Europeans circumspect about benefits of interaction between Muslim and Western Worlds

A report "Islam and the West: Annual Report on the State of Dialogue" presented at the 38th World Economic Forum (Davos) found that Europeans are more circumspect than Americans and Israelis about the benefits of "interaction between Muslim and Western worlds": "… majorities in the United States (70%) and Canada (72%) say greater interaction is a benefit. Majorities in Singapore (77%) and Israel (56%), both nations with majority-Muslim neighbours as well as significant Muslim minorities themselves, also believe that greater interaction between Muslim and Western societies is a benefit, not a threat. In sharp contrast, clear majorities in all European countries surveyed - including Denmark (79%), Italy (67%), the Netherlands (67%), Spain (68%), Sweden (65%) and Belgium (59%) - see greater interaction between the West and the Muslim world as a threat. This reflects a growing fear among Europeans – driven in part by rising immigration from predominantly Muslim regions - of a perceived "Islamic threat" to their cultural identities. A recent poll found that only 21% of Europeans supported Turkey’s bid to become an EU member, and Nicolas Sarkozy’s successful presidential campaign in France included strong opposition to Turkish membership. A 2006 poll found that the main reason Germans opposed Turkey’s membership was "fear of a growing influence of Islam in Europe"…" This survey should be compared to the one carried out in 2003 by the European Commission which revealed that 60% Europeans believed that Israel poses the greatest threat to world peace. What are the grounds for such pessimism among Europeans - whereas Americans, victims of 9/11, and Israelis, victims of human bombs, are much more optimistic and positive about relations with the Muslim World? Where is the logic for feeling threatened both by the Muslim World and by Israel? Not to mention the widespread antipathy felt for the U.S. If the media and opinion-makers did their job properly, Europeans would have a much better understanding of the world around them and feel less threatened.

French TV channel apologizes

The Jewish nature of the State of Israel was questioned by a French TV journalist. The full story in EJP: "The largest French public TV network has apologized after comments made by one of its correspondent who said that US President George Bush’s statement on the Jewish nature of the State of Israel was 'slanted'. France 2 head of news department Arlette Chabot wrote a letter to Richard Prasquier, president of CRIF, the umbrella group of Jewish organizations in France, in which she apologizes and says the journalist’s wording should have been making clear that the criticism of Bush came from Palestinian leaders. … In her letter, Arlette Chabot said: "I have read the CRIF communication about the commentary of President Bush’s visit to Israel broadcast on the (Primetime) evening News on Wednesday January 9. You focus on the journalist’s expression "semantic slant", when discussing the US President talking about "the security of Israel as a Jewish State". Philippe Rochot’s wording should have been different, to make it clear that this criticism came from Palestinian leaders." She added: "Rochot is a very experienced journalist. He was uncharacteristically tactless on that occasion, but had absolutely no intention of being dishonest. In order to avoid any misunderstanding, I would like to apologise, and assure you that your comments have been understood and accepted." Chabot’s letter was an answer to a CRIF statement entitled "Israel is the Jewish State". The statement read: "CRIF reminds readers that the notion of a Jewish State was included in the United Nations vote on November 29, 1947 that led to the creation of the State of Israel. The existence of a Jewish State alongside a Palestinian State is the only basis on which negotiations can take place. Obviously, the Jewish nature of the State in no way prevents Israeli Arabs having full rights of citizenship, as is indeed the case". "By putting across his own militant point of view to disqualify the perfectly legitimate statement of the US President, Philippe Rochot failed to respect basic journalistic ethics." "His remark, which goes against the position taken by all French politicians, engages the responsibility of France 2. CRIF expects an unequivocal reaction from the heads of France 2 concerning this extremely serious statement.""

The Al Durah affair - why truth matters, by Solomonia

Solomonia correctly draws the conclusion (unfortunately far from obvious to everyone) that truth is important: "Richard Landes gave a presentation in Israel on the Al Durah controversy last week and writes about it here: "So What if Al Durah was Staged?": Meditations on the Colonization of the Israeli Mind. Infuriating: "I recently gave a talk at a conference on Media and Ethics in Jerusalem, where I presented the case against Enderlin’s version of the Muhammad al Durah story. Apparently, the presentation was relatively convincing since one of the first criticisms I immediately received from a prominent Israeli professor of communications was: "So what? According to reliable statistics, the Israeli army has killed over 800 Palestinian children since the second Intifada. So what difference does it make if this case is staged or not?" His intervention was followed by a round of applause from about a third of the 200-some person audience..." A predictable attitude. … here are a couple of why's: Because it was a lie. Because people who lie always have a reason for doing so, in this case to incite more murder and perpetuate a blood libel. Speaking as the average American, most people can understand when innocents are killed in the course of war, but the scene staged by the Al Durah myth was unforgivable if true. No collateral damage this. We had (supposedly) a father and son in the cross hairs in plain site fired on with small arms (and missiles so the fairy tale goes) for 45 minutes with no armed enemy in site. This was murder on film. These were not casualties of war, these were murder victims as plain as day -- even to the most cold-hearted purveyor of the collateral damage concept. That changes everything. "...The big losers in this process were the forces of moderation on all sides: many Palestinians eagerly threw themselves into as total a war with Israel as they could muster; moderates could not brake their momentum; they could not even talk with their Israeli partners in dialogue without appearing to betray their people..." Indeed! This scene made moderation impossible on BOTH sides. One side's already weak moderates were completely disarmed, the other (Israeli) side's were completely powerless in the face of a lie. When did you stop beating your wife? When will you stop murdering children in cold blood? Yet you never started! How do you respond except with arms to defend yourself from the horrendous attacks the lie has sparked? This is the classic tactic of the terrorist. Instigate an outrage -- perpetuate it yourself if you have to -- and destroy prospects of a negotiated settlement. The media and the left, the Israeli, left play right along with it. In fact, they are essential for its success."

Israel bashing - International citizens' tribunal

First class moonbat at work = Israel bashing coordinator = a lot of hot air as usual: Raoul Marc JENNAR chercheur URFIG / Fondation Copernic consultant de la GUE/NGL (European United Left, Nordic Green Left) at the European Parliament) (bureau 4E202) (office at European Parliament, Brussels) Tél. (PE) : 00 32 2 283 10 43 (phone at the European Parliment, Brussels) raoul.jennar@europarl.europa.eu (email address at the European Parliament, Brussels) Proposal for setting up an international citizens' tribunal on the deeds committed by the Israeli army and secret services in Lebanon and the occupied Palestinian territories The deeds committed by the Israeli army and secret services in Lebanon, as in the occupied Palestinian territories, constitute a violent affront to the universal human conscience. These are criminal acts, as many people feel instinctively. They are different from the acts that take place in all armed conflict committed by the aggressor as well as by the aggressed. But feeling is not enough. The facts must be established. They must then be assessed in the light of existing international law. This should be done with the detachment and rigour of a process that excludes any a priori conclusions, the results of which will convince all people of good will. The international community is not an autonomous political and juridical body. It is but a summation of positions adopted by a certain number of governments. In many situations it has proved incapable of applying existing law by distancing itself from geopolitical or ideological contingencies. This impunity has covered up the numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity that have been committed since the end of the second world war. The unilateral attitude of the United States of America, like the double-speak of many European governments, make it necessary for those defending the law to take the place of failed political powers. The American administration is against any questioning of Israel’s role in acts committed in Lebanon as well as in the occupied Palestinian territories. Germany, Great Britain, Finland and France refuse to support a request formulated at the UN Human Rights Council to investigate the use by the Israeli armed forces of arms that are prohibited by international law. The systematic disinformation practised by an overwhelming majority of the media deprives Western public opinion of balanced information. All this justifies an initiative by the citizens themselves. This initiative must aim at being of the same high quality as the tribunal initiated by Bertrand Russell during the Vietnam war. It should be carried out with the same rigour, the same credibility and the same concern to go beyond divisions which have no place when it is a question of the rights of people. It must bring together highly qualified experts and personalities who are universally recognized for their moral authority. It must not limit itself up to a restricted circle. For this reason I believe it should not follow in the footsteps of similar initiatives taken in the past, whatever the quality that such work has achieved in the past. Such an action cannot be carried out properly in a hurry. It require an the formulation of a comprehensive project, together with a precise timetable, the mobilization of appropriate human and financial resources and an irreproachable moral framework. These requirements demand an international mobilization to support such an initiative. For this purpose we propose that a preparatory committee be set up which will carry out as rapidly as possible all the tasks necessary for launching this initiative. We ask your active participation in creating this preparatory committee. Coordinateurs: Raoul Marc JENNAR, chercheur URFIG / Fondation Copernic consultant de la GUE/NGL au Parlement européen (bureau 4E202) 7, place du Château, F 66500 Mosset Tél. (PE) : 00 32 2 283 10 43, Tel. : 00 33 468 05 84 25 Port. : 00 33 632 16 65 52 www.urfig.org raoul.jennar@europarl.europa.eu

Werner Theodore Barazetti - a Swiss hero of Kindertransporte

From The Times' obituary of 9 Oct. 2000: "A retiring hero of the struggle against Nazism, whose story came to light only ten years ago, Bill Barazetti helped thousands of victims of discrimination to get out of prewar Germany. In a Schindler-style operation carried out in conjunction with a British stockbroker, Nicholas Winton, he also played a major part in organising the escape of children from German-occupied Prague in the spring and summer months of 1939 before war broke out. Between May and July that year three trainloads of mainly Jewish children - the Kindertransporte - left the city and, thanks to a complicated system of false identity papers engineered by Barazetti, succeeded in reaching London via Holland. Werner Theodore Barazetti, as he was born, was the son of a Swiss Professor of French at Heidelberg University. His family were well connected. ... As a 19-year-old, Barazetti was studying law at Hamburg University in 1933, when he saw Hitler’s Nazi thugs beat up Jewish, socialist and communist students and academics in the university precinct. His protests to the Dean - also Jewish - drew the reply: "We are the silent majority." … in Prague he worked with church-based charities to help to channel the flood of refugees into Czechoslovakia, many from post-Anschluss Austria, towards Britain and Scandinavia. Between 50,000 and 70,000 people were helped to escape by these organisations. So it was only natural that when a British stockbroker, Nicholas Winton, decided, after a winter skiing holiday in the Czech mountains, that children were an urgent priority for evacuation, Barazetti was recommended as a partner in the enterprise. Winton returned to England where he was engaged in arranging for visas, homes and £50-a-head sponsors for each child. Barazetti made all the arrangements at the Prague end. He organised the trains, interviewed the families and sent Winton the details and photographs of each child. His rescue work was nearly halted after the Gestapo caught him again. This time he was released only through the intervention of an uncle, a colonel in the Swiss Army, who insisted that he stop working for Czech Intelligence and move to Switzerland. … Returning to Prague - which was occupied by the Germans after March 1939 - in disguise and with a new identity, he evaded capture by spending every night in the home of a different family from among those of the 664 children for whom he had organised an exit. Because the English visas were often slow to come through, Barazetti got a Jewish printer in Prague to produce forged papers to show to the German authorities. By the time the first train reached Holland, the genuine visas were ready to hand out to the children on the train. Barazetti managed to organise the return to Prague of the forged documents for re-use. Three trains full of children left Prague that spring and sunmmer. A fourth was ready to go on the eve of war - but it never reached Holland and was not heard of again. … In the diaries, copies of which are now held by the Jerusalem Holocaust memorial institute, Yad Vashem, Winton noted that he had left the entire Prague Kindertransport operation to Barazetti. Finally, in 1993 Yad Vashem honoured Barazetti as one of the Righteous among the Gentiles." Via: Snoopy at Simply Jews

The Israel Lobby - Philippe Gélie of Le Figaro is unconvinced

Philippe Gélie writes in an piece in Le Figaro that the authors of The Israel Lobby missed what lies at the heart of relationship between the United States and Israel:

"In 2006, an article The Israel Lobby written by two political science professors at the Chicago University and at Harvard, John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, caused a sensation. They argued that American foreign policy was being "held hostage", to the detriment of America’s own interests, by the role played by official lobbies such as AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) with its 100,000 members, neoconservatives with pro-Israel leanings, and the presence at the White House of advisors close to the Likoud (Israeli right wing political party) like Elliott Abrams. …

Other than the storm of controversy it caused, this pamphlet has had hardly any tangible effect on the United States’ position. In fact, it ignores the national consensus that lies at the heart of the alliance with Israel: a deep-seated phenomenom with historical, ideological and affective dimensions …"
Translated by Philosemite

Dalai Lama on Israel

Tibetans and Israelis want to live in peace (Poster by Blue Star PR, The Jewish Ink Tank)