Wednesday, September 03, 2014
From Ian:
Isi Leibler: Candidly speaking: Déjà vu: Jewish renegades spewing vitriol against their people
Isi Leibler: Candidly speaking: Déjà vu: Jewish renegades spewing vitriol against their people
The more naïve bleeding-heart fellow travelers display a softer version of anti-Israelism, ignore the criminality of Islamic fascism, and emphasize that they are motivated by humanity and acting in the best interests of the Jewish people. History will judge them even more harshly than the liberals who embraced Stalin and refused to recognize the reality of the evil empire as constituted by the Soviet Union. Many of them today are also academics, like their predecessors who were promoting the “peace camp” during the Cold War, which effectively amounted to advancing Soviet foreign policy objectives.'These 6 million will not go gently into the night'
The liberal and left-wing media, exemplified by The New York Times and The Guardian, which provide extensive coverage and editorial endorsement for these demented views, will be judged even more harshly than for their previous unconscionable defense of the Soviet Union. Although New York Times Jerusalem correspondent Jodi Rudoren is far from being an anti-Zionist renegade, some of her reports about Gaza are reminiscent of Walter Duranty’s reports of the Soviet Union during the 1930s in the Times, which became notorious for understating Stalin’s criminal behavior.
In summary, the manifestation of Jewish renegades in our times comes with a sense of a déjà vu. Its influence feels magnified due to the impact of electronic media and social networking. We must remind ourselves that we live in democratic societies in which people are free to deceive. Our legitimate source of regret is that these one-dimensional Jewish anti-Semites achieve so much media exposure.
We must constantly challenge their attempts to portray themselves as mainstream, and emphasize that they represent a minuscule component of the Jewish world, which despises them.
The Middle East is burning. Barbaric Islamist hordes are slaughtering innocent civilians by the tens of thousands. Women and children are raped, killed and sold to slavery. Others are beheaded and their heads put on display.Douglas Murray: How can Jews oppose Muslim anti-Semitism without being ‘Islamophobic’?
The scope of this savagery boggles the mind. Meanwhile, the president of the United States curtails arms shipments to Israel, a staunch U.S. ally and the only democracy in the region. Without verification, the administration accepts Palestinian ‘civilian’ casualty claims and chooses to punish Israel.
Israel used precautions unheard of in the history of warfare to minimize non-combatant casualties in its defensive war against Hamas, a terror organization that committed a double war crime: firing at Israeli civilians and using Palestinian civilians as human shields. The fact is, Palestinian reporting cannot be trusted.
Well, no less a witness than the left-wing Muslim firebrand Mehdi Hasan has said that ‘anti-Semitism isn’t just tolerated in some sections of the British Muslim community; it’s routine and commonplace’. Just last year Hasan wrote: ‘Any Muslims reading this article – if they are honest with themselves – will know instantly what I am referring to. It’s our dirty little secret.’ He went on: ‘To be honest, I’ve always been reluctant to write a column such as this. To accuse my fellow Muslims of being soft on the scourge of anti-Semitism isn’t easy; I feel as if I am “dobbing in” the community… [But] as a community, we do have a “Jewish problem”. There is no point pretending otherwise.’Douglas Murray: "Dangerous Laws"
Now this causes a problem, doesn’t it? Because the claim made by most Jewish and non-Jewish mainstream voices is that the Muslim extremists constitute a tiny proportion of the Muslim population in Britain and other Western countries. They maintain that the ‘vast majority’ are overwhelmingly ‘moderate’ and opposed to all such extremist views. Yet when it comes to Jews it would appear – as Hasan implies – that a very large proportion of Muslims, perhaps a majority, are anti-Semitic. So how do Jews oppose Muslim anti-Semitism without being ‘Islamophobic’?
It has become increasingly plain in recent years that there are areas of our country in which different rules apply. When the former Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali, said that there were areas of Britain which were effectively "no-go areas" for non-Muslims, he was ridiculed and dismissed as a scare-monger by much of the media and the political class.
Earlier this year, the Chief Inspector of Constabulary, Tom Winsor, was condemned in the same way and by the same forces when he said that there were areas of the country which constituted no-go areas for the police, and inside which minority communities administered their own forms of justice.
In Rotherham and many other places this analysis -- far from being untrue -- rings true with a dreadful clarity. There were local norms which the wider country might not recognize, but which were certainly recognized in Rotherham and elsewhere in Britain. Here were places where religion and ethnicity, and the fear of accusations of "racism" and "Islamophobia," trump everything -- including women's rights and, it is now clear, even children's rights.
This parallel set of "laws" was not instituted officially of course. The Rotherham report simply shows that these new, unofficial laws of behaviour were instituted informally. Thousands of members of the local Muslim Pakistani community must have understood them to have existed. And thousands of non-Muslim, white British, Sikh British and other groups must have understood them to exist as well. The officials of Rotherham certainly understood them to exist.
