Antisemitism | WarSclerotic | Page 4

Posted tagged ‘Antisemitism’

Britain’s Little Lies

December 31, 2016

Britain’s Little Lies, Gatestone Institute, Douglas Murray, December 31, 2016

This is a serious category error for a Prime Minister to make. It puts critics of a religion on the same plane as people wanted for terrorism. It blurs the line between speech and action, and mixes people who call for violence with those who do not.

Only now, a fortnight later, has the true duplicity of Theresa May’s speech been exposed. For now the world has learned what diplomacy the British government was engaged in even as May was making her speech. At the same time as the Prime Minister was talking about “true friendship” in front of friends of Israel, her government was conspiring with the outgoing Obama administration to kick that friend in the back. The British government was exposed as being one of the key players intent on pushing through the anti-Israel UNSC Resolution 2334. British diplomats were revealed to have been behind the wording and rallying of allies for the resolution.

The British government, whilst saying that it remains committed to a peace deal that comes as a result of direct negotiations between the two sides, has its own preconditions for peace: a freeze on the building of what it calls “settlements.” They maintain this line despite the fact that settlements have nothing to do with the Israeli-Palestinian problem. Before the June 1967 Six Day War, there were no such things as “settlements.” Palestinians were trying to destroy and displace Israel anyhow. The core problem is not, and never was, “settlements,” but the right of Israel (or any non-Muslim nation) to exist inside any borders in that part of the world.

If you take a stand that is based on a lie, then that stand cannot succeed. If you try to oppose anti-Semitism but pretend it is the same thing as “Islamophobia,” then the structure on which you have made your stand will totter and all your aspirations will fail. If you try to make a stand based on the idea that settlement construction rather than the intransigence of the Palestinians to the existence of a Jewish state is what is holding up a peace deal, then facts will keep on intruding.

On December 12, the Conservative Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Theresa May, gave a fulsome speech to the annual Conservative Friends of Israel lunch. Before a roomful of 800 pro-Israel Conservative MPs and party supporters, she lavished praise on the Jewish state. She praised Israel’s achievements and castigated its enemies. She said that Britain would be marking the centenary of the Balfour declaration “with pride.” She also stressed that cooperation and friendship between Britain and Israel was not just for the good of those two countries, but “for the good of the world.”

For many of the people listening in the room, there were just two discordant notes. The first was related to the focus on anti-Semitism in May’s speech. As she used the opportunity rightly to lambaste the Labour party for its anti-Semitism problem, she extended the reach of her own claims for herself. While boasting of her success as Home Secretary in keeping out the prominent French anti-Semite Dieudonné and finally deporting the Salafist cleric Abu Qatada al-Filistini back to his native Jordan, she also used the opportunity to congratulate herself for banning Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer and Pastor Terry Jones from coming to the UK. “Islamophobia comes from the same wellspring of hatred” as anti-Semitism, she explained.

This is a serious category error for a Prime Minister to make. It puts critics of a religion, such as Geller and Spencer, on the same plane as people wanted for terrorism (Qatada). It blurs the line between speech and action, and mixes people who call for violence with those who do not. The comparison also fails to follow the consequences of its logic to its own illogical conclusion. The comparison fails to recognise that anyone who objects to Islamic anti-Semitism is immediately known as an “Islamophobe.” Therefore, someone hoping to come to Britain would have to accept being attacked by Muslim extremists for fear of being banned from entering the UK. These are serious and basic misunderstandings for a Prime Minister to propagate.

There was, however, a clear political sense to them. A Prime Minister in a country such as 21^stCentury Britain might believe that he or she has to be exceptionally careful not to appear to be criticising any one group of people or praising another too highly. So for the time being in Britain, a moral relativism continues to stagnate. If the Jewish community complains of anti-Semitism, then you must criticise anti-Semitism. If the Muslim community complains of “Islamophobia,” then you must criticise “Islamophobia.” To make value judgements might be to commit an act of political folly. Wise leaders in increasingly “diverse” societies must therefore position themselves midway between all communities, neither castigating nor over-praising, in order to keep as many people onside as possible.

2172

UK Prime Minister Theresa May speaks at the annual Conservative Friends of Israel lunch, December 12, 2016. (Image source: Conservative Friends of Israel)

The same tactic brought the other discordant moment at the Prime Minister’s lunch — the same tactic brought to the discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. For the other discordant note in May’s speech came when she mentioned Israeli settlement building. It was carefully placed in the speech, after a passage in which May congratulated her own Department for International Development (DfID) Minister, Priti Patel. In the days before the lunch, Patel had announced that DfID would carry out an investigation to determine whether British taxpayer money being sent to what May called “the Occupied Palestinian Territories” was being used to fund salaries for Palestinians convicted of terrorism offences against Israelis. Following this May said:

“When talking about global obligations, we must be honest with our friends, like Israel, because that is what true friendship is about. That is why we have been clear about building new, illegal settlements: it is wrong; it is not conducive to peace; and it must stop.”

The comment was received in silence and May moved on.

But this comment fitted in closely with the strategy of her other comment. For having lavished praise on Israel, a castigation apparently seemed necessary. It is wrong, but hardly possible for a British Prime Minister currently to do otherwise. If there are terrorists receiving funds from British taxpayers thanks to the largesse of the UK government, then this may — after many years of campaigning by anti-terrorism organisations — finally be “investigated.” However, throughout any such investigation, the British government, whilst saying that it remains committed to a peace deal that comes as a result of direct negotiations between the two sides, has for years announced its own preconditions for peace: a freeze on the building of what it calls “settlements.” They maintain this line despite the fact that settlements have nothing to do with the Israeli-Palestinian problem. Before the June 1967 Six Day War, there were no such things as “settlements.” Palestinians were trying to destroy and displace Israel anyhow — in 1948, 1956, and 1967. The core problem is not, and never was, “settlements,” but the right of Israel (or any non-Muslim nation) to exist inside any borders in that part of the world.

At the time of May’s speech, these two issues seemed like minor cavils to some and gained little notice. Only now, a fortnight later, has the true duplicity of the speech been exposed. For now the world has learned what diplomacy the British government was engaged in even as May was making her speech.

At the same time as the Prime Minister was talking about “true friendship” in front of friends of Israel, her government was conspiring with the outgoing Obama administration to kick that friend in the back. In the wake of the collapse of the Egyptian-sponsored initiative at the UN, the British government was exposed as being one of the key players intent on pushing through the anti-Israel UN Security Council Resolution 2334. British diplomats were revealed to have been behind the wording and rallying of allies for the resolution.

The most obvious interpretation of this fact is simply a reflection that friends do not kick friends in the back. Especially not in the world’s foremost international forum for kicking that particular friend. But some people are putting a kinder interpretation on the facts. The kindest to date is that the May government believes that a sterner line on the issue of Israeli settlements would give the British government more leverage with the Palestinians.

If that is so, then it seems that the May government will have to learn abroad the same lesson that they must learn at home. Both will come about because of the same strategic mistake: a reliance on the short-term convenience of what must seem at first to be only convenient little lies. The problem is that such little lies, when tested on the great seas of domestic and international affairs, have a tendency to come to grief with exceptional rapidity and ease.

Politicians are keen on taking stands. But if you take a stand that is based on a lie, then that stand cannot succeed. If you try to oppose anti-Semitism but pretend it is the same thing as “Islamophobia,” then the structure on which you have made your stand will totter and all your aspirations will fail. If you try to make a stand for Israel while simultaneously conniving at the UN to undermine Israel, then your duplicity will be exposed and admiration for this and other stands will falter. If you try to make a stand based on the idea that settlement construction rather than the intransigence of the Palestinians to the existence of a Jewish state is what is holding up a peace deal, then facts will keep on intruding. They have before — at home and abroad — and they will again.

Categories: Antisemitism, Britain, Britain and Islamists, Britain and Israel, Britain and UN Security Council resolution against Israel, Islamophobia, Israel, Israeli settlements, Theresa May and Islamists, Theresa May and Israel, UN and Israel, UN Security Council
Tags: Antisemitism, Britain, Britain and Islamists, Britain and Israel, Britain and UN Security Council resolution against Israel, Islamophobia, Israel, Israeli settlements, Theresa May and Islamists, Theresa May and Israel, UN and Israel, UN Security Council

Comments: Be the first to comment

Jewish #NeverTrump Site Defends Bannon; Slams Ellison, Schumer

November 30, 2016

Jewish #NeverTrump Site Defends Bannon; Slams Ellison, Schumer, Breitbart, Joel B. Pollak, November 30, 2016

charles-schumer-chip-somodevilla-getty-640x480

Chip Somodevilla / Getty

Tablet magazine, an online magazine on Jewish affairs, was one of the leading “NeverTrump” websites — but has published an op-ed defending Donald Trump and denouncing Democrats for supporting Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) to lead the party.

The article, by Jeff Ballabon, documents Ellison’s history of supporting and defending rabid antisemites. It also defends the President-elect, as well as adviser Stephen K. Bannon and Breitbart News, from false charges of antisemitism. Ballabon also notes that some of the same Jewish politicians that led the attack on Bannon, such as incoming Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), are also leading the effort to elect Ellison as the next chair of the Democratic National Committee. He also notes that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which led the attack on Bannon, has had to “withdraw their accusations.”

Ballabon writes:

It is clear that Ellison trafficked with incredibly virulent, open anti-Semites and supported and defended them until it became politically inconvenient. Then he lied about it—and once in office, he decided to target the Jewish state.

…

Personally, I don’t care if Ellison ever did or still does hate Jews. He’s entitled to love and hate whomever he wants. What worries me is that a leading member of the extreme anti-Israel wing of the Democratic Party is poised to become the party’s chairman. What disturbs me is that the mainstreaming and elevating of this man—who, at the very least, is clearly more enthusiastic about Louis Farrakhan than he is about the State of Israel—is being done with the support of Sen. Chuck Schumer, and of organizations that claim to represent the interests of American Jewry.

It is also hard to miss the fact that these same politicians and groups are now diverting attention away from actual threats to a campaign of politically-motivated fictions and calumnies directed against Donald Trump, a man who has spent decades supporting an impressive array of Jewish causes and of the State of Israel—and whose daughter, son-in-law and grandchildren are Orthodox Jews. Trump’s daughter Ivanka chose to join the Jewish people, and she did so by all accounts with the approval and full support of her father. Perhaps Keith Ellison, despite his associations and activities, is secretly a great friend of the Jewish people and the State of Israel, and Donald Trump, despite his friends and family, is secretly the raving anti-Semite his detractors allege. But even the most extreme partisan would have to admit that the evidence for either proposition is quite thin. In fact, the ADL and friends have also had to withdraw their accusations of anti-Semitism against Trump’s adviser Steve Bannon and Breitbart news, which briefly flourished after Trump’s win, since they could not point to any actual evidence that either charge was true: In fact, Bannon and Breitbart have demonstrably been among the most dedicated supporters of the State of Israel and most vociferous opponents of BDS and campus hate in the America media.

Read the whole article here.

Categories: Antisemitism, Democrat National Committee, Israel, Keith Ellison, Never Trumpers, Steven K. Bannon
Tags: Antisemitism, Democrat National Committee, Israel, Keith Ellison, Never Trumpers, Steven K. Bannon

Comments: Be the first to comment

Islamist Organization Threatens Violence against the Trump Administration

November 28, 2016

Islamist Organization Threatens Violence against the Trump Administration, Dan Miller’s Blog, November 28, 2016

(This article is based in part on a Clarion Project article posted here earlier today. The views expressed here are mine, and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM)

An article posted today by The Clarion Project — which supports the reformation of Islam and opposes Sharia law and Islamic jihad — states that an Islamist organization named “Muslims of America” is planning violent confrontations with the Trump administration.

Khalifa Hussain Abdallah, (foreground) known as ‘K1’ within the group for his top ranking as an original founder, is said to be a key supervisor of these preparations for armed conflict.

Khalifa Hussain Abdallah, (foreground) known as ‘K1’ within the group for his top ranking as an original founder, is said to be a key supervisor of these preparations for armed conflict.

Here’s an interview by Bill O’Reilly with Clarion Project National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro. Presented on January 15, 2015, it deals with Muslims of America and other Islamist groups active in Obama’s America:

The Clarion Project article published today states that,

Multiple confidential sources inside of a powerful jihadist group within the United States have informed the Christian Action Network and the Clarion Project that members have been told to arm themselves in anticipation of raids by the Trump Administration.

It seems odd that sources inside the organization would give advance warning of its intentions, but they appear to have done so. The organization seems well motivated, equipped and trained to carry out its threats.

The members believe that President-elect Trump is part of a satanic-Zionist conspiracy to destroy Islam, and that he is fulfilling apocalyptic End Times prophecies. Any action taken against MOA is seen as part of a war on Islam, a situation that permits violent jihad.

The preparations for armed confrontation are described as “self-defense measures,” but one source cautioned that the group could decide to take “offensive” action if it believes armed conflict is imminent. [Emphasis added.]

. . . .

The Pakistan-based spiritual leader of Muslims of America (MOA), Sheikh Gilani, told top MOA officials (known as “khalifas”) to order all unarmed members to obtain firearms, licenses and hunting permits in order to resist raids on the group’s approximately 22 compounds that they expect to happen under the Trump Administration. Additional “security” was also called up and assault rifles have been mentioned as desirable.

The group now expects the FBI “to reopen its cases against them as a homegrown terrorist organization,” one of the confidential sources told Martin Mawyer of the Christian Action Network and Ryan Mauro of the Clarion Project.

The sources independently stated that members across the country were told of instructions from Sheikh Gilani to “be prepared to fight.” The message reportedly relayed to members was to “hear and obey,” using language identical to the oath of allegiance members sign when they join the group. He predicted, “You will be tested.” [Emphasis added.]

. . . .

MOA members have a long history of terrorism, extremism and criminal activity including weapons trafficking. A 2007 FBI report obtained by Ryan Mauro of the Clarion Project states:

“The documented propensity for violence by this organization supports the belief the leadership of the MOA extols membership to pursue a policy of jihad or holy war against individuals or groups it considers enemies of Islam, which includes the US Government.” [Emphasis added.]

It warned that MOA “possesses an infrastructure capable of planning and mounting terrorist campaigns within the U.S. and overseas.”

According to an article posted by The Clarion Project in 2013,

A secret Canadian intelligence report described al-Fuqra as a “militant Sufi sect” that believes “there is a Satanic Zionist conspiracy to destroy Islam and that the Fuqra is God’s chosen instrument to defeat the enemies of Islam.” Among those they say are complicit in the conspiracy are Jews, Hindus, other Muslims and the governments of the U.S. and Canada.[5] Gilani has said, “We are fighting to destroy the enemy. We are dealing with evil at its roots and its roots are America.”[6] He says that the “U.S. has become a pawn of hidden hands that use America’s wealth and the innocent blood of their sons and daughters to wage their wars against Muslims.”[7] [Emphasisadded.]

MOA says it has 22 settlements across the United States.[8] A 2006 report for law enforcement put the number at above 35 and estimated that the organization has 3,000 members. It said that the organization is set up like “classically structured terrorist cells” and that Gilani is “now known as an international terrorist.” It said that at least seven of the communes are used for paramilitary training and that members are also sent to Pakistan for further instruction. [9]There are unconfirmed reports of members being trained in Sudan.[10]

A former high-level MOA operative that was a NYPD informant says that MOA also has set up operations in Trinidad, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Venezuela. He said that the paramilitary training is now only given to a select group. He describes MOA as being cult-like and said that most of the children are taught privately on its premises and are illiterate. He says he witnessed vicious punishments, including the beating of a 50-year old woman, for violating the strict moral code set by Gilani.[11] Two former female MOA members were interviewed by a filmmaker in 2011 and told stories of abuse, polygamy, forced marriages, brainwashing and terrorist activity.[12]

MOA believes that Gilani is a miracle-making representative of Allah. He claimed he exited his body to meet Jesus and the forthcoming Mahdi in 2009. Khalid Khawaja, a former pilot for Osama Bin Laden and a close friend of Gilani’s, says that “One white American [follower of Gilani’s] told me that there are thousands of people in America, who, if they are asked to cut off one limb so that they can stay with him, they are ready to do that.”

“If you push him to that stage, that he has no option but to declare jihad on America… it will blow like a volcano,” he said.[13]

He also said, “I am sure of one thing, Osama does not have even one of his followers as committed as Sheik Mubarak Gilani. Osama does not have even one as committed as the least of his people.”[14]

Gilani says that Jews are “an example of human Satans”[15] and that “I have never seen, in the whole of my life or even in the past thousand years, a Jew who will tell the truth.”[16] In making that case for Muslim-Christian relations, Gilani says, “the Jews tried to murder Jesus, son of Mary.”[17]

MOA believes that the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were part of a Satanic-Zionist conspiracy to wage war on Islam and stop Muslim-Christian unity. Gilani has referred to Osama Bin Laden as a “Saudi activist.”[18] MOA’s newspaper, the Islamic Post, praised Iranian President Ahmadinejad when he called for an independent investigation into 9/11 at the United Nations.[19]

The MOA also believes that evil “jinn beings” possess human beings. It says that the movies Star Wars, The Lord of the Rings, Avatar, The Exorcist and Harry Potter were part of “jinn” plots to corrupt minds and spread Satanic influence.[20]

Jamaat ul-Fuqra has a history of terrorist and criminal activity. At least a dozen members have been convicted and its members have been accused of involvement in at least 10 assassinations and 17 firebombings since 1980.[21]

A 2004 report funded by the Justice Department said that “members of the Fuqra group have raised money by taking advantage of a variety of social service programs, including worker’s compensation, public health care, welfare, and food stamps programs. Other crimes committed by Fuqra members include the creation and use of false identification cards, birth certificates, and other forged documents.”[22] The group recruits heavily from those with criminal backgrounds.[23] The group is also known to use security companies as fronts. [Emphasis added.]

A secret tape made by Gilani’s followers in Pakistan in the 1980s proves that the purpose of the camps in the U.S. is to facilitate paramilitary training. In the video, Gilani boasts of having “one of the most advanced training courses in Islamic military warfare” and invites interested Muslims to contact MOA offices in Pakistan or in several states in the U.S.

The film shows Gilani followers receiving the training and practicing the hijacking of vehicles, use of firearms, hand-to-hand combat, setting off explosives and other violent acts. In one scene, an instructor says, “Act like you are a friend, then kill him.”[24]

In 1989, the FBI raided a storage locker in Colorado Springs used by a Fuqra member and discovered weapons, explosives and plans for terrorist attacks, including the murder of Imam Rasad Khalifa in Arizona. He was a Muslim that was branded an apostate for his interpretations of the religion.[25] He was killed in 1990 exactly as the plans described.

The FBI discovered that the Fuqra members had to pledge, “I shall always hear and obey, and whenever given the command, I shall readily fight for Allah’s sake.”

The biggest Fuqra terror plot was attempted in 1991 and it aimed to kill 4,500 people. Five operatives tried to bomb a Hindu temple and an Indian cinema in the Toronto area during the Hindu Festival of Lights. The terrorists possessed a book authored by Gilani that says, “The mission of this Jamaat ul-Fuqra is to lead Muslims to their final victory over Communists, Zionists, Hindus and deviators.”[26]

In October 1992, law enforcement authorities shut down Fuqra’s 101-acre commune at Buena Vista and discovered that it was essentially a terrorist training camp financed through crime. A poem was found that reads, “Come join my troops and army/Says our Sheikh Gilani/Prepare to sacrifice your head/A true believer is never dead/Say ‘Victory is in the Air’/The kafir’s blood will not be spared.”[27]

One terrorist involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, Clement Rodney Hampton, was a Fuqra member and had been trained by the group near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. He was convicted for his role in another campaign to bomb several New York City targets.

In December 1993, Sheikh Gilani reportedly attended a terrorist conference in Khartoum, Sudan. Among the groups represented were Hamas, Hezbollah, Egyptian Islamic Jihad and others. [28] Some reports say that Osama Bin Laden was present, a believable claim as he lived in the country at the time.[29]

In 2001, Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and executed in Pakistan when he was on his way to interview Gilani. He has never been charged and denies involvement but says that Pearl was sent to assassinate him.

In 2009, Clarion Project National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro obtained two MOA tapes. One showed women training at its Islamberg headquarters in military fatigue. Only the first two digits in the on-screen date could be seen, indicating it was made in 2000 or afterwards. The trainees were seen marching in formation, practicing hand-to-hand combat, learning to use knives and swords and firing guns into a lake.

A second video showed MOA leaders declaring that the U.S. is a Muslim-majority country and vowing to defend it from foreign and domestic enemies. The speakers said they would never declare jihad on their country but “will not sit idly by and let our country be destroyed by this hidden hand.”[30]

In February 2010, Pakistan refused entry to two high-level MOA members.[31] It was reported in early 2010 by multiple sources that a large number of MOA members had suddenly moved out of their communes.

The current threat by Muslims of America must be taken seriously. Although many of their notions are loony, that makes them more, not less, dangerous.

Categories: Anti-Zionism, Antisemitism, CAIR, Clarion Project, Donald Trump and Islamists, Donald Trump and jihad, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic integration, Islamic radicalization, Islamic settlements in America, Islamic terrorism, Islamist organizations, Islamist training camps, Islamists in America, Muslims of America, Obama and Islamic terrorism, Trump and Islam
Tags: Anti-Zionism, Antisemitism, CAIR, Clarion Project, Donald Trump and Islamists, Donald Trump and jihad, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic integration, Islamic radicalization, Islamic settlements in America, Islamic terrorism, Islamist organizations, Islamist training camps, Islamists in America, Muslims of America, Obama and Islamic terrorism, Trump and Islam

Comments: Be the first to comment

Twitter Grants Verification to Muslim Brotherhood’s Violent, Anti-Semitic Online Mouthpiece

November 28, 2016

Twitter Grants Verification to Muslim Brotherhood’s Violent, Anti-Semitic Online Mouthpiece, Washington Free Beacon, Adam Kredo, November 28, 2016

Bydgoszcz, Poland, 20 June 2016: Twitter has announced the possibility of live streaming via itís site. With the integration of Periscope, the popular live streaming app Twitter now has the majority of the live streaming market in itís hands making rivals like Meerkat all but disappear. (Photo by Jaap Arriens/NurPhoto) *** Please Use Credit from Credit Field ***

Twitter. (Photo by Jaap Arriens/NurPhoto)

“At a time when Twitter is already facing criticism for banning individuals based solely on speech, Twitter has effectively lionized a group responsible for the burning of Coptic churches and the killing of Egyptian police and judiciary officials,” Shideler added. “How is Twitter supposed to help defeat online radicalization when it essentially endorses the biggest source for Islamist radicals in the world?”

************************

The social media website Twitter is facing criticism for its recent decision to grant verification to the Muslim Brotherhood’s official mouthpiece, which routinely writes in favor of violent terror acts and disseminates anti-Semitic propaganda.

The Muslim Brotherhood–which has been designated as a terror outfit and banned by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and elsewhere–operates in the online sphere via a website known as Ikhwan Web, which serves as the Brotherhood’s “official” English-speaking feed.

Twitter recently granted verification to Ikhwan Web’s online feed, giving the organization an air of legitimacy that leading lawmakers and experts described as reckless given the Brotherhood’s history of supporting violent jihad and terrorism.

‎”Verifying the Muslim Brotherhood’s Twitter feed helps further their narrative of civilization-Jihad,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas), a Muslim Brotherhood critic who has authorized legislation to designate it in the United States as a terror organization, told the Washington Free Beacon.

“This maneuver makes the Brotherhood seem like a legitimate group while providing them cover to spread their radical version of Islam,” Cruz added. “I look forward to working with the new administration to expose the Brotherhood’s efforts to increase their influence in America.”

Ikhwan Web’s Twitter feed serves as a central hub for the Brotherhood’s radical propaganda and official statements. A Free Beacon request for comment to Twitter’s public relations department went unanswered.

Twitter has faced a wave of criticism for failing to shut down various accounts promoting radical jihad and terrorism against Western countries. Others have criticized the social media site for cracking down on accounts associated with conservative-leaning thinkers and writers.

Recent tweets indicate that the Brotherhood is, via its Twitter feed, advocating continued violence and resistance against Egypt’s ruling government. It also is working to mainstream the Brotherhood as a legitimate resistance organization and governing body.

Ikhwan Web has a history of promoting violence in the Middle East, primarily in Egypt, where the Brotherhood led a bloody coup and continues to support violence against the country’s ruling authority.

“It is incumbent upon everyone to be aware that we are in the process of a new phase, where we summon what is latent in our strength, where we recall the meanings of jihad and prepare ourselves, our wives, our sons, our daughters, and whoever marched on our path to a long, uncompromising jihad, and during this stage we ask for martyrdom,” the Brotherhood said in a 2015 statement that was posted on Ikhwan Web.

The website also has a history of defending individuals accused of organizing terror attacks on U.S. soil.

Other recent articles posted by the group promote violence against the Israeli government and Jewish people, including one 2009 post quoting a Muslim Brotherhood leader as calling for “jihad” to “liberate” Jerusalem from Israeli control.

The Brotherhood falsely claims that Israel is attempting to vandalize Muslim holy sites and prevent access for adherents to the faith.

Other postings rally against “the ugly face” of Zionism.

Kyle Shideler, director of the Center for Security Policy’s Threat Information Office, told the Free Beacon that Twitter’s decision to grant legitimacy to the organization is “deeply concerning.”

“This decision by Twitter to provide the Muslim Brotherhood with this literal blue check of approval is deeply disconcerting,” Shideler said.

“At a time when Twitter is already facing criticism for banning individuals based solely on speech, Twitter has effectively lionized a group responsible for the burning of Coptic churches and the killing of Egyptian police and judiciary officials,” Shideler added. “How is Twitter supposed to help defeat online radicalization when it essentially endorses the biggest source for Islamist radicals in the world?”

Categories: Anti-Israel, Antisemitism, Ikhwan Web, Islamic terrorism, Muslim Brotherhood, social media, Twitter
Tags: anti-Israel, Antisemitism, Ikhwan Web, Islamic terrorism, Muslim Brotherhood, social media, Twitter

Comments: 1 Comment

The Trump revolution, Israel and American Jews‎

November 22, 2016

The Trump revolution, Israel and American Jews‎, Israel Hayom, Isi Leibler, November 22,2016

The most bizarre aspect of this election result is the almost hysterical reaction by liberal ‎segments of the Jewish community. That 70% of Jews supported Hillary Clinton is not ‎surprising and consistent with their long-standing obsession with liberalism. But the ‎manipulation of Jewish issues as a political vehicle by some American Jewish leaders to oppose ‎Trump will be recorded as an act of infamy. ‎

***********************

The victory of Donald Trump in the U.S. presidential elections will have long-term global ‎repercussions at many levels. It represents a revolt against extreme postmodernism which has ‎undermined the moral fiber of the West and its willingness to defend itself, facilitating the ‎emergence of brutal Islamic terror throughout the world.‎

Many, if not most, of those who voted for Trump were offended by his vulgarity and ‎aggressive language and did not support all aspects of his policies. They voted for him because ‎they regarded him as the only opportunity to break with the status quo.‎

The refusal of his antagonists — the self-styled liberal guardians of democracy — to accept the ‎outcome of the election was despicable and unprecedented and contrasts with the ‎acquiescence of the defeated Republicans when Barack Obama won both of his elections.‎

Whether or not Trump will succeed in restoring America’s former global and political status ‎remains to be seen. We should bear in mind that when Ronald Reagan was elected, the media ‎and much of the “intelligentsia” described him as an idiot and predicted disaster. But he ‎proved to be one of the greatest American presidents.‎

Trump’s victory could have dramatic ramifications for Israel. Of course, pre-election ‎undertakings are never fully implemented, but it is historically unprecedented for Israel to ‎enjoy such a committed pro-Israel incoming president together with massive support from ‎both houses of Congress. ‎

Trump, who literally gushes over Israel, has always been closely associated with Jews in ‎business and politics. Aside from his family, his senior advisers include committed devotees of ‎Israel.‎

He has repeatedly praised Israel and refers to us as America’s greatest ally; he has endorsed ‎Israel’s position on defensible borders and stated that he has no objection to construction in ‎the major settlement blocs and Jerusalem; he called on the Palestinians to recognize Israel as a ‎Jewish state and is opposed to imposed solutions, insisting that the only way to peace is by ‎direct negotiations between the parties; and most importantly, he has made it clear that he ‎totally repudiates President Obama’s criticism of Israel for failing to make progress in the ‎peace talks and his application of moral equivalence between Israelis and Palestinians.‎

Trump committed to moving the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem — although that is ‎an unfulfilled pre-electoral promise made by many of his predecessors, both Democrat and ‎Republican. ‎

He has also undertaken to confront the Iranian terrorist regime and either terminate the bogus ‎nuclear deal or at least pressure the Iranians to adhere to their commitments. ‎

His vice president-elect, Mike Pence, is a passionately devoted Christian friend of Israel and a ‎seasoned politician who Trump has announced will be his major adviser and policy formulator.‎

And whatever tensions exist between Trump and both of the Republican-controlled houses of ‎Congress, the one issue that they share in common is support of Israel.‎

However, none of this should be misinterpreted to mean that the Trump administration will ‎favor annexation or a one-state policy. Trump has made it clear that he still endorses a two-‎state policy but, in contrast to Obama, he stipulates that it cannot be imposed without ‎providing Israel with defensible borders and all of the security guarantees it requires — an ‎unattainable objective and at present, not even on the horizon. ‎

For this reason, the bombastic declarations by the Israeli Right and particularly Habayit ‎Hayehudi Chairman Naftali Bennett’s calls for annexation in the wake of the election results ‎are irresponsible and could be highly counterproductive. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ‎should tell his coalition members to zip their mouths shut and enable him to move forward by ‎engaging in silent diplomacy with Trump, who has already extended a warm invitation to meet ‎with him.‎

One of the negative repercussions of the Trump victory is the accelerated erosion of ‎bipartisanship and the growing influence of the radical anti-Israel wing of the Democratic ‎Party. Nothing exemplifies this more than the likelihood of the anti-Israel Muslim Congressman ‎Keith Ellison — who was initially funded by the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic ‎Relations — assuming the role of chairman of the Democratic National Committee, supported ‎by leading Jewish Senator Chuck Schumer. The post was formerly held by pro-Israel ‎Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Simultaneously, anti-Israel Jewish Senator Bernie ‎Sanders is emerging as one of the most powerful forces in the defeated radicalized ‎Democratic Party.‎

The most bizarre aspect of this election result is the almost hysterical reaction by liberal ‎segments of the Jewish community. That 70% of Jews supported Hillary Clinton is not ‎surprising and consistent with their long-standing obsession with liberalism. But the ‎manipulation of Jewish issues as a political vehicle by some American Jewish leaders to oppose ‎Trump will be recorded as an act of infamy. ‎

The trailblazer was Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt, who shamelessly uses ‎this once-venerable organization as a mantle to promote his radical liberal agenda. ‎Commissioned to combat anti-Semitism, he had the chutzpah to harness the ADL to condemn ‎the Republicans as “anti-Zionist” because they failed to relate to a two-state solution in their ‎Middle East policy platform.‎

He condemned Trump for “tolerating” anti-Semites because he declined to dignify the Ku Klux ‎Klan by responding to their expressions of support for him. In fact, thanks to the ADL’s anti-‎Trump hysteria, anti-Semites and scum like David Duke were brought to the forefront of the ‎mainstream media, a goal which they had sought unsuccessfully to achieve over the past ‎decades. It also encouraged racists and anti-Semites to emerge from their closets.‎

This contrasts starkly with the muted response to by liberals to Obama’s relationship with Rev. ‎Jeremiah Wright, a paranoid anti-Semite. Not only did Obama attend his sermons with his ‎family, but Wright actually officiated at his wedding and was appointed by him in 2007 to the ‎African American Religious Leadership Committee. He only dissociated himself from Wright’s ‎views after media exposure but refused to disown him personally, relating to him as “an old ‎uncle.” Not even the fiercest critics of Trump can suggest any comparable relationship with ‎Duke or any other identifiable anti-Semite. But his critics continue defaming him as a promoter ‎of anti-Semites.‎

Clearly motivated by a very partisan agenda, they take this to insane levels. A star motif used in ‎Trump’s election propaganda was pounced upon by the ADL, claiming that it was a Star of ‎David employed to inflame Jew-hatred. The frenzied ADL also suggested that Trump’s ‎condemnation of the power of the international banks (also promoted by Bernie Sanders) was ‎a subtle means of promoting “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” One has to be either a ‎paranoid delusional or an anti-Semite to genuinely believe that any reference to international ‎banks is a reference to Jews. And to top this, a negative reference to the anti-Israel George ‎Soros — which most Jews would endorse — was also alleged to be anti-Semitic.‎

Not surprisingly, the hysteria impacted on Jews at the grass roots. ‎

Yet in the wake of the election of a most pro-Israel U.S. government, in which Jews and ‎staunch friends of Israel are likely to assume key positions, with the president’s daughter ‎having converted to Judaism and observing an Orthodox religious lifestyle, many Jews have ‎simply lost the plot. A number of Reform and Conservative synagogues actually held special ‎mourning services to bewail the advent of fascism in America. One prominent Conservative ‎rabbi in New York even made a shocking analogy between the Trump victory and the rise of ‎Nazism prior to the Holocaust.‎

The ultimate obscenity was the hysterical attack on Trump’s appointment of the controversial ‎right-wing media executive Steve Bannon as his strategic adviser. Without any credible proof, ‎the ADL accused him of being an anti-Semite who would pave the way for a return to anti-‎Semitism and white supremacy.‎

It so happens that Bannon is surrounded by Jews in his media company, Breitbart News. He is ‎known for his fervent support for Israel and his condemnations of the boycott, divestment and ‎sanctions movement, anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism on campus. One can disagree with ‎Trump’s selection of Bannon, but for Greenblatt and the ADL to smear him as an anti-Semite is ‎beyond the pale. The uproar following this was so great that Greenblatt was ultimately obliged ‎to whisper a withdrawal of this false allegation. ‎

The double standards applied by the ADL is exemplified by the fact that despite the outright ‎anti-Semitism and promotion of BDS against Israel promoted by the Black Lives Matter ‎movement, Greenblatt does not call for Jews to boycott the organization and still refers ‎approvingly to the “positive” aspects of its work, suggesting that only a “small minority” ‎imposed the anti-Semitic aspects of its program. Apparently the ADL adopt very liberal ‎standards to real anti-Semitic groups if they come from the Left.‎

Greenblatt’s use of a revered body created to combat anti-Semitism to promote his own ‎partisan political agenda and even stooping to use allegations of anti-Semitism to slander his ‎opponents is scandalous. He has no place in a mainstream Jewish organization.‎

American Jewry today stands at a crossroads. Ironically, at a time when possibly the most pro-‎Israel U.S. administration in history is about to take office, significant sectors of the Jewish ‎community are falsely accusing its leaders of promoting anti-Semitism. It should be noted that ‎other mainstream Jewish bodies, like the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish ‎Organizations, American Israel Public Affairs Committee, and the American Jewish Committee, ‎did not engage in this campaign and merely called for unity. But the Zionist Organization of ‎America was the only significant Jewish organization protesting against this partisan ‎defamatory campaign.‎

However, it is obvious that increasing numbers of Reform, Conservative and secular Jews ‎consider Israel low among their priorities and confuse liberalism or “social justice” as a ‎universalist basis for a Jewish commitment with no Jewish content or values. In all likelihood, ‎they will become even more estranged from Israel as they seek to further ingratiate ‎themselves with their liberal friends. ‎

Fortunately, this will be compensated by the intensified support for Israel from committed ‎Jews and Christian friends.

Categories: Anti-Defamation League, Antisemitism, Donald Trump and Israel, Jewish left in America, Trump and Iran
Tags: Anti-Defamation League, Antisemitism, Donald Trump and Israel, Jewish left in America, Trump and Iran

Comments: Be the first to comment

Right From Wrong: Alt-left delete

November 21, 2016

Right From Wrong: Alt-left delete, Jerusalem Post, Ruthie Blum, November 20, 2016

trumpandbannon

The millions of voters who elected Trump do not deserve the mud-slinging.

The term “alt-right”, which nobody had heard of until the unexpected emergence and rise of Donald Trump in the US presidential election campaign, has become all the rage, literally and figuratively. Indeed, it is now the angry go-to explanation in every analysis of the Republican candidate’s ostensibly miraculous victory on November 8. And it is the key buzzword of the fever-pitched brouhaha surrounding Trump’s appointment of Breitbart publisher Steve Bannon as his chief strategist.

One the main arguments against Bannon – at times a self-described promoter of the alt-right message – is that he, like the neo-Nazi Trump-supporting trolls on Twitter, is an antisemite. Though this is patent nonsense, as the evidence raised to prove it is flimsy at best, it is one of those labels that enables both liberals and anti-Trump conservatives to kill two birds with one stone: Bannon and the man who elevated him to a highly important and coveted post.

The intellectual pitfall for mainstream conservatives here is plain. Whatever their position on Bannon, they are aware that Trump’s stunning victory not only in the race for the Oval Office, but in that of both houses of Congress cannot be attributed to a fringe group of right-wingers with no formal homogeneous ideology. Within this loose category are white supremacists who hate Jews, blacks and gays, and any member of the Right who has a nuanced view of everything from immigration to abortion. But these are a tiny minority in America as a whole, and played less of a role in the election of Trump than they and their detractors would love to imagine.

Others who are lumped into that label are people – like myself – who consider the decline of American power to be a danger both domestically and internationally, and desperately wanted the new style of Democrats – those who radicalized the party of Scoop Jackson into oblivion – out of office. We are right-wingers who believe in individual enterprise and ideological freedom. We believe that the federal government should not be dictating the rules of personal moral engagement or funding our choices. We want academia to be a place for the advanced study of humankind in all its facets and history – a space for the education and maturation of each new generation of young adults who will be faced with the often unpleasant task of making their way in the world with nothing but a set of tools in their satchel to give them a sense of their otherwise good fortune to be doing this in the United States, and not in Iran, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela or Mexico, to name but a few examples.

But mainly we want to preserve all of the things that make America great, while repairing those that prevent it from becoming even better – and not by having politicians tell us what’s good for us. It is we who are charged with spelling out for them what is required when we hire them to represent us. The majority of Americans who feel this way opted to give Trump a chance to make good on his promise to reinvigorate the economy and prevent evil forces from corroding the fiber of a country that causes people from around the globe to want to live in what European Jews fleeing eastern Europe prior to, during and after World War II, used to call the “golden medinah” – a nation where the streets are paved in gold.

It thus seemed like the height of irony that a billionaire who actually gilds his buildings was selected to represent those people whose roads are barely paved at all, let alone in gold. Nevertheless they did, because his message to them was that it’s honorable, not shameful, to strive for the gold medal.

WHERE IMMIGRATION is concerned, the so-called alt-right – whoever comprises it – may believe in sealed borders against the influx of “undesirables,” but neither Trump nor most of his backers hold this view. What we do believe, especially those of us American Jews who moved to Israel for Zionist reasons, is that immigrants should have to go through legal channels and a vetting process. Just as citizens of America and Israel must adhere to the law of the land, so must those who want to become members of those societies. Forcing wannabes to undergo a process of examination and a trial period does not constitute racism, it is simply a necessary procedure. This is particularly true today, as radical Islamists have been infiltrating every country in the world to try and spread a pernicious ideology through the use of mayhem and murder.

Nor is the proposed policy of putting a stop to illegal immigration from Mexico a question of discrimination. On the contrary, it is an assertion that Mexicans, like all other immigrants, Latinos included, who applied for visas, green cards and citizenship, are welcome under certain conditions.

Even Canadians are not allowed simply to cross the border and work in America without going through such channels.

One may not agree with the above, but it is a valid position that has nothing to do with white supremacism. And the millions of voters who elected Trump do not deserve the mud-slinging.

Furthermore, what all anti-Trump conservatives must know in their hearts is that even if Trump had not ended up winning the Republican primary race, the Left would have gone after any of the others in the same fashion. Had Ted Cruz been left standing against Hillary Clinton, he would have received the very same treatment, and had similar, if not identical, epithets hurled at him and his supporters. In addition, the only antisemitic diatribes to which I personally have been exposed on social media are from left-wing radicals, calling me a “dirty Jewess” and “Israeli killer of Palestinian children.” But somehow, when such slurs come from the Left, they are considered expressions of a political viewpoint, rather than what they really are.

In Israel, too, the settler movement and anyone who believes in Jewish rights to the land – as well as those warning against the true aim of the Palestinian leadership – are vilified and likened to the fringe members of the Right who violate laws on behalf of an extreme position held by very few people. As is the case in America, the alt-left in America has a prominent place in the mainstream media and ivory tower, where thought-policing and debate-stifling is the norm. And we right-wingers on both sides of the ocean have had enough.

It is time to acknowledge that it was the alt-left the American voter was responding to when he or she cast a ballot for Trump, not the alt-right.

Categories: 2016 elections, Alt-Left, Alt-Right, Antisemitism, Immigration, Israel
Tags: Alt-Left, Alt-Right, Antisemitism, Immigration, Israel

Comments: Be the first to comment

The Ellison Angle

November 15, 2016

The Ellison Angle, Power Line, Scott Johnson, November 15, 2016

Democrats and their media adjunct are stirring the pot about the alleged bigotry of prospective Trump White House advisor Steve Bannon, yet they are poised to name a long-time advocate of one of the leading racist and anti-Semitic organizations in the United States as chairman of their party. I’m referring of course to Minnesota Fifth District Rep. Keith Ellison and his long involvement with the Nation of Islam.

Yesterday Ellison formally announced his bid to become chairman of the Democratic Party. Leading Democrats have lined up to support him. He seems to be poised to take the reins of the national party. Allison Sherry reports from Washington for the Star Tribune:

Ellison drew widespread support over the weekend and Monday from the party’s elite, including Sanders and presumed incoming Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. Harry Reid, the current Senate minority leader, threw his support behind Ellison. Even President Obama told reporters the party needed fresh faces and new ideas to rebuild, though he did not mention anyone by name.

As a black and left-wing Muslim in a one-party town with a cheerleading newspaper, Ellison has been insulated from the kind of media scrutiny that he should have received over the past 10 years. Rather, he has been celebrated as the first Muslim to be elected to Congress. Who wanted to stand in his way? Certainly not the political reporters or editors at the Star Tribune.

The Star Tribune has never troubled itself to chronicle Ellison’s unsavory years on the make in Minneapolis as an active local leader of the Nation of Islam, even though it could have drawn on its own archives to do so. The Star Tribune has left Ellison free to lie about his past and it is a freedom that he has exploited to the hilt.

Thus Sherry reports on Ellison’s current bid without the slightest hint of Ellison’s back pages:

Ellison issued a statement Monday castigating Trump’s choice, saying that Bannon “is adored by white supremacists, white nationalists, anti-Semites, neo-Nazis and the KKK,” and that the president-elect must rescind the appointment if he is “serious about rejecting bigotry, hatred and violence from his supporters.”

Ellison’s public agitation on behalf of the Nation of Islam extends back to his days as a law student at the University of Minnesota Law School through his first attempt to secure the Democratic endorsement for a state legislative seat. Over the years Ellison agitated on behalf of the Nation of Islam he operated under names including Keith Hakim, Keith X Ellison and Keith Ellison-Muhammad. I summarized this aspect of Ellison’s rise in the Weekly Standard article “Louis Farrakhan’s first Congressman” and the companion Power Line post “Keith Ellison for dummies.”

Ellison’s freedom from media scrutiny has served him well so far. Apart from an extremely misleading letter to the Jewish Community Relations Council in 2006, Ellison has never had to account, explain or apologize for his long-time membership in and advocacy of the Nation of Islam. Rather, Ellison has lied about it, minimized it and suppressed it. In his own memoir Ellison rewrites his past, presenting himself as a critic of the Nation of Islam for its bigotry and hatred. He does not confide in readers that the source of his knowledge is personal and that it comes from the inside. I don’t think much of the Democratic Party or its leaders, but I have to ask whether Democrats really know what they are buying with Ellison.

UPDATE: I just heard a radio news report indicating that Ellison denies he was ever a member of the Nation of Islam. This is a bald-faced lie for which I have the ocular proof in “Keith Ellison for dummies.”

Categories: Antisemitism, Democrat establishment, Democrat National Committee, Democrat Party, Keith Ellison, Media, Nation of Islam, Racism
Tags: Antisemitism, Democrat establishment, Democrat National Committee, Democrat Party, Keith Ellison, Media, Nation of Islam, Racism

Comments: Be the first to comment

Qatar’s Shopping Spree to Buy and Displace the West?

November 11, 2016

Qatar’s Shopping Spree to Buy and Displace the West? Gatestone Institute,Giulio Meotti, November 11, 2016

Qatar sits on the executive board of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the UN agency that has just erased 3000 years of Jewish history in Jerusalem, and has set its sights on the main chair at UNESCO: as the successor of UNESCO’s secretary general, Irina Bokova.

Human rights organizations have already promoted a campaign to prevent Qatar’s Kawari from taking the UNESCO seat. Citing a vast amount of anti-Semitic material present at the Doha Book Fair, Kawari’s flagship, the Simon Wiesenthal Center launched a campaign against his candidacy.

Qatar is the puppeteer behind UNESCO’s anti-Semitic resolution on Jerusalem, and a world center of Islamic extremism. Qatar does not make a secret of trying to submit Western culture to the Muslim crescent.

The Soviet Union, during the Cold War, invested in propaganda operations in the West to subvert capitalism and democracy. Communism found precious allies in the so-called “useful idiots” who facilitated Soviet work in academia, newspapers and publishing houses. Political Islam has been using the same convenient outlets and mechanisms to spread Islamic sharia law in the West.

The old role of Soviet propaganda has now been taken up by Islamic regimes. Qatar, for instance, is not only interested in buying large segments of Europe’s economy (Hochtief, Volkswagen, Porsche, Canary Wharf and Deutsche Bank), but also in playing a key role in Europe’s culture.

Qatar sits on the executive board of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the UN agency that has just erased 3000 years of Jewish history in Jerusalem, and has set its sights on the main chair at UNESCO: as the successor of UNESCO’s secretary general, Irina Bokova.

The favorite for this race is, in fact, the former minister of culture of Qatar from 2008 to 2016, Hamad bin Abdulaziz al Kawari, who currently serves as “cultural adviser to the Emir,” Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. In 2017, the UNESCO leadership is supposed to go to a representative of the Arab world, according to the rule of geographic rotation; Kawari will have to defeat the candidacy of a Lebanese and an Egyptian.

Kawari recently landed in Rome, apparently to start his promotional tour, and he met with its mayor, Virginia Raggi, who received the Islamic emirate’s delegation. Kawari received an honorary degree from Tor Vergata University, Rome’s second most important university. The photo of the ceremony speaks volumes about political Islam’s level of penetration in Europe’s academic culture. Abdullah Bin Hamad Al Attiyah, Qatar’s former deputy prime minister, even spoke at Tor Vergata.

2037

Qatar’s Hamad bin Abdulaziz al Kawari (center), who serves as “cultural adviser to the Emir,” is pictured receiving an honorary degree from Rome’s Tor Vergata University last month. (Image source: Askanews video screenshot)

Kawari also had a meeting with Italy’s minister of culture, Dario Franceschini and minister of education, Stefania Giannini.

Last June, Kawari was also in the Vatican to meet with Pope Francis and sign an agreement between the Vatican Apostolic Library and the Qatar Foundation for Education. Kawari, fluent in Arabic, English and French, is an affable man of the world, at home in Paris, where he graduated from Sorbonne University; his climb to the leadership of UNESCO has the support of the rulers of the Gulf and Saudi Arabia.

Human rights organizations have already promoted a campaign to prevent Kawari from taking the UNESCO seat. Citing a vast amount of anti-Semitic material present at the Doha Book Fair, Kawari’s flagship, the Simon Wiesenthal Center launched a campaign against his candidacy. In a letter to Kawari, Shimon Samuels, Director for International Relations of the Wiesenthal Center, said the material on display every year in Doha “violates the values promoted by Unesco“.

Samuels listed at least 35 anti-Semitic titles, including nine editions of the anti-Semitic forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, four editions of Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler, and four editions of Henry Ford’s The International Jew. “From this point of view, Doha is far from Paris,” said Samuels, referring to the general headquarters of UNESCO.

Qatar is the puppeteer behind UNESCO’s anti-Semitic resolution on Jerusalem, and a world center of Islamic extremism. Doha just held a meeting between the Palestinian Authority’s leader, Mahmoud Abbas, and the heads of Hamas, a terrorist organization devoted to the destruction of the State of Israel. Qatar does not make a secret of trying to submit Western culture to the Muslim crescent. The only question is, which country’s culture will UNESCO erase next?

The Qatari royal family is now much involved in “the arts.” According to the BBC, “To take a recent example, the Qatari royal family sponsored the Tate’s Damien Hirst retrospective. It’s now moved to Doha, where Tate director Nicholas Serota attended the official launch.” Major works by Warhol, Bacon, Rothko, Koons and Hirst are all thought to have made their way to Qatar.

Qatar is buying academic chairs in Europe’s universities, such as the pact between Doha and Rome’s Tor Vergata. What is the university presumably expected to do for Qatar in exchange for that? Qatar academic purchases are also the subject of Le Monde’s investigation entitled, “Tariq Ramadan: le sphinx,” which details how Tariq Ramadan, the well-known European Muslim intellectual, was been able to obtain a chair at the University of Oxford. Mediapart, the French leftist magazine, ran a long exposé about Tariq Ramadan as “Qatar’s showcase.”

The Qatari monarchy, in 2015 alone, donated £11 million to renew Oxford’s St Antony’s College, where Tariq Ramadan works. Sheikha Moza, the wife of Emir Al Thani, inaugurated the magnificent building designed by the late architect, Zaha Hadid.

Qatar also financed the creation of an Islamic section at the Bloomsbury publishing house and the “Doha Debates” program that aired on the BBC. It would be interesting to know how Qatar’s sharia can find agreement with the sybaritic Bloomsbury’s British culture.

The attorney-general of Qatar also signed an agreement with the president of Sorbonne University, Philippe Boutry, in Paris, for the enrollment of hundreds of migrants from the Middle East. The Sorbonne accepted 600,000 euros a year, for three years.

Many British universities also receive large donations from Qatar. University College London, for example, has an archeology campus in Qatar. The Qatar Development Fund recently donated $4.3 million to the Margaret Thatcher Scholarship Trust at Oxford University.

Qatar is also having a shopping spree in American universities, and is funding their university departments in the Arabian desert. Universities such as Cornell, Carnegie Mellon, Georgetown, Texas A&M and Virginia Commonwealth have all signed agreements with Emir Al Thani. Each will receive $320 million dollars a year.

Students of American Universities based in Doha are also invited to attend the sermons of Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the spiritual mentor of the Muslim Brotherhood, who is known for his hate-ridden religious edicts. The Simon Wiesenthal Center has called it “outrageous” for Cornell University to decide to open a campus in Doha while the kingdom funds Hamas’s war against Israel.

The Financial Times once called Qatar “the world’s most aggressive deal hunter.” Emir Al Thani is now promoting a takeover of Western culture. But very few in Europe seem to care about that. Is it because “it is difficult to avoid its money and influence“, especially for an economically depressed Europe? With their telling silence, are they simply aligning with Qatar’s sharia rulers, and hoping they will chosen to be bought out next?

Categories: Academia and Islamists, Antisemitism, Arab nations, Human rights organizations, Islamist organizations, Israel, Jerusalem, Palestinians, Qatar, UNESCO
Tags: Academia and Islamists, Antisemitism, Arab nations, Human rights organizations, Islamist organizations, Israel, Jerusalem, Palestinians, Qatar, UNESCO

Comments: Be the first to comment

Anti-Semitism was required, Anti-Islamism is verboten

October 21, 2016

Anti-Semitism was required, Anti-Islamism is verboten, Israel National News, Janet Levy, October 21, 2016

In their recent documentary, Germans and Jews, filmmakers Tal Recanati and Junina Quint, portray Germany as having reached a nuanced reconciliation with its Nazi past by breaking the silence about it and facing it head-on. Yet, several recent surveys of German attitudes toward Jews and the Jewish homeland reveal the persistence of strong, anti-Semitic attitudes that belie the filmmakers’ conclusions.

Indeed, Germany may actually be stoking anti-Semitism with its official policy of acceptance and open-mindedness toward Muslim immigrants, even to the point of allowing them expression of hatred toward Jews. One of Germany’s major trade partners is Iran, hostile to Israel since the first Gulf War, and Germany continues to blame Israeli settlements for Middle East unrest. Thus, Germany’s policy of acceptance and tolerance toward Muslims may actually mask an underlying anti-Semitism that stubbornly remains despite the passage of time.

The Surveys and Anti-Semitism Revealed

In 2011, a survey by the Freidrich Ebert Foundation,Intolerance, Prejudice and Discrimination, found that 49% of German respondents agreed with the statement that Jews were trying to take advantage of their people’s suffering during the Holocaust. Another 20% of Germans agreed that Jews have too much influence in their country, 30% agreed, “Jews don’t care about anything or anyone but their own kind.”

A 2015 study by the Institute for Interdisciplinary Research on Conflict and Violence from the University of Bielefeld found that 49% of Germans don’t want to hear anything about the Holocaust, 55% are angry that Germans are still accused of crimes against Jews, 28% responded that they can understand why people don’t like Jews considering Israel’s policies, and 27% say that Israeli policy toward Arab-Palestinians is not different from what the Nazis did to the Jews during the Third Reich.

In 2012, an Anti-Defamation League survey of Attitudes Toward Jews in 10 European Countries discovered the following about German respondents: 24% felt that Jews have too much power in international financial markets, 43% agreed that Jews talk too much about what happened to them in the Holocaust, 14% believe that Jews are responsible for the death of Christ, and 77% believed the government was doing enough to ensure the safety and security of its Jewish citizens.

The deep resentment and demonization of Jews revealed in the surveys are not indicative of a guilt-wracked, tortured people anxious to rise above the atrocities of the Nazi generation. Clearly, large percentages of Germans still harbor harsh, anti-Jewish sentiments.

Muslim-Only Multi-culturalism

By contrast, Germans seem to apply the values of multiculturalism, diversity and tolerance to Muslims, bypassing Jews entirely. Germany today houses Europe’s largest Muslim population, with the influx of Muslim refugees comprising almost 6% of the total population. It leads the way as Europe becomes an increasingly multicultural and Islamic continent. Yet, far from experiencing great anguish about dramatic increases in anti-Semitism that rose during the Holocaust, Germany appears indifferent toward the impact of Muslim interlopers on its Jewish population.

Paradoxically, Germany has accepted this wave of Muslim “refugees,” many of whom vacation in their war-torn homelands, while, the Third Reich persecuted Germany’s Jewish citizens, who, by and large, were productive members of society contributing substantially to the economy and culture of the state. While Jews fled to avoid death camps and had few places to go during Nazi persecution, Muslims are welcomed in Europe. Although more than 33 Muslim countries exist that could choose to accommodate Muslim refugees, five of the wealthiest – Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, and Bahrain – are unwilling to accept a single refugee.

During the Weimar Republic (1918-1933) which preceded the Third Reich, Jews, who were barred from certain professions, were disproportionately represented in law, medicine, journalism and retailing. They were active in creative pursuits, business, diplomacy and government. A Jew even drafted the Weimar Republic Constitution. At the time, five of the nine German recipients of the Nobel Prize were Jewish scientists. For the first time, German universities fully opened their faculties to Jewish scholars, including physicist Albert Einstein.

Although portrayed as “the enemy within,” a higher percentage of German Jews fought in World War I than any other ethnic group in Germany. Over 12,000 gave their lives for their country.

Despite their sacrifice in that war, Jews were targeted beginning in the 1920s with wide circulation of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a forgery that claimed that Jews conspired to take over the world.

Given the contributions of a predominantly upright Jewish citizenry and their benign, contributory, integral presence in Germany, it is remarkable to consider what followed, even more so as we view today’s efforts to accommodate Muslim “refugees” who decline to work and integrate into German society and insist on shariah law supremacy in lieu of German constitutional law. Further, Muslims in German have been linked to 69,000 crimes in the country in the first quarter of 2016!

Whether actively or passively, most Germans went along with the marginalization and demonization of Jews and the concomitant restrictive laws, ghettoization and, ultimately, the Final Solution. Desperate Jews facing deportation to Nazi death camps were not widely welcomed as refugees by other countries. Official German policy singled out Jews for ethnic cleansing to purify the Aryan race and made harboring and assisting Jews a crime punishable by death.

By comparison, today’s Muslims in Germany enjoy protections from persecution. Social media is reviewed for offensive statements against Muslims. Germans who openly object to the settlement of Muslim “refugees” are charged with incitement and hate speech, forced to pay fines and/or endure probation or suspended sentences. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has gone so far as to chastise her fellow countrymen about those “with hate in their hearts”… “who seek to marginalize others.” It is indeed striking to comprehend the gaping dissimilarities between official German policy toward its productive Jewish population during the Third Reich with the protections, generous entitlements and privileges afforded to today’s mostly parasitic Muslim refugee populations that refuse to become part of German society and are massively over-represented in every category of crime.

The official narrative, vastly different from the past party line about the Jews, is that the influx of Muslim refugees is having a positive, multi-cultural influence on Germany, that Islam is truly a religion of peace not represented by ISIS, and that random acts of terrorism have nothing to do with Islam. Evidence for this distorted, benign view is non-existent and stands in sharp contrast to the Third Reich view of evil Jews as “subhuman” creatures infiltrating Aryan society, inhuman and unworthy of life itself.

This apocryphal perspective is further buttressed by efforts by German authorities and the media to conceal the dramatic rise in rapes, assaults and murders perpetrated by Muslim migrants. Following the Cologne sexual attacks on New Year’s Eve during which 1,200 women were assaulted by groups of men described as Arab or North African, the North-Rhine Westphalia government ordered a cover-up to include the elimination of the word “rape” from police reports. Of the 2,000 men involved, the authorities identified only 120 and they were given suspended sentences of a year or less.

The German media takes great pains to obscure the religion, nationalities and motives of Muslim assailants and often refrains from reporting incidents altogether to avoid charges of racism or xenophobia. In 2013, in an extreme case of Germany’s so-called open-mindedness, the prestigious Ludwig-Borne literary prize was given to a philosopher who sympathized with Islamic terrorist organizations and equated the 9/11 attacks with the Holocaust, the Allied bombings of Nazi Germany and the atomic bombing of Japan.

Anti-Semitism Revived

Reminiscent of the Third Reich era, displays of Jewish hatred and agitating against Jews are in full bloom in today’s Germany. Radical Islamic protestors are permitted to yell, “Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas,” “Jewish s—t” and “Jew, Jew, cowardly swine, come out and fight on your own.” Yet those who call for the preservation of German culture, protest the massive influx of Muslim “refugees,” religious fanaticism and Islamic separatism and radicalism are shut down, depicted as Nazis, prosecuted for hate speech, fined and even jailed. Appallingly, it has been alleged that the German government is busing in counter-protest groups to create opposition to anti-immigrant rallies.

Lutz Bachmann, the founder of PEGIDA, the organization that opposes the Merkel migration policy that has brought more than 1 million “refugees” to Germany last year, was convictedof inciting racial hatred which constituted an “attack on the dignity” of refugees and fined close to $11,000. Quite a turnabout from a country that forced Jews out of their homes into ghettos, then death camps, encouraged its populace to turn them in and fomented Kristallnacht against Jewish businesses.

This past summer, the creators of a Facebook forum for AFB, an anti-refugee movement, were found guilty of hate speech for conducting online discussions about the migrant issue. A teenage girl who posted a video, in which she expressed her fears for her safety, had her FB page taken down.

It defies belief that a Germany that once prized its Aryan identity to the point of committing genocide has gone so far as to encourage its citizens to submit to Islam and shariah. A current television ad asks Germans to “Enjoy difference, start tolerance” by wearing the “beautiful hijab.” Instead of requiring Muslims in Germany to adhere to cultural and social norms, parents have been warned not to let their daughters wear revealing clothing to avoid “misunderstandings” by Muslims who are thought unable to control themselves at the sight of a short skirt or bikini and will harass the girls. Islamic education has even been introduced into German schools. Seven out of Germany’s sixteen federal states now offer some form of Islamic religious education.

The pundits who claim “Holocaust guilt” as the driving force behind the present day pandering to Muslims and their demands are off track. It is implausible to reconcile today’s Muslim “refugee” policies with stubbornly intransigent anti-Jewish sentiments and rationalize it as a reaction to Third Reich atrocities.

The popularity in Germany of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanction (BDS), belies claims of profound Holocaust guilt. The BDS movement singles out Israel for criticism while ignoring the human rights violations of true tyrannical states. It uses false analogies of apartheid and Nazi Germany against Israel and attempts to damage Israel economically and put a stop to academic and cultural exchanges. It seeks to boycott Israel on all levels and to delegitimatize and eliminate Israel as a Jewish state. In July, NGO Monitor discovered that the German government had been donating millions of euros to groups promoting BDS. This, at the same time they were providing generous entitlements to Muslim refugees, despite the fact that they include ISIS supporters and that 13% of the refugees believe that suicide bombings are justified, according to a Pew Research poll.

Today, Germany is the top European trading partner of Iran, with sizable business interests in the Islamic terrorist state. Yet German officials consistently condemn the only democracy in the Middle East, while displaying reticence to criticize Muslim Palestinian murderers of Israeli Jews.

In 2011, the German Foreign Ministry supported a UN Security Council resolution to condemn Israeli settlement construction as “illegal.” Its top diplomat, Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle went so far as to meet with then-President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Tehran.

The fixation on blaming construction projects in Israeli communities for the lack of Middle East peace and blaming Israel, not Palestinian terrorists, while, at the same time, pursuing a lucrative relationship with the Islamic terrorist state of Iran, contradicts the existence of any heartfelt remorse for anti-Semitism, past or present. When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called Chancellor Merkel to express his disappointment about Germany’s position on the U.N. resolution, the Muslim “refugee” champion, who favored forcing Israeli Jews alone to freeze settlement construction, rebuked Netanyahu for “failing to advance peace” by telling him, “How dare you. You are the one who is disappointing us. You haven’t made a single step to advance peace.”

The hubris of this perverted policy in light of the yet un-atoned transgressions of the Holocaust and extant anti-Semitism is stunning. European leaders like Merkel remain mum about continuing anti-Semitism and persist in vilifying the Jewish State, a country on the front lines of the war against Islamic terrorism. At the same time, they pursue policies of Muslim appeasement and prohibit criticism of Islam in the name of multiculturalism. Merkel and her compatriots are thus paving the way for continued crime, civil unrest, the rise of Islam within their borders, and the ultimate destruction of their countries.

Categories: Antisemitism, Germany, Islam and Jews, Islam's war on Jews, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion, Islamisation, Multiculturalism
Tags: Antisemitism, Germany, Islam and Jews, Islam's war on Jews, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion, Islamisation, Multiculturalism

Comments: Be the first to comment

Palestinians: Abbas “The Jew”

October 7, 2016

Palestinians: Abbas “The Jew”, Gatestone Institute, Khaled Abu Toameh, October 7, 2016

The unprecedented outcry over Abbas’s participation in the funeral of an Israeli leader is further proof of the degree to which Palestinians have been radicalized.

This is what happens when you unleash a tidal wave of hate against Israel and its leaders in the media, mosques and public rhetoric. In light of this brainwashing, how do you expect your people to respond when you, in any way, associate with an Israeli leader?

If attending the funeral of an Israeli leader, especially one who devoted the past two decades of his life to peace between Israel and the Palestinians, draws such condemnation, it is easy to imagine the result of a Palestinian leader making a peace overture to Israel.

Even if the current condemnation eventually dies down, it will have sent a message to future Palestinian leaders: “No peace with Israel, not in our time, and not in any time.”

Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas is facing a barrage of criticism for attending the funeral of former Israeli President Shimon Peres in Jerusalem. The fury directed towards Abbas comes as no surprise to those who are familiar with the unrelenting campaign of anti-Israel incitement that has been taking place for many years in Palestinian society.

If attending the funeral of an Israeli leader, especially one who devoted the past two decades of his life to peace between Israel and the Palestinians, draws such condemnation, it is easy to imagine the result of a Palestinian leader making a peace overture to Israel.

President Abbas is now receiving a dose of his own medicine. This is what happens when you unleash a tidal wave of hate against Israel and its leaders in the media, mosques and public rhetoric. This is what happens when you inform your people that Israeli leaders are “war criminals” who ought to be prosecuted before the International Criminal Court. This is what happens when you drive into your people that Jews are desecrating with their “filthy feet” Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem. This is what happens when you accuse Israel of “ethnic cleansing”, “extra-judicial executions” and “poisoning” Yasser Arafat.

In light of this brainwashing, how do you expect your people to respond when you, in any way, associate with an Israeli leader?

1928

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas shakes hands with Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu at the funeral of Shimon Peres, a former president of Israel, on September 30. Abbas is facing a barrage of criticism for attending the funeral, with members of his own party calling it “treason.” (Image source: Ruptly video screenshot)

It is hard to believe that Abbas and his cronies were surprised by the current wave of reprobation. But the degree of vitriol was perhaps not predicted.

Abbas is now getting it from all quarters. The denunciations are coming not only from his political foes in Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), but also from groups and figures belonging to his ruling Fatah faction.

Palestinians say that the 81-year-old Abbas, who is now in his 11th year of his four-year term in office, is facing his most serious challenge to leadership. And there are no signs that the recriminations are subsiding. On the contrary, each day brings with it yet another flood of reproof, prompting Palestinian Authority officials in Ramallah to issue a stiff warning to those who are exploiting the situation to “incite” against Abbas. However, the threats have failed to deter his critics from proceeding with their attacks on him and calling on him to step down.

One of those who have already paid a price for criticizing Abbas’s attendance of the Peres funeral is Lieutenant Colonel Osama Mansour, who holds a senior position in the PA’s Military Liaison Apparatus. In a post on Facebook, the PA officer strongly condemned Abbas’s move:

“If you alone decided to participate in the funeral of the killer of our sons, then you erred. And if you took the decision on the basis of what you were told by your advisors, then they have misled you.”

Hours after the post appeared on Facebook, Mansour was suspended from his job. Later, he was arrested by PA Military Intelligence Service officers who raided his house and conducted a search, during which they destroyed furniture, according to his family. A PA court has since ordered Mansour remanded into custody for fifteen days.

The suspension and subsequent arrest of the officer sparked a new wave of rage against Abbas and his security forces. Palestinians took to social media to protest the crackdown on the officer, hailing him as a hero and denouncing Abbas as a “dog” and Israeli “collaborator.” Some suggested that the officer was worthy of being appointed as a minister in the PA Cabinet for his courageous remarks.

But the move against the senior officer did not deter many Abbas loyalists from coming out against him for going to the funeral of Peres.

Fatah’s “Youth Movement,” known in Arabic as Al-Shabiba, issued a statement calling on Abbas to “apologize” to the Palestinians for committing a “grave mistake.” Abbas’s participation in the funeral was “humiliating and degrading” for the Palestinians and a form of “treason,” according to the statement. The group pointed out that Abbas’s move was in violation of Fatah’s regulations, which envisage the “full liberation of Palestine and eliminating Israeli occupation economically, politically, militarily and culturally.” Addressing Abbas, the group stated:

“Mr. President of the State of Palestine, Mahmoud Abbas. You have committed a crime against our people by equating the executioner with the victim. We will not allow treason to become a viewpoint.”

Several senior Fatah officials sought to distance themselves from Abbas’s decision to attend the funeral of Peres by claiming that they had not been consulted beforehand.

One of them, Tawfik Tirawi, who previously served as commander of the Palestinian Authority’s General Intelligence Service in the West Bank, announced that he was personally opposed to Abbas’s gesture. He clarified that Abbas did not seek the opinion of the Fatah leadership before he went to the funeral:

“Had I been personally consulted as a member of the Fatah Central Committee, I would have made it clear that I am against participation in principle, because this is a funeral of a Zionist who wallowed, from head to toe, in the blood of our people and other Arabs.”

Tirawi went on to describe Peres as the “engineer of the Israeli nuclear project which is designed to foil any plan to retrieve our land.”

The widespread protests against Abbas’s decision to participate in Peres’s funeral took a violent turn on October 3, when PA policemen used force to break up a peaceful demonstration in Ramallah. Organized by the PFLP, the protest was yet another sign of the strong sentiments many Palestinians harbor not only against Abbas, but also Israel.

Palestinian lawyer Muhanad Karajeh, who works for a Ramallah-based human rights organization, reported that he was asked by the organizers to be present in order to document the event. The lawyer stated he was severely beaten by PA security officers during the protest. “I was repeatedly beaten in the face and different parts of the body,” he recounted. “I know some of the officers personally. They tore my suit although I told them I am a lawyer. They humiliated me and cursed me and my profession.”

In a desperate act to counter the spreading protests, Abbas’s aides organized impromptu marches in support of the Palestinian Authority president. The PA leadership summons Fatah activist-thugs to take to the streets whenever it feels the heat. Carrying photos of Abbas and the yellow Fatah flags, scores of Fatah members marched in the streets of Ramallah in a show of force and as a message of warning to those who would censure Abbas. “We stand behind our historic leadership and President Abbas,” declared top Fatah activist Osama Qawassmeh. “Fatah is a red line and it is facing a conspiracy.”

On social media, the attacks on Abbas were quite ruthless. Palestinian activists circulated cartoons ridiculing Abbas. One of them depicted Abbas as a rabbi in Israeli military uniform and a Jewish skullcap weeping next to Peres’s grave. Another cartoon featured an Arab laying a wreath on a boot next to Peres’s photo.

On Twitter, activists launched hashtags called, “Offering Condolences On the Death of Peres is Treason” and “Normalization is Treason.”

Hamas was not silent about Abbas’s “treason.” Mahmoud Zahar, one of the leaders of the Islamist movement in the Gaza Strip, opined that according to Islamic teachings, Abbas qualifies as a Jew. “We hope that he will join Peres in Hell,” Zahar said. “Abbas is an Israeli product. The man who claims to represent all the Palestinian people has stood up against all Palestinians and Arabs.”

A large group of Palestinian and Arab academics, journalists and political activists signed a petition calling on Abbas to apologize for attending the Peres funeral, characterizing the move as an “historic and political mistake.” At least 150 Palestinians and Arabs signed the petition, which stressed that Abbas’s decision came as a “shock” to Palestinians.

The protests have, meanwhile, spread to Palestinian refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and neighboring Arab countries. At the Balata refugee camp near the West Bank city of Nablus, thousands of Palestinians chanted slogans calling for the removal of Abbas from power. The protest came during a funeral of a Palestinian man who had been shot dead a week earlier by Palestinian Authority policemen.

The unprecedented outcry over Abbas’s participation in the funeral of an Israeli leader is further proof of the degree to which Palestinians have been radicalized. Frustration with Abbas and his policies is not new. More and more Palestinians have in recent years expressed rage over his “lenient” policies towards Israel. A particular bone in their throat is the continued security coordination between PA security forces and Israel. They perceive this cooperation with the Israelis as “treasonous”. Many Palestinians are also angry with Abbas for his refusal to share power and pave the way for the emergence of new leaders.

The blame for the radicalization of the Palestinian people lies squarely at the feet of Abbas and the rest of the PA. If you promote boycotts of Israel, expect to be attacked when you break that boycott by associating with any Israeli, alive or dead. Protests tend to subside, but even if the current condemnation eventually does die down, it will have sent a message to future Palestinian leaders. The message is: “No peace with Israel, not in our time, and not in any time.”

Categories: Abbas, Antisemitism, Israel, Israeli security, Israeli settlements, Isreal - Jewish state, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian incitement, Palestinian state, Palestinian terrorists, Palestinians and Jews, Shimon Peres, Two state solution
Tags: Abbas, Antisemitism, Israel, Israeli security, Israeli settlements, Isreal - Jewish state, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian incitement, Palestinian state, Palestinian terrorists, Palestinians and Jews, Shimon Peres, Two state solution

Comments: Be the first to comment

Archives