Vandals strike memorial to Austrian Jews

The JTA reports:

"An artwork remembering the suffering of Austrian Jews under the Nazis was destroyed days after it was installed.

Artist Peter Wagner had planted the 70 wooden stakes last week alongside a road in the town of Oberschutzen, near a controversial memorial that serves as a reminder of Germany's annexation of Austria on March 12, 1938.

According to the Kurier newspaper, Wagner's project was called "zone38 -- 70 years after the annexation," and was dedicated to the memory of the Jews of the Oberwart district."

Ancient Mayas and the Jews

"Being unaware of the existence of Jews, the ancient Maya ascribed all their misfortunes to the dark forces of nature."



Source: from a lecture on history of religion (lecturer unknown)
Via: Simply Jews

This is what came later:
The Manual of Inquisitors by Nicholas Eymerich

"Contemporary antisemitism is not explicitly or obviously antisemitic", David Hirsh

David Hirsh's speech at the Global Forum for Combating Antisemitism
From Engage. The whole speech is well worth reading in full.

"In my view the main manifestation of antisemitism in the near future is going to be conspiracy theory.

The kind of antisemitism which really worries me is the kind which is difficult to spot. Governments can imprison those who commit racist assaults and they can ban hate-speech. But we cannot shut down the Guardian newspaper or my trade union or the Green Party.

Why not? Because contemporary antisemitism is not explicitly or obviously antisemitic.

We can respond that according to the EUMC working definition this or that piece in the Guardian is in fact antisemitic, irrespective of what people think. But the counter-response will be "of course, you wrote it". (…)

We should not base our strategy on the assumption that the powerful in the world - or in America - will be prepared to oppose antisemitism. We should not act as though the "lobby" rhetoric was true. It isn’t. Moshe Postone tells us that antisemitism can appear to be anti-hegemonic. But we shouldn’t act as though antisemitism was in fact anti-hegemonic.

We don’t aim to change the mind of Ilan Pappe or Saemas Milne but we do aim to change the mind of those who may be influenced by them. Yesterday John Mann said that the boycotters are afraid of us. And I think they are. They’re not afraid of being denounced as wild-eyed leftists or as antisemites or as self-haters. They love that.

But they are afraid of coming up against people who have a chance of influencing their own followers or of sewing doubt amongst those who they aim to influence. This is a difficult job. Thursday’s Guardian is a case-study in how difficult the job is.

The contemporary way of doing antisemitic conspiracy theory was given a stamp of professorial legitimacy by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt in 2006. They created a vocabulary which one could use to express conspiracy theory and which did not seem to be antisemtic.

Conspiracy theory is nearly always, today, articulated using the Livingstone Formulation, which claims that Jews play the antisemitism card in bad faith in order to de-legitimize criticism of Israeli human rights abuses. In this way, anyone who raises a worry about contemporary antisemitism already stands accused of doing so maliciously; and they stand accused of doing so as part of a common plan with others. Livingstone’s formulation also denies the distinction between criticism and demonization.

Thursday’s Guardian had the rhetoric and the images of antisemitic conspiracy theory running through it, from the front page to the inside pages, to the leader. Antisemitism of this sort is not explicit, is not obvious, and is not self-aware. It is necessary to analyze and interpret a text to know whether it is antisemitic.

The substance of the exclusive story was that a civil servant had written the word "Israel" on the margin of a document in relation to Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction. The word "Israel" was removed before the draft document was made public. That’s it. That’s the story.

The front page headline is: ‘Labour kept criticism of Israel secret’ and it is illustrated by Israeli flags and Union Jacks; when you click the link on the website, it becomes ‘How Labour used the law to keep criticism of Israel secret’. A sub-headline informs us: ‘Israel’s weapons - a diplomatic no-go area’. And the leader brings together all of the soundbites and imagery of contemporary antisemitic conspiracy theory: censorship; suppression of the word ‘Israel’; cravenness of the Labour government (before the ‘lobby’); secret deliberation; an act of concealment; exploiting the loopholes; Israel regularly kicks up a fuss over far more minor matters; the blue pencil; decisions reached in secret; ‘Israel’ the banned word; how easily the tribunal can be influenced into concealing public material.

The central task that the Engage website has set itself is to rebut and de-code this kind of antisemitism so that it can be understood for what it is. We should not underestimate either how important or how difficult this task is.

We are involved in a political argument. We aim to change people’s minds. Our central task is to make sure that the intelligentsia is able to recognize antisemitism. It should go without saying that as well as being able to recognize antisemitism, we should also know how to recognize other racisms too."

Campaign to rehabilitate Captain Barros Basto, the 'Portuguese Dreyfus'

Help restore the posthumous reputation of Portuguese Jewish army officer Artur Carlos Barros Basto (1887-1961) by signing the petition created by the Oporto Jewish Congregation and written by Jorge Neves:
http://www.petitiononline.com/benrosh/

Cry justice for the 'Portuguese Dreyfus', by Michael Freund (2003)

A few months ago, in the northern Portuguese village of Amarante, I stood before the simple and unadorned grave of a largely forgotten Jewish hero of the 20th century, Captain Arthur Carlos de Barros Basto.
His name might not be familiar to you, but his story is worth recounting, nonetheless, because it is one of heartbreak and heroism, and its final chapter remains to be written.
Historians such as the late Cecil Roth labeled him the 'Portuguese Dreyfus' after French General Staff officer Alfred Dreyfus, who was convicted of treason on trumped-up charges in 1894 and drummed out of the military.
But in one important respect Barros Basto's story is even more compelling, because, unlike his French counterpart, he has yet to receive the exoneration and acclaim he so richly deserves.
This year marks six decades since the Portuguese armed forces summarily decided to expel Barros Basto from their ranks, citing unspecified reasons of "good and welfare" for its decision.
The truth of the incident is far more troubling.
Captain Barros Basto was one of the Anousim, a descendant of Jews whose ancestors had been forced to convert to Catholicism during the time of the Spanish Inquisition. According to his biographers, Dr. Elvira Mea and journalist Inacio Steinhardt, Barros Basto was a decorated soldier who commanded a Portuguese infantry company in World War I, fought in the trenches of Flanders, and took part in the allied offensive to liberate Belgium.
After returning home from the war he decided to embrace the faith of his forefathers, and underwent a formal return to Judaism before a rabbinical court in Spanish Morocco in December 1920.
Based in the northern Portuguese city of Oporto, Barros Basto launched a public campaign to convince other Anousim to emerge from centuries of hiding and rejoin their people. This dashing war hero traveled among the villages and towns of the area, bedecked in his military uniform, holding Jewish services and seeking to inspire others to follow his example.
He succeeded in building the beautiful Mekor Haim synagogue, which still stands in Oporto, and opened a yeshiva that operated for nine years, teaching young Anousim about their heritage. Singlehandedly he produced a Jewish newspaper and was responsible for the publication of numerous books on Jewish history, law and lore in Portuguese.
But his open profession of Judaism, and the thousands of people whom historians say he inspired, did not sit well with the government, or the Church authorities of the time. They sought to quell his nascent movement by bringing false charges of moral debauchery against him.
Though the local prosecutor filed charges against Barros Basto, the case was dropped after two years, in 1937, for lack of evidence. Nevertheless, in 1943, Portugal's Ministry of Defense expelled him from the army, unjustly humiliating him and bringing about an end to his efforts to reawaken Portugal's Anousim.
He died in 1961, a broken man.
And so, whereas Dreyfus was eventually pardoned in 1899 and restored to the French army in 1906 with full honors, Barros Basto went to the grave without justice ever being served.
When I first learned of his story on a visit to Portugal last fall, I was livid with rage. How could it be that so many years have passed without the injustice done to this valiant, heroic figure being rectified? And so, earlier this year I launched a public campaign under the auspices of Amishav, the organization I direct in Jerusalem, seeking to persuade the Portuguese government to clear Capt. Barros Basto's name.
In a meeting with the Portuguese ambassador to Tel Aviv I asked that his government acknowledge Barros Basto's innocence and apologize for the hurt this chapter has caused to both his family and the Jewish people. Similar appeals were sent to the Portuguese government and its representatives abroad.
American Jewish organizations such as the Conference of Presidents, the Orthodox Union and the Religious Zionists of America have all joined the campaign, writing to the Portuguese ambassador to Washington about the Barros Basto case.
And US Congressman Gary Ackerman, a member of the House International Relations Committee, has also spoken out, urging the Portuguese to resolve the matter.
Thus far, however, there has not been any progress. The stain on this noble man's name has yet to be removed.
In a time when Israel finds itself targeted by terror it may seem incongruous to be concerning ourselves with such a symbolic cause. But symbols still have meaning, and it is incumbent upon us to do whatever we can to right this historical wrong.
Barros Basto was a courageous figure who stood up for the Jewish people, defying the powers that be to help his brethren. When anti-Semitism victimizes such a person, be it in 1943 or 2003, how can we possibly remain silent?
More pressure must be brought to bear on the Portuguese government to address this matter, and so the issue may be laid to rest once and for all. Contact your local Portuguese embassy or write to Portugal's Ministry of Foreign Affairs at: inf-imprensa@mne.gov.pt and ask them why they have not yet resolved this important case.
Captain Arthur Carlos de Barros Basto risked his career and reputation on behalf of his people, the Jewish people. The least we can do in return is see that the dignity so unjustly taken away from him is restored.

Israel on trial in Brussels - a prelude to Durban II?

The latest in a long list of initiatives in Europe to demonise Israel

A so-called peoples' tribunal is convening in Brussels this weekend to put Israel on trial for crimes purportedly committed by the Israeli army during the 2006 Lebanon war.

The name of Pierre Galand, President of the French-speaking Belgian Secularist association (Centre d'Action Laïque, a member of the International Humanist Ethical Union (IHEU), the world union of Humanist organisations), features on the tribunal committee sponsorship list. He is a long-time rabid critic and demoniser of Israel.

This is how NGO Monitor described Pierre Galand in 2004:

"There are very few radical NGO activities in the United Nations or in Europe in which Pierre Galand does not actively participate. His rhetoric of hatred, anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism (disguised, as in the case of many other members of the political NGO community, in the language of human rights and sympathy for Palestinian victimization), includes references to Israeli "aggression", "war crimes", "colonization", "apartheid", etc. while referring to Palestinian terror as "heroic" and in need of international protection."

In 2001, Pierre Galand attended the UN anti-racist conference in Durban in his capacity as European Chairman of the Coordinating Committee for NGOs on the Question of Palestine (ECCP), a Brussels based association of NGOs cooperating with the UN Committee on the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. At the conference, he called for the reactivation a peoples' tribunal to judge Israeli crimes against the Palestinians, and announced that he had the support of the Rossel and Danièle Mitterrand (the widow of French President François Mitterrand) Foundations, and that Nobel Prize winners would be associated with the tribunal. He had Desmond Tutu in mind.

The peoples' tribunal has finally come into being seven years later in Brussels this weekend. But the sponsorship committee list falls short of Mr. Galand's grandiose expectations. There is no trace of any foundation or Nobel prize winner. No religious leaders, no scholars, no universities either. And no trace of his fellow secularists, free thinkers, humanists, rationalists, atheists either. The media have kept mum about the event.

Altough the pseudo-tribunal is a farce, it would be unwise not to denounce it. It is a dire warning of what Durban II is likely to turn into - another exercise in the demonisation of Israel, with some Europeans taking the leading role. It proves that a small group of single-minded individuals and NGOs (Amnesty International and HRW will, according to the programme, participate) with a anti-Israel agenda are capable of collecting substantial funds and resources to put together an event like the one taking place in Brussels.

For them, the only rogue state in the world is Israel. They are not intent on bringing the Sudanese government on trial for war crimes, crimes against humanity, or worse: genocide, committed in Darfur.

"Inside the Durban debacle", by Michael J. Jordan, Salon:

"During one street rally, they saw a placard that read "Hitler Should Have Finished the Job" and heard someone yell "Kill the Jews." Nearby, a man was reportedly spotted selling the most notorious and conspiratorial of anti-Semitic tracts, "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion."

Inside the U.N. conference grounds and within its tents, the rhetoric and agitprop were also white hot. Fliers were found with Hitler's photo above the question: "What if I had won? There would be no Israel, and no Palestinian bloodshed." A press conference held by the Jewish caucus was cut short by a rowdy group of Iranian women, one of whom screamed, "Six million dead and you're holding the world hostage!"

Israel's supporters, it should be noted, usually hold their own in the media and intellectual debate. But at the Durban conference, the Jewish side came armed with little more than position papers, books and other workshop materials, and was overmatched. Thrown on the defensive, they responded by quickly printing and handing out T-shirts of their own, one with a peace sign inside the Jewish Star of David under the slogan "Fight Racism, Not Jews" and a second with Martin Luther King Jr.'s quote: "When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews."

And certainly they had their high-profile defenders. When U.N. officials appeared ready to tolerate inflammatory anti-Israel language making its way into a final conference report, U.S. Rep. Tom Lantos, D-Calif., the top Democrat in the U.S. delegation, said sharply, "What you have here is the paradox of an anti-racism conference that is itself racist." Lantos, the only Holocaust survivor sitting in Congress and a co-founder of its human rights caucus, blasted delegates from Western nations who he said were privately disgusted with the proceedings but refused to speak out."

Over half the Dutch would vote for a Jewish prime minister

Considering the biased way in which the Israeli-Arab conflict is reported in the European media (although they are careful to state that criticism is only levelled at the government and not at the people of Israel or the Jews, the confusion is inevitable), it is not surprising that only 53% of the Dutch would vote for a Jewish PM. Manfred Gerstenfeld comments in TJP: "A poll taken earlier this month found that only 53 percent of the Dutch would consider voting for a Jewish prime minister. In the rankings, Jews figured far behind women (93%), homosexuals (78%) and blacks (75%), but well before Muslims (27%) and people over 70. … a report by the Center for Information and Documentation on Israel (CIDI) on the steep rise in anti-Semitic incidents in the Netherlands was not even mentioned by most major dailies, according to Elma Drayer, a prominent Dutch columnist writing recently in the daily Trouw. She stressed that, on the other hand, there was huge interest in improving the chances of survival of a chestnut tree that the late Anne Frank could see from her hiding place. Drayer drew attention to the tendency of many Dutch to embrace dead Jews while keeping their distance from living ones. … Much has been written about how Jews have supposedly successfully integrated into the Netherlands. This poll, however, proves again that the widespread social anti-Semitism so prevalent before WWII has far from disappeared. Nowadays, moreover, the main characteristics of classic anti-Semitism have mutated into a "new anti-Semitism" which expresses itself in the double standards applied in Dutch circles to Israel, compared to their criticism of other countries. One former senior Dutch cabinet minister told me recently: "If I were a Jew, I would not want my children to grow up here. I would tell them to emigrate to the United States, Israel or Australia. In view of the present mood and developments in the Netherlands, Jews should realize that there is no future for them here as they will continue to be less and less welcome." … People can learn much from the Netherlands poll. The Dutch should ponder what it means that so many of them are still discriminating against Jews - of which there are so few, who so much resemble other Dutch, and whose ancestors came to the Netherlands 400 years ago."

Zan Studio: Palestinian artists show Pope as US warrior

Where is the outrage when Palestinian artists of the Zan Studio of Ramallah depict the Pope in such a disrespectful way?

The IHT reports:
"Police arrested two Tunisians and a Dane of Moroccan descent on Tuesday for planning to kill a cartoonist who drew one of the cartoons printed in a Danish newspaper two years ago that roused a storm of protest in Muslim countries.
Fifteen Danish newspapers reprinted his drawing on Wednesday in protest against the alleged murder plot.
Several hundred Muslims gathered in central Copenhagen on Friday to protest against publication of the cartoon. Most Muslims consider depictions of the founder of Islam offensive.
Social workers said the arrests, the reprinting of the cartoon and protests against its appearance might have fuelled the riots.
Publication of the cartoons two years ago led to protests and rioting in Muslim countries in which at least 50 people were killed and three Danish embassies attacked."

See: Zan Studio of Ramallah - anti-Israeli artists invited to Belgium