn’t my guarantee of being heard. I can’t make my freedom your obligation. Freedom of speech entitles me to the first available spot in Hyde Park. It doesn’t entitle me to halt traffic in Piccadilly Circus.  My freedom of speech isn’t a key to your front door. I’m free to speak but not to enter your parlour or your legislative building, or the public roads and parks surrounding them, or any of your spaces not specifically set aside for assemblies and demonstrations.
 
Those who want to limit free speech claim that it’s not absolute but this is false. Free speech is absolute; it’s just that using words doesn’t amount to a pass to break the law. It’s no licence to defraud, defame, incite a riot, enter a criminal conspiracy, betray an official secret, impersonate an officer, misrepresent a qualification, breach a fiduciary obligation, etc., nor should it be. Free speech should eliminate the censor and the “human rights” commissioner, but it’s not doing it yet. A pity….
(Top)

__________________________________________________________________________________


IN EGYPT, ANTI-SEMITISM IS BACK IN FASHION
Jeffrey Goldberg

Bloomberg, Aug 6, 2012
 

A travel tip for the international executive class: If you find yourself doing business in Egypt and you feel the urge to insult your interlocutor, 1) try not to insult your interlocutor; and 2) if you must, cast aspersions on the chastity of the person’s mother or sister. This insult will be taken hard, but it may eventually be forgiven.
 
Whatever you do, don’t accuse the person of being Jewish. That may cause an irrevocable breach, and could even provoke violence.  Anti-Semitism, the socialism of fools, is becoming the opiate of the Egyptian masses. And not just the masses. Egypt has never been notably philo-Semitic (just ask Moses), but today it’s entirely acceptable among the educated and creative classes there to demonize Jews and voice the most despicable anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. Careerists know that even fleeting associations with Jews and Israelis could spell professional trouble.
 
The level of anti-Semitism in Egypt has consequences, of course, for Middle East peace and for the safety of Jews. But, importantly, it has consequences for the welfare of Egypt itself. The revolution that overthrew the country’s dictator, Hosni Mubarak, held great promise, but it also exposed the enormous challenges facing Egyptian politics and culture. And anti-Semitism, if nothing else, has always been a sign of a deeply damaged culture.
 
As Walter Russell Mead has written on his blog, countries “where vicious anti-Semitism is rife are almost always backward and poor.” They aren’t backward and poor because the Elders of Zion conspire against them. They’re backward and poor because, Mead argues, they lack the ability to “see the world clearly and discern cause and effect relations in complex social settings.” He calls anti-Semitism the “sociology of the befuddled.”
 
Egyptian television is filled with such sociology. One popular series depicts an Egyptian diplomat stationed in Tel Aviv who robs Israeli banks on the side. The show was promoted by a Middle East satellite channel, which claimed that it would “surprise the audience with the sweetest jokes about the cheap Jew.”
 
A television show called “Il Hukm Ba’d il Muzawla,” a kind of “Candid Camera” knockoff, provides further evidence that Judeophobia in Egypt has become pathological. The show lures celebrities into an interview under the pretense that it will air on a foreign television station, and then tries to discomfit them by claiming they’re actually being interviewed for an Israeli show.
 
Recently, the show targeted actor Ayman Kandeel. The episode didn’t proceed as smoothly as planned. According to a translation by the Middle East Media Research Institute, the interviewer, an Egyptian woman named Iman Mubarak, surprises Kandeel by admitting that he’s appearing on Israeli television, and not German, as he was promised. A producer named Amr Alaa appears on set and asks Kandeel if there’s a problem.…
 
Kandeel then attacks Alaa, slapping him and shoving him, throwing chairs and cursing. He wheels on Mubarak, slaps her — knocking her against a wall — and curses her. A staff member runs onto the set: “Ayman, please, it’s a prank. Shame on you for hitting a woman.”
 
Kandeel is given Mubarak’s identification card, to prove that she isn’t Israeli. Finally, he says, “She’s Egyptian?”…‘Long Live Egypt’
 
The next guest, the actress Mayer al-Beblawi, unburdens herself of an anti-Semitic tirade before being told the show is an Israeli production. The Israelis, she begins, “are real liars. They keep whining all the time about the Holocaust, or whatever it’s called. With all the Palestinians that you have killed, you are still whining about the Holocaust and its lousy figures?” She goes on: “They are the slayers of the prophets, what else can we say about them.”
 
The host, Mubarak, then provokes her: “You’ve got it wrong. They are the Chosen People.” Al-Beblawi responds: “The Chosen People? Allah did not curse the worm and the moth as much as he cursed the Jews.”
 
Al-Beblawi didn’t resort to violence. But the next guest, Mahmoud Abd al-Ghaffar, did, screaming at Mubarak, “You are a Jew!” and then pulling Alaa by the hair. Mubarak shouts: “Mahmoud, this is a ‘Candid Camera’ show. We are all Egyptians. Long live Egypt!”
 
Al Ghaffar says, “You brought me someone who looks like a Jew,” and then hugs Alaa. He turns to Mubarak: “If you weren’t a girl, the moment you told me you were Jewish … I hate the Jews to death.”
 
Mubarak then makes a statement that captures almost perfectly the moral perversion of the prank: “I’d like to tell you that I enjoyed today’s episode with Mahmoud. I didn’t know that there could be such patriotism, but it exists in every Egyptian who breathes the air of this country.”
 
In a column published last week, the Washington Post’s Colbert King correctly indicted the leadership of Iran as sponsors of “the most virulent form of state-sanctioned anti- Semitism since Nazi Germany.” It is true that the Iranian leadership is wildly anti-Semitic, but, on my visits to Iran, I’ve never personally felt the hatred of Jews on the popular level.…Any country in which anti-Semitism is considered a form of patriotism is in dire trouble
. (Top)

________________________________________________________________________


THE SINISTER ALLIANCE OF THE ISLAMIST-MARXIST AXIS
Robert S. Wistrich

Times of Israel, August 18, 2012

Since the year 2000, there has been an increasing convergence between those who belong to the radical left and those who promote Islamism in the West. One of the key areas in cementing their rapprochement has been the Palestinian question. The new “alliance” was further reinforced during the past decade by the Iraq war, the Second Lebanon War, and the Israeli attack on Gaza in 2009.
 
Despite its current marginality, Palestine still remains the paradigmatic case of oppression for most left-wing militants today. Israelis, on the other hand, are not only the bad guys in this conflict; they are seen as the embodiment of capitalist-imperialist evil. Amazingly, this negative imagery has not been much affected by the Arab revolutions of 2011, despite their revelation of the cruelty, corruption, and utter cynicism of Arab regimes, highlighted by the ethnic cleansing and genocidal assault of the Assad regime on its own population in Syria.
 
Broadly speaking, Israel is still perceived by much of the Western left and by the Islamists as being “white,” Western, and alien to the Middle East. In other words, Israelis are seen as brutal colonialist invaders. The whole story of the Zionist project is disconnected from Jewish history and the centuries’-old link between the people of Israel and its historic homeland. The Palestinians…have, by contrast, been successfully cast in the role of “Jews,” downtrodden and ruthlessly abused by Nazi-like Israelis. A key part of this campaign has been the corrosive depiction of Israel as an “apartheid state.” This libel is endlessly repeated throughout North America and Western Europe—in Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands, Spain, as well as France, Germany and Great Britain. As a consequence, the anti-Israeli obsession has steadily seeped into the European chattering classes, the free professions, the churches, and nongovernmental organizations. It is especially virulent in academia and very much in tune with the postcolonial zeitgeist.
 
Another weapon in this global anti-Zionist transformation is the growing effort to “Nazify” Israel and thereby invert the Holocaust. The abuse of Holocaust memory as a political weapon against the Jewish state has indeed become increasingly rampant in recent years along with the popularity of antisemitic conspiracy theories. The soft version of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which evokes the all-powerful “Zionist Lobby” and the alleged hidden control of “Jewish moneybags,” is in fact far more common than many people realize.
 
Anti-Semitism has been further stimulated by the growing worldwide influence of the Muslim Brotherhood, as well as the racist anti-Jewish material that is funded by Saudi Arabia and openly preached in the Middle Eastern, European and American mosques or is on sale in Islamist bookshops. The “decadent” Western culture that radical Muslims endlessly execrate is seen by jihadists as being controlled and dominated by Jews. This adds a particularly inflammatory dimension to Muslim anti-Semitism, which on this point has many affinities with the Neo-Nazi right. The message of the jihadists is indeed explicitly genocidal, but it is left-wing anti-Israeli rhetoric that gives it intellectual cover and respectability.
 
In the midst of the London Olympics, it was rather sobering to recall that a country like Great Britain remains today the world center of the academic boycott and also of trade union efforts to economically sanction Israel….Among Western democracies, only in Britain has the boycott thus far achieved such a level of resonance — even though most Britons, if asked, would almost certainly reject it, and bilateral relations between the UK and Israel still remain fairly cordial.
 
The relations between France and Israel are also largely positive, but that did not prevent the lethal jihadi assault in Toulouse several months ago in which three Jewish children and a young rabbi were ruthlessly murdered in cold blood. In the two months that followed, aggressive anti-Semitic attacks in France by Muslims against Jewish adolescents surged dramatically. To even point to such naked violence in the current toxic atmosphere is to risk being labeled a “Zionist lackey,” an Islamophobe, or a racist, especially in bien-pensant leftist or liberal circles.
 
It should be recalled that Mohammed Merah’s brutal slaughter of innocent Jewish children in France was carried out in the name of the global jihad and “avenging Palestine.” The muted response to such atrocities in liberal “progressive” Western opinion is a badge of shame for those whose self-proclaimed banner is that of human rights. 
(Top)

On Topic Links