Friday, March 29, 2013

Mordechai Kedar: The Islamic Winter Blows into Jerusalem


by Mordechai Kedar

Read the article in the original עברית
Read the article in Italiano (translated by Yehudit Weisz, edited by Angelo Pezzana)

One of the biggest complaints of the Syrian regime against the involvement of Qatar in Syria during the past two years is that the Emir of Qatar has been utilizing all of his wealth in fighting the wrong enemy: instead of fighting Israel, which is the true problem of Arabs and Muslims, the Emir of Qatar uses his strength and wealth in a fight against the "resistance" regimes, mainly Syria and Libya, who take a strong stand against Israel and Zionism. Qatar does not usually respond to accusations of this sort, because everyone knows that Israel has always been used to hide the real problems of the Arab and Muslim world, which center around corrupt, rotten, cruel and illegitimate regimes.
However, the Syrian propaganda has ultimately succeeded. Last Tuesday [March 26], while the Jewish people celebrated the first day of the holiday of Freedom, the Arab League summit met in Doha, the capital of Qatar and took two important decisions: one was to arm the Syrian opposition, which also includes - as everyone knows - some al-Qaeda style jihadi groups, such as " Jabhat al-Nusrah", to oust Bashar Asad and his regime from the   institutions of the League and to make the Syrian opposition the official representation of Syria in these institutions. And indeed, behind the sign for "the Syrian Arab Republic" in the summit conference, sat Muath al-Khatib, head of the coalition of Syrian opposition organizations.

The second decision was to establish a fund of a billion dollars in order to strengthen the Arab and Muslim character of Jerusalem, and to add a sense of validity and resolve to this decision, Qatar announced that it is donating a half billion dollars to the fund. According to the decision, the fund will serve to finance projects and plans to strengthen the steadfastness of the residents of Jerusalem and to strengthen the Palestinian economy so that it will be able to free itself from dependence on the Israeli economy. "The Islamic Development Bank" was appointed to manage the fund. in parallel, the summit conference decided to form a delegation of ministers headed by the prime minister and foreign minister of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim al-Thani, and it will include members from Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Palestine, Egypt and Morocco as well as the secretary-general of the League. The function of this delegation will be to pressure the American government in the Palestinian matter in general and the issue of Jerusalem in particular.

 The question at the moment is whether to relate seriously to Qatar's intentions, especially in light of the fact that in about one more month we will mark forty six years of the unification of Jerusalem. This number is important, because in another four years the Islamic world will mark fifty years of the loss of Jerusalem and its return to the Jewish bosom, and an era of fifty years has a symbolic significance of permanence and perpetuity. Our assumption must be that Qatar relates to the matter of Jerusalem with total seriousness, for several reasons:

1. Islamic rule in East Jerusalem, and especially in the area of the Temple Mount, implies, according to Islam, the abolition of Judaism, and is supposed to prove the Islamic notion that Islam has come into the world in order to replace Judaism and Christianity. Muslims cannot tolerate Jewish rule on the Temple Mount because from their point of view it means that Judaism has again become a relevant religion after Islam had superseded it when Islam arrived in the world in the seventh century CE.

2. More than anything else, Jewish rule on the Temple Mount symbolizes the Israeli victories over the Arab world in the wars since 1948. This is an insult to the Arab honor and Islamic pride.

3. There is not and cannot be another interpretation in this matter: the Jews can live as "dhimmis" (a protected people) of Islam as long as they accept upon themselves the limits that the Muslim regime places upon them, and in no way can they be permitted to live as sovereign and ruling masters on the land and in the places that Islam has consecrated for itself such as the Temple Mount, which, since the end of the seventh century, has been called "the al-Aqsa Mosque".

4. Since the "Arab Spring" - which Qatar funded and promoted in many ways - is seen as a blood bath whose victims are Arabs and Muslims, Qatar must atone for its sins by using some of its resources against the ultimate historical rival, which is Judaism, and specifically, Israel. 

5. The fact that the president of the United States takes a conciliatory approach toward the Palestinians and their Arab brothers, means that there is a significant chance that the present administration will be sympathetic to the Palestinian, Arab and Islamic demands regarding Jerusalem.

6. Within the Arab and Muslim world there is an almost unanimous consensus that sees Jerusalem as Islamic property. This consensus allows Qatar to lead in a matter that almost everyone agrees upon, for a change.

7. The battle for Jerusalem is almost the only thing that all of the Palestinian streams agree on, and therefore it can be used as the basis for reunification of Fatah and Hamas.

8. In Israel there are more than a few "bleeding hearts" who think that giving up Jerusalem will appease the Arabs and Muslims and after that, they will let Israel live in peace. They call for "compromise", meaning that Israel should give up East Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount, and Qatar can depend on them too in the struggle against Israel in this matter.

What Can We Expect?

A billion dollars is a large amount, very large, and Qatar can do many things with it in Jerusalem, all of which are allowed according to Israeli law: purchasing buildings and lots from Jews and Christians at an exorbitant price; acting to prevent Jews and Christians from purchasing buildings and lots; establishing civil social organizations and Islamic and general "charity" institutions together with Jews and Christians who particcipate, whether from naivete or malice; Supporting "maintenance" activities by the Wakf in the Temple Mount; support of activities for adults and youth in the Temple Mount organized by the northern and southern Islamic movements in Israel; issuing grants to  the Arab residents of Jerusalem for building, both with a permit and without one; issuing grants to Arab residents of Jerusalem for buildings that have been destroyed by the state or by the city; funding organizations that act to prevent the destruction of buildings; increasing the media coverage of al-Jazeera - the jihadi channel of Qatar - in Jerusalem, in order to renew awareness of "the occupation" after the events of the "Arab Spring" displaced it from the center of the world's attention; funding suits of individuals for restitution of property from individuals, the city and the Israel Land Authority; funding of suits to delay and cancel the city's development plans; international activities for increasing awareness of the Israeli "occupation" in Jerusalem; funding for convening international conferences on the subject of "the Judaization of Jerusalem"; activities against Israeli publications abroad that show Jerusalem as the capital of Israel; funding for appeals to international organizations and tribunals against the steps that Israel takes in Jerusalem; funding of the Arabic educational system in Jerusalem in order to prevent Israeli Ministry of Education from setting foot in it; funding for establishment and development of infrastructures (water, sewage, electricity, communications, roads, sidewalks and parks) in East Jerusalem; funding for the establishment of mosques in East Jerusalem; funding for Israeli NGOs such as "Ir Amim" and similar ones via the New Israel Fund or American funds such as the Ford Foundation; funding of Israeli politicians who support the division of Jerusalem; funding of international "understand the reality" delegations in Jerusalem; funding for "roots" journeys for people from the United States and Europe to Jerusalem; funding for books and publications about the Islamic past and the "dismal present" of Jerusalem; support for consolidation of Muslim foreign workers - and especially from Eritrea - in Jerusalem; funding an organization for demonstrations in Jerusalem in order to highlight its problems in the news media; covert funding of martyrs' families who have sacrificed themselves and those who will sacrifice themselves in terror attacks in Jerusalem.

These are only a few of the activities that Qatar will be able to fund, either openly or indirectly. Some of these activities are happening already!!! It's important to note that Qatar is capable of streaming money into Israel by way of funds, companies and organizations that act legally in Europe or the United States, and it is extremely difficult in a democratic country like Israel to put a stop to the flow of these monies and to stop the activity that is funded by them. 

It could be that the Israeli legislature will have to use the Basic Law on Jerusalem in order to widen the authorities of the state in a way that will be able to cope effectively with the threats of Qatar to bring an "Islamic winter" to Jerusalem that it has been supporting since December of 2010. Democracy does not have to allow jihad to be waged against it, even if this jihad uses means that appear to be legal. This is called "defensive democracy", and a democratic state that refrains from defending itself is a "suicidal democracy".
Qatar's support for anti-semites is not new: only a few months ago the Emir of Qatar visited the Gaza Strip and left the terrorist government of Hamas almost a half billion dollars, and not to fund a delegation of "Lovers of Zion" in the Strip. With this, Qatar has proven that it is a state that supports terror, and in the most official way. If the Jewish people and its Christian supporters do not wake up in time, we might find ourselves victims of the jihad that Qatar has declared on Israel in the matter of Jerusalem. The Israeli legislature must take immediate action in order to lay down the legal infrastructure for the Israeli and Jewish defensive battle for the capital of the Jews since 3000 years ago.

The Jewish and Christian world must use their political abilities and financial resources  to preempt the encroaching evil that is threatening Jerusalem, brought in by the desert tribes and funded by the monies from the black gold.

In November of the year 636 CE the Islamic siege of Jerusalem, which was then under the command of the Byzantine bishop Sopronius, began. Half a year afterward, toward the end of April, 637, after Khaliph Umar bin al-Khattab arrived at the gates of the city, Sopronius  surrendered and handed the keys of Jerusalem over to the cruel ruler of the desert tribes. The question that the world is now presented with is: will the keys of the holy city again be handed over to the tribes of the desert who enter on the wings of petrodollars from the Arabian Peninsula? Has the time not yet come to undo the legacy of criminal archaeologist, Moshe Dayan, who granted control over the site of the Temple to the Wakf so that he - Dayan - could secretly excavate it? Will the Jewish and Christian world allow oil monies to subjugate again the holy city and bring its residents to their knees?


Dr. Kedar is available for lectures

Dr. Mordechai Kedar
( is an Israeli scholar of Arabic and Islam, a lecturer at Bar-Ilan University and the director of the Center for the Study of the Middle East and Islam (under formation), Bar Ilan University, Israel. He specializes in Islamic ideology and movements, the political discourse of Arab countries, the Arabic mass media, and the Syrian domestic arena.

Translated from Hebrew by Sally Zahav with permission from the author.

Additional articles by Dr. Kedar

Source: The article is published in the framework of the Center for the Study of the Middle East and Islam (under formation), Bar Ilan University, Israel. Also published in Makor Rishon, a Hebrew weekly newspaper.

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the author.

Slice of Gazan Life: Baker Bombers

by Jonathan S. Tobin

In recent weeks, the New York Times has been working hard to paint those bent on using violence against Israel in the most attractive light as possible. It memorably used the cover story of its Sunday magazine on March 18 to allow a dedicated opponent of Zionism to falsely portray the architects of the next intifada as civil rights advocates. That polemic eclipses their most recent attempt to humanize terrorists, in terms of the story’s political intent. But today’s feature on the latest pastry craze in Gaza is in its own way just as outrageous.

The piece, slugged under the category of “Gaza Journal” with the headline “Ex-Prisoners Bring Taste of West Bank to Gaza,” concerns the activities of two Palestinians who were released from Israeli jails as part of the ransom deal in which kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit was freed. The pair opened a beachfront shop in which they sell a particular dessert that is associated with the West Bank city of Nablus, from which they have been exiled. The Times portrays the two as a couple of Horatio Alger-style strivers who are not only working hard but whose efforts illustrate the fact that Gazans no longer have easy access to the cuisine of Nablus because of Israeli restrictions. But anyone seeking to use this as either an illustration of Israeli perfidy or the pluck of the Palestinians needs to sift through most of the Times pastry puffery to the bottom of the piece to see why Nadu Abu Turki and Hamouda Sala were the guests of the Israeli prison service until their Hamas overlords sprung them: they were both convicted of planting bombs and conspiring to commit murder as members of Hamas terror cells.

The conceit of the piece is to show how plucky Palestinians have adapted to onerous Israeli measures that have prevented people in Gaza from consuming nabulsia, a variant of the kenafeh dessert popular in Nablus. This is a special hardship for those West Bankers whose terrorist activities have led to actions that stranded them in Gaza. So for the apparently not inconsiderable number of homesick bomb builders and snipers stuck in the strip, the two ex-prisoners’ bakery is a godsend.

Were the point of the article to show us how these terrorists have changed their ways and traded murder for pastry, it might have been a tale of redemption. But there is nothing of the sort in the piece. Instead, we are left with the impression that the two dessert-makers are merely biding their time selling nabulsia simply because their main occupation—trying to kill Jews—has been taken away from them by being deposited in Gaza.

As the Times notes toward the bottom of the piece:
For Mr. Abu Turki and Mr. Salah, the kenafeh business represents a kind of re-entry into normal society.
Mr. Abu Turki was convicted by Israel and sentenced to 15 years for conspiracy to murder, stone-throwing, planting a bomb and membership in an illegal organization — the military wing of Hamas — according to an Israel Prison Service list of those released under the Shalit deal.
Mr. Salah, another Hamas member, was sentenced to 22 years for conspiracy to murder, planting a bomb and shooting at people. They were among about 160 released prisoners to be exiled to Gaza.
But nowhere in the piece is there any sign of remorse about their murderous activities or a decision to try something else. The only line in the piece that alludes to their current politics is the comment of one that Gaza is “an open air prison.”

But if those living there resent the fact that they no longer have free access to jobs in Israel or travel to the West Bank, they can thank Abu Turki, Salah and their Hamas overlords for that. The border is closed except for humanitarian cases that receive medical care in Israeli hospitals specifically because Hamas has waged war on the Jewish state, launching terror attacks intended to kidnap, kill and maim people. Also unmentioned in the article is the fact that the Islamist tyranny there has continued to use the strip as a launching pad for rocket fire at Israeli towns and villages.

Peace will be possible when Palestinians give up their dream of destroying Israel—a goal that is integral to Hamas ideology—and concentrate on more productive activities. But so long as Hamas rules Gaza—and seeks to extend their hold to the West Bank—that won’t be possible. Hope will come the day we read stories like this in the Times in which ex-terrorists renounce their past rather than merely grouse about its consequences. The taste of nabulsia can’t wipe away Hamas’s record of terror or the consciences of two bakers with blood on their hands. 

Jonathan S. Tobin


Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Crowning Erdogan as the New King of Islamists

by Ryan Mauro


Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s apology to Turkey for the deaths of its citizens during the 2010 flotilla raid misses the point. The tension with Turkey was never really about the operation. It was about making Israel bow to Turkey, crowning Prime Minister Erdogan as the new king of the Islamists.

“Israel apologized to Turkey. Dear prime minister, we are grateful that you let our country experience this pride,” says billboards that have been set up in Ankara celebrating the Israeli apology.

The actions taken by the Turkish government since Netanyahu’s apology show that its goal is submission, not reconciliation.

Erdogan is extending his time in the spotlight by demanding that Israel pay $1 million to each of the nine casualties’ families, ten times the amount Israel has offered. He isn’t yet dropping his case against the Israeli generals involved in the raid, nor is he fully restoring diplomatic ties with Israel. And he’s announced that he will visit the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip in what is a thinly-concealed victory lap.

The aspirations of the Turkish government were frankly stated by Foreign Minister Davutoglu. Last May, he said, “We will manage the wave of change in the Middle East. Just as the ideal we have in our minds about Turkey, we have an ideal of a new Middle East. We will be the leader and the spokesperson of a new peaceful order, no matter what they say.”

The Turkish government has announced its intention to build a mega-mosque in Istanbul that will have the tallest minarets in the world and can “be seen from every corner of the Bosphorus.” This is a reflection of its grand vision of dominance.

Erdogan was rated as the second most influential Muslim leader of 2012, only behind Saudi King Abdullah. Despite his reputation as a “moderate,” Erdogan has said that Hamas is a “resistance” group, not a terrorist group. He has won the admiration of Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal, who said, “Turkey’s support for the people of Syria and Palestine is unforgettable. My brother Erdogan, thank goodness God gave you so much. And you deserve it. You are also a leader in the Muslim world.”

The Turkish government isn’t “moderate” and trying to position itself to help bring peace in the Middle East. Instead, its top officials are promoting the themes against Israel’s right to exist that sustain the conflict.

Erdogan recently said that “Islamophobia” and Zionism are crimes against humanity on par with fascism and anti-Semitism. He also called Israel a “terrorist state” during the latest round of fighting with Hamas. This rhetoric isn’t as inflammatory as Iran’s pledges to wipe Israel off the map, but the point is the same. A “terrorist state” should not exist, nor does a philosophy that is equivalent to fascism.

The Turkish government has adopted the Muslim Brotherhood doctrine of “gradualism.” As the ruling AKP party is strengthened, it has more room to implement its Islamist agenda.

In July, the government proposed limits on freedom of speech for the sake of “public morality,” “national security,” “public order” and to “prevent pro-war propaganda, discriminations and hate.” Turkey is now  believed to have “more journalists in detention than any other state in the world.” Pianist Fazil Say, , a critic of Erdogan’s, was arrested for insulting “religious values.” A human rights organization defending him was charged with “denigration of the state.”

Since the AKP has taken power, the number of mosques has grown from 76,000 to 93,000, while not a single public school has been added. In the first seven years of its rule, the number of honor killings in Turkey increased by 14 times. In 2009, its rate of honor killings was five times that of Pakistan.

The increased Islamization of Turkey corresponds with increased discrimination against Christians and Jews and hostility to the U.S. and Israel. The Turkish Association of Protestant Christians complains of a “root of intolerance” resulting in anti-Christian discrimination.

A 2009 poll found that 55% of Turks do not want non-Muslims to have positions in justice or security. About 44% don’t want to be treated by Christian or Jewish doctors. About 57% are against having atheists as neighbors, while 42% feel that way about Jews and 35% about Christians. Interestingly, 54% don’t want “Shariah supporters” as their neighbors, which may be a reference to Salafists.

Nonetheless, the statistics and aforementioned facts show that the Turkish government is transitioning the country from a secular identity to an Islamist one. And Turkey is increasingly looking to export its ideology, whether it is in Syria through rebel forces or the U.S. through the Fethullah Gulen network and outreach to Native American tribes.

The political success of Erdogan is alarming. One of the best advantages the West enjoys in the ideological war is that Islamists usually lose much of their support once they gain power. The most recent entry in this pattern is the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. On the other hand, the popularity of the AKP and Erdogan has increased in Turkey since they came into power.

Israel may stand strong against Iran, Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, but it caved to Turkey. The apology and the West’s reluctance to confront Turkey sends the signal that Erdogan is the leader of the region.

Ryan Mauro


Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

The Spiritual Journey of Magdi Allam

by Robert Spencer


Reprinted from

The highest-profile convert to Roman Catholicism in recent memory, Magdi Cristiano Allam, has left the Catholic Church.

Allam, who was baptized in the Vatican by Pope Benedict XVI on Easter day 2008, explained that what “more than any other factor drove me away from the Church” was the “legitimization of Islam as the true religion of Allah as the one true God, Muhammad as a true prophet, the Koran as a sacred text, and of mosques as places of worship.”

Allam declared that contrary to all that, he was “convinced” that Islam was an “inherently violent ideology,” and that he was “even more convinced that Europe will eventually submit to Islam.”

Perhaps if the Church he joined in 2008 had been more resolute in standing for the defense of Judeo-Christian values and civilization, he would not have such a dark vision of the future. But there’s the rub: the determination to seek accommodation with Islam at all costs, even as Muslims persecute Christians with increasing ferocity all over the globe, is near-universal in the Catholic Church.

Everywhere Catholic prelates, even at the highest levels, pursue a “dialogue” with Muslim leaders, whose responses to that dialogue always solely involve not genuine discussion of matters of concern, but thinly veiled criticism of Christianity and calls to accept Islam. Those prelates are almost universally punctilious about avoiding ever saying anything remotely critical or challenging to their aggressive, expansionist partner in this “dialogue,” although that partner is convinced of his own superiority and of the inevitability of the removal of all obstacles to his will.

And as if to illustrate the reasonableness of Allam’s frustration, Matthew Schmitz of First Things, one of the leading Catholic publications in the United States, took the opportunity of his apostasy not to engage in any introspection about the Church’s resolutely irenic clinging to the 1960s-era model of “dialogue” even as it is confronted around the world with an increasingly violent and supremacist Islam, but to excoriate Allam, a former Muslim, for his misunderstanding of Islam: “In retrospect, Allam’s disappointment seems inevitable. If we mistake Islam for a mere ideology of violence, we risk mistaking Christianity as merely an ideology that allows us to oppose that violence. Yet Christ did not come to this earth or found his church to oppose Islam but to propose the gospel. Not to eclipse the moon, but to reveal the Son.”

Magdi Allam knows far better than Matthew Schmitz, who has previously written an apologia for Islamic law, glossing over its elements that mandate the subjugation of women, the oppression of non-Muslims, and its denial of the freedom of speech and the freedom of conscience, that Islam is not “a mere ideology of violence.” But whatever else it is, it is also clearly exactly that: an ideology of violence (cf. Qur’an 2:190-193; 4:89; 8:39; 8:60; 9:5; 9:29; 47:4, etc.). Schmitz thinks that Allam’s recognition of that fact, and frustration with the Catholic Church’s general failure to grasp its implications, disqualifies him as an analyst of the Islamic jihad threat: “Benedict’s pontificate has come to an end; in time Islam will, too. Neither event should affect whether or not one affirms Christian truth or chooses to be in communion with the bishop of Rome. That Allam so grievously fails to understand this aspect of Christian truth ought to warn us against the judgment of Islam he shares with many other anti-Islam advocates.”

I don’t know Magdi Allam personally and don’t know anything beyond his published statements about why he has left the Catholic Church. I am not going to leave the Catholic Church over its failure to defend those powerless Christians who are facing ever more violent persecution from Muslims worldwide, as I am aware that the Church is made up entirely of imperfect, sinful people. I also know, with all due respect to those to whom respect is due, that the charism of infallibility is nowhere taught as inhering in bishops’ or even popes’ prudential judgments about how to deal with the threat of jihad and Islamic supremacism.

I share Magdi Allam’s frustration over that failure of the Church to address that persecution in any meaningful way. I share his outrage over statements like that of Bishop Robert McManus of Worcester, Massachusetts, who barred me from speaking at a Catholic conference over concerns that “Mr. Spencer’s talk about extreme, militant Islamists and the atrocities that they have perpetrated globally might undercut the positive achievements that we Catholics have attained in our inter-religious dialogue with devout Muslims.” Why would a talk about “extreme, militant Islamists and the atrocities that they have perpetrated globally” undercut dialogue with Muslims who profess to reject those atrocities and the interpretation of Islam that underlies and justifies them? If they reject the jihadists’ understanding of Islam, why wouldn’t they welcome and applaud an honest discussion of that understanding of Islam, which presumably they oppose as much as I do?

And that is the problem with all this spurious “dialogue.” Muslim Brotherhood theorist Sayyid Qutb explained: “The chasm between Islam and Jahiliyyah [the society of unbelievers] is great, and a bridge is not to be built across it so that the people on the two sides may mix with each other, but only so that the people of Jahiliyyah may come over to Islam.” That’s what “interfaith dialogue” is for Islamic supremacists: a vehicle for proselytizing.

Magdi Allam is right, and righteous, to be appalled at Catholic leaders’ failure to understand that, and – despite all their rhetoric about identifying with the downtrodden — to “speak truth to power” and “give voice to the voiceless” in any sense beyond rhetoric. I am sorry that he has left the Church, and hope that the bland complacency and excusing of Islam-inspired atrocities of Catholics like Matthew Schmitz will soon give way to a recognition that what Magdi Allam sees so clearly is indeed a real and immense threat, and that his prophetic voice must be heeded, before all is lost – which could be quite a bit sooner than anyone thinks.

Robert Spencer


Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Erdogan Doing his Best to Make Israel Regret Apology

by Shlomo Cesana and Eli Leon

Economy and Trade Minister Naftali Bennett: Turkish PM Recep Tayyip Erdoğan conducting a personal and vitriolic campaign at the expense of Israel-Turkey relations • Israeli officials: Level of compensation families will receive has not yet been determined.
Turkish PM Recep Tayyip Erdoğan says apology deal obligates Israel to cooperate with Turkey on Israel-Palestinian peace process.
Photo credit: AFP
Shlomo Cesana and Eli Leon


Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Europe: The Submission That Dare Not Speak Its Name

by Guy Millière

What is taking shape could be a shift toward the end of the Jewish presence in Europe.
Exactly one year ago, a killer entered the courtyard of a Jewish school in Toulouse, France, and shot in cold blood a rabbi and three children. He said he had wanted to kill more, and to perpetrate a massacre, but that his gun jammed.

During the previous days, he had shot three French soldiers of Arab origin.

The killer was quickly located, besieged by the police for thirty two hours, then riddled with bullets when he tried to escape.

A few weeks later, his statements to the police during the siege were leaked. They showed that he defined himself as a "soldier of Islam" and that he was trained in Pakistan and Afghanistan by al Qaeda affiliates. He said that he wanted to kill French Arab soldiers because they were "traitors to their religion" and that "all traitors" had to be "eliminated." He also said that he hated "Jews," that Jews had to be "removed form the face of the earth" and that his only regret was that he did not have "the opportunity to kill more Jews." Political leaders and the mainstream media immediately said that these statements did not make sense, and they tried to describe him as a "lone wolf" and a "lost boy" who acted "irrationally." Sociologists explained that he'd had a "hard childhood," and that he'd had to face "French prejudices" all of his life. Radical Islam and hatred of Jews were almost never evoked.

In the months that followed, he became a hero -- almost a legend -- in all French Muslim suburbs. His name, Mohamed Merah, appeared on leaflets and graffiti, and was quoted with praise in rap songs. The number of anti-Semitic attacks increased all over the country: reports show that most perpetrators were young Muslims citing "Mohamed" as an "example" to follow. Two jihadist terrorist cells planning anti-Semitic attacks and assassinations of prominent Jews were dismantled: their members declared after their arrest that they wanted to die as martyrs, and kill Jews, "like Mohamed," who "showed the way." Political leaders and the mainstream media did not speak of leaflets, graffiti, rap songs, anti-Semitic attacks, or references to "Mohamed." They spoke of the dismantling of "terrorist cells" -- as if the cells had no relation to "Mohamed."

The anniversary of the crimes committed by "Mohamed" came, and what happened was not surprising: Reports were broadcast on television concerning "Mohamed," his life and his acts. Pictures of a smiling Mohamed were on the cover of magazines everywhere. Photos were shown of his travels. One of the main French TV channels programmed a "Mohamed Merah Special Evening."

Sociologists were invited. Mohamed's sister, Souad, and his mother, Zoulika, both fully veiled, were interviewed extensively. They said that Mohamed was a "sweet young man" and a "good Muslim," who committed an "inexplicable acts." Mohamed's lawyer said that his client was "depressed." Souad, filmed by a hidden camera a few weeks earlier, stated that, "Mohamed had fought well and bravely," and that "Jews deserved to be killed;" but what she said then, when she thought that nobody was listening, seemed of interest to nobody. Mohamed's elder brother, Abdelghani, published a book, My Brother, this Terrorist, explaining that all his family was radicalized; that he was scared and that he had a "duty to speak," but nobody gave him a chance. His name was not even mentioned.

Once again, radical Islam and hatred of Jews were virtually not evoked. The explanation given by Mohamed Merah, of his decision to kill French soldiers of Arab origin, was totally set aside. The Jewish victims were just evoked as "casualties," and "victims" among others. Mohamed seemed also to be a victim.

The remembrance ceremonies referred to the "victims" in general, and to "terrorism" in general. Although French President François Hollande spoke briefly of "anti-Semitism," he was the only one to do so. "Sadness" was in the air, but it seemed essentially to have no cause and no effect: a "tragedy" had happened, that's all.

When they are in private, the police officials say that there "hundreds of Mohamed Merahs" in France and many Islamist cells, but that they are much more discreet when they are in public.

France intervened militarily against Islamists in northern Mali, but no French political leader ever said that the fight was waged against Islamists: the official word used was "terrorists" -- only "terrorists." Members of the French Council of the Muslim Faith asked the French political leaders to make no reference to Islam; they were obeyed.

French political leaders know perfectly well that there is an Islamist threat in France and that the French army is fighting Islamists in Mali; they are afraid to call things by their name. They fear riots in Muslim suburbs. They know perfectly well that Muslim anti-Semitism is rising in France, but, for the same reason, they are afraid to say it. The mainstream journalists are also scared.

The general atmosphere is impregnated with a submission that dare not speak his name. Those who do not comply and who speak too clearly are vilified, caricatured, excluded. Eventually they submit and they radicalize, and, as many radical Muslims find accomplices, many non-Muslims join soft jihadi movements.

The majority of the population discerns that something is wrong, but cannot find a reliable explanation.

Jews feel threatened, abandoned, and a growing number of them consider exile. Over the last two decades, French Jewish families have gradually withdrawn their children from public schools to protect them against bullying and insults. Today, Jewish schools themselves have become a target. What happened in Toulouse was an unparalleled crime, but every day, Jewish children going to or parting from Jewish schools are assaulted.

Every week, Jewish businesses are subjected to attacks.

The French Jewish community is the largest in Western Europe. Its existence dates back to the early Middle Ages. A decade ago, it had approximately 500,000 members. Last year, its number fell to 400,000, and continues to fall. If the trend does not stop, the Jewish presence in France will, in the medium term, come to an end.

As long as what happens in France also happens in other European countries, what is taking shape could be a shift towards the end of the Jewish presence in Europe. It is impossible to assess the consequences that such an event could have, but one would have to be blind to underestimate its significance.

Guy Millière


Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Europe acquiesces while Jews are threatened, and killed. Again

by Adam Turner

When Gunther Grass, a German writer, wrote a nasty bit of verse attacking the Jewish state of Israel and defending the Mad Mullahs of Iran and their genocidal desires to destroy the world's Jews, many of the chattering classes in the Europe were, oh-so-shocked.  Considering Grass's background as a member of the notorious Waffen S.S., I was not.  The only shocking thing to me was that a Nazi verbally attacking the Jewish state was considered newsworthy by anyone in the real world. 

Likewise, when a French Muslim Arab brutally massacred a French Rabbi, his two sons, and an eight year old girl, I was disgusted, but not shocked.  But once again, many in Europe were.  Disgustingly, the French government, which loves to police the language of some critical of Islam, did nothing to head off the killer, or crack down on his religious inciters.  Over the years, the French government has often gone out of its way to avoid prosecuting, condemning, or even exposing, the anti-Semitic preaching of French imams, which prompted the mass murderer to murder.  Apparently, if the incitement is in another language, and against Jews, it is not all that important to the French government.

Now, some Dutch Muslims have been caught on tape, praising Hitler and the Holocaust, and hoping for a new slaughter of Jews.  Once again, some in Europe are shocked.  How could these children say such things?  But, these days, the Dutch elites are too busy going after Geert Wilders for his speech, which they claim incites hatred against the Dutch Muslim minority, to bother prosecuting the speech of Dutch imams, whom actually incite hatred towards the Jewish minority in the Netherlands.  So, as a result, young Dutch Muslims learn to hate Jews. 

There have been, and there will be, many more such incidents of the European elites expressing their surprise when anti-Semitic incidents occur in Europe.  And you can be sure that as before, the respective European governments will keep expressing their shock, but do absolutely nothing to learn from this incident or act to prevent the next one. 

None of this European obliviousness to anti-Semitism shocks me, though.

I guess I can thank my family for this.  My great grandfather, Nathan Trigoboff, and his father, Samuel Trigoboff, were all too familiar with anti-Semitism, violence against Jews, and an uncaring European elite.  Their story educated me to build up an immunity to the false conventional wisdom I keep hearing from some today, about how Europeans are civilized people who respect their Jewish minorities.

When Nathan was a teenager, the Czarist government of Russia drafted him to join their army.  This was, of course, the same army that often led pogroms against Russian Jews.  Nathan was incredibly strong and muscular; in his picture, his build resembles that of a professional boxer, like a young Mike Tyson.  But Nathan, and his father Samuel, knew that for a Jew to join the Russian Imperial Army was basically to receive a death sentence.  Nathan would either be worked to death, killed by his comrades at arms, who were usually virulent anti-Semites, or killed in battle.  And the Russian elites wanted it this way, while the "progressive" elites from the rest of Europe merely looked away. 

So, to save his son, Samuel sent Nathan to the United States of America, the one nation then in existence that actually cared about the minorities of the world.  Including Jews.  And Samuel did so knowing full well the legal consequences - Russian law demanded that the father of a draft evader must serve in his son's place.  To avoid the fate he had saved his son from, Samuel then sliced off his own trigger finger, making it impossible for him to use a gun and thus, useless to the army.  Years later, Samuel Trigoboff joined his son in America, and sure enough, his Ellis Island records make note of his missing finger.

The Jews of Europe need to wake up to reality.  There is no future for Jewish life in that dark continent.  It is time for European Jews to go to a nation that welcomes and appreciates them, either the U.S., or (now) Israel.  The 600,000 Jews in France need to go.  The 250,000 in the U.K. must leave.  So too, must those Jews in the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Russia (and the former U.S.S.R. states), Italy, and, of course, Germany

Otherwise, in a matter of time, each and every one of these European Jews will be dead.  And the elites of Europe will, like Renault, limit themselves to expressing their "shock" each time another Jew is killed.

Adam Turner serves as staff counsel to the Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET).  He is a former counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee where he focused on national security law.


Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.