Archive for the ‘Islamic hatred’ Category

The ‘Muslim Students Association’ [MSU, MSA] = Radical Islamic Hatred

September 10, 2008

The ‘Muslim Students Association’ [MSU, MSA] = Radical Islamic Hatred

MSA’s slogan ‘FASCISM, NOT TRUTH!’

MSA = HATRED

A. Writes: I was first introduced to MSA ‘Muslim Student Association’ by an apparent advocate for them, an Arab poster (posing as “Italian”) on AOL message boards [under multiple screen names ‘sock-puppets’ including “LetsReadAll”, “CryToHvn” and more] on 2001 who claimed to be a ‘Holocaust denier’ but liked to brag about Nazis killing Jews, liked to post against certain AOL users that were openly Jewish a thread like: “paging Dr. Mengele”, ) that posted again & again a video propaganda “little ones”, a collection of graphic content like bloody pictures of dead kids, on Arab “Palestinians” killed (mostly) due to Arab Muslim terrorists using them as shields but of course the blame was entirely on “The Zionists”, a typical smear campaign tool using most graphic bloody photos of the dead or wounded, “accompanied” by blatant lies such as calling tear gas (used by the careful & moral driven IDF to disperse protesters and minimize loss of lives) as “chemical weapons”, imagine that!

In 2002 this venomous MSA distributed an anti Jewish ‘anti-Semitic’ propaganda [in reference to Arab children who are held hostage by Arab adult terrorists hiding in residential homes so that the Arab kids could die when the IDF is after them, and be served as propaganda against the Zionists]  bottled meat with a label “Palestinian children butchered in accordance with Jewish law’  — http://www.standwithus.com/actions/051802.asp GUPS MSA .. racism is not directed specifically at Israel but at Jews.

Then again, just like other typical Islamic lobbies, MSA was/is more about hatred of “the other” than any actions “for” their ‘community’.

LOOK WHO’S TALKING, THE VEILED

MSA- UCB organized a competing week of events titled “Peace Not Prejudice Week” that opened with a screening and discussion of the film Ghosts of Abu Ghraib …
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=274ECFEE-A822-42A7-B840-2EC28369A95F

Isn’t it ironic that a racist hateful LOBBY would take upon itself a response to [the reality & the] exposure of ‘Islamo-fascism’  with a VEIL under a supposed “anti-racist” mask?

‘PEACE NOT PREJUDICE’ OR ‘FASCISM NOT TRUTH’?

Check this, in the style of the Arab lobby’s funded Carter’s slogan “peace not apartheid” (though Carter admits: CNN.com – Transcripts Plus, interview with former President Jimmy Carter. … “I recognize Israel is a wonderful democracy with freedom of speech and equality of treatment …”
http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0612/13/ltm.01.html ), the MSA as good ‘Palestinian – PALLYWOOD’ propagandists they try to play a pun: “peace not prejudice”.

Exactly that fascistic “peace”, is the most dangerous bigotry and war, that the entire humanity is a menace under (from the Islamic Hitler in Iran’s nukes to Islamists worldwide, holding the sword everywhere there’s a Muslim population & beyond).

____________

“Peace not Prejudice” Who Should We Believe about “Radical” Islam: MSA or the Imams? … “taqqiyah” (Arabic for “deception” against infidels sanctioned in the Koran)
http://www.floppingaces.net/2007/10/24/curt-has-finally-convinced-me/

September 12, 2007 Give Islamists an Inch: MSA Harassing Christians Entirely predictable. The Muslim Student Association at George Mason University harassing non-Muslims in ‘ecumenical’ prayer space.
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/189352.php

As a Muslim student at Arizona State University who abhors Wahhabism, I’ve been the victim of MSA’s hate campaigns. For my efforts in organizing a “Support …
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10305

UC IRVINE’s MSU is making the mistake of bringing hate [by MSA Muslim Student Association] to campus
http://www.standwithus.com/news_post.asp?NPI=820

MSA’s heroes are such traitors terrorists like: Sami Al-Arian is currently banned from his own campus, at the University of South Florida, because of security concerns. He is also under current FBI surveillance. He is on videotape (http://www.john-loftus.com/video_clips.htm) being introduced as the president of Islamic Jihad in America. He refers to Jews as “the sons and daughters of monkeys and pigs.” He presided over a rally where $500 was solicited to Jihad for the explicit purpose of stabbing and killing a Jew.
http://media.www.michigandaily.com/media/storage/paper851/news/2002/10/28/Opinion/Divest.From.Hate.And.Boycott.Ari.Paul-1413352.shtml

Accuracy In Academia — The Muslim Student Association: Coming In Peace? By Malcolm A. Kline … the government has identified as having a significant problem with terrorism.” …
http://www.academia.org/campus_reports/2004/arc_msa.html

muslim students association UCLA Sponsors of Terrorism By  The Muslim Student Association: A Wahhabi Front By
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6175

Butcher Enablers
The Muslim Students’ Association….
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-schwartz031003.asp

Islamism’s Campus Club: The Muslim Students’ Association – Middle …We come before you today on behalf of the Muslim Student Association at USF … has once again been unfurled by the U.S. military in this War on Terrorism …
http://www.meforum.org/article/603

Extremism on Campus, Muslims Students Association « Christian …Although the Muslim Students’ Association (MSA) may present itself as a non-political and benevolent student religious group During the past several years, operating both on campus and off, some chapters of the MSA have acted in collaboration with a number of Islamic groups and individuals.  The MSA organizes events featuring militant speakers, so-sponsor events and conferences with radical Islamic groups, and co-sponsor fundraisers for killers and Islamic radicals.  In addition, they use their publication, Al-Talib, to disseminate their often radical, anti-Semitic, anti-Israel views.

Fascism at UC Berkeley: Muslim Student Association Disrupts Daniel …Indeed, the Muslim Student Association (MSA) was out in full force on Tuesday, … He managed to deliver his lecture, which covered the War on Terrorism, …
http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/999

[2006] Muhammed Al-Asi, scheduled to speak on “Hamas: The People’s Choice,” was removed as Imam of the Washington, DC Islamic Center in 1981 at the request of Saudi Arabia, Egypt and other Middle Eastern governments because of his “fiery sermons” (1) and pro-Khomeini rhetoric (2) Saudi Arabia barred him from making the hajj to Mecca. He is notorious for his anti-Semitic comments, such as “You can take the Jew out of the ghetto but you cannot take the ghetto out of the Jew,” for claiming that Nazi anti-Semitism was justifiable and for his close association with Ahmed Huber, the neo-Nazi Swiss convert to Islam who praised Khomeini as the “living continuation of Adolf Hitler.”…
Imam Abdel Malik Ali, is a firebrand rhetorician who uses street slang to vilify Jews and to rouse his audiences to fight for the victory of Islam in America. Notorious for such anti-Semitic comments as “The Zionists control the media, and the Zionists have spied in your classrooms,” Malik Ali and others who shared the podium at a 2004 Berkeley MSA event shocked and embarrassed many Muslim students, according to the East Bay Express.
http://standwithuscampus.com/?cat=4

Fairness Doctrine Watch: Still “on track?” wouldn’t that provide an opportunity to apply hate speech laws to the qutba (qur’anic sermons), as well as CAIR/ISNA/MSA sponsored hate fests? …
http://michellemalkin.com/2007/07/05/fairness-doctrine-watch-still-on-track/

[Hooked nose Arabs paint hooked noses?]
Author Derided by Muslim Students [Association] in Anti Semitic Cartoon
Author David Horowitz responded today to his recent controversy at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. David Horowitz, a popular conservative writer, was derided in a Nazi-like anti-Semitic cartoon, put out by the Muslim Student Association. The cartoon, which was copied and spread around campus, portrays Horowitz, a Jewish man, as a hooked-nose Nazi hiding in a trash can.
http://tothecenter.com/news.php?readmore=4895

The MSA-As Sabiqun Connection
[July 2008]
The Terrorism Awareness Project has just released this very informative video of the blatant  Islamic pro-terror movement As Sabiqun, and their influence on life at UC Irvine, and universities across the United States. 
http://www.redcounty.com/rccampuswatch/2008/07/the-msa-as-sabiqun-connection/
 
Jew Hatred at CSULB … is his account: This “passion play” used (by the Muslim Students Union AKA Muslim Students Association MSA) was created to incite hatred against Jews and Israelis.
http://www.redcounty.com/rccampuswatch/2008/05/jew-hatred-at-csulb/

“Hadith of Hate” Banned at USC
By Reut R. Cohen FrontPageMagazine.com | 8/29/2008
As Muslim Student Association (MSA) chapters have become increasingly influential at universities and colleges around the country, critics have charged that it is a hate group that sympathizes with the international jihad and promulgates an anti-American and anti-Semitic ideology in its campus actions. In response, the MSA has claimed that it is merely another religious and cultural group similar to Hillel, a club for Jewish students, or the Newman Club for Catholics. That deception has been now unmasked at the University of Southern California, where the school’s Provost, Chrysostomos L. Max Nikias, reacting to a call from the David Horowitz Freedom Center and the Simon Wiesenthal Center, has ordered the campus MSA to remove a “despicable” hadith calling for Muslims to murder Jews as a condition for redemption from its website.
David Horowitz, President of the Freedom Center, hails this as a breakthrough moment when the double standards that control the political and intellectual culture of most universities have finally been challenged. “Up to now, the slightest criticism of radical Islam on campus has been slammed as ‘Islamophobia,’ while Muslim groups and their radical fellow travelers have been allowed to say the most hateful things imaginable about Christians and Jews without any reaction from university administrators whatsoever,” Horowitz says. “Provost Nikias has called the hadith on the MSA website for what it is: despicable. Given the atmosphere that prevails on most campuses today, it was an act of integrity on his part to make this call and to demand that the MSA live up to basic standards of civility that should govern the university.”
The hadith (sacred teaching) reads as follows:
“Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him….”
http://www.rightsidenews.com/200808301838/homeland-security/-hadith-of-hate-banned-at-usc.html

 

Technorati –

Advertisements

ISLAMIC “PALESTINIAN” APARTHEID – Expert: ‘Christian groups in PA to disappear’

December 6, 2007

http://www.jpost. com/servlet/ Satellite? pagename= JPost%2FJPArticl e\
%2FShowFull& cid=119554679587 4

Expert: ‘Christian groups in PA to disappear’
Etgar Lefkovits , THE JERUSALEM POST Dec. 4, 2007
The ever-dwindling Christian communities living in
Palestinian- run territories in the West Bank and Gaza are likely
to dissipate completely within the next 15 years as a result of
increasing Muslim persecution and maltreatment, an Israeli
scholar said Monday.

“The systematic persecution of Christian Arabs living in
Palestinian areas is being met with nearly total silence by the
international community, human rights activists, the media and
NGOs,” said Justus Reid Weiner, an international human rights
lawyer in an address at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs,
where he serves as a scholar in residence.

He cited Muslim harassment and persecution as the main cause of
the “acute human rights crisis” facing Christian Arabs, and
predicted that unless governments or institutions step in to
remedy the situation – such as with job opportunities – there
will be no more Christian communities living in the Palestinians
territories within 15 years, with only a few Western Christians
and top clergymen left in the area.

“Christian leaders are being forced to abandon their followers to
the forces of radical Islam,” Weiner said.

Facing a pernicious mixture of persecution and economic hardships
as a result of years of Palestinian violence and Israeli
counter-terrorism measures, tens of thousands of Christian Arabs
have left the Palestinian territories for a better life in the
West, in a continuing exodus which has led some Christian leaders
to warn that the faith could be virtually extinct in its
birthplace in a matter of decades.

The Palestinian Christian population has dipped to 1.5 percent of
the West Bank and Gaza Strip, down from at least 15% a half
century ago, according to some estimates.

No one city in the Holy Land is more indicative of the great
exodus of Christians than Bethlehem, which fell under full
Palestinian control last decade as part of the Oslo Accords.

The town of 30,000 is now less than 20% Christian, after decades
when Christians were the majority. Elsewhere in the Palestinian
territories, only about 3,000 Christians, mostly Greek Orthodox,
live in the Hamas-run Gaza Strip, out of a strongly conservative
Muslim population of 1.4 million.

“In a society where Arab Christians have no voice and no
protection it is no surprise that they are leaving,” he said.

In his address, Weiner pointedly downplayed the effects that
Israeli security measures, such as the security barrier being
built between Israel and the West Bank, have had on the Christian
Arabs living in the West Bank.

The barrier, which is especially conspicuous at the entrance to
Bethlehem where it is a concrete wall, is an issue which many
Palestinian Christian clerics have pointed to, along with the
ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as a central cause of
Christian emigration.

Weiner argued there was a “180 degree difference” between the
public statements coming out of the mainstream Christian
leadership in the Holy Land – who “sing the PA’s tune” and blame
Israel for all the Christian Arabs’ ills – and people’s
experience on the ground.

“The truth is beginning to come out,” he said. “The question is
what is being done with the truth.”

His comments come just months after a prominent Christian
activist, Rami Khader Ayyad, 32, was killed in Gaza.

“For too long the plight of Christian Arabs has been put on the
back-burner or ignored altogether,” said Rev. Malcolm Hedding,
executive director of the International Christian Embassy, a
Jerusalem-based evangelical organization.

The Evangelical leader, who has drawn the wrath of Catholic
leaders in the Holy Land for his strong support for Israel, said
that “power politics” has prevented the major Christian leaders
in the Holy Land from speaking out on this issue.

“There is a one-sided debate in which Israel is responsible for
everything,” he said. “The Christian world needs to stand up and
speak out about this.”

Savage vs the Controlling Terrorist Islamic Lobby CAIR

December 6, 2007

Savage Sues the infamous Pro Terror devious Islamic Lobby CAIR

Radio Host Sues Group That Quoted Him
The Associated Press – Dec 4, 2007
The suit alleges CAIR is not a civil rights group, but a political organization funded by foreigners with ties to Hamas and other terrorist groups.
Radio Host Sues Islamic Civil Liberties Group For Quoting Him AHN
Effort targets supporters of Michael Savage’s talk-radio show WorldNetDaily

‘Proven record of senior officials being indicted, imprisoned
WorldNetDaily, OR – Dec 3, 2007
CAIR denies supporting terrorism and continues to claim to be a “moderate” voice for Muslims in America. The group says its critics are the extremists,

PipeLineNews.org

Clinton Foreign Policy Team Adopts cairs Twisted Ideology
PipeLineNews.org, CA
policy team have now wholly adopted cair’s position on Islamofascism, thus finding common ground with what is widely understood in the counter-terrorism

Congressional Paul Revere Warns Nation About Islamofascist Threat
http://www.aina.org/news/2007112093227.htm
… However, groups such as Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and others have a proven record of senior officials being indicted and either imprisoned or deported from the U.S. Just to name a few: Ghassan Elashi, a founding board member of CAIR, is serving 80 months in prison; Randall “Ismail” Royer, the communications director for CAIR, is serving 20 years in prison; and Bassam Khafagi…

Londonistan Islamization, Islamic Hatred Virus // Britain’s Anti-Semitic Turn

November 6, 2007

Londonistan Islamization, Islamic Hatred Virus // Britain’s Anti-Semitic Turn

Britain’s Anti-Semitic Turn
Melanie Phillips

A new manifestation of the oldest hatred demonizes the Jewish state.

In August 2006, as the war in Lebanon raged, a gang of teenage girls confronted 12-year-old Jasmine Kranat and a friend on a London bus. “Are you Jewish?” they demanded. They didn’t hurt the friend, who was wearing a crucifix. But they subjected Jasmine, a Jew, to a brutal beating—stomping on her head and chest, fracturing her eye socket, and knocking her unconscious.

According to the Community Security Trust, the defense organization of Britain’s 300,000-strong Jewish community, last year saw nearly 600 anti-Semitic assaults, incidents of vandalism, cases of abuse, and threats against Jewish individuals and institutions—double the 2001 number. According to the police, Jews are four times more likely to be attacked because of their religion than are Muslims. Every synagogue service and Jewish communal event now requires guards on the lookout for violence from both neo-Nazis and Muslim extremists. Orthodox Jews have become particular targets; some have begun wearing baseball caps instead of skullcaps and concealing their Star of David jewelry.

Anti-Semitism is rife within Britain’s Muslim community. Islamic bookshops sell copies of Hitler’s Mein Kampf and the notorious czarist forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion; as an undercover TV documentary revealed in January, imams routinely preach anti-Jewish sermons. Opinion polls show that nearly two-fifths of Britain’s Muslims believe that the Jewish community in Britain is a legitimate target “as part of the ongoing struggle for justice in the Middle East”; that more than half believe that British Jews have “too much influence over the direction of UK foreign policy”; and that no fewer than 46 percent think that the Jewish community is “in league with Freemasons to control the media and politics.”

But anti-Semitism has also become respectable in mainstream British society. “Anti-Jewish themes and remarks are gaining acceptability in some quarters in public and private discourse in Britain and there is a danger that this trend will become more and more mainstream,” reported a Parliamentary inquiry last year. “It is this phenomenon that has contributed to an atmosphere where Jews have become more anxious and more vulnerable to abuse and attack than at any other time for a generation or longer.”

At the heart of this ugly development is a new variety of anti-Semitism, aimed primarily not at the Jewish religion, and not at a purported Jewish race, but at the Jewish state. Zionism is now a dirty word in Britain, and opposition to Israel has become a fig leaf for a resurgence of the oldest hatred.

Anti-Semitism has continually changed its shape over the centuries. In the Greco-Roman world, it expressed itself in cultural hostility, resentment of the Jews’ economic power, and disdain for the separate lives that Jews led as the result of their religious practices, such as dietary laws and refusal to marry outside the faith.

Adding fuel to these pagan prejudices, Christian theology accused Jews of deicide and held them responsible for all time for killing Christ, a position that effectively associated them with the devil and, crucially, laid the blame for their suffering on their own shoulders. Later, medieval Christianity attempted to usurp the Jewish heritage through “replacement theology,” which claimed that Christians inherited all the promises that God had made to the Jews, who were to be eliminated through either conversion or death. These ideas underlay medieval Europe’s regular anti-Jewish pogroms, which consisted of massacres, forced conversions, and torchings of synagogues.

Theological anti-Semitism’s themes reemerged in the next mutation: racial anti-Semitism. This ideology held that, on account of their genetic inheritance, Jews were the enemies of humanity—a demonic conspiracy whose malign influence could be countered only by removing them from the face of the earth. Nazi Germany tried to do just that, killing 6 million Jews between 1933 and 1945.

And now, in Britain and elsewhere, anti-Semitism has mutated again, its target shifting from culture to creed to race to nation. What anti-Semitism once did to Jews as people, it now does to Jews as a people. First it wanted the Jewish religion, and then the Jews themselves, to disappear; now it wants the Jewish state to disappear. For the presentation of Israel in British public discourse does not consist of mere criticism. It has become a torrent of libels, distortions, and obsessional vilification, representing Israel not as a country under exterminatory attack by the Arabs for the 60 years of its existence but as a regional bully persecuting innocent Palestinians who want only a homeland.

Language straight out of the lexicon of medieval and Nazi Jew-hatred has become commonplace in acceptable British discourse, particularly in the media. Indeed, the most striking evidence that hatred of Israel is the latest mutation of anti-Semitism is that it resurrects the libel of the world Jewish conspiracy, a defining anti-Semitic motif that went underground after the Holocaust.

Take the much-abused term “neoconservatives,” which has become code for the Jews who have supposedly suborned America in Israel’s interests. In the Guardian, Geoffrey Wheatcroft lamented the fact that Conservative Party leader David Cameron had fallen under the spell of neoconservatives’ “ardent support for the Iraq war, for the US and for Israel,” and urged Cameron to ensure that British foreign policy was no longer based on the interest of “another country”—Israel. In the Times, Simon Jenkins supported the notion that “a small group of neo-conservatives contrived to take the greatest nation on Earth to war and kill thousands of people” and that these “traitors to the American conservative tradition,” whose “first commitment was to the defence of Israel,” had achieved a “seizure of Washington (and London) after 9/11.” According to this familiar thesis, the Jews covertly exercise their extraordinary power to advance their own interests and harm the rest of mankind.

The New Statesman took a more straightforward approach in 2002, printing an investigation into the power of the “Zionist” lobby in Britain, which it dubbed the “Kosher Conspiracy” and illustrated on its cover with a gold Star of David piercing the Union Jack. The image conveyed at a glance the message that rich Jews were stabbing British interests through the national heart.

The British media accuse Israel of a host of crimes. The Guardian published a two-day special report painting Israel as an apartheid state, ignoring the fact that Israeli Arabs have full civil rights. Another Guardian article, by Patrick Seale, portrayed Israel’s incursions into Gaza as a “destructive rampage.” Dismissing or ignoring the rocket attacks, hostage-taking, and terrorism that those incursions were trying to stop, Seale concluded instead that Israel “deliberately inflicts inhumane hardships on the Palestinians in order to radicalise them and drive the moderates from the scene.” When the National Union of Journalists, joining a number of other academic and professional groups, voted last April to boycott Israeli goods—a move that it has since reversed—one of its members, freelancer Pamela Hardyment, described Israel as “a wonderful Nazi-like killing machine backed by the world’s richest Jews.” Then she referred to the “so-called Holocaust” and concluded: “Shame on all Jews, may your lives be cursed.”

The British media uncritically regurgitate Palestinian propaganda even when it is demonstrably false. In April 2002, many outlets labeled Israel’s assault on the refugee camp in Jenin a “massacre” with thousands dead; in fact, some 52 Palestinian men had died (of whom the great majority were terrorists), along with 23 Israeli soldiers. In last year’s Lebanon war, the media propagated manifestly false Hezbollah claims of Israeli massacres that later proved to have been staged.

During the same war, the Guardian published a cartoon depicting a huge fist, armed with brass knuckles shaped like Stars of David, hammering a bloody child while a wasp representing Hezbollah buzzed around ineffectually. The image suggested that Israel was a gigantic oppressor, slaughtering children in brutal overreaction to Hezbollah, a minor irritant. It was reminiscent of an earlier cartoon in the Independent that showed a monstrous Ariel Sharon biting the head off a Palestinian baby, which won first prize in the British Political Cartoon Society’s annual competition for 2003. By showing Jews killing children, both cartoons employed the imagery of the blood libel—the medieval European calumny that sparked many massacres of Jews by claiming that they murdered Gentile children and used their blood for religious rituals.

The BBC, despite its claims of fairness and honesty, is just as marked by hatred of Israel, and much more influential. It reported the Lebanon war by focusing almost entirely on the Israeli assault upon Lebanon, with scarcely a nod at the Hezbollah rocket barrage against Israel. Its reporters blame Israel even for Palestinians’ killing of other Palestinians. Last December, in a briefing for other BBC staff, Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen wrote of the incipient Palestinian civil war in Gaza: “The reason is the death of hope, caused by a cocktail of Israel’s military activities, land expropriation and settlement building—and the financial sanctions imposed on the Hamas led government.”

Some media websites publish readers’ anti-Semitic comments. On the Guardian’s Comment Is Free blog—which does try to remove some of the more offensive remarks—one reader wrote: “Because of their religious teachings whenever Jews have had power they have used it to persecute non-Jews—from the extermination of Amalek to the killing of Christian converts, to the oppression of medieval peasantry in Poland to the Palestinians today.” A message board on BBC Radio Five Live’s website published a reader’s remark that “Zionism is a racist ideology where jews [sic] are given supremacy over all other races and faiths. This is found in the Talmud.” Though the site reserves the right not to post messages that are “racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, abusive or otherwise objectionable,” it refused to remove that posting, which apparently “did not contravene the house rules.”

Another force propagating the new anti-Semitism is the institution at the heart of the old theological version: the Church, which has reverted to blaming Jews for their own suffering and accusing them once again of a diabolical conspiracy against the innocent. Although Britain is in many ways a postreligious society, it still sees the churches as custodians of high-minded conscience and truth. And those churches are viscerally prejudiced against Israel.

The Church of England is especially unfriendly; one might say that it is the Guardian at prayer. In a lecture in 2001, the archbishop of Canterbury’s representative in the Middle East, Canon Andrew White, observed with concern that propaganda accusing Israel of ethnic cleansing and of systematically “Judaising” Jerusalem had assumed great authority within the Church of England. The Church, he said, was undergoing not just a spell of Israel-hatred but also a revival of theological anti-Semitism.

One major influence here is radical Palestinian Christian theology, such as that of Canon Naim Ateek, which revives the imagery of Christ-killing in order to claim that the Palestinians are the rightful inheritors of God’s promise of the Land of Israel. Another is the prominent Reverend Stephen Sizer, who has said that Israel is fundamentally an apartheid state, that he hopes that it will be “brought to an end,” and that Christianity has inherited God’s promises to the Jews. Sizer agrees with another leading Anglican, Reverend Dr. John Stott, that the idea that Jews still have a special relationship with God is “biblically anathema.” And Colin Chapman’s book Whose Promised Land?—hugely influential within the Church—likewise says that God’s promises to the Jews now pertain to the Christians, adding that violence has always been implicit in Zionism and that Jewish self-determination is somehow racist.

Small wonder, then, that Christian aid societies regularly represent Israel as a malevolent occupying power, distorting Jews’ historical claims to the land and making scant reference to the sustained campaign of Arab terrorism against them. A 2005 report by the Anglican Peace and Justice Network—which underpinned a short-lived move to “divest” from companies supporting Israel—compared Israel’s security barrier with “the barbed-wire fence of the Buchenwald camp.” Jews were apparently like Nazis—and because of a measure aimed at preventing a second Jewish Holocaust. Last Christmas, several Anglican and Catholic churches replaced their traditional nativity tableaux with montages of Israel’s security barrier, carrying the unmistakable message that the Palestinians were the modern version of the suffering Christ being crucified all over again by the Jews. And earlier this year, the Catholic weekly The Tablet revealed that almost 80 percent of British Christians polled did not believe that Israel was fighting enemies that were pledged to destroy it.

Like the media and the churches, Britain’s political and academic Left is making common cause with Islamist radicalism. The Islamists oppose the Left’s most deeply held causes, such as gay rights and equality for women. Yet leftists and Islamists now march together under such slogans as “We are all Hezbollah now” during rallies protesting the Lebanon war, and even “Death to the Jews” outside a debate over whether Manchester University’s Jewish Society should be banned.

In 2005, London’s far-left mayor, Ken Livingstone, illustrated this unholy alliance by publicly embracing Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, the cleric who endorses suicide bombings in Israel and Iraq. In the same year, he asked a Jewish reporter who approached him after a party, “What did you do before? Were you a German war criminal?” When the reporter said that he was Jewish and that the remark offended him, Livingstone likened him to a “concentration camp guard.” After a government panel found that Livingstone had brought his office into disrepute, the mayor challenged the finding in court, where a judge ruled that his remarks were not anti-Semitic. But the Community Security Trust found that a number of perpetrators of anti-Semitic attacks mentioned those comments. And John Mann, chairman of the Parliamentary Committee Against Antisemitism, was in no doubt: “If you have people like the Mayor of London crossing the line . . . then it gives a message out to the rest of the community. That is why antisemitism is on the rise again—because it’s become acceptable.”

Livingstone is not the only leftist politician “crossing the line.” In 2003, Labour backbencher Tam Dalyell claimed that Tony Blair was “being unduly influenced by a cabal of Jewish advisers.” Liberal Democrat Jenny Tonge, whose party honored her with a peerage after she sympathized with suicide bombers and compared Arabs in Gaza with Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto, told her party conference in 2006: “The pro-Israel lobby has got its grips on the Western world. I think they’ve probably got a certain grip on our party.”

Even a distinguished general told me, without a shred of evidence, that Rupert Murdoch had ordered the Times, which he owns, to limit its opposition to the Iraq War “on the instruction of the Jewish lobby in America.” Furthermore, claimed the general, George Bush had invaded Iraq because “he had Ariel Sharon’s hand up his back.” Moreover, a number of institutions and professional groups have tried to launch boycotts of Israel: academics, journalists, architects, doctors, public-sector unions, and again the Church of England. Many of these have not succeeded, but they have served to remind the public that Israel is a pariah.

Given these views, widespread in the media and among political and intellectual elites, it’s no surprise that many Britons believe that global Islamic terrorism is the result of Israel’s behavior toward the Palestinians—or that hatred of both the Jewish state and Jews in general has become increasingly acceptable among the population. As a woman said to me conversationally at dinner one evening: “I hate the Jews because of what they do to the Palestinians.” So acceptable has the new anti-Semitism become that many left-wing Jews promulgate the idea that Israel is a racist or apartheid state, demonize those Jews who seek to defend it against slander, and claim that because they are Jews themselves, their words cannot be anti-Semitic—despite the fact that throughout history there have been Jews who have turned on their coreligionists.

One of the most conspicuous features of British anti-Semitism is that the British deny its existence. The Parliamentary inquiry received only a muted response. Both Mann and Richard Littlejohn, a journalist whose TV program on the subject aired in July 2007, encountered people who, when discovering their concern about anti-Semitism, said: “Oh, I didn’t know you were Jewish.” But Mann and Littlejohn aren’t Jewish. As Littlejohn noted, the implication was that no non-Jew would ever identify anti-Semitism, and therefore that anti-Semitism was generally a figment of the Jewish imagination. When I proposed to write a book about it, I was turned down by every mainstream publishing house. “No British publisher will touch this,” one editorial director told me. “Claiming there is anti-Semitism in Britain is simply unsayable.”

Many Britons deny the resurgence of anti-Semitism because they think of it as prejudice toward Jews as people and believe that it died with Hitler. The argument that attitudes toward Israel may be anti-Semitic strikes them as absurd. But consider the characteristics of anti-Semitism. It applies to the Jews expectations applied to no other people; it libels, vilifies, demonizes, and dehumanizes them; it scapegoats them not merely for crimes that they have not committed, but for crimes of which they are the victims; it holds them responsible for all the ills of the world. These characteristics remain precisely the same in today’s hatred of the Jewish state. Israel is held to standards expected of no other nation; it is libeled and vilified; it is blamed both for crimes that it has not committed and for those of which it is the victim; and it is held responsible for all the world’s misfortunes—most recently, Islamic terrorism.

So the Israel boycotts that have broken out in Britain are intrinsically anti-Semitic. The boycotters do not seek to cut ties with any other country, however tyrannical or murderous. They blame no other country for populations that have been displaced through war or other upheavals. And they expect no other nation that has held off its mortal enemies to defer to those aggressors and accede to their demands.

Britons also tend to suspect that Jews use the charge of anti-Semitism to divert attention from Israel’s crimes. This is why, for so many in Britain, the suggestion that anti-Semitism is enjoying a renaissance seems not only false but sinister. Outraged to be accused of peddling bigotry, they begin to hate those who level that charge—who, they conclude, are part of a conspiracy against truth.

Thus Jews who seek to defend Israel find themselves in a trap. By complaining that attacks on Israel are anti-Semitic, they become examples of the supposed Jewish tendency to play the anti-Semitism card to suppress legitimate debate—and provoke yet more of the very prejudice that they are trying to combat. Such Jews find themselves in a situation that Kafka could have scripted. The Economist hosted a 2004 debate in London proposing that “the enemies of antisemitism are the new McCarthyites” because they were trying to suppress legitimate criticism of Israel. And at that debate, a former Conservative higher-education minister and a member of the Council for the Advancement of Arab-British Understanding stated that any British Jew who supported Israel’s policies was guilty of “dual loyalty.” I myself, on the BBC’s Question Time in 2001, was accused of dual loyalty for the same reason.

Insofar as Britons are forced to acknowledge a rise in anti-Semitism, they assume that Jews have brought it on themselves because of Israel’s behavior. There is certainly a link: whenever Middle East violence surges, as in the 2006 Lebanon war or at the height of the second intifada, physical attacks on British Jews surge, too. Since violence in the Middle East invariably consists of attacks on Israel to which it is forced to respond, the appalling conclusion is that the more Jews are murdered in Israel, the more Jews are attacked in Britain.

Not all Britons who oppose Israel are anti-Semites, of course. Many are decent people who hate prejudice. Indeed, that is why they hate Israel—because they have been taught that it is like apartheid-era South Africa. Profoundly ignorant of the history of the Jewish people and of the Middle East, they have been indoctrinated with one of the Big Lies of human history. And it is because of their very high-mindedness that the better educated and more socially progressive they are, the more likely they are to spew Jew-hatred.

But why has this poison seeped into the British bloodstream? Why has the country that was once the cradle of the Enlightenment values of tolerance, objectivity, and reason departed so precipitately from its own tradition?

For one thing, Britain has always had an ambivalent relationship with the Jews. Medieval England actually led the European charge against them. The blood libel is thought to have originated in twelfth-century England; and in 1290, after numerous pogroms against its Jewish citizens, it expelled them altogether. It was not until 1656 that, for a variety of economic and religious reasons, Oliver Cromwell allowed Jews to return to England. Though they subsequently flourished there, a measure of social anti-Semitism persisted until the Holocaust.

Britain’s role in the creation of modern Israel is also a factor in British antagonism toward the Jewish state. In the early 1920s, the League of Nations entrusted Britain with the administration of Palestine, holding it responsible for “placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home.” For almost three decades, the British tried to evade that obligation in order to appease the Arabs. The Jews of Palestine thus found themselves fighting the British as well as the Arabs, a fact that caused lasting resentment in Britain. Public opinion recalls with undimmed bitterness the Jewish terrorism of that period, such as the 1946 destruction of the British headquarters at Jerusalem’s King David hotel. Arabism is still the default position at the Foreign Office, where sympathetic diplomats are dubbed “the camel corps.”

But a subtler reason exists for Britain’s embrace of the new anti-Semitism. After the Second World War, the radical Left set out to destroy the fundamentals of Western morality, but its campaign played out very differently in America and Britain. In America, it resulted in the culture wars, with conservatives, many churches, and sensible liberals launching a vigorous counterattack in defense of Western moral values—and, as it happened, Israel.

Exhausted by two world wars, shattered by the loss of empire, and hollowed out by the failure of the Church of England or a substantial body of intellectuals and elites to hold the line, Britain was uniquely vulnerable to the predations of the Left. The institutions that underpinned truth and morality—the traditional family and an education system that transmitted the national culture—collapsed. Britain’s monolithic intelligentsia soon embraced postmodernism, multiculturalism, victim culture, and a morally inverted hegemony of ideas in which the values of marginalized or transgressive groups replaced the values of the purportedly racist, oppressive West.

Further, people across the political spectrum became increasingly unable to make moral distinctions based on behavior. This erasing of the line between right and wrong produced a tendency to equate, and then invert, the roles of terrorists and of their victims, and to regard self-defense as aggression and the original violence as understandable and even justified. That attitude is, of course, inherently antagonistic to Israel, which was founded on the determination never to allow another genocide of Jews, to defend itself when attacked, and to destroy those who would destroy it. But for the Left, powerlessness is virtue; better for Jews to die than to kill, because only as dead victims can they be moral.

And this general endorsement of surrender feeds straight into a subterranean but potent resentment simmering in Europe. For over 60 years, a major tendency in European thought has sought to distance itself from moral responsibility for the Holocaust. The only way to do so, however, was somehow to blame the Jews for their own destruction; and that monstrous reasoning was inconceivable while the dominant narrative was of Jews as victims.

Now, however, the Palestinians have handed Europe a rival narrative. The misrepresentation of Israeli self-defense as belligerence, suggesting that Jews are not victims but aggressors, implicitly provides Europeans with the means to blame the destruction of European Jewry on its own misdeeds. As one influential left-wing editor said to me: “The Holocaust meant that for decades the Jews were untouchable. It’s such a relief that Israel means we don’t have to worry about that any more.”

It is no accident that Jews find themselves at the center of Britain’s modern convulsion. Today’s British prejudices rest on a repudiation of truth and a refusal to defend Western moral values. And it was the Jews who first gave the West those moral codes that underpin its civilization and that are now under siege.

If British politicians were to start speaking the truth about Israel’s history and defending Jews publicly, they might help stem the new anti-Semitism. Likewise, British Jews—who, unlike their American counterparts, are almost totally silent for fear of making things worse—need to put their heads above the parapet and start telling the truth about Israel. But for Jews who had allowed themselves to believe that they were truly at home in Britain, the new anti-Semitism is the end of an idyll.

Melanie Phillips, a British writer, is a commentator for the Daily Mail and the author of Londonistan. She blogs at http://www.melaniephillips.com.

http://www.city-journal.org/html/17_4_anti-semitism.html

Technorati –

ISLAMIC LOBBY ‘MPAC’ THE BULLY, Muslims bully Muslims over selling Israeli produce

November 5, 2007

[ISLAMIC LOBBY ‘MPAC’ THE BULLY]Muslims bully Muslims over selling Israeli produce12/10/2007By Rachel Fletcher
A campaign by the Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC) to bully Muslim shop-owners not to sell Israeli produce “verges on antisemitism”, an interfaith activist said this week.

Richard Stone, founder and president of Muslim-Jewish dialogue group Alif-Aleph UK, said the tactics by MPAC, which calls on its website for pressure against shops that carry Israeli stock, were “not constructive”.

The lobby group’s campaign, timed to coincide with the holy month of Ramadan, includes calls to boycott Sabar Bros in Slough for stocking Israeli “blood” dates, giving the shop’s address and phone number.

Complaining that the shop “supports Israel”, the site urges: “Don’t be silent in the face of oppression — please phone them now and tell them you will boycott their shop unless they stop selling Israeli produce.”

MPAC’s website states: “The dates in your household which you may be using to break your fasts with, despite being from a Muslim-owned shop, may well be fuelling the Israeli economy.”

It said eight Muslim-owned businesses in Manchester had been visited. Six of them carried Israeli stock.

The campaigners complain that several businessmen — whose shops they did not name — had said they would continue to sell the Israeli products.

Mr Stone told the JC: “This sort of digging around to find the smallest possible bit of Israeli activity, anything that could possibly be criticised, verges in my view on antisemitism.

“This encourages people to be hostile to people who have sympathy for the Israeli position, in the same way I would not want Jewish people to promote hostility to Palestinians on the grounds of what a minority of Palestinian people do.

“A lot of anti-Israel stuff has tones which slip over into being antisemitic. There should be nothing political to divide Muslims and Jews in this country and importing the crisis is often found objectionable by Israelis and Palestinians here.”

Sabar Hussain, the owner of the Slough shop, Sabar Bros, said he was receiving four or five calls a day, pressuring him to stop selling Israeli produce.

He told the JC: “We are open for everyone, not just Muslims. Is it illegal to sell Israeli dates? There is demand for them.Everyone in Slough sells these dates, so why are they mentioning my name? If you don’t want to buy Israeli products, don’t buy them.”

Mr Hussain, who said he intended to contact his local MP, added: “Some callers say things like, ‘You are not Muslim, you’re supporting Israel.’ If people were polite I might consider what they are asking, but this makes me want to go on selling them.”

MPAC’s website claimed that the Appna Cash and Carry in Manchester had declined to put up their flyers for fear of offending, but had a policy of not knowingly selling Israeli dates.

Manager Naseer Ahmed said he had long refused to stock Israeli dates, but had never heard of MPAC or been approached by them.

“It is possible they spoke to someone on the shop floor,” he said, adding: “I have political reasons [for not carrying Israeli stock]. In the time of apartheid, I didn’t sell South African products.”

An MPAC spokesman told the JC: “Some people in the Muslim community have a village mentality. They can’t think ethically and are more profit-motivated.”

http://www.thejc.com/Home.aspx?ParentId=m11&AId=55936&ATypeId=1&secid=11&prev=true

Technorati –

Christian bookstore director murdered in Gaza by “Palestinian” Muslims

October 21, 2007

Christian bookstore director murdered in Gaza by “Palestinian” Muslims
http://foehammer.net/2007/10/christian-bookstore-director-murdered-in-gaza-by-muslims.html

Gaza (MNN)  Gaza’s minority Christian community was badly shaken over the weekend after the director of the Christian Bookstore run by the Bible Society was found beaten, stabbed and shot to death. Rami Ayyad was 29 years old and an active member of the Gaza Baptist Church.

Technorati –

ADL Responds To CAIR; Releases Photo Of Group’s Leader Speaking Next To [fascist] Hezbollah Flag – CAIR a bastion of hatred

September 3, 2007

ADL Responds To CAIR; Releases Photo Of Group’s Leader Speaking Next To [fascist] Hezbollah Flag
ADL ^

ADL Responds To Open Letter From CAIR; Releases Photo Of Group’s Leader Speaking Next To Hezbollah Flag

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/Teror_92/5122_92.htm

ADL Responds To Open Letter From CAIR; Releases Photo Of Group’s Leader Speaking Next To Hezbollah Flag
New York, NY, August 30, 2007 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), in response to an “open letter” from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) suggesting that their organization has “acted numerous times … to condemn terrorism,” today released a photograph of CAIR’s executive director speaking at a podium next to a known anti-Semite and the flag of the terrorist group Hezbollah.

Glen S. Lewy, ADL National Chair, and Abraham H. Foxman, National Director, issued the following statement:

The Council on American-Islamic Relations has once again squandered an opportunity to unequivocally condemn terrorists – such as Hezbollah and Hamas – by name and to address its past affiliation with the Islamic Association for Palestine, whose ideology is rooted in virulent anti-Semitism.

The August 29, 2007, “Open Letter from CAIR to ADL” is yet another weary tactic by CAIR’s leadership to divert attention from its troubling roots and disingenuous record. CAIR Chairman Parvez Ahmed and Executive Director Nihad Awad continue to willfully ignore legitimate questions.  Attacking ADL will not make the real issues go away.
 
An organization that purportedly seeks to enter into dialogue with ADL should firmly denounce the anti-Semitic rhetoric and support for terror organizations that regularly occur at rallies, instead of sponsoring and joining them.

ADL’s 94-year history supporting the civil rights of all in this country, including Muslims, and our record of teaching respect for all religions through interfaith and diversity education programs is unparalleled.  Unfortunately, CAIR has shown that it is not a legitimate partner in this vital work.

In the attached photo released by ADL, CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad is shown delivering a speech under a Hezbollah flag during a rally on April 20, 2002 in Washington, DC.  To his right stands Imam Abdul Alim Musa, the anti-Semitic head of Masjid Al Islam mosque. 

The Radical Evil Of The Palestinian Arab Population

August 7, 2007

The Radical Evil Of The Palestinian Arab Population

Wednesday, June 20, 2007

The battle over the Palestinian Arab territory in the Gaza Strip is a battle between extremists and more radical extremists. Last week, the extremists, led by Holocaust denier and Fatah strongman Mahmoud Abbas, were ousted in a bloody coup by the radical extremists, Islamist terrorist group Hamas.

Yet, instead of allowing Fatah and Hamas to slug it out, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice informed newly appointed Abbas frontman Prime Minister Salam Fayyad that America would resume aid to the Palestinian Authority. “I told the prime minister that we want to work with his government and support his efforts to enforce the rule of law and to ensure a better life for the Palestinian people,” Rice told the media.

Ah, the fabled Palestinian people. The Palestinian people, who simply want “a better life.” The Palestinian people, who, President George W. Bush has repeatedly informed us, “long for a society in which they can raise their children in peace and hope.”

The Palestinian people, who support, fund and execute suicide bombings. The Palestinian people, who dress their toddlers in bomb belts and then take family snapshots. The Palestinian people, who cheered on September 11 as the World Trade Center towers fell. The Palestinian people, who followed terrorist extraordinaire Yasser Arafat, supported Saddam Hussein, shredded the blooming rose that was once Christian Lebanon, and almost toppled the Western-friendly Jordanian monarchy.

The Palestinian people, who destroy relics on the Temple Mount, openly call for the destruction of the state of Israel, ally with Syria and Iran, and elect Hamas. The Palestinian people, who teach their children that the Holocaust is a fairy tale, and that Jews routinely poison Palestinian candy. The Palestinian people, who stage injuries in order to solicit Western media sympathy, and then roar madly as they hold up their hands, red with the blood of murdered Israeli soldiers.

The idea of an entire population corrupted by bloodthirsty anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism violates modern ideas of politics. According to the Bush administration, the problem with the Palestinian Arabs isn’t the Palestinian Arabs — it’s their leadership. During Yasser Arafat’s tenure, the problem was Yasser Arafat, not the hundreds of thousands who followed him. Now the problem is Hamas, not the hundreds of thousands who supported and elected them.

The problem runs deeper than a few figureheads. The Palestinian Arab population is rotten to the core. There are many to be blamed: Yasser Arafat, who lined his pockets with cash and subsidized murder while playing the victim of oppression. An Arab world that refused to absorb the Palestinian population, preferring to use it as a political pawn against Israel. The United Nations, which suckled the Palestinian Arab population into dependency at the international teat. Israel, for emboldening the Palestinian Arabs by conceding to them.

But in the end, the blame must lie with the Palestinian Arabs themselves. They have accepted their role with relish. They are as responsible for their government’s longstanding evil as the Germans were for the Nazis’.

It is far more convenient, however, for the Bush administration and the international community to treat the Palestinian Arabs’ thoroughgoing radicalism as a top-down problem. Throw a bit of money at the Holocaust denier, pressure Israel into concessions and hope that the Palestinian Arabs will abandon their attachment to Islamofascism, the logic runs.

Such policy demonstrates an adolescent understanding of Palestinian Arab motivation. Palestinian Arabs will not be bribed: The West has bribed them for decades, and the Palestinian Arabs have demonstrated their preference for suicide bombing over working toilets. Palestinian Arabs will not be moderated: Israel has ceded land continuously since 1993, and the Palestinian Arabs have demonstrated their preference for murder over peace. Palestinian Arabs must be fought on their own terms: as a people dedicated to an evil cause.

So far, Israel and America have willfully blinded themselves to the harsh reality of popular evil. They have refused to come to terms with the harsh fact that collective choices require collective treatment.

Treating collective problems as problems of individuals is a vacuous panacea. Waiting for Arafat to die of old age did not moderate the Palestinian Arabs; supporting one radical over another will not moderate them, either. The Palestinian Arab population breeds terrorism, anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism. If Israel and America refuse to recognize that simple truth, they will continue to pay the price in blood and treasure.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/BenShapiro/2007/06/20/the_radical_evil_of_the_palestinian_arab_population

Technorati –

Zionists are trying the best to accomedate Arabs that cowardly left Israel “palestine” in 1948, but Arab racists & Islamofascists (within the Arab Muslim mainstream) still deny Jews’ rights to return to their historic land

July 24, 2007

Zionists are trying the best to accomedate Arabs that cowardly left Israel “palestine” in 1948, but Arab racists & Islamofascists (within the Arab Muslim mainstream) still deny Jews’ rights to return to their historic land.

The Right of Return of the Jewish People
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/885657.html

_________________

Technorati –