Europe, EU, Russia, Ukraine

Muslim antisemites in Holland praise Hitler

________________________________________________________________

A bridge too far?
Victor Sharpe
March 12, 2013

prince_charles-208x300
Britain’s Prince Charles is currently on an official visit to Jordan, Oman and Qatar. But stepping foot in nearby Israel by any member of the British royal family is officially banned by the British Foreign Office.

Prince Charles’ latest trip is one more of the many routine visits by various members of the royal family to the Muslim Arab countries of the Middle East organized for them by the Foreign Office in successive British governments. Yet the same royals are never sent to Israel and one wonders if any of them ever express a desire to visit the Jewish state. If they do, no doubt the Foreign Office slaps them down quickly for fear that such a visit would upset their Arab and Muslim trading partners and endanger Britain’s extensive and lucrative bi-lateral economic and business ties in the Muslim Arab world.
It was just over a year ago that the Countess of Wessex, wife to Prince Edward, was embroiled in a scandal after she had accepted a lavish set of gems and a solid silver and pearl cup from the Bharaini royal family during her visit to the Persian Gulf state. Her “duty” included attending an opulent and lavish banquet in the repressive and hardline oil rich nation and hobnobbing with King Hamad al-Khalifa and his prime minister, whose name is almost as long as a sentence – Sheikh Khalifa bin Salman al-Khalifa.
Apart from accepting the gifts – or what some have described as bribes – Bahrain was wracked by demonstrations during the so-called Arab Spring in which fifty people were killed and many more arrested and tortured. Under such circumstances, perhaps the extravagant gifts should be returned by Buckingham Palace. So far they remain the property of what is called the Royal Collection.
The value of the jewels alone could be as high as $3.5 million. Back in 2007, the Duchess of Cornwall was given similar gifts by the Saudi royal family including three separate suites of jewels, also estimated at $3.5 million.
So for the happy Royals, endlessly jetting off to some of the most despotic and autocratic regimes in the world, it is fair game. Visiting the only true democracy in the Middle East, however, is off limits. And the present visit by Prince Charles to Jordan means that only one of the bridges over the River Jordan separates him from the Jewish state: So near and yet so far.
This British ban on royals visiting Israel is no different than the divestment and boycott campaign against the Jewish state by pro-Palestinian Israel haters and by the Left. The lordly mandarins of the Foreign Office, influenced by the corrosive presence of the Arabists amongst them, maintain this outrageous boycott of Israel and have done so for 65 years since the Jewish state’s 1948 rebirth as a nation in its ancestral and biblical homeland.
Queen Elizabeth, during her 60 or so years on the throne, has made some 250 overseas visits attending, among others, functions in Sudan, Libya, Qatar, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Iran, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Jordan, Turkey and Saudi Arabia – including some of the most deplorable human rights abusers on earth. But a state visit to Israel, where she would be showered with immense affection by its people, is tragically out of the question.
So what would happen if, just once, Prince Charles ignored his Foreign Office handlers and made the moral choice to cross that bridge over the River Jordan?

Link to original article: http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/sharpe/130312

____________________________________________________________________

French city grants honorary citizenship to murderer of Israeli minister

by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik
March 10, 2013

Terrorist Majdi Al-Rimawi was sentenced to life imprisonment plus 80 years for participating in the planning and murder of Israeli Minister Rechavam Zeevi in 2001.
A few weeks ago, the city of Bezons in France decided to grant Al-Rimawi “honorary citizenship.” The inscription on the plaque prepared by the municipality of Bezons
referred to Al-Rimawi as a “political prisoner.” Al-Rimawi participated in Zeevi’s murder and was a member of the terrorist organization PFLP, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

The Mayor of the city of Bezons, Dominique Lesparre, made a speech at the ceremony in which he justified the acts of the terrorist convicted of murder, calling him
a “victim.” He also defended all 4,500 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli prisons as “Palestinian resistance.” The transcript of his speech was posted on his blog:
Dominique Lesparre, Mayor of Bezons: “Majdi is a direct victim of this occupation… As are the 4,500 Palestinian resistance [fighters] who were imprisoned for having dared to defend their country against
an occupier whose military means are oversized and whose methods constantly violate UN resolutions and international law.”

_____________________________________________________________________

Germans Lurching towards Anti-Semitism

Isi Leibler
February 28, 2013
http://wordfromjerusalem.com/?p=4518
In the aftermath of the Holocaust, successive German governments have meticulously upheld their obligations to the Jewish people. Study of the Holocaust is a mandatory component of the German state education curriculum, Holocaust denial is classified as a crime and restitution commitments were honored and even exceeded.

Chancellor Angela Merkel is a genuine friend of the Jews and despite intense political pressures and occasional minor vacillations, has consistently supported Israel, describing its security as “part of my country’s raison d’etre”. However in recent years, as in other European countries, German public opinion has turned against Israel, perceiving it as the principal threat to global stability and peace. This hostility has increasingly assumed overt anti-Semitic tones.

There is growing resentment against Jews, who are blamed for imposing excessive emphasis on collective German national guilt for the Holocaust. Anti-Jewish hostility is often expressed in the more ‘politically respectable’ demonization of the Jewish nation state, allegedly not related to anti-Semitism although the “Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe” (OSCE) explicitly defines such behavior as anti-Semitic. The German left has accused Israel of war crimes, occupation and racism and also engages in inverse Holocaust imagery, enthusiastically condemning Israel for allegedly behaving towards the Palestinians as its Nazi forebears did to the Jews. When reproached for engaging in anti-Semitism, the left condemns the ‘global Zionist propaganda machine’ for seeking to deny Germans the right to criticize Israeli government policies.

These trends are fortified by the sizable Islamic migrant community – now numbering over four million – which aggressively agitates against Israel, utilizing obscene placards at demonstrations chanting “gas the Jews” or “death to the Jews”. Moslems are at the forefront of violence directed at identifiable Jews in urban areas, especially in Berlin, where some Jewish communal leaders are now recommending to avoid wearing kipot in public. Yet, the government has welcomed the immigration of almost 200,000 former Soviet Jews and invested major funds to resurrect a vigorous Jewish communal life and foster Jewish education. Despite receiving state subsidies, the Jewish leadership displays its independence and frequently speaks out if it considers the government is not fulfilling its obligations to the Jewish community or fails to act evenhandedly towards Israel. However the intensification of extreme anti-Israeli hostility combined with a recent spate of disconcerting incidents has created angst within the Jewish community. Last year, there was a traumatic national debate which assumed ugly anti-Semitic overtones after a judgment in Cologne ruled that male circumcision causes “bodily harm” and declared the practice illegal. The matter was only resolved following the direct intervention of Chancellor Merkel who initiated the passage of legislation legalizing circumcision.

In April 2012, in a provocative outburst, 84 year old Nobel Prize laureate Gunter Grass bitterly accused the Israeli government of seeking to obliterate the Iranian population. He warned that the Jewish state, which he considers ‘insane and unscrupulous’, represents the principal obstacle to peace in the region and called on his government to cancel delivery to Israel of the last Dolphin submarine. Despite being discredited for having initially concealed that he had served as a member of the Nazi Waffen SS, Grass’s vicious attack on Israel, whilst condemned by numerous politicians and journalists, was enthusiastically endorsed by many Germans. Shortly after that incident, the state-sponsored Berlin Jewish Museum invited Judith Butler, a notorious Jewish promoter of BDS against Israel, as a guest lecturer. Butler received enthusiastic applause from the 700-strong audience when, purporting to act in accordance with the highest Jewish moral values, she renewed calls to boycott Israel and ‘abolish political Zionism’ in order to create a bi-national Palestinian state.

To provide a platform for such an outspoken anti-Israeli activist at a state-sponsored Jewish Museum in Berlin is surely obscene but not unprecedented. Former Israeli communist Felicia Langer, lives in Germany where she condemns the German government for supporting Israel, constantly equates Israelis with Nazis, calls for Israeli leaders to be tried as war criminals, describes Israel as an apartheid regime and even praises Iranian President Ahmadinejad. In August 2009, German President Horst Kohler, who four years earlier had addressed the Knesset, shocked the Jewish community by honoring Langer with the Federal Cross of Merit, Germany’s most prestigious award.

In 2010, despite protests from the Israeli Embassy, Frankfurt’s Mayor Petra Roth invited Alfred Grosser, a German-born Jew known to be frenziedly hostile to Israel, to give the annual Kristallnacht oration in the Paul’s Church. He used the occasion to draw parallels between the behavior of Israelis and Nazis and was lauded by the media.

Another ongoing scandal prevails at the German Center on anti-Semitism in Berlin, considered the most important German institute engaged with the subject. Until last year it was headed by Professor Wolfgang Benz, who received his PhD from Professor Karl Bosl, a former Nazi storm trooper who maintains an ongoing association with right wing extremist groups. To this day, Benz continues defending his mentor. Benz equates Islamophobia with anti-Semitism, alleging that critics of Islamic practice are reminiscent of Nazi anti-Semites attacking the Talmud. He recently challenged the fact that the Muslim terrorist murders in Toulouse had an “anti-Semitic dimension”. He dismisses concerns about the Moslem Brotherhood as being reminiscent of anti-Semitic phobias like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and bizarrely complains that drawing attention to the fact that Moslems comprise 70% of Berlin prison inmates is comparable to Hitler’s ravings over “the fact that 89% of Berlin pediatricians in the 1930s were Jews”. The Center focuses on right-wing extremism and largely ignores or understates left-wing and Islamic anti-Semitism. Yet, despite protests, no effort has been made to redirect the activities of this government funded institute.

The most recent upheaval erupted in response to a list compiled by the US-based Simon Wiesenthal Center, purporting to identify the ten worst anti-Semitic statements of 2012. It included President Ahmadinejad, the Moslem Brotherhood, Nation of Islam founder, Louis Farrakhan and European anti-Semites. Ninth on the list was Jakob Augstein, publisher of the magazine Der Freitag, who also provides columns to Der Spiegel, Germany’s leading weekly, founded by his father. I have an aversion to simplistic lists prioritizing bigots and having reviewed some of Augstein’s outbursts, I consider that bracketing him with Ahmadinejad or Farrakhan absurdly magnifies his standing and impact. But nevertheless, his outbursts, by any benchmark, warrant describing him as an anti-Semite. Augstein alleges that when “Jerusalem calls, Berlin bows its will”; that US presidents were obliged to “secure the support of Jewish lobby groups”; that American Republicans and the Israeli government profit from violence in Libya, Sudan and Yemen; that “the Netanyahu government keeps the world on a leash with an ever swelling war chant”; that “Israel incubates its opponents in Gaza”; that the recent Prophet Mohammed video provoking riots was initiated by Israel; that ultra-Orthodox Jews are like Islamic fundamentalist terrorists and “follow the law of revenge”. Even the broadest interpretation of the OSCE definition would qualify such demonization of Israel and allusions to Jewish global power as anti-Semitic. In response, Augstein shamelessly claimed that being opposed to Jew hatred and “deeply respecting” the Simon Wiesenthal Center, he was distressed to be defamed as an anti-Semite. Prominent German Jewish writer and commentator, Henryk Broder, was sufficiently outraged to describe Augstein as “a pure anti-Semite… who only missed the opportunity to make his career with the Gestapo because he was born after the war”. The president of the Jewish Central Council of Jews, Dieter Graumann, whilst condemning his “horrible, hideous” articles on Israel, criticized his placement on such a list. His vice president, Salomon Korn, went further and foolishly defended Augstein against charges of anti-Semitism. Juliane Wetzel from the German Center on anti-Semitism was amongst those who rejected suggestions that Augstein was disseminating hatred of Jews. Overall, the bulk of the German media, as well as both leftist and CDU politicians defended him, insisting that he was merely expressing legitimate criticism of Israel.

It was significant that in 2010, two Bundestag leftist representatives were aboard the Turkish Marvi Marmara and that for the first time, the left and the right united in parliament to carry a unanimous resolution censuring Israel for the Gaza flotilla episode. This in itself may not represent anti-Semitism, but reflects the atmosphere of increasing hostility against Israel which would have been inconceivable in Germany only a few years ago.

For Jews, the positive side of Germany is the evident abundance of pro-Israeli and even philo-Semitic rank and file Germans in all walks of life. Yet, simultaneously the intensifying efforts by left wing activists uniting with Moslem extremists and occasionally even Nazis, to demonize Israel and promote anti-Semitism, provide valid grounds for concern about a future for Jews in Germany.

The situation is likely to further deteriorate drastically after the culmination of Angela Merkel’s term as Chancellor.

_____________________________________________________________

Forbes Picture Captures IOC President Jacques Rogge Wearing Official Palestinian Olympic Shawl.
Sunday, August 05, 2012

… The best excuse Rogge has mustered [for refusing to hold a moment of silence commemorating the 40th anniversary of the Munich massacre of Israeli athletes] is that a commemoration wouldn’t be appropriate. He apparently forgot about the moment of silence for the besieged city of Sarajevo at the start of the 1984 Winter Games.

And the moment of silence at the close of the 1996 Games for victims of the Centennial Park bombing. And Rogge has certainly forgotten the opening of the 2002 Salt Lake City Games.

A tattered American flag recovered from the World Trade Center on 9-11 was carried around the stadium. It was then raised as the official U.S. flag. …

– SportingNews, Jul 27, 2012

International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Jacques Rogge is a bigot, hypocrite, and supporter of terrorists. The “Palestinian” government is made up of two terrorist groups, the PLO/Fatah in Judea and Samaria, and Hamas in Gaza. Their athletes’ mere presence at the Olympics is disgusting and an affront to civilized values. Yet, despite the hypocritical and contradictory evidence provided above, he thinks commemorating the savage murder of Israeli athletes by “Palestinians” linked to the PLO/Fatah and the current “Palestinian Authority” is “inappropriate?” Well, Forbes has evidence of what is really inappropriate: A bona fide picture of Rogge wearing an official, terrorist Palestinian Olympic shawl in 2010 while visiting the “Palestinian Authority,” a terrorist group child of the Fatah and PLO terrorist groups:
rogge

Here’s Forbes caption for Rogge’s mugshot: “President of the International Olympic Committee Jacques Rogge pauses during a press conference in the West Bank city of Ramallah, Tuesday, Oct. 5, 2010. Rogge on Tuesday expressed concern over “obstacles” facing Palestinian athletes, and in veiled criticism of Israel said athletes should be granted free movement regardless of politics.”

“Regardless of politics?!?!?!” But “Palestinian” terrorist politics are fine? Rogge is a politically-correct partisan, wanting to jump on the Jew-hate bandwagon so he gets lots of atta-boys from like-minded useless idiots — the ones he rubs elbows with at expense international cocktail parties where limousine liberals can assuage their secret guilt about being rich and comfortable while the true, teeming, suffering masses of the earth wriggle in the dirt. I would venture Rogge harbors fear and wants to be on the “right” side of politics so some crazed Arab/Muslim terrorist doesn’t blow him up, or to prevent himself from getting beheaded when the New World Caliphate takes over starting in Europe. But what are we to expect of the eternally corrupt and hypocritical Internal Olympic Committee? Their true nature is betrayed by their concrete actions. Again, SportingNews:

[The IOC] …awarded Berlin the Olympics as Adolf Hitler was passing anti-Jewish laws.

It went to Moscow right after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. It partied in Beijing as dissidents were rounded up.

It has looked the other way as Iranian athletes refused to compete against Israelis. The Palestinian Authority sent a letter this week to Rogge, thanking him for opposing “Israel’s attempts to exploit the Olympic games for propaganda purposes.” …

I guess he’s gleeful for being congratulated by his terrorist friends. I know Rogge’s heart is as cold as ice:

When Ankie Spitzer, widow of Andre Spitzer [Israeli athlete murdered at the 1972 games in Munich], stretched out her hands to Jacques Rogge, the International Olympic Committee president, and begged him to hold a minute’s silence, he refused. “My hands are tied” he said. “No,” Ankie replied: “Your hands are not tied. My husband’s hands were tied, so were here his feet, when he was murdered. That was having your hands tied.” …

But as usual, the reasons behind burying the memory of murdered Jews are probably more concrete — i.e., selling your soul for a couple of gold coins. From New Jersey On-Line:

… Actually, it’s easy to understand anyone’s actions when money is involved. For years, the IOC’s refusal to commemorate the Munich 11 was assumed to be based on pressure from Arab nations, a huge financier of the Games. ESPN found the proof, in the form of minutes from a meeting of the 2000 Sydney planning committee, that said the IOC received boycott threats “from several Arab Olympic committees” if the Israeli dead were honored in any manner. …
______________________________________________________________________

EJC head blasts ‘Spiegel’ writer for ‘Israel hatred’

Benjamin Weinthal
January 8, 2013
European Jewish Congress head Kantor accuses Augstein of using his columns to stoke hate against Israel and Jews.

Jakob Augstein

Jakob Augstein Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Berlin – The head of the European Jewish Congress (EJC), Dr. Moshe Kantor, accused the Spiegel journalist Jakob Augstein of using his columns to stoke hate against Israel and Jews. In a statement issued to The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday, Kantor wrote, “Certain journalists and other opinion-shapers, among them Jakob Augstein, over the last few years have used their columns to promote hate and fear of the Jewish State and the Jewish People.”The EJC represents more than 2.5 million of Jews throughout Europe, covering 42 national Jewish communities.Kantor, who is widely considered a leading authority on contemporary anti-Semitism, continued that “ Obviously they are not the same thing, but when the age-old canards that were used against Jews for hundreds  of years appear to be directly replicated against the Jewish State this should tell us something about the dangerous lines which these people are treading. If these people are using the same unoriginal attacks against the Jewish State as were used against the Jewish People then we have a right to defend ourselves in exactly the same way and call this hatred for what it is.”Kantor’s remarks differed sharply from the Vice President of Germany’s Jews, Salomon Korn, who argued that Augstein’s writings are not anti-Semitic. Korn along with some German Jewish leaders appear to be a lone voice among major European and American Jewish leaders.The Simon Wiesenthal Center included Augstein in its 2012 list of top ten anti-Semites and haters of Israel because of a steady stream of writings hostile to Jews and Israel. The ADL told the Post that one of Augstein’s statements   falls into the category of conspiratorial anti-Semitic thinking. The telling example for the ADL was Augstein wrote“ With backing from the US, where the president must secure the support of Jewish lobby groups, and in Germany, where coping with history, in the meantime, has a military component, the [Binyamin] Netanyahu government keeps the world on a leash with an ever-swelling war chant.”Augstein equates Israeli haredim with Islamic terrorists whofollow the “law of revenge.” The left-wing Spiegel writer said the attacks on him are “defaming critical journalism.”
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bye-bye London
January 21, 2013 
by Caroline Glick

In an interview with Haaretz in November 2010, British novelist Martin Amis said the following about discussions of Israel in his motherland:

I live in a mildly anti-Semitic country, and Europe is mildly anti-Semitic, and they hold Israel to a higher moral standard than its neighbors. If you bring up Israel in a public meeting in England, the whole atmosphere changes. The standard left-wing person never feels more comfortable than when attacking Israel. Because they are the only foreigners you can attack. Everyone else is protected by having dark skin, or colonial history, or something. But you can attack Israel. And the atmosphere becomes very unpleasant. It is traditional, snobbish, British anti-Semitism combined with present-day circumstances.

After participating last week in a debate in London about Israeli communities beyond the 1949 armistice lines organized by the self-consciously pretentious Intelligence Squared debating society, I can now say from personal experience that Amis is correct. The public atmosphere in England regarding Israel is ugly and violent.

The resolution we debated read: “Israel is destroying itself with its settlement policy. If settlement expansion continues Israel will have no future.”

My debating partner was Danny Dayan, the outgoing head of the Yesha Council.

We debated Daniel Levy, one of the founders of J-Street and the drafter of the Geneva Initiative, and the son of Lord Michael Levy, one of Tony Blair’s biggest fundraisers; and William Sieghart, a British philanthropist who runs a non-profit that among other things, champions Hamas. Levy has publicly stated that Israel’s creation was immoral. And Sieghart has a past record of saying that Israel’s delegitimization would be a salutary proces and calling for a complete cultural boycott of Israel while lauding Hamas.

We lost overwhelmingly. I think the final vote tally was something like 500 for the resolution and 100 against it.

A couple of impressions I took away from the experience: First, I can say without hesitation that I hope never to return to Britain. I actually don’t see any point. Jews are targeted by massive anti-Semitism of both the social and physical varieties. Why would anyone Jewish want to live there?

As to visiting as an Israeli, again, I just don’t see the point. The discourse is owned by anti-Israel voices. They don’t make arguments to spur thought, but to end it, by appealing to people’s passions.

For instance, in one particularly ugly segment, Levy made the scurrilous accusation that Israel systematically steals land from the Palestinians. Both Dayan and I demanded that he provide just one example of his charge. And the audience raged against us for our temerity at insisting that he provide substantiation for his baseless allegation. In the event, he failed to substantiate his allegation.

At another point, I was asked how I defend the Nazi state of Israel. When I responded by among other things giving the Nazi pedigree of the Palestinian nationalist movement founded by Nazi agent Haj Amin el Husseini and currently led by Holocaust denier Mahmoud Abbas, the crowd angrily shouted me down.

I want to note that the audience was made up of upper crust, wealthy British people, not unwashed rabble rousers. And yet they behaved in many respects like a mob when presented with pro-Israel positions.

I honestly don’t know whether there are policy implications that arise from my experience in London last week. I have for a long time been of the opinion that Israel shouldn’t bother to try to win over Europe because the Europeans have multiple reasons for always being anti-Israel and none of them have anything to do with anything that Israel does. As I discuss in my book, these reasons include anti-Semitism, anti-Americanism, addiction to Arab oil, and growing Muslim populations in Europe.

I was prepared to conduct a civilized debate based on facts and reasoned argumentation. I expected it to be a difficult experience. I was not expecting to be greeted by a well-dressed mob. My pessimism about Europeans’ capacity to avail themselves to reasoned, fact-based argumentation about Israel has only deepened from the experience.

One positive note, I had a breakfast discussion last Wednesday morning with activists from the Zionist Federation of Britain. The people I met are committed, warm, hardworking Zionists. I wish them all the best, and mainly that means, that I hope that these wonderful people and their families make aliyah.
While their work is worthwhile, there is no future for Jews in England.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Anglo-Jewish Leaders partner anti-Israeli Charity
by Isi Leibler
January 29, 2013
http://wordfromjerusalem.com/?p=4458

I rubbed my eyes as I observed yet another botched initiative by the well-intentioned leadership of the Board of Deputies of British Jews. Its plenum, by a vote of almost to 2:1, endorsed a linkage with the British branch of Oxfam International, one of the largest global charity organizations with branches in over 90 countries.

The Board of Deputies will send 30 representatives to a training weekend with Oxfam where they will be taught how to raise funds in the battle against global hunger in order to “tackle injustices in the international food system”. The cost, about $13,000, will largely be borne by Oxfam.

It is unprecedented for an umbrella body like the Board of Deputies to enter into partnerships with charities. The Board struggles to fulfill its clearly defined constitutional obligations. Besides, Jews are renowned for their generous philanthropic contributions, and there is thus no rational reason why it should seek to highlight such non-Jewish activity.

But even if the Board felt an obligation to become visibly engaged with a charity, it is staggering that it chose to do so with Oxfam, an organization which has a notorious reputation for engaging in anti-Israeli initiatives totally beyond the normal province of a charity.

Oxfam’s hostility towards Israel goes back for over a decade. One of the worst examples occurred in the wake of the Durban hate fest, when the Belgian branch produced huge posters with oranges dripping in blood titled “Israeli fruits have a bitter taste: reject the occupation of Palestine, don’t buy Israeli fruits and vegetables”. Following a storm of protest this blood libel was withdrawn.

In 2009 Oxfam effectively promoted BDS by terminating its relationship with actress Kristin Davis, one of its principal spokespersons, because she had endorsed Israeli Ahava cosmetic products.

Oxfam’s director Jeremy Hobbs proclaimed that “the people of Gaza are living in the world’s largest prison but have fewer rights than convicts”. Oxfam called for ending the boycott of Hamas and repeatedly condemned the “illegal” Israeli presence in East Jerusalem. It was party to a document urging the international community to demand that Israel “provide compensation for the damage caused during Operation Cast Lead and other Israeli military action”.

Following the 2010 Gaza flotilla incident, which Oxfam considered “a direct result of the Israeli blockade in Gaza”, it denounced Israel’s “appalling use of violence and killing of civilians”.

Oxfam has condemned Israel’s security fence which played an important role in bring an end to suicide bombings within Israel

To this day Oxfam calls for the specific labeling of goods produced over the green line – clearly a form of boycott.

In addition Oxfam cosponsors initiatives with bodies that have clear records of supporting terrorists such as the London Muslim Center and Islamic Relief.

It is thus inexplicable why a Jewish representative body would associate itself with a charity which prides itself on maintaining a consistent record of hostility towards the Jewish state.

Even more bizarre was the fact that the Board was encouraged by other Jewish establishment bodies. These included the principal PR organization promoting Israel, the British Israel Communications and Research Center (BICOM) and the United Jewish Israel Appeal (UJIA), the principal Israel fundraiser whose former leader had the dubious record of having urged British Jews to speak out against the policies of the democratically elected government of Israel.

Astonishingly, even the British ambassador to Israel, Matthew Gould, intervened, telling the London Jewish Chronicle that the Board should engage with Oxfam as well as with other bodies which criticize Israel. It is unprecedented for a British civil servant, an ambassador to Israel, to intervene in such a controversial domestic issue. What motivated him to do so on this occasion?

In justifying the initiative, Board President Vivian Wineman sought to calm his constituents by remarking that working with Oxfam did not mean the Board shared its views. However, he opined that his executive felt obliged to “engage” with bodies that were hostile to Israel.

He stated that after meeting with Oxfam, he was satisfied it would not boycott Israel or associate itself with organizations linked to terrorism. If it did, the Board would terminate the association.

However Oxfam refused to modify ongoing political attacks on Israel or suspend its campaign to oblige Israel to label all products produced over the green line.

The Board also failed to explain why, if it sought to “engage” with organizations hostile to Israel, it chose a charity which it was unlikely to influence, rather than concentrating on “engaging” with more relevant organizations such as the government and political parties. In this context few would hail the Board’s promotion of the case for Israel in the broader political arena as a stellar success.

Clearly some British Jews would be happier if the Board was seen to be more “balanced” or “evenhanded” in relation to Israel. There are undoubtedly pressures from elements within the Jewish establishment – the “trembling Israelites” – that are discomforted at being perceived as a pro-Israel lobby. Perhaps they sought to distance themselves from this by displaying their broadmindedness and commitment to society at large by linking to an anti-Israeli charity.

During the debate, there were repeated remarks that dealing with Oxfam may not be good for Israel but it was good for Anglo-Jews to be seen as helping charities providing food for children. Senior vice-president Laura Marks conceded that it was highly unlikely that the Board would succeed to persuade Oxfam to modify its policies towards Israel, but gushed that the Board’s involvement would at least result in “helping Oxfam understand our values as Jews, to help them to see that we share values with them”.

It should be noted that those opposed to this initiative were not calling for a Jewish boycott of the charity. They argued, with irrefutable justification, that there was no rationale for the official organ of the Jewish community to provide an imprimatur to an organization which has a consistent record of hostility to the Jewish state.

There is also the issue of Jewish dignity. What sort of message is the community sending to the British public and for that matter what example is it providing to Jewish youngsters, when it associates itself with such an organization?

Following the plenum vote, Jonathan Hoffman, one of those leading the opposition to the association with Oxfam, said it was a sad day for British Jews and undermined Israel. “To Israel’s enemies it says, even the Board supports an organization hostile to Israel – look how isolated Israel is. To Israel’s friends it says, the Board’s not serious about fighting delegitimization. How can it be when it rushes into a tie-up with one of Israel’s most hostile charities?”

Despite obtaining a plenum majority to endorse their initiative, it may well be a Pyrrhic victory for the leaders of the Board because the divisions created will not soon be healed. British Jews who are passionate supporters of Israel and at the forefront of Jewish activity will not easily forgive their leaders for shamefully linking them with an organization consistently displaying double standards and bias against Israel. According to the Jewish Chronicle, numerous outraged constituents have already threatened to withdraw their communal levy payments from the Board.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Venomous Antisemitism published by Palestinian Ma’an News Agency
funded by Danish, Dutch and UK governments
and the EU, UNDP, and UNESCO

by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik
January 30, 2012

“[The Jews] feel inferior to the nations and societies in which they live, because of the hostility and evil rising in their hearts towards others and for their plots and schemes against the nations who know with certainty that the Jews are the root of conflict in the world, wherever they reside.”
“[Jews are] outcasts in every corner of the earth, and not one nation in the world respects them… but Allah’s curse upon them and his fury at them cause them to
continue with their transgression.” “Allah has stricken fear in their hearts and decreed humiliation and degradation upon them until Judgment Day”

An article published by the independent and European funded Palestinian Ma’an News Agency (MNA) confirms that classic Antisemitic ideologies continue to exist among
Palestinians. The article written by Sawsan Najib Abd Al-Halim appears on Ma’an’s website, and describes Jews as: “the root of conflict in the world,” cursed by Allah, and “outcasts in every corner of the earth.”

Palestinian Media Watch [http://www.palwatch.org/] has documented that demonization of Jews [http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=757] and Israelis has been an integral part of PA ideology for years.

The Ma’an article further explains that Jews are hostile, evil, and brutal, plotting and scheming, and that “Allah has decreed” that Jews are destined to be “humiliated.”

Ma’an News Agency, “an integral part of Ma’an Network,” “was launched with generous funding from the Danish Representative Office to the Palestinian Authority

Some of Ma’an Network’s donors: The European Commission, UNDP, UNESCO, the Government of Denmark, the Government of the Netherlands and UKaid. [http://www.maannet.org]

(PA) and the Netherlands Representative Office to the PA,” the agency’s website states. Some of the donors with whom Ma’an Network partners are The European Commission (the EU), UNDP, UNESCO, the Government of Denmark, the Government of the Netherlands, UKaid.
“Undeterred in its mission to convey the truth” says a slogan among several on Ma’an Network’s website. The Antisemitic article on Ma’an’s website expresses contempt for Jews, defining them as “sons of death”, “too cowardly to confront an enemy face to face” and “seized by fear and trembling” if “their fortresses” are breached, and describes how “their hearts fill with horror” if “a missile falls” or “a bullet passes over them.”
This is because:
“Allah has stricken fear in their hearts and decreed humiliation and degradation upon them until Judgment Day.”
Jews “cause strife, and scheme everywhere they settle,” the article claims, and therefore “they have been outcasts in every corner of the earth, and not one nation
in the world respects them.” As a result, “the lives of Jews have always been war and fighting.”
However, “because of the hostility and evil rising in their hearts towards others and for their plots and schemes against the nations,” the Jews “have been defeated
through the ages and feel inferior to the nations and societies in which they live,” the writer explains. These nations, the writer asserts, “know with certainty that the Jews are the root of conflict in the world, wherever they reside.”
The Ma’an article concludes with Fatah’s slogan: “Revolution until victory”.
Ma’an’s editors did not dissociate themselves from the contents of this Antisemitic article in any way. The article only appeared on Ma’an’s Arabic website and not
on its English site. The article was posted on November 18, 2012 and still appears there as of the PMW publication on January 29, 2013.

PMW reported on Antisemitic content [http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=8465]
in a recent film about Fatah broadcast by PA TV.

The following is part of the Antisemitic article on Ma’an’s website (emphasis added):
“Israel is Trembling”
by Sawsan Najib Abd Al-Halim
“We’re used to seeing vampires in Dracula movies, where the murderer and the vampire act in the dead of night, and as soon as dawn breaks, the murderer disappears and hides during the day. The brave warrior, who at the very least has moral values, fights in the daytime. In all wars, in all eras, honorable nations conducted their battles during the day and slept at night. But has Israel even a trace of morality? A brave warrior is proud when he confronts another [warrior] as brave as he, and the more he is struck, the stronger he grows, proud in his struggle and respectful of his adversary. But since Jews are – as our grandparents said of them – sons of death (expression of contempt, meaning ‘a coward,’ -Ed.), they are too cowardly to confront an enemy face to face, especially if their enemy is as well armed as they…
Jews think that their fortresses will protect them from death, but any breach of these fortresses or protective walls instills panic and fear in their hearts, and
they are seized by fear and trembling. If a missile falls beyond their protective walls or if even a bullet passes over them, you can see how their hearts fill with
horror – and this is because Allah has stricken fear in their hearts and decreed humiliation and degradation upon them until Judgment Day…
Historically, it is known that the lives of Jews have always been war and fighting. The only reason for this is that they have been outcasts in every corner of the
earth, and not one nation in the world respects them, for they cause strife, and scheme everywhere they settle. We know that they have been defeated in every war
they have fought throughout history, and they have been dispersed in every direction, but Allah’s curse upon them and his fury at them cause them to continue with their transgression and tyranny.
A coward acts brutally when he can, but runs for cover humiliated, when he faces anyone who is his equal. Our fathers told us of one Palestinian before 1948 who
was holding a stick while walking the streets of Tel Aviv, and he drove away scores of cowardly Jews…
Psychologically, they have been defeated through the ages and feel inferior to the nations and societies in which they live, because of the hostility and evil rising
in their hearts towards others and for their plots and schemes against the nations who know with certainty that the Jews are the root of conflict in the world, wherever they reside.
Jews think that every shout is against them, and what better proof is there than the slogan they voiced to the world – which is ‘Antisemitism.’
Therefore, the only way we can deal with them, when we are weak militarily compared to Israel’s power, is to stick to the threat to annihilate Israel, not to submit
to its [Israel’s] desire for a cease fire, and keep the flame of resistance burning.Rather than [violently] resist and then back off somewhat, whereby we give them
the impression that we are afraid of them. There is nothing wrong with our sitting with them to talk, but the resistance must always continue. Late President Yasser
Arafat, peace be upon him, understood the Jews’ weakness, so he showed them the face of peace in negotiations, and at the same time raised the slogan ‘Every day
a settler.’ This is the slogan that terrorized the Jews, and which many Palestinians have forgotten. They may have forgotten why the comrade-fighter Marwan Barghouti
was arrested. Wasn’t it because he was the one given the job to fulfill this slogan? (Marwan Barghouti is serving 5 life sentences for orchestrating terror attacks against Israeli civilians.)
Let us again be united in the message against the Jews and turn the weapons against them. Every time the guns and stones are directed at the Jews, they become angry,
seized by fear, their brutality increases and our sacrificing increases more and more. Jews know that the more their brutality increases, so our resolve and defiance
are strengthened against them, until Allah will strike terror in their hearts and they will be driven away from our land humiliated. This is revolution until victory.”
[Ma’an News Agency’s website, posted Nov. 18, 2012, accessed Jan. 29, 2012]
_____________________________________________________________________________

No-go Britain
Douglas Murray ablogging at the Spectator:
In 2008 one of Britain’s best and most courageous men, Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali, said that there were parts of Britain which had become no-go areas for non-Muslims.
For these comments he was met with widespread scorn and denial. Nick Clegg – then merely leader of the Liberal Democrat party – said the Bishop’s comments were ‘a gross caricature of reality.’ William Hague said that the Bishop had ‘probably put it too strongly’, while the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) accused him of ‘frantic scaremongering.’
So how interesting it is to read of the arrests made by police in recent days of a number of men for a string of incidents in London. These involve radical Muslim men trying to enforce Islamic law at night in parts of London. This is done by informing people that they are in ‘a Muslim area’ and demanding their compliance with sharia principles. These include telling a man carrying alcohol: ‘No drink in this area, it’s a Muslim area’ and telling a woman they think is dressed inappropriately that she cannot dress like that ‘in a Muslim area.’
They also tell a man they think looks gay: ‘You’re walking through a Muslim area dressed like a fag… You need to get out here… You’re dirty… This is a Muslim area. You’re a gay. You’re a fag. You bloody fag. Get out of here you fag … don’t stay around here anymore.’
While of course being delighted that the police have actually done something, it should be remembered that these events only came to light because the people who were doing the ‘patrols’ videoed their actions and posted the videos up on the internet. These were then picked up by the Commentator website and given widespread publicity. So on this occasion, it was all rather difficult to ignore.
Of course I wouldn’t expect anything from the MCB. But is it too much to hope that Nick Clegg and William Hague might now take this opportunity to apologise to Michael Nazir-Ali?
If they choose not to do so, perhaps it is because they think that this is a one-off event? In which case perhaps Mr Clegg and Mr Hague could assist us all by seeing how they might fare late at night in some of the more ‘diverse’ areas of our country?
_____________________________________________________________

Facing flak over his criticism of ‘the Jews,’ David Ward says he’d be ‘happy’ to change terminology to ‘the Jewish community’
Times of Israel

Miriam Shaviv
February 8, 2013

ward-635x357

British member of Parliament David Ward of the Liberal Democrat party (photo credit: CC BY-ND emcmillanscott/Flickr)

LONDON – A British Member of Parliament who last month was censured for accusing “the Jews” of inflicting atrocities on the Palestinians is facing fresh action after he suggested blaming “the Jewish community” instead.

David Ward, a member of the Liberal Democrat party which is in coalition with the ruling Conservatives, made his original comments after signing a book of remembrance ahead of Holocaust Memorial Day on January 27. He said he was “saddened that the Jews, who suffered unbelievable levels of persecution during the Holocaust, could, within a few years of liberation, be inflicting atrocities on the Palestinians in the new State of Israel – and continue to do so.”

Following an outcry from the Jewish community, the Liberal Democrat chief whip Alistair Carmichael, whose job it is to enforce discipline within the party, gave Ward a written warning, and Ward pledged never again to use the phrase “the Jews” in the same context.

However, asked by the London newspaper The Jewish News this week why the original statement remained on his website, Ward replied in an email, “Can you provide me with a more acceptable choice of words that I could use to criticize the treatment of the Palestinians?”

In a later message, he asked the paper whether it could ask the Board of Deputies, Anglo-Jewry’s main representative organization, “if they’re in agreement that I should replace the words ‘the Jews’ with ‘the Jewish community?’”

“If so,” he added, “I’m perfectly happy to do so.”

In a meeting with Jewish community leaders on Thursday morning, Carmichael pledged to deal with Ward’s latest comments, in line with his previous promise that the consequences for Ward “would escalate significantly” if he repeated his behavior.

The meeting was attended by the heads of the Board of Deputies, the Jewish Leadership Council, the Holocaust Educational Trust and the Community Security Trust, which monitors anti-Semitism in the UK.

“During the meeting we repeated our bewilderment that the original statements remain on Ward’s website and our view that his prior apology has no credibility,” they said in a statement.

Ward represents the constituency of Bradford East.
_______________________________________________________

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s