Harry's Place

Must be a bit of both. These scummy people are filled up with ‘glamorous’ images of Muslim insurgents maltreating their hostages, plus they want lots of dosh. Do they have the death penalty in France?

How many posts is it going to take for Ronstadt and HB to come out and say that this is just justifiable rage against Israel’s Palestinian genocide, that it’s not antisemitic, that it’s an over-reaction and so forth?

The flying-squad to mitigate the significance of any violence against Jews is on its way!

I await with interest the ‘tipping point’ – as I believe the fashionable phrase is – when Jews have finally had enough of the brewing Muslim anti-Semitism across Europe. They might reflect on the old, proverbial statement of the quintessential nature of the Englishman; Step on my foot and I’ll apologise. Step on my foot again and I will apologise again. Step on my foot a third time and I will knock you down.

“I hate those motherf – - -ers, those f – - -ing Jewish bastards . . . I would like to get a synagogue,” Cromitie told an informant, according to a criminal complaint.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05212009/news/regionalnews/chilling_terror_plot_thwarted_170280.htm

As an aside I am getting really tired of the ‘-porn’ meme or whatever you call it. Housing porn, horror porn… please.

Dammit why can’t I ever remember to change my user name back.

I understand that Jew hatred is rife again in France, and that many French Jews are thinking of leaving; but then France has twice the Muslim population of the UK – both absolutely and proportionately – and Jew hatred is sanctioned in Islamic jurisprudence, so it’s hardly surprising that it’s endemic amongst Muslim population groups. France also has a running Intifada.

Both the Jew hatred and Intifada are distinctly under reported. I guess it’s Lefty angst at work.

Don’t publish the images, please.

Why? They’ve been published, already.

It was a plot to rob a Jew because – Fofana has made it quite clear -they thought Jews are rich or in any case “the community will pay”. Fofana himself is an insane, megalomaniac simpleton and has now turned up in court in a new almost comedy – were it not for the context – jihadist persona. But he had a mind-boggling number of accomplices of both genders who all had no problems with the plan. In the end he realised that he would not get any money and decided to release him. But they mistreated him so badly on the way back that he died. I don’t think we’ll ever find out exactly what happened in the car. But no, the plan was not to kill him from the start obviously.

The whole thing is an almost perfect (as in “perfect storm”) synthesis of old-school, thuggish antisemitism and its modern ethnic-tinged avatar.

Is the photo up there? I am very glad my browser blocks pictures.

It is a troubling and tragic case.

Another similar case just this month in America, where a young student was repeatedly shot by an anti semite so consumed with hatred he had to rampage through a bookshop and kill a Jew:

http://ajewwithaview.wordpress.com/2009/05/08/jewish-student-gunned-down-on-us-campus/

Brilliant piece by Mark Steyn here, on the ever rising anti semitism in Europe: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/israel-today–the-west-tomorrow-15134

Let’s just say that, had the crime been perpetrated by those of an altogether lighter hue against a victim with melanin to spare, I don’t think anybody would dare question a ‘racial’ motive.

In this case, we see what looks to be the inchoate gnashing of P.C. crime definition in the 21st century. Those who persist in the permanent delusionary state of considering ‘racism’ as the evil spawn of prejudice and ‘power’ should take heed.

and Jew hatred is sanctioned in Islamic jurisprudence

Whilst the phrase Islamic jurisprudence is broad enough to encompass the fatwas of Abu Hamza and the seminal works of Imam ash-Shafi’i, I’m positive that ‘Jew hatred’ is not in any way, shape or form sanctioned in either modern ‘mainstream’ or classical fiqh.

@Tabitha

From the Commentary mag. link there’s an ad. for The Jewish Odyssey of George Eliot by the intriguingly named Gertrude Himmelfarb…a pseudonym? Either way, what a magical name.

The antisemitism displayed in court is an “act” to what purpose?

It doesn’t mean that you should post them on your blog.
We are not animals.

Winning popular support perhaps?

“However, I am now finding it increasingly difficult to avoid the conclusion that Ilan Halimi’s death was not a robbery that ended in the murder of a Jew, but a plot to murder a Jew, simpliciter.”

I am not finding it the least bit difficult to conclude what their motives were but I am finding it difficult to look at these Images

Robbers don’t photograph their victims in the painfully graphic ‘we are all Islamists now’ way, they shoot them or stab them, take the money and run.
Only deranged Psychopaths, which by the way, is a mental disease from which the Islamist hero’s of the far left are not immune, would treat another human being in this vile and inhuman manner.

No matter what ‘the far left’ think is the root cause of these vile creatures ‘grievances’ only deranged evil bastards act in this way. Anyone who thinks otherwise is not only a delusional idiot they are my enemy and I really don’t care as to which side of the political divide they claim to support, what ‘religion’ they follow, what cultural or ethnic minority they belong to or what colour their skin is, they are my enemy now and will be until the day I die.

Disgusting evil scum.

Gertrude Himmelfarb…a pseudonym?

No, and a lovely name. She is a historian and also the wife of Irving Kristol, the famous neo-conservative. I’ve read her Roads to Modernity, which contrasted the British, American and French enlightenments.

I’ve read her Roads to Modernity, which contrasted the British, American and French enlightenments.

Sounds fascinating…thanks for your reply.

Like Sue R, I should think it’s a mixture of anti-semitism plus enrichment. People who commit these sort of crimes are rarely master criminals with a full worked out rationale anyway.

Some elements of the French media are clearly trying to play down or explain away the anti-semitic element, in the same way that some people have difficulty acknowledging that, say, black people can be racist in relation to whites. It’s part of the worldview that pigeonholes minorities as victims.

Tusker
21 May 2009, 10:48 am

Whilst the phrase Islamic jurisprudence is broad enough to encompass the fatwas of Abu Hamza and the seminal works of Imam ash-Shafi’i, I’m positive that ‘Jew hatred’ is not in any way, shape or form sanctioned in either modern ‘mainstream’ or classical fiqh.

——–

I’m pretty sure it is. While Jews, like Christians, are al-khitab (’people of the book’) therefore preferable to the polytheists and idolators, the Jews are ‘despised as pigs and apes’, ‘those who have earned Allah’s wrath’ and the ‘killers of prophets’ (Jesus and Mohammed). Also a quick look at the Hamas Charter confirms this.

As an aside, the term ‘feuj’ is ‘verlain’ (l’invers) French slang for ‘juif’. ‘Mere’ (mother) is ‘rem’ and ‘femme’ (woman) is ‘moeuf’.

As an aside,

No, and a lovely name. She is a historian and also the wife of Irving Kristol, the famous neo-conservative. I’ve read her Roads to Modernity, which contrasted the British, American and French enlightenments.

She’s also quite good on the subject of “postmodernist history” which we have often discussed in passing before here:

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=DMGhFjSVVoAC&pg=PA158&lpg=PA158&dq=Gertrude+Himmelfarb+postmodernist&source=bl&ots=YIUUlICAVw&sig=MNl9Nv2kgzAsJMRv-xtVb2PT3sY&hl=en&ei=akUVSt32B43LjAff4p2FDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1

Just curious. Is planning to blow up a synagogue motivated by antisemitism?

NEW YORK – The New York City police commissioner says four men wanted to commit jihad when they plotted to bomb a Jewish temple and shoot down military planes in upstate New York.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090521/ap_on_re_us/us_temple_plot

A curious double murder case is currently in the news in Brazil. On April 20, two students were shot dead in their car: Bernardo Dayrell Pedroso, 24, and his girlfriend, Renata Waechter Ferreira, 21. It happened just outside Curitiba, in Paraná, a state largely settled in the early twentieth century by immigrants from Germany and Poland.

It turns out that Pedroso was a prominent member of a neo-Nazi movement called “Neuland”, based in Sao Paulo, and that the killings were carried out by one or more members of the organization, allegedly under orders from its head, Ricardo Barollo, 34, who is now under arrest, along with Jairo Maciel Fischer, 21, suspected of being the hitman, and four others. Fischer was arrested in a town named Teutônia in Rio Grande do Sul, another state where Germans made up a sizable proportion of the early settlers.

The motive for the killing is said to be that Pedroso was emerging as the leader of a splinter group within the organization, and that Barollo feared a challenge to his own leadership.

http://zerohora.clicrbs.com.br/zerohora/jsp/default.jsp?uf=1&local=1&section=Geral&newsID=a2500340.xml

Schmuel, the guy is a narcissistic psychopath. I think he has realised he is going down for life and wants to do a big show of the trial, play the flamboyant monster. (As a result it is now going on behind closed doors.) Of course it is also possible he has made “new friends” in prison…

I think there is a slight mistranslation here somewhere in the report chain: “faire son numéro” means having an act but more in the sense of playing to the gallery.

I understand that Jew hatred is rife again in France, and that many French Jews are thinking of leaving; but then France has twice the Muslim population of the UK – both absolutely and proportionately – and Jew hatred is sanctioned in Islamic jurisprudence, so it’s hardly surprising that it’s endemic amongst Muslim population groups. France also has a running Intifada.

In 2007 Canada’s CBC network did a documentary on the precarious situation for Jews in France. It is very dangerous for Jews to signal even in small ways their identity in certain parisian neighbourhoods. It’s not just that the “no-go” areas for Jews expand every year, it’s also the fact the attackers get bolder and are now invading old Jewish neighbourhoods to vandalise property and harrass people.

The blame for this resurgence of anti-semitism can be squarely laid at the feet of leftists. Even as late as the 1990s France,s cultural elites were producing films like “La Haine” ( The Hatred) whose plots revolved around an alliance between victimised Arabs forming alliances with victimised Jews to fend of evil white racists.

Even then it was already the antipodes of France’s social reality, and I watched it in utter amazement and just pondered the depth of denial that lay behind it.

It was like a fantasy, nostalgic almost, and an effort to remain in a comfortable ‘68 past, one in which good and evil, progressive and fascist, were so easy to distinguish from each other.

There was an attempted bombing of a synagogue in New York this week. The U.S. press would not identify the perpetrators as Muslim.
An overall state of denial is permeating the West. Anti-semitism and more specifically Muslim anti-semitism does not exist if we pretend it does not.

I was raised on the phrase “never again.”
It is happening again.

Stan

STAN

Eloquently put.

Then fellers in NYC are – er – persons of slave descent who converted to Islam while doing time.

The ‘explosive’ they carried was bogus stuff supplied by the FBI props room, as was the shoulder-fired missile.

The whole yarn is, in short, a sting or an entrapment. Nasty coves, alright but gullible and easy led.

FBI operatives will be decorated, feted and promoted. The perps will go back into the slammer. End of story.

I’m pretty sure it is. While Jews, like Christians, are al-khitab (’people of the book’)

‘Ahl ul-Kitaab (أهل الكتاب)

therefore preferable to the polytheists and idolators, the Jews are ‘despised as pigs and apes’, ‘those who have earned Allah’s wrath’ and the ‘killers of prophets’ (Jesus and Mohammed). Also a quick look at the Hamas Charter confirms this.

Whilst your fleeting journey through the genres of Qur’an commentary and Islamist texts might convince some, I can assure you that, even for the more zealous adherents of the ‘neo-Zahiri’ school (extreme literalists), a simple Qur’an quotation (and certainly not the secular Hamas charter) will not cut the mustard in terms of legal reasoning. The study and implementation of fiqh extends to literally thousands of treatises, authored over some 1300 years; the procedures are a good deal more nuanced and the majority of rulings more elaborate than you’d have us believe.

Even as late as the 1990s France,s cultural elites were producing films like “La Haine” ( The Hatred) whose plots revolved around an alliance between victimised Arabs forming alliances with victimised Jews to fend of evil white racists.

Yes, John, there’s a certain bitter irony in the scene where Said addresses Vinz’s sis with the chilling words: “I’ll cut your throat, hang you up and you’ll drown in your blood!” cos she told him off pour fumer le shit. Still, they ‘were’ all mates in the film.

The photo should be widely published. While extremely disturbing, it is not gruesome. By not publishing it, you are protecting the terrorists/criminals more than respecting Ilan and his family. Anti-semitism in France does not get the coverage it should by the media.

Just read the story about the NY terrorists on the BBC. One of them was of Afghani origin although he had assumed an Anglo name. I’m sorry, but from what I read it seems like they were entrapped. This could be a very divisive case. Aren’t there enough genuine psychopathic would-be terrorists in New York without tricking people into thinking they are involved in jehad?

Another similar case just this month in America, where a young student was repeatedly shot by an anti semite so consumed with hatred he had to rampage through a bookshop and kill a Jew:

But for the fact that he murdered a young Jewish woman, I don’t know how similar the cases are. The facts are not all in and Morgan, who turned himself in, comes across as more psychotic as opposed to the sociopaths in France. But, again, not enough is known about Morgan. In the long run, it probably doesn’t matter: If you are being targeted for death because you are a Jew, the motivation doesn’t matter.

I hesitate to mention this of the great Gertrude Himmelfarb, as nowadays that is not a recommendation, but she is a favourite writer of Gordon Brown.

I’m sorry, but from what I read it seems like they were entrapped.

They were not entrapped. Entrapment is only a defense if law enforcement engaged in conduct that would cause a normally law-aiding person to commit the crime. These guys have extensive criminal histories. Merely giving them an opportunity to commit the crime is not entrapment.

I’m sorry, but from what I read it seems like they were entrapped.

Yes they were entrapped, but only after they had made strenuous efforts to actually commit the offenses for real. From what I can glean all four had every intention of committing mass murder.

One of the best ways to nab people intent on mass murder is through a sting operation. A successful sting operation ( and ensuing conviction) can be carried off without any need whatsoever to ‘encourage’ or egg-on the perps in any way that could falsify, embellish or skew the intent to murder.

Yes, John, there’s a certain bitter irony in the scene where Said addresses Vinz’s sis with the chilling words: “I’ll cut your throat, hang you up and you’ll drown in your blood!” cos she told him off pour fumer le shit. Still, they ‘were’ all mates in the film.

There is an excellent French-Canadian website called Pointe Du Bascule whoch regularly features videos and newsreports from France.

A couple months ago they ran a french newsreport about the constuction of a large mosque and islamic school, bith gov’t subsidised.

The reporter gushed on about the growth of France’s diversity and multiculturalism and the mosque’s head told the reporter just about every schmarmy, multi-culti line a blinkered leftist’s ears would want to hear.

There was only one probleme, and it was a probleme the reporter failed to notice; on top of the mosque’s dome flew a large green flag, the flag of Hamas.

Yes they were entrapped, but only after they had made strenuous efforts to actually commit the offenses for real.

They were not entrapped.

One of them was of Afghani origin although he had assumed an Anglo name

I’ve seen a picture of this guy. He looks African-American. Other accounts had suggested that his PARENTS had been in Afghanistan when pregnant with him: and so he felt a link to the country.

I read afghan father and black mother.

CNN reports that his parents live in Afghanistan ie at the current moment. Pretty rum though, I mean who’d choose to live in a war zone when you could live in the States?

It’s part of the worldview that pigeonholes minorities as victims.

With of course the one notable exception – Jews. Globally outnumbered by Muslims 80:1.

It’s now fine in polite company to see Jews as perpetrators rather than victims, subscribing to Mein Kampf boilerplate is fine and dandy, hell you even see it in publically funded theatrical performances punted by British Left leaning newspapers.

A horrible crime, indeed. Motivated by anti-Semitism? No doubt, in my mind.

Pret wrote:

How many posts is it going to take for Ronstadt and HB to come out and say that this is just justifiable rage against Israel’s Palestinian genocide, that it’s not antisemitic, that it’s an over-reaction and so forth?

That’s a truly horrific statement to make, even more so in the absence of the accused.

And on that absence, I’m appealing once more to HP’s sense of fairness regarding what appears to be the banning of HB, at least at posts published by Your View.

I raised the matter at one of Your View’s posts, referring to HB by his full moniker, by means of two respectful comments, neither of which actually appeared (I’m now assuming that HP’s moderating algo is triggered into non-publication when HB’s full handle is contained in the comment or identifier). I’d appreciate clarification of this matter.

“Liberty, if it means anything, is the right to tell people what they don’t want to hear”

Indeed.

Tusker
21 May 2009, 1:29 pm

I’m pretty sure it is. While Jews, like Christians, are al-khitab (’people of the book’)

‘Ahl ul-Kitaab (أهل الكتاب)

therefore preferable to the polytheists and idolators, the Jews are ‘despised as pigs and apes’, ‘those who have earned Allah’s wrath’ and the ‘killers of prophets’ (Jesus and Mohammed). Also a quick look at the Hamas Charter confirms this.

Whilst your fleeting journey through the genres of Qur’an commentary and Islamist texts might convince some, I can assure you that, even for the more zealous adherents of the ‘neo-Zahiri’ school (extreme literalists), a simple Qur’an quotation (and certainly not the secular Hamas charter) will not cut the mustard in terms of legal reasoning. The study and implementation of fiqh extends to literally thousands of treatises, authored over some 1300 years; the procedures are a good deal more nuanced and the majority of rulings more elaborate than you’d have us believe.

———–

So the literalist interpretation is that Islam hates Jews? And a more elaborate and nuanced reading means that it doesn’t. That’s very reassuring.

Maybe you should be directing your subtle appreciation if Islamic fiqh to the people who both ‘misinterpret’ AND act on them – ie muslims.

A muslim client once told me that doing business with Jews is a great sin, but sadly inevitable as they control all the money

Fabian:

“It doesn’t mean that you should post them on your blog. We are not animals.”

Fabian, your humanity does you credit. But HP is right to publish this picture.

Imagine a 1945 newspaper article, describing at length and in vivid detail, the hell that the Allied troops discovered in Bergen-Belsen. One single picture could convey that horror more vividly and more immediately than a million such articles.

Without the photo, Ilam Halimi’s terrible ordeal could be read by some just as his torturers want it to be read, as a robbery gone wrong. With it, there can be no such illusion. Sometimes a picture really is worth a thousand words.

Oh and by the way, the part of the Hamas charter I was referring to was not secular but scriptural:

“The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them; until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!”

cited by Bukhari and Muslim

By all means produce me the elaboration in Islamic fiqh that gives this a more nuanced meaning. Bukhari and muslim are trusted hadith.

Sue R
21 May 2009, 2:02 pm

Entrapped? Or caught out for a history of making suspect statements? These sorts of operations are pretty expensive to run and are not conducted at random.

Try some other source than the Beeb: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/nyc-police-terror-suspects-wanted-to-commit-jihad/article1145909/

James Cromitie, David Williams, Onta Williams and Laguerre Payen, all of Newburgh, were charged with conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction within the United States and conspiracy to acquire and use anti-aircraft missiles, the U.S. attorney’s office said.

“They stated that they wanted to commit jihad,” Kelly said. “They were disturbed about what happened in Afghanistan and Pakistan, that Muslims were being killed.”

Kelly said he believed the men knew each other through prison. They had long rap sheets for charges including drug possession and assault.

An official said that three of the men are converts to Islam. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the person was not authorized to discuss details of the investigation. Three of the defendants are U.S. citizens and one is of Haitian descent, officials said.

Mr. Payen occasionally attended a Newburgh mosque. His statements on Islam often had to be corrected, according to Assistant Imam Hamin Rashada, who met Mr. Payen through a program that helps prisoners re-enter society.

I hesitate to mention this of the great Gertrude Himmelfarb, as nowadays that is not a recommendation, but she is a favourite writer of Gordon Brown

No need to hesitate. The PM’s reportedly got a forensic memory for history…he is a DPhil after all. No, despite all his faults as PM and as Chancellor, I’m sure he’s a nice bloke deep down and also that he’s extremely bright. I don’t share the pleasure with many in the media of calling him all the names under the sun and fostering hatred towards the man…that’s not on in my book. Like Denis Macshane, another bright individual, I reserve my ire for his views. For instance, Denis is also a pretty sound chappy by all accounts, except…for his position on the EU, when he turns into a complete arse.

@Monty/Cobblers

So the literalist interpretation is that Islam hates Jews? And a more elaborate and nuanced reading means that it doesn’t. That’s very reassuring.

Is that what I said? You’ll notice I employed the word ‘even’.

Is there one ‘literal’ interpretation? No, of course not. And nor was there ever, even in Muhammad’s time.

Maybe you should be directing your subtle appreciation if Islamic fiqh to the people who both ‘misinterpret’ AND act on them – ie muslims.

There’s nothing wrong with reading about and studying Islamic fiqh – and I do advocate moderate positions in matters fiqh whenever I’ve the opportunity and the wherewithall. As a Christian, it’s much easier for me to approach historical fiqh objectively than it is for many Muslims.

Only a small minority of Muslims misinterpret the texts either deliberately or having been persuaded to accept a particular ruling. Note that ’small minority’ does not equate to ‘Muslims in general’ in English.

A muslim client once told me that doing business with Jews is a great sin, but sadly inevitable as they control all the money

What a sad fellow! I do hope that he recanted his anti-Semitism and Jew-hatred…did you happen to pick up a copy of his legal reasoning whereby he used Islamic sources, scholars of good standing and his own intellect to arrive at this conclusion?

If a Christian makes anti-Semitic comments does that mean he has co-opted a particular precedent in the Church canon?

Christianity or Islam is no more intrinsically antisemitic than any other constantly shifting and diverse belief system. You might as well say that Christianity or Islam are “anti science”.

In other words: yes, of course they can be anti scientific belief systems. But many believers good at working around creationism.

Christians who base their antisemitism on Biblical quotations, certainly do have scripture to back their prejudices.

This is the main source:

http://bible.cc/matthew/27-25.htm

“and I do advocate moderate positions in matters fiqh whenever I’ve the opportunity and the wherewithall”

Yes I can see that.

I don’t have the time at the moment to post up all the other hateful Koranic passages about ‘the other’ including but not limited to Jews. But I will have the time another time, so get your fiqh ready because I will be interested to know how the obvious literal meanings are nuanced/elaborated away.

Monsters….Jew hating barbaric monsters

With my academic head on, two things:

Firstly, the nature of the torture and the ‘display’ being copy cat speaks of a shared visual and ritual vernacular. ‘This is how to make the Jew ridiculous, this heralds a new age of power, tommorow belongs to us blah blah blah’. It tell not just of the perps’ anti-semetism but of their use of militant Islamist habitas. By using these forms of ritualised violence, the killers located their act in a fervent cultural and extremely modernist pallete of imagery and ’strategy’.

The images of Pearl and other beheadings, the Iraq sniper videos, the frantic live footage from an Al-Queda ’spectacular’ all introduces forms of both killing and communicating that killing and the underlying message. This is more immersed than keffiyah wearing youths burning cars. It is a ‘handy’ transcendental tool, that raises the crime above itself. It make a narrative out of criminal greed and bigoted hatred and transforms them into action.

Which brings me to the second point. Such crimes are rarely pure of motive. Even looking at holocaust literature, ‘Ordinary men’ by Chris Browning, ‘Democracy’s Dark side’ by Michael Mann, Mart Bax’s study of Ustasha violence in rural Bosnia, there are a multiplicity of motives. Chris Taylor notes it in Rwanda too. Greed is one of the major factors in the popular nature of pogroms and eliminationist mass murder. It operates in a murky brew with hatred, self-conception of crisis and moral exception along with the personal psychological condition of the killers.

To repeat – monsters

The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them; until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!”

My original point was that the document is not a legal ruling or the elaboration thereof. However, you rightly point out this thoroughly offensive and well-known hadith: I have searched in vain for a legal ruling condemning anti-Semitism (something which will no doubt confirm your suspicions), but that does not mean a Muslim with the right attitude and with sufficient knowledge could not condemn it and malevolent hadiths such as this one. An enlightened reading of the Islamic scriptures should disavow such texts, and you and others like you are quite right to point out this.

@Mr T

Fair enough regarding that particular text, but my point is that there are many other stimulii other than scripture that foment anti-Semitism and other types of bigotry. A Christian, or indeed a Muslim or Jew making anti-Semitic statements could just as easily be drawing on some other meme which eventually stimulated the anti-Semitism. You no doubt know a great deal more than I do on the subject and may well consider anti-Semitism to have ultimately originated in the Gospels. Scripture, as you are well aware though, need not be the only causative agent.

I think the origins of antisemitism are the first Jewish-Roman war, not Christianity.

David T. -the word anti-Semitism did not actually come into existance until 1879 in a pamphlet called ‘The victory of Judaism over Germanism’ by Wilhelm Marr.
There’s a difference between anti-Semitism and the anti-Judaism that came before it. Anti-Semitism is illogical and irrational. First comes the prejudice and then the rationalised justification for that feeling. Anti-Jewish violence stems from conscious motivation, followed by retaliation.
Anti-Semitism is directed towards the Jewish race and ignores the individual Jew’s faults or virtues. Anti-Jewish violence is directed towards an individual in the same way that violence can be directed towards any other person of any other race or religion.
Anti-Semitism seeks out Jews only, ignoring all others who may be ‘guilty’ of the same ‘crime’ of which the jews are accused. Anti-Jewish violence is often an incidental factor in the general violence committed by the attacker.
Anti-Semitism offers no ‘way out’ for the Jew -there is no alternative to being Jewish. Anti-Jewish violence aims to convert the Jews to the religion of the attacker.
It was not anti-Semitism which caused the Romans to lay waste to Jerusalem and banish them. The Jews had revolted three times just like the Cartheginians and got the same punishment. This was a political act and indeed subsequently the Romans gave citizenship to all the Jews.
If contrasted with the fate of the Jews in Nazi Germany who had never revolted against the Germans, it is obvious that the Germans were motivated purely by prejudice. Their ‘crime’ was in actually being Jewish.
Yes, from 2000 BC to 1800 CE the Jews were slain, massacred, tortured and sold as slaves, but so was everybody else in those days who belonged to a minority group or small nation.
It was not until the mid C19th that politicians found anti-Semitism to be a tool they could use to further their own ends. When it was convenient, Jews could be capitalists or communists as needed in order to whip up the masses.

Tusker, why do religious people like yourself attempt to justify the writings of ‘voice’s in the head’ mentally ill people with reams and reams of theological psycho babble?
Why do people like yourself attempt to justify the writings of clearly primitive people who without the advantage of modern learning and information came up with all kinds of this “lord of the rings” stuff?

Is it so you can square your own circle in respects to your “Faith” or is it a good career move, you know, an easy way to spend your life in academia constantly looking for hidden meanings, writing down what ‘you think’ the author of any given religious compilation ‘really’ meant.

I have Looked at the abstracts of many papers but I have completely read relatively few because I pride myself on being able to distinguish between a paper that has been written simply to fulfill preset academic requirements and one that actually has something new to offer.

In this day and age people who hear voices in their heads are deemed to be, quite rightly in my view, mentally ill and are in most cases treated for said illness. This is not the middle ages although with so, so many irrational Intellectuals around these days it may as well be.

Mark Brentano said: “…..Step on my foot a third time and I will knock you down.”

Sadly, I don’t believe that the jews that remain in Europe are capable of fighting back or knocking anyone down, and even if they did the demographics are relentlessly against them, and will never improve.

If Europe’s jews have the will to survive, departure is their only option. This process is well under way.

Tusker, why do religious people like yourself attempt to justify the writings of ‘voice’s in the head’ mentally ill people with reams and reams of theological psycho babble?[...]

How do you know whether I’m a religious person or not? If being Christian is religious then I guess I qualify.

I fell into the study of Islam and interreligious dialogue at university via linguistics, but I enjoy the academic study of Islam and the Middle East for what it is: damn interesting stuff! Whether Muhammad made up the Qur’an, received a revelation from God or others compiled it and appended it in the Abbasid period is neither here nor there to me.

If you believe, you believe; if you don’t, you don’t. It’s entirely up to you. But not all Muslims are the same (an absurd proposition) and there are a million ways to live and experience Islam without resorting to violent Islamism.

Peace

i agree with Anaximander’s other sandal. Why do intelligent, thoughtful people spend so much time studying bollocks and taking it so seriously? I don’t just mean religious philosphies as truth ( they are alright to study as systems of thought, but they are not true) but the other nonsense stuff about sociology, culture and literature? I don’t know how any one can take it seriously. Which is why I didn’t continue in Higher Education. I just couldn’t take it seriously enough.

I notice you can speak Arabic and English, that’s an amazing coincidence, you see I know an Illiterate 10yr old who can also speak Arabic and English, he cannot read yet but give him time, the child is still only 10, the child still believes fantasy and reality are the same thing, that Frodo Baggins was a Real person and that Sauron was the ‘Devil’ but as I said give him time.

That is only my “view” of the situation you understand re the interpretation of so called ‘religious’ texts and I my add, considering the lack of “evidence” for these ’scriptures’ being anything other than bad fiction, it is also only your “view” that they are anything other than fiction.

“If you believe, you believe; if you don’t, you don’t. It’s entirely up to you. But not all Muslims are the same (an absurd proposition) and there are a million ways to live and experience Islam without resorting to violent Islamism.”

I agree entirely, but you need to tell the muslims, not me. If you cannot grasp the simplicity of that reasoning then I am afraid you are part of the problem not the solution. Peace for all, not just the religious.

David T:

Christianity or Islam is no more intrinsically antisemitic than any other constantly shifting and diverse belief system

Come, come David, you’re rather stretching credulity here to the point of eye brow strain.

I just don’t believe – and I wager I’m not alone – that you honestly think that Buddhism or Jainism are as ‘intrinsically antisemitic’ as Christianity or most especially especially Islam.

anti-jewish sentiment existed long before the roman-jewish war of 66-70 a.d. there were anti-jewish riots in alexandria, among other places, well before that. One could say that anti-jewish sentiment truly began with the Hasmonean (maccabean) reaction to hellenization and took off from there. Post-Jewish war christianity certainly gave anti-jewish sentiment a boost, though. And racial — as opposed to religious — antisemitism is really a 19th century construct.

on the subject at hand, my personal feeling is that individuals who try to deny the racial aspect of this ghastly crime are verging on anti-semitism themselves.

RE: as ‘intrinsically antisemitic’ as Christianity or most especially especially Islam.

Historically, of course, christianity has a far greater anti-jewish history than islam. that may not seem plausible given the age we live in now, which is why knowledge of history is so useful. from the 7th to the 19th century, Islam’s treatment of Jews (and by this i mean most Islamic states, including, crucially, the Ottoman empire and before that, the ummayad and abbasid caliphates, were oases of relative normality for jews compared with the unrelenting hostility from Christian states, peoples and the church. Don’t believe me: look up the crusades, the black death, expulsions in virtually all western european countries, chmielnitski massacres (Poland and Ukraine), inquisitions, etc. etc. etc. nothing comparable in the Islamic world.
How times have changed!

There was a conference on “Nationalism in Northern Europe” which was held at the University of Wales in 1979. A book was compiled of the proceedings and edited by Rosalind Mitchison.

In the Introduction Dr A.B. Phillip wrote this:

“The simplicity of nationalist ideas should never be underestimated. It means that they can be easily transmitted and understood by a mass electorate, whether literate or uneducated. Nationalism is thus able to be the great political mobiliser, providing an all-purpose framework into which popular grievances can easily be fitted. Hence part of the appeal of nationalism for youth. At the same time nationalism fulfils a psychological need for the young in search of an identity in a grouping larger than the family which they are out growing. Nor is nationalism an exclusive political ideology. It can change its colour like the chameleon according to the political and social landscape. Liberals were nationalists in the nineteenth century, leninists in the twentieth. Nationalism thus has a remarkable fly-paper quality which guarantees its continuation as a major influence in world affairs.”

Now as free thinking western democracies should we or in the current climate dare we, consider the whole of Islam as a nationalist entity manifested as a shared religious belief? Well there are certainly some elements of togetherness, of oneness, the United Islamic People of the world view but there are also glaring contradictions the most visible being the Sunni, Shia split. Personally I would say no the whole of Islam should not be considered a nationalist entity.

Islamist groups however, should, in my view, certainly be categorized as nationalist entities, movements such as the “Muslim Brotherhood” are not, as far as I can see, any different from the “Aryan Brotherhood”
The Muslim “brothers” and the Aryan “brothers” should be treated with equal contempt as far as I am concerned and the religion they claim to follow or the colour of their skin or indeed their geographical location should not, to a true believer in peace for all mankind make the slightest bit of difference.

First, this is an excellent, if extremely depressing piece.

Christians who base their antisemitism on Biblical quotations, certainly do have scripture to back their prejudices.

This is the main source:

http://bible.cc/matthew/27-25.htm

You know, I don’t know that that really IS the main source (at least not from where I stand, which, granted, is a different place from where you stand).

I think that verse in Matthew you cite may well have (had: hopefully this is entirely past tense) greater appeal to, or resonsance to, well, real Jew-haters, organizers of pogroms; the real fanatics and bigots I mean: but in terms of background “mood music” I think there are more important (and more low-key) Christian scriptural references that can be used to generate suspicion (or worse) of Jews.

Not saying it’s not A source, nor an unimportant one, and of course different things have been emphasised more in different places and times…but the thing that has always leapt out at me, above all I think, is the repeated references that use expressions like “for fear of the Jews” (yes, also during the recollection of the events of Passion week), specifically, and above all, in the Gospel of John, that can (presented out of context: as it is a particular group of Jews being referred to, not Jews in general; and in any case those who through this fear have been forced into hiding are also Jews) that (can) have the overall effect of appearing to present Jews in a malevolent and vicious light. There’s a cumulation of references there that could lend themselves to being twisted in such a way.

The other thing is: at least in modern times (do I mean post-Vatican 2? I don’t know. My childhood experience and religious education were at the non-happy-clappy semi-calvinist but nonetheless very anti-intellectual end of the Church of England on an East London council estate. I only discovered the Catholic Church much later on) in this part of the world is the way that – not the Jews – but, rather “their God”: by which I mean “the God of the Old Testament” [as opposed to "the God of the New Testament"] is often presented by Christians as being brutal, vicious, wrathful, and so on; which I think has the indirect implication of saying that “those who follow the God of the Old Testament” (and I know all of these terms are rather simplistic and troublesome, hence my use of loads of quotation marks) are implicitly like that, or at least tolerant of all that smiting and so on. (Private Eye’s presntation of anything to do with Israel frequently, attempting to be jocular, takes that sort of line: but the great Judy of Adloyada has also illustrated instances of this “Old Testament Bad and Vicious God, New Testament Kind and Loviog God” on her blog from the Telegraph and the BBC.

I must say, the first time I read the Bible all the way through (having had a lot of this background mood-music about what to expect) I was really quite surprised: and make of this interpretation what you will: yes, smiting and punishments, and so so there for sure (but, well, I’m an Ulsterman: the world is tough, that is only to be expected, really, althogh I do grant that Northern Ireland is the only place I know where villages welcome travellers with big signs announcing that The End is Nigh) – but actually I thought “the God of the Old Testament” came off really bloody well; he was extremely patient and kind and protective of his people – and what struck me about them, as presented there, was that..they repeatedly, really repeatedly, disobeyed what they were told to do, often in really quite foolish or short-sighted ways (golden calves and all that), and were constantly shown to be stubborn and “stiff-necked” (is that another potentially antisemetic adjective? I’m not sure. It is used a lot in the Bible – mainly, I think, the Old Testament, to describe Jews), and put their own intentions before those of God for much of the time.

Pretty much like everyone else, really, I s’pose. Except no other people gets a book about them granted such stature…

I am sorry, Nurse, but I do not agree with you, and I believe that you have misunderstood history.

Lori made a point so obvious that most people can’t see it.

How many British Jews have three or more children?

Add the low birthrate to marrying-out [exogamy] and that’s the Final Solution in a nutshell.

Right?

Christians who base their antisemitism on Biblical quotations, certainly do have scripture to back their prejudices.

This is the main source:

http://bible.cc/matthew/27-25.htm

On the surface it may appear so. However in Christianity, at least theologically, murder, any murder, distances an individual from Christ and from ’salvation’.

In Islam, ONTH, murder, and even mass murder, can get you fast-tracked to ‘paradise’ and can move you closer to Allah.

The French philosopher Robert Redecker was charged with hate crimes for pointing that out.

from the 7th to the 19th century, Islam’s treatment of Jews (and by this i mean most Islamic states, including, crucially, the Ottoman empire and before that, the ummayad and abbasid caliphates, were oases of relative normality for jews compared with the unrelenting hostility from Christian states, peoples and the church. Don’t believe me:

I would have believed you 20 years ago, but then I stumbled across Maimonides “Epistle to the Yemeni Jews”, a document that describes in great detail the suffering of the Jews under Islam, and one in which Maimonides himself referred to Mohammed as a ‘meshuggah’

Much of the oft-touted Islamic tolerance is just a myth that emerged in the 20th century

According to historian Richard Fletcher, “Moorish Spain was not a tolerant and enlightened society even in its most cultivated epoch.” On December 30, 1066, about four thousand Jews in Granada were murdered by rioting Muslim mobs—more than would be killed in the Crusaders’ infamous Rhineland pogroms of the mid-twelfth century. What enraged the Granadan Muslims was the political power of the Jewish vizier Samuel ibn Naghrila and his son Joseph: the mob resented the fact that these men had authority over Muslims, which they saw as a “breach of sharia.” The mob was incited to kill the Jews by a poem composed by Muslim jurist Abu Ishaq: “I myself arrived in Granada and saw that these Jews were meddling in its affairs. … So hasten to slaughter them as a good work whereby you will earn God’s favor, and offer them up in sacrifice, a well-fattened ram.” Andrew Bostom

Yes John P, it’s so typical of you to cherry-pick from history to make a distorted point. You don’t have to believe ME, it’s the point of view of all respected historians on the subject. However, when you cherry-pick history the same way as David Irving, you come up with twisted ass-backward notions like “churchill’s war” or in your case, christians treated Jews BETTER or equal to the way Muslims did, which is a joke. Yes there were riots in 1066 in one part of spain. That is one incident in a history of 400 years. Why do Jews look back on the Golden Age in Spain, if it were so horrible. And why, pray tell, did the holocaust happen in Europe. What about all the other massacres and slaughters i mentioned (just the tip of the iceberg, by the way). but hey, in the David Irving school of historical scholarship, one muslim slaughter offsets all that.

Finally, as interesting as it is that Maimonides called Mohammad a madman, it is irrelevant to this discussion. What Maimonides thought of Mohammed or anybody else doesn’t say anything about whether Christians or Muslims treated Jews BETTER between 650 and 1900. The word “meshugah” or madman does, however, appropriately fit anybody who really believes that Jews fared better under Christians.

I hope that boys family find their peace one day soon, hope those vile animals rot in hell.

On another note..

Judging by some of the comments here along with all the things you folk keep insisting on posting…..is it that difficult to see why hatred is rising. Sorry if muslims hated you guys so much throughout history it would be unlikely that any of you would be left today.

Here is a very very mild example of how great things were like for you folk in Europe. Try typing “Little Saint Hugh of Lincoln” into google.

Erm also seeing as there’s a great big crisis going on, which involves a disproportionately large amount of jewish financiers, (Mr Maddoff anyone?), I for one would be a little less smug about things.

RE:Erm also seeing as there’s a great big crisis going on, which involves a disproportionately large amount of jewish financiers, (Mr Maddoff anyone?), I for one would be a little less smug about things.

The first two paragraphs were good, Adam. But what the hell is that last bit supposed to mean. First of all, Madoff has nothing to do with the financial crisis, other than he had to come clean because of it. He’s a serious prick who deserves to rot, but he and his certainly didn’t cause the financial crisis. “you folk” ought to know better.

The Halimi incident was only one of several attempts to kidnap French Jews.

The French insistence that the incident wasn’t necessarily anti-Semitic, is itself as depraved as would be Germans insisting the Nazis weren’t anti-Semitic.

The debate itself sullies France.