Posted tagged ‘Holocaust’

The best way to remember the Holocaust is by bringing Muslims to kill American Jews

November 20, 2015

The best way to remember the Holocaust is by bringing Muslims to kill American Jews, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, November 20, 2015

godblesshitler_1

Telling Americans they’re supposed to “atone” for the Holocaust by helping Muslims harass and murder Jews is as backward as trying to apologize for slavery with more slavery.

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

The dumbest “refugees” meme the left has rolled out to date are the comparisons between the Holocaust refugee policies of FDR that kept out Jews and political leaders today who want to take genuine Christian and Yazidi refugees instead of fake economic Muslim migrants who pose serious terrorism threats.

Living in New York City, I’ve lost count of the number of Muslim terror plots against synagogues since 9/11.  The previous Paris attack by Muslims targeted a Jewish supermarket. (Or as Obama put it, “random folks in a deli.”)

Sure it’s #NotAllMuslims. It’s just enough of them that this behavior repeats itself time and time again. Until you end up with European cities like Malmo where there are so many Muslims that the Jews have to flee.

Because Muslims don’t like non-Muslims and really don’t like Jews.

Researchers found that the percentage expressing “favorable views” about Jews was uniformly low: Egypt, 2 percent; Jordan, 2 percent; Pakistan, 2 percent; Lebanon, 3 percent; Palestine, 4 percent; Turkey, 4 percent.

And yes, Muslims in the West also hate Jews.

Belgium: 68 percent of Muslims harbor anti-Semitic attitudes, compared to 21 percent overall;
Spain: 62 percent, compared to 29 percent overall;
Germany: 56 percent, compared to 16 percent overall;
Italy: 56 percent, compared to 29 percent overall;
United Kingdom: 54 percent, compared to 12 percent overall;
France: 49 percent, compared to 17 percent overall.

Theologically, Islam is violently anti-Semitic. Mohammed’s final command was the ethnic cleansing of Jews. The shout Allahu Akbar originated from one of his massacres of Jews.

It’s that simple. Muslims hate Jews. Bringing more Muslims to America makes the country more anti-Semitic. It promotes violence against Jews and harassment of Jews.

be-prepared-for-the-real-holocaust-sign

The numbers are in[NOTE: clicking on the link returns “blank.” — DM)

In France, 73 percent of Jews surveyed said that they had witnessed or experienced anti-Semitism from someone with “Muslim extremist views.”

Why do liberals want to bring this same horrible reality to America?

Telling Americans they’re supposed to “atone” for the Holocaust by helping Muslims harass and murder Jews is as backward as trying to apologize for slavery with more slavery.

The worst possible way to respond to the Holocaust is by promoting the Muslim persecution of Jews in America.

If we want to take the kinds of refugees who are like the Jews in WW2, we should take stateless persecuted minorities, Christians and Yazidis.

Syrian Muslims are not stateless and they are not a minority. They are a supremacist group whose own intolerance of religious differences tore Syria apart. If we bring that intolerance to America, we will all suffer.

mufti-and-hitler

Syrian Muslim migrants are already attacking Syrian Christian refugees in Europe.

Said went across Turkey on foot. He never thought that his problems would only be starting once he made it to Germany.

“In Iran, the Revolutionary Guards have arrested my brother in a house church. I fled the Iranian secret police, because I thought in Germany I can finally freely live by my religion,” says Said. “But in the home for asylum seekers, I can’t even openly admit that I am a Christian.”

Mainly Syrian refugees, mostly devout Sunni Muslims, live in the home. “They wake me before dawn during Ramadan and say that I should eat before the sun comes up. If I refuse, they say, I’m a, kuffar ‘, an unbeliever. They spit at me,” says Said. “They treat me like an animal. And threaten to kill me.”

Why do liberals want to bring this to America? If they don’t care about Syrian Christian refugees, what about gay Syrian refugees?

Rami Ktifan made a snap decision to come out. A fellow Syrian had spotted a rainbow flag lying near the 23-year-old university student’s belongings inside a packed refugee center. The curious man, Ktifan recalled, picked it up before casually asking, “What is this?”

“I decided to tell the truth, that it is the flag for gay people like me,” Ktifan said. “I thought, I am in Europe now. In Germany, I should not have to hide anymore.”

What followed over the next several weeks, though, was abuse — both verbal and physical — from other refugees, including an attempt to burn Ktifan’s feet in the middle of the night.

Bringing these people to America is like bringing Nazis here during the Holocaust to attack minorities here. It’s just evil and wrong.

muslim_antisemitism

Cartoons of the day

October 22, 2015

H/t The Jewish Press

 

holocaust-denial

 

Foreign-press-reports-on-terror-e1445449566860

Netanyahu accurately describes the Mufti’s role in the Holocaust

October 22, 2015

Netanyahu accurately describes the Mufti’s role in the Holocaustelderofziyon2 via You Tube, October 22, 2015

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olZK97f2U9k

Mufti Advised Hitler on Holocaust, Says Middle East Forum Scholar

October 22, 2015

Mufti Advised Hitler on Holocaust, Says Middle East Forum Scholar, Middle East Forum,  October 21, 2015

Noted Middle East Forum scholar Dr. Wolfgang G. Schwanitz responds to criticism of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Schwanitz, a leading expert on ties between Nazis and Islamists, says al-Hajj Amin al-Husaini was instrumental in the decision to exterminate the Jews of Europe.

Philadelphia, PA – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has drawn criticism for comments about the role of al-Hajj Amin al-Husaini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, in conceiving and perpetrating the Holocaust. Indeed, leading Nazi aides testified that al-Husaini was one of the instigators of the genocide. In his 1999 autobiography, a senior Nazi official admitted how he advised Hitler and other leading Nazis, and that he acquired full knowledge of the ongoing mass murder.

Middle East Forum scholar, historian, and author Wolfgang G. Schwanitz added, “It is a historical fact that the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem al-Hajj Amin al-Husaini was an accomplice whose collaboration with Adolf Hitler played an important role in the Holocaust. He was the foremost extra-European adviser in the process to destroy the Jews of Europe.”

Although Schwanitz hadn’t previously heard the dialogue between Hitler and al-Husaini as told by Netanyahu, he says it is absurd to ignore the role played by al-Hajj Amin al-Husaini, a war criminal, in encouraging and urging Hitler and other leading Nazis to exterminate European Jewry.

According to the foremost expert on the ties between Nazis and Islamists, there is much evidence that al-Husaini’s primary goal was blocking all of the ways out of Europe. He pushed Hitler to slam the last doors of a burning house shut.

In their 2014 book Nazis, Islamists, and the Making of the Modern Middle East, published by Yale University Press, Schwanitz and co-author Barry Rubin delve into the deep ties between Hitler and the Grand Mufti:

At their meeting [on November 28, 1941, Hitler and al-Husaini] concluded the pact of Jewish genocide in Europe and the Middle East, and immediately afterward, Hitler gave the order to prepare for the Holocaust. The next day invitations went out to thirteen Nazis for the Wannsee Conference to begin organizing the logistics of this mass murder.

The highly acclaimed book also examined the Grand Mufti’s efforts to prevent Europe’s Jews from finding refuge in the land that would become Israel:

And since any European Jews let out of Europe might later go to Palestine, al-Husaini made it clear that if Hitler wanted Muslims and Arabs as allies he must close Europe’s exits to Jews. At the same time, al-Husaini and Arab rulers also told Britain that if it wanted to keep Arabs and Muslims from being enemies, it must close entrance to Palestine to all Jews. By succeeding on both fronts, al-Husaini contributed to the Holocaust doubly, directly, and from the start.

Never Again’ means standing with Israel

October 14, 2015

Never Again’ means standing with Israel, Jerusalem Post, Dr. Ben Carson, October 14, 2015

ShowImage (13)Ben Carson . (photo credit: MARC ISRAEL SELLEM)

While Israel must be able to go it alone, it should never have to stand alone.  In recent years, personalities and politics have been permitted to negatively affect America’s relationship with Israel despite the fact that the bonds between our two nations are so unique and vital.  When the enemies of Israel and the United States sense rifts between us, they are emboldened and grow even more dangerous.

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

Sometimes it is hard to find the right words to talk about the kind of evil that defies reason and destroys lives.  We saw that evil on full display during the Holocaust perpetuated by the fanatical and tyrannical Nazi regime under Adolph Hitler.  The lessons to be drawn from those darkest of days in world history are plentiful, and as relevant today as they were nearly 80 years ago.

In recent days I suggested that things might have unfolded in a very different manner in Europe had the Jewish people been armed and better able to defend themselves. What would have been the impact on Hitler’s war machine if his victims had had more access to guns? It is something that we will never know for sure.

What I do know however, beyond any shadow of a doubt, is that I never intended for my words to diminish the enormity of the tragedy or in any way to cause any pain for Holocaust survivors or their families.

Both those who perished and those who survived the Nazi camps deserve our deepest reverence, as do the partisan fighters who rose in armed opposition.

It is truly incomprehensive to imagine what these men, women and children endured, and it is impossible for us to put ourselves in their shoes.  This I know, since I have seen some of those actual shoes first-hand at the Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C. and at Yad Vashem in Israel. Those shoes, stripped from just some of the millions of Holocaust victims, are a jarring symbol that humanizes the loss.

They are poignant and painful reminders. I have learned about the Holocaust and studied the history.  So should every American, as well as others all around the world.

When I was in Israel last year, stepping from the dimmed lights of their Holocaust Museum into the bright Jerusalem sunshine underscored for me in a literal and figurative manner that often out of darkness comes light.  And upon reflection, I concluded that there are vital lessons that can be drawn from the Holocaust’s senselessness and savagery.  One is that going back centuries the Jewish people have somehow managed to find a way to overcome every oppressor who sought to destroy them.

Another is that the Jewish people need a state and that they must have the ability to defend themselves in order to ensure that “never again” remains a reality. That state, Israel, has been re-established in their historic homeland.

The founding of the State of Israel in 1948 was an accomplishment that almost never fully came to pass. Just hours after declaring its independence, Arab armies descended on the fledgling state in a war of annihilation only to be overcome by spirited Israeli forces who fought with the conviction and valor of those with nowhere else to go and no other option for survival.

Sadly for Israel, serious threats remain and its people must still live in a perpetual state of readiness to confront those who seek her destruction.  Israel’s armed forces and the country’s qualitative military edge over other nations in the Middle East are essential elements that ensure that the Jewish people continue to have a state of their own and that Israel can thrive.

The Middle East is a region awash with dictatorships, ruthless violence, turmoil and political instability where Israel is the only Western-style democracy.

As Americans we stand with Israel because the Jewish state embodies many of the same aspects that make the United States the greatest nation in the world: commitment to human rights, religious liberty for all citizens, the rule of law, equal rights for women, a free press, a robust judicial system.

America’s relationship with Israel is one with deep benefits for both nations. This proves invaluable every day in term of strategic cooperation and in specific arenas of homeland security and counterterrorism.

In the years to come, America’s ability to defend herself against all enemies, foreign and domestic, will be critical.  Our determination to secure our homeland and to safeguard our citizens against adversaries and radical Islamist terrorist groups must be stronger than ever.

Looking to the future, while remaining mindful of the past, I believe that it is in America’s national security interests to deepen our commitment to Israel.  If elected president in November 2016, I will explore every opportunity to strengthen ties between our two nations and to ensure that Israel always has the tools it needs to protect herself and our shared interests.

While Israel must be able to go it alone, it should never have to stand alone.  In recent years, personalities and politics have been permitted to negatively affect America’s relationship with Israel despite the fact that the bonds between our two nations are so unique and vital.  When the enemies of Israel and the United States sense rifts between us, they are emboldened and grow even more dangerous.

The strength of the U.S.-Israel relationship can and must be strengthened.

That is precisely why I look forward to my first conversation as President of the United States with the Prime Minister of Israel. On that phone call I will utter four important words that reflect the future direction we will take together: “Our relationship is restored.”

The left’s war on Jewish self-defense

October 12, 2015

The left’s war on Jewish self-defense, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, October 12, 2015

ghetto_vilinus

Ben Carson’s comments that armed Jews might have saved lives in the Holocaust by resisting Nazi terror have been met with condescending mockery from the left. The Jewish establishment, a network of wealthy non-profit organizations that claim to represent Jews without ever being chosen by them and while working against their interests, has reacted in the same way as their liberal brethren.

But this establishment has forgotten that it was built on providing guns to Jews.

Historical revisionism is what the left does best. American Jewish history in the last century is a revisionist history in which the heroes are the “establishment”. The truth lies buried in old papers and lost documents. And it’s a deeply compelling truth of how the left suppressed Jewish self-defense.

The Jewish Defense Association was the first time that uptown establishment German Jews and downtown Eastern Jewish immigrants came together. The JDA’s goal had little in common with the empty rubber chicken dinner agendas of what the establishment that grew out of it would become.

Instead the Jewish Defense Association’s mission was simple. Buy guns for Jews.

Its agenda, as reported by the New York Times was, “New massacres are preparing. Our people must be possessed of arms to defend themselves and their honor.”

The year was 1905. The slow bloody beginning of the Russian Revolution was underway. Much like the Syrian Civil War, brutal militias aligned with different factions from the left to the right would arise out of the violence. Like the Christians in Syria, the Jews were an isolated minority. Xenophobia allowed both Communists and Czarists to score populist points by massacring the Jews in violent pogroms.

The Jewish Defense Association responded with a call to arms. Its motto took a part of Hillel’s credo, “If I am not for myself, who will be for me.” Its membership encompassed the left and the right, Zionists and anti-Zionists, religious and secular Jews.

A march of 200,000 Jews to Union Square included 5,000 former Russian soldiers, the volunteer Zion Guards in blue uniforms carrying rifles and the young men of the Manhattan Rifles, begun in the Lower East Side’s Educational Alliance as the Alliance Cadets, which had been formed in imitation of the Jewish Lads Brigade, a group that had put thousands of Jewish boys in the UK through military training.

The final resolutions declared that, “Eternal vigilance is the price of the Jew’s life, and that we urge our people to take up arms against their assailants, and if need be to sell their lives most dearly.”

It concluded with the ringing challenge, “We call Jews everywhere toward the defense of the Jewish people.”

In the words of the New York Times, “A ripple went through the crowd like wind rising to a hurricane which roared “Aye!”

It was undoubtedly the most heavily armed Jewish rally in American history. The sight of all those guns, not to mention early versions of the Israeli flag, would give any modern establishment leader a fit.

And yet the JDA included key establishment figures like Judah Magnes and Louis Marshall. Branches of the organization quickly emerged around the country from Los Angeles to Cincinnati showing how popular the message of Jewish self-defense was.

“In underlining the word ‘Self’ it expresses its conviction of the futility of all kinds of Jewish demonstration which appeal to others,” Rabbi Israel Friedlander, a co-founder of Young Israel who would later be murdered by Communist thugs, wrote.

“The modern Jew, who is otherwise ready to boast of his liberalism… anxiously watches every nod of a king and every smile of a prime minister. The old ‘Shtadlan’ still exists in the form of the ‘influential Hebrew’ who on the backstairs often begs what as a representative of a free nation he ought openly to demand. In times of danger the modern Jews…  appeal to the Spirit of Humanity, Modern Civilization or Brotherhood of Mankind, without themselves moving a finger in their defense.”

“Attacks of bloodthirsty beasts cannot be beaten back by appeals to Humanity and Civilization,” he wrote.”Surely the Self-Defense of the Jews will not at once stop all further bloodshed. Some Jews may still be slain, be destroyed and be beaten. But they will certainly not be put to shame. They will meet violence with violence and teach their enemies the value of a Jewish life.”

But of course it was not to be.

The “Shtadlans,” the institutional establishment figures who had taken over the JDA, would abandon and dismantle it, recreating its corpse as the American Jewish Committee. The AJC would default to exactly the kind of aimless political begging that Rabbi Friedlander had condemned because that made power brokers like Marshall and Magnes feel important. Their goal was not to empower Jews, but to disempower them. The establishment robbed Jews of their power and offered them a chance to donate to a corrupt network of organizations whose only real purpose was making their leaders feel important.

Meanwhile the leftists tore apart the JDA by refusing to work with the Jewish “religious and capitalist elements” of the JDA.

Leading the charge against the JDA were the Bund, an anti-Jewish Marxist organization, and the Forward, a radical left-wing paper that continues to spread hate against Jews and Judaism today.

While the Bund and the Forward’s mendacious Abe Cahan had initially supported the JDA in order to take advantage of Jewish outrage over the pogroms, the Bund’s position firmly opposed self-defense along “national lines” as a distraction from class consciousness and class warfare. And armed Jews, especially Zionists, might end up shooting some of the Bund’s favorite “workers mobs” at a pogrom.

Jewish self-defense threatened the Marxist agenda. The Marxists were willing to exploit Jews through front groups, but were determined to deny them any ability to defend themselves. For its Communist collaboration, the Bund earned the dubious honor of being the last non-Bolshevik Jewish organization allowed to operate on Soviet soil. Eventually it was purged and its members were shot. Others found their way into the Yevsektsiya, the Communist Party’s Jewish Section, tasked with wiping out Judaism by shutting down synagogues and Jewish institutions, and organizing the murder of Rabbis and Zionists.

Despite the interference of the Marxists, Jewish self-defense groups in Russia, such as the Giborei Zion (Heroes of Zion), assembled their own weapons or smuggled them in to resist attacks.

The Communist takeover led to the end of Jewish self-defense groups in Russia. Those who stayed behind were shot or sent to gulags. Many others made their way to Israel where they helped defend Jews against Muslim terror and fought for the independence of the Jewish State. Others played a key role in the resistance to Nazi occupation during WW2 in the Warsaw Ghetto and elsewhere.

The self-defense organizations that had failed in Russia, succeeded in Israel. They did it even though the establishment continued to undermine them by entering into a shameful collaboration with the USSR.

The JDC and the establishment spent most of its money on Soviet agricultural colonies in which Russian Jews were supposed to find a “new life” and a “happy future”. Newspapers were filled with glowing accounts of how happy the resettled Jews were. The scam eventually collapsed when the Communists had gotten enough money out of their useful anti-Zionist idiots. Those Jews who had been resettled, were murdered by the Nazis. Local JDC employees were shot or imprisoned.

At a crucial period, the establishment had starved Jewish settlers of funds that could have been used to dramatically transform Israel. But the pro-Communist left had its own agenda. The eagerness of the JDC to collaborate with the Communists could be found in their cover-up of the murder of Rabbi Friedlander.

Rabbi Friedlander, who advocated Jewish self-defense, had been in the Ukraine as a JDC emissary. He and two other Jews were murdered by the Red Army. The Forward feverishly engaged in a cover-up while the JDC stayed silent to avoid offending the Bolsheviks and their fellow travelers at the Forward.

Jewish self-defense was popular with Jews, but unpopular with the establishment and the far left. The establishment wanted Jews to be dependent on their political access, but refused to use that access to protect Jews by challenging the left, whether that meant standing up to the USSR over its persecution of Jews or to FDR over the Holocaust.

The far left had done everything in its power to suppress a “national solution” to the Jewish question. That is still what it is doing today. Its fight against Israel has nothing to do with the fake nationhood of the “Palestinian” terror groups, but is part of a longstanding campaign to shut down any independent Jewish consciousness because that might interfere with its class consciousness and class warfare.

American Jews are blamed for their apathy to the Holocaust or to Israel. But the good intentions of ordinary Jews were hijacked and continue to be hijacked by a corrupt establishment for its own political agendas. The establishment put FDR first and the left put Stalin first. Today it puts Obama first. It is a parasitic entity that hijacked Jewish self-defense and concerns while costing countless Jewish lives.

Armed Jews alone would not have stopped the Holocaust, but the awareness rising in Jewish circles in 1905 could have led to a movement that would have built a secure Israel and evacuated Jews from danger zones long before the Holocaust. Guns are only the final element of self-defense. Self-defense begins with awareness and mobilization. It’s what you do to prepare for the worst that really counts.

Very little has changed today. The establishment continues to undermine Israel, pursuing left-wing causes at Jewish expense, while pretending that it cares about the Jewish State, even as it undermines its efforts at self-defense. The left wants to destroy Israel. And the establishment helps make it happen.

The establishment ridicules the idea for which those 200,000 Jews gathered, armed and unarmed, over a century ago. Such contempt is fashionable in liberal circles. And yet that old message continues to resound today. “Our people must be possessed of arms to defend themselves and their honor.”

Jews, Islamophobia and compassion for refugees

October 4, 2015

Jews, Islamophobia and compassion for refugees, Israel Hayom, Isi Leibler, October 4, 2015

We should be under no illusions. Most emigrants from Muslim countries have been nurtured ‎with hatred of Western values, contempt for democracy and vicious anti-Semitism. Ironically, ‎Germany’s concern to demonstrate its severance from its evil Nazi past by hosting large ‎numbers of these “refugees” will inevitably strengthen the growing Islamist anti-Semitism in ‎Germany and throughout Europe.‎

We must rationally consider the ‎long-term repercussions of our actions and, while displaying compassion and joining calls for ‎Christians and Yazidis facing genocide in Syria to be accepted as refugees in Western countries, ‎we must also avoid creating a situation in which we lay the foundations for jihadis to achieve ‎their objectives by demographic means and devour the hand that feeds them. ‎

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

It would be inhumane not to react with compassion to the tragic and harrowing depictions of ‎the suffering of refugees. For Jews, more than any others, these images revive horrific ‎memories of their own collective past and the horrors endured by their families and kinsman ‎when an indifferent world effectively collaborated with the Nazis by denying haven to Jews ‎seeking escape from the gas chambers.‎

In this context, it is ironic that the most generous assistance to refugees emanates from the ‎Germans, who — even setting aside the Nazi era — were hardly renowned as adherents of ‎multiculturalism. Many attribute this to a guilt reflex and atonement for Germany’s iniquities ‎during the Holocaust. ‎

It is also not surprising that many Jewish communities in Europe, North America and Australia ‎are currently at the vanguard of those calling on governments to be more liberal and accept ‎greater numbers of refugees. We also hear passionate calls from rabbis and Jewish lay leaders ‎citing religious and ethical teachings that oblige us as Jews to provide haven for refugees. ‎Former British Chief Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks even went to the absurd extreme of making an ‎analogy between Syrian refugees and Jews in Europe during the Holocaust.‎

While reaching out and providing assistance to refugee families in distress is highly ‎commendable, to make analogies between these refugees and Jews facing the Nazi genocidal ‎policies is not merely misleading, but it also trivializes the Holocaust.‎

The Jews who found refuge from the Nazis integrated into their host societies and never ‎sought to impose their Jewish values — in stark contrast to the tensions created in Europe over ‎recent decades by Islamic migration of elements who seek to impose anti-democratic values, ‎restrict freedom of expression and promote the equivalent of Shariah law. In fact, the Jews ‎became the most committed advocates for strengthening democracy and made major ‎contributions to the economic and cultural enrichment of the countries that gave them haven. ‎

Nor can one point to a single example of a second-generation Jew transformed into a terrorist ‎by extremist rabbis, while this has been the case with many Muslim migrants. Indeed, the idea ‎of Jews engaging in terrorism in Western countries is simply inconceivable.‎

That European Union bureaucrats are pressuring European countries to absorb refugees ‎indeed reflects commendable humanitarian intentions. But there is a need to act rationally and ‎appreciate that a growing flood of Muslim migrants to Europe could lead to disaster and even ‎ultimately undermine West European civilization. ‎

That may sound hysterical and, in the current climate, such observations automatically ‎provoke accusations of Islamophobia and lack of compassion. ‎

But the reality is that the overwhelming majority of these “refugees” not only originate from ‎Muslim countries other than Syria, but 70% are estimated to be men of military age. That is to ‎say that the majority of this “refugee” population are not traditional families seeking ‎sanctuary, but men seeking economic enhancement.‎

Furthermore, these large numbers will act as a magnet which could result in profound ‎demographic changes with tens of millions of Muslims seeking to escape Arab countries for ‎better lives in Europe. Taking account of their high fertility rates in a continent with declining ‎birth rates, Islam could yet conquer Europe by demographic means, despite being vanquished ‎militarily hundreds of years ago on the battlefields.‎

Most European countries already face major problems integrating existing Muslim ‎communities, all of which include substantial extremist elements promoting objectives ‎incompatible with Western values and creating major social upheavals and conflicts.‎

We should be under no illusions. Most emigrants from Muslim countries have been nurtured ‎with hatred of Western values, contempt for democracy and vicious anti-Semitism. Ironically, ‎Germany’s concern to demonstrate its severance from its evil Nazi past by hosting large ‎numbers of these “refugees” will inevitably strengthen the growing Islamist anti-Semitism in ‎Germany and throughout Europe.‎

It would be absurd to imagine that these migrants will somehow miraculously be integrated ‎more effectively than their predecessors. We already have the specter of second-generation ‎Muslims educated and nurtured in European countries becoming jihadis, voluntarily serving ‎in terrorist militias in Syria and returning to Western countries to embark on terrorist activities.‎

In this environment, Europe’s current security problems will exponentially increase if large ‎numbers of Islamic refugees descend upon the continent — especially as there are no means ‎of identifying or excluding potential terrorists. The reality is that a significant proportion ‎support the jihadi movement and will never be integrated into democratic societies. ‎

These are indeed difficult problems and there is no easy solution. To allow compassion to ‎determine policy without reference to long-term repercussions reflects a total lack of resolve ‎to maintain democratic values and is almost comparable to lemmings heading to the slaughter ‎‎ — a true recipe for the demise of Western civilization.‎

The reality is that Western democratic values are under threat and that while multiculturalism ‎is an idyllic concept, it can only apply in an environment where all parties accept an open ‎democratic society. Alas, the reality is that the Muslim radicals are gaining strength and while ‎distinctions between moderate and radical Muslims may apply in realpolitik on the ‎international global arena, all evidence indicates the rapid expansion of powerful and surging ‎anti-democratic and jihadi elements in every expatriate Muslim community.‎

This is further highlighted by the astonishing but adamant refusal of the wealthy Arab oil ‎countries — Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, which import vast numbers of Asian workers — ‎to absorb even a minimal number of their own kinsman. They justify their exclusion on the ‎grounds that such people will create disorder and represent security risks.‎

It is also scandalous that the Arab League and the 57-state Organization of the Islamic ‎Conference make pious comments but turn to the non-Muslim international community to ‎resolve issues created by Islamist extremism from their own ranks. The wealthy Muslim states ‎should be obliged to take the lead role in efforts to integrate their own people. ‎

There must be an intensive effort to stabilize the Middle East region. In this context, it should ‎be noted that the barbarism that today dominates the region is a direct outcome of U.S. ‎President Barack Obama’s concern not to alienate the Iranians, and the repudiation of his ‎commitment to act against the Syrians after Bashar Assad used chemical weapons against his ‎own people. ‎

There are no easy solutions but the Western world must seek to resolve these problems ‎without paving the way for anti-democratic forces to destroy our way of life. As Jews, despite ‎identifying with the harrowing images of suffering endured by those seeking to find a better ‎life in Western countries, we must not let ourselves be ruled by emotions or intimidated by the ‎threat that we will be accused of engaging in Islamophobia. We must rationally consider the ‎long-term repercussions of our actions and, while displaying compassion and joining calls for ‎Christians and Yazidis facing genocide in Syria to be accepted as refugees in Western countries, ‎we must also avoid creating a situation in which we lay the foundations for jihadis to achieve ‎their objectives by demographic means and devour the hand that feeds them. ‎

Migration Crisis: Germany Wants to Be “Miss Congeniality”

September 20, 2015

Migration Crisis: Germany Wants to Be “Miss Congeniality,” Gatestone InstituteVijeta Uniyal, September 20, 2015

(Please see also, U.S. to Increase Admission of Refugees to 100,000 in 2017, Kerry Says. — DM)

  • Chancellor Merkel today seems to be promising nothing less than absolution for Germany’s sins of the Holocaust. The problem is, of course, that Muslims are quite different from Jews.
  • German media outlets have suppressed the stories of rampant rape and child abuse among the migrants housed in government-run accommodations.
  • The editor-in-chief defended her decision to suppress the rape story on public TV broadcaster ZDF: “We don’t want to inflame the situation and spread the bad mood. [The migrants] don’t deserve it.” That the poor rape victim deserved justice was apparently of no concern to the broadcaster.
  • Germany under Chancellor Merkel wants to play “Miss Congeniality” at the global scale, and wants Europe to pick up the tab.

Overwhelmed by the unprecedented influx of migrants, Germany has imposed temporary border controls. This temporary halt in new arrivals is “intended to give Germany a chance to catch its breath while at the same time ratcheting up the pressure on other European Union member states to accept a quota system for the distribution of asylum recipients across the bloc,”according to Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann of the German state of Bavaria on public radio. Germany’s move to tighten its border controls, however, is not going to halt millions of migrants already mobilized by Berlin’s suspension of existing asylum rules and its open border policy in the first place.

Horst Seehofer, the leader of Christian Social Union (CSU), the Bavaria-based sister party to Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats (CDU), painted a grim picture, saying that Merkel’s open border policy “was a mistake that will occupy us for a long time yet. I see no possibility of putting the stopper back into the bottle.”

German media is in lockstep with the government, giving happy-talk and a positive spin on migrant crisis of gigantic proportions hitting Europe.

German newspapers and media outlets have suppressed the stories of rampant rape and child abuse among the migrants housed in government-run accommodations. In a recent letter addressed to the Minister of Integration and Social Affairs in the state of Hesse, prominent women’s organizations have described the culture of rape and violence perpetuated by male migrants — right under the nose of German authorities. The letter states:

“It is a fact that women and children [at HEAE accommodation facility, under the supervision of Administrative District of Giessen] are unprotected. This situation is opportune to those men who already regard women as their inferior and treat unaccompanied women as ‘fair game.’ As a consequence, there are reports of numerous rapes, sexual assaults and increasingly of forced prostitution. … These are not isolated incidents.”

According to the letter, women were terrified to walk in the camp even during the day.

The letter, signed by leading officials organizing the settlement of the migrants in the state of Hesse, went virtually unreported in the German media.

For now, the German media can afford to ignore these crimes, committed in makeshift transit centers — away from the public eye. How do the media plan to suppress this reality once some of these criminals are released into communities? Here is a foretaste of the things to come:

Recently the Germany’s top public broadcaster ZDF refused to run a segment about a rape case on its prime time crime show, “Aktenzeichen XY,” which helps law enforcement to gather leads from the general public, on the grounds that the alleged fugitive was of a “darker skin” and might fit the profile of a migrant. The editor-in-chief, Ina-Maria Reize-Wildemann, defended her decision: “We don’t want to inflame the situation and spread the bad mood. [The migrants] don’t deserve it.” That the poor rape victim deserved justice was apparently of no concern to the broadcaster.

Mainstream media in Germany are not merely willing executioners of Merkel’s open border policy, they are ideological players committed to breaking any opposition to the plan.

1253Commenting on Germany’s acceptance of hundreds of thousands of migrants, the popular mainstream newsmagazine Der Spiegel last week portrayed Chancellor Merkel as a Mother Theresa-like figure (left). Pictured at right, a German policeman leads a group of newly arrived migrants.

Germany wants to dictate its stand on migration to other EU member states. First Germany wrecked the existing legal framework by unilaterally suspending the Dublin Protocol, and now it wants Europe to shoulder a “fair share” of migrants who are stampeding into Europe — encouraged by Berlin’s irresponsible stance to begin with.

Chancellor Merkel today seems to be promising nothing less than absolution for Germany’s sins of the Holocaust. “The world sees Germany as a land of hope and opportunities,” she says. “That hasn’t always been the case.” The problem is, of course, that Muslims are quite different from Jews.

German politicians and EU Commissars, however, seem hell bent on imposing quotas on member states – harkening back to the heyday of Soviets jackboots running the Eastern bloc. It may only be a matter of time until some of the reluctant East European states start complying, possibly forced by economic threats and sanctions from Brussels and Berlin.

Germany under Chancellor Merkel wants to play “Miss Congeniality” at the global scale and wants Europe to pick up the tab.

Israeli Preemptive Action, Western Reaction

August 4, 2015

Israeli Preemptive Action, Western Reaction, National Review, Victor Davis Hanson, August 4, 2015

[W]e should conclude that any deal that leads, now or in the near future, to an Iranian bomb is unacceptable to Israel — a nation that will likely soon have no choice but to consider the unthinkable in order to prevent the unimaginable.

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

Will Israel do the unthinkable to stop the unimaginable?

The Obama administration seems peeved that almost everyone in Israel, left and right, has no use for the present Iranian–American deal to thwart Iran’s efforts to get the bomb. Indeed, at times John Kerry has hinted darkly that Israel’s opposition to the pact might incur American wrath should the deal be tabled — even though Kerry knows that the polls show a clear majority of Americans being against the proposed agreement while remaining quite supportive of the Jewish state. President Obama, from time to time, suggests that his agreement is being sabotaged by nefarious lobbying groups, big-time check writers, and neoconservative supporters of the Iraq war — all shorthand, apparently, for pushy Jewish groups.

Obama and his negotiators seem surprised that Israelis take quite seriously Iranian leaders’ taunts over the past 35 years that they would like to liquidate the Jewish state and everyone in it. The Israelis, for some reason, remember that well before Hitler came to power, he had bragged about the idea of killing Jews en masse in his sloppily composed autobiographical Mein Kampf. Few in Germany or abroad had taken the raving young Hitler too seriously. Even in the late 1930s, when German Jews were being rounded up and haphazardly killed on German streets by state-sanctioned thugs, most observers considered such activities merely periodic excesses or outbursts from non-governmental Black- and Brownshirts.

The Obama administration, with vast oceans between Tehran and the United States, tsk-tsks over Iranian threats as revolutionary hyperbole served up for domestic consumption. The Israelis, with less than a thousand miles between themselves and Tehran, do not — and cannot. Given the 20th century’s history, Israel has good reason not to trust either the United States or Europe to ensure the security of the Jewish state. Israel has learned from the despicable anti-Semitism now prevalent at the U.N. and from the increasing thuggery directed at Jews in Europe that the world at large would shed crocodile tears over the passing of Israel on the day of its destruction, but, the next day, sigh and get right back to business in a “that was then, this is now” style.

In 1981 the Israelis took out the Iraqi nuclear reactor — sold to Saddam Hussein by France. They were ritually blasted as state terrorists and worse by major U.S. newspapers and at the United Nations — though not by Khomeini’s Iran, which earlier had failed in a preemptive bombing strike to do much damage to the Osirak reactor. Today, in retrospect, most nations are privately glad that the Israelis removed the reactor from a country that had hundreds of years’ worth of natural-gas and oil supplies and no need for nuclear power — and that is now under assault from ISIS.

In 2007, when the Israelis preempted once more, and destroyed the al-Kibar nuclear facility that was under construction in Syria, the world, after initial silence, again in Pavlovian fashion became outraged at such preemptive bombing. The global chorus claimed that there was no intelligence confirming that the North Koreans had helped to launch a Syrian uranium-enrichment plant.

Yet eight years later, most observers abroad once again privately shrug that Bashar Assad most certainly had hired the Koreans to build a nuclear processing plant — and are quietly satisfied that the Israelis took care of it. Note that the al-Kibar site lies in territory now controlled by ISIS. One can imagine a variety of terrifying contemporary scenarios had the Israelis not preempted. Most of those who condemned Israel’s attack would now be worrying about an ISIS improvised explosive device, packed with dirty uranium, that might go off in a major Western city.

In all these cases, the Israelis assumed that Western intelligence about nuclear proliferation in the Middle East was unreliable. They took for granted that Westerners automatically would blame Israelis for any preemptive attack against an Islamic nuclear site. And they likewise concluded that, privately and belatedly, Westerners would eventually be happy that the Israelis had belled the would-be nuclear cat.

But in a larger sense, the Israelis also recall the sad story of the West and the Holocaust less than 75 years ago — a horror central to the birthing of a “never again” Jewish state. By 1943, the outlines of the Nazis’ Final Solution were well known in both Washington and London; Jews were already being gassed at German death camps in Poland in an effort to kill every Jew from the Atlantic Ocean to the Volga River.

It was also a matter of record that the major Western democracies — America, Britain, and prewar France — had refused sanctuary to millions of Jewish refugees who had been stripped of their property by the Third Reich and told to leave Germany and its occupied territories. In some notorious cases, shiploads of Jews were turned away after docking in Western ports and were sent back to Nazi-occupied Europe, where the passengers were disembarked and soon afterward gassed. Moreover, Israelis understand that Hitler’s Final Solution would have been far more difficult to implement without the active participation of sympathetic anti-Semites in occupied European nations, who volunteered to round up their own Jews and send them on German trains eastward to the death camps.

In the case of the United States, anti-Semitic or indifferent officials high up in the State Department and elsewhere within the Roosevelt administration went out of their way to hide data about the plight of Jewish refugees, and circumvented protocol in order to refuse entry into the United States to the vast majority of Jews fleeing the Holocaust. The British were nearly as exclusionary, and also did their best to stop Jewish refugees from fleeing to Palestine to escape the death camps.

As it happens, Fascist and Nazi-allied Japan was sometimes more sympathetic to Jews desperate to leave Europe than were the Allies. Indeed, Hitler and his Nazi top echelon constantly bragged about the fact that neither the Allied powers nor occupied European nations wanted to take Jews off Berlin’s hands — proof, in Nazi eyes, of a supportive wink-and-nod attitude to the Holocaust. Each time the Allies published a threat to the Nazi leadership that there would be an accounting and war-crime trials after the war, Hitler, Goebbels, and Himmler remembered that none of these outraged governments wanted to accept Jews themselves, and thus they must secretly still have remained indifferent to their fate. Thus the threats rang hollow to the Nazis, and the crematoria burned on.

By mid-1943 at the latest, American authorities had comprehensive knowledge — from firsthand reports by camp escapees, from photo reconnaissance, and from brave Germans who passed on detailed inside information through the neutral Swiss — of the vast scope of the Holocaust. They were constantly beseeched by international Jewish advocates to at least bomb the crematoria and gas chambers at Auschwitz, which were within range of the Allies’ four-engine heavy bombers. Indeed, an Allied bombing mission would on occasion hit one of the key German factories that surrounded Auschwitz itself — to the delight of the doomed inmates of the death camps.

Given that eventually over 10,000 Jews per day were being gassed and cremated at Auschwitz, almost every Jewish leader advocated bombing the camps to destroy the rail links, the intricate camp machinery, and the SS guards so essential to the perpetration of the Holocaust. Again, such pleas were met with both indifference and lies, once more offered up by heralded American statesmen like U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Breckinridge Long and well-connected consigliere and future “wise man” John McCloy of the War Department. The latter falsely argued at times that the camps were not really in reach of Allied bombers, or that the numbers of Jews being slaughtered were exaggerated, or that the diversion of even one or two missions from the strategic bombing of Germany would hamper the entire Allied war effort.

After the war, with rising Cold War tensions and a need to ensure that the West German public remained firmly in the new NATO alliance, many Nazi war criminals either were let out of prison early, had their sentences commuted, or were never charged at all. For all the Western empathy about the horrific Final Solution, Jews remembered (1) that it would once have been possible to save many fleeing Jews, if only the democracies had just allowed in political refugees; (2) that many of the death camps could have been leveled by Allied bombers in their last year or two of full-bore operation, saving perhaps 2 to 3 million of the doomed; and (3) that the political expediency of the postwar Western alliance had trumped bringing Nazi war criminals to a full accounting for their horrendous acts.

The Israelis have taken to heart lots of lessons over the last 70 years. They have concluded that often the world quietly wants Israel to deal with existential threats emanating from the Middle East while loudly damning it when it does. They have learned from the experience of the Holocaust that, for good or evil, Jews are on their own and can never again trust in the world’s professed humanity to prevent another Holocaust. And they are convinced that they can also never again err on the side of the probability that national leaders, with deadly weapons in their grasp, do not really mean all the unhinged things they shout and scream about killing Jews.

Given all that, we should conclude that any deal that leads, now or in the near future, to an Iranian bomb is unacceptable to Israel — a nation that will likely soon have no choice but to consider the unthinkable in order to prevent the unimaginable.

Op-Ed: Obama Knows Iran will Use its Nukes on Israel

July 28, 2015

Op-Ed: Obama Knows Iran will Use its Nukes on Israel, Israel National News, Mark Langfan, July 28, 2015

(The very notion that Iran wants to send the Jews of Israel to the ovens is ridiculous. Iran just wants to send the ovens to the Jews of Israel. Since they won’t even have to be transported and shoved in, why make a big deal of it? Hmmmm. — DM)

At first, Obama said we couldn’t talk about his Iranian Nuke Deal unless it was finalized.  Then, Obama said we couldn’t talk about his Iranian Nuke Deal unless we read it all – and simply didn’t disclose all of his side-deals.  Now, he says Mike Huckabee’s comparison of shipping the Jews of Israel to the new ovens of the Iranian Auschwitz-Nuke is “ridiculous.”

Perhaps Obama wants to wait until Iran nukes Israel for it to be politically correct to call Iran’s wiping Israel off the map a “Holocaust.”  But, make no mistake, Obama knows full well that Iran intends to wipe Israel off the map with its Obama-blessed Nukes.

Come on, does anyone (except the American left-wing cool-aid drinking Jews) really believe that Iran will abide by their “voluntary” protocols under the Vienna announcement?  Of course not!  Are Obama or any of the European Unionleaders so rank stupid and naïve that they think Iran won’t build a bomb just like North Korea?  Does anyone not know that one of Iran’s first targets will be to annihilate Israel?

Of course Obama knows Iran will seek to annihilate Israel, so that must be what Obama wants.

Obviously, Obama doesn’t care if he enables the murder of another 6 million Jews through a Palestinian State’s chemical Sarin-tipped Katyusha rockets, or an Iranian Nuke.  It’s simple: Obama wants Israel and its Jews offed.  What is so difficult to understand about that?  Every move Obama has made from the very first moment of his presidency has been to irreparably harm Israel and Saudi Arabia, and irrevocably empower Iran.  It doesn’t matter what Obama’s specific motivation is.  Obama may believe in Farrakhan’s and Rev. Wright’s virulent Chicago anti-Semitism; Obama may be merely steeped in anti-British anti-Colonialism; or both.  All that matters is Obama is acting in ways that will allow others to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. If Obama walks like a Jew-hater, arms Iran like a Jew-hater, and creates a PA “West Bank” State like a Jew-hater, he’s a Jew-hater.

But, now here come the American Leftist Jewish “Holocaust” speech-police like Debbie Wasserman-Schulz who say one isn’t allowed to invoke the “Holocaust” or “Auschwitz” into a political debate when it is Iran’s highest leaders who have repeatedly, openly, and notoriously injected into the political debate that they intend to wipe Israel off the map.  And, in plain sight, Obama is crowning Iran, the greatest openly Holocaust-threatening, terror-state in the world, the nuclear hegemon-state of the Middle East because Iran is “stable.” I guess Obama forgot he helped quash a popular uprising there  as his first foreign policy debacle.

And, let’s also not forget that Iran’s “stability” in Syria has murdered over 250,000 Syrian Sunnis. The Hiroshima “Little Boy” Uranium Gun-type Nuke killed about 150,000 Japanese, and the Nagasaki “Fat Man” Plutonium Implosion Nuke killed about 40,000 Japanese. So, Iran has already killed 2 Hiroshima’s worth of Syrian Sunnis or 6 Nagasaki’s worth of Syrian Sunnis.  So, the 150 Billion Dollars Obama is giving Iran is actually a weapon of mass destruction in itself.  All of the additional hundreds of thousands of dead Sunnis spilt by Iran’s malign use of the 150 Billion dollars is on the hands of Obama, Susan Rice, John Kerry and Samantha Power.

What Is so loathsome, is that every word, every sentence Obama says  is a lie tainted with a patina of truth, Take for example Obama’s statement that Iran had enough enriched Uranium for 10 nukes, but it will be cut down under the supposed deal.  When exactly did Iran enrich 10 nukes worth of Uranium?  Iran enriched the uranium solely in the last 6 years because the CIA’s published declassified number had virtually zero enriched Uranium when Obama became President.  And, Iran’s method to cut down its enrichment is a chemical process that can easily be reversed by a chemical process.

And you have to love Obama’s “If Iran’s ‘stable’ give them nukes” foreign policy.  Under Obama’s “Stability” theory, Obama would have also armed Hitler with an arsenal of nukes because Hitler’s Nazi Germany was very stable.

In short, Obama knows full well that Iran is building an Auschwitz-Nuke that it wants to use to annihilate Israel; and, Obama is doing everything he can to ensure that it can do so.

Don’t let Jew-haters like Obama and Wasserman-Schultz turn “Never again,” into “Too Late.