"the Palestinians enjoy nearly twice as much support (27%) as the Israelis (14%)"
"A significant majority of the French also said they believed anti-Semitism was a serious problem in their country, which has seen a number of violent attacks against Jews and Jewish institutions in recent years. Fully 69% said anti-Semitism was a problem, with almost two-thirds of that group (41% of all French respondents) saying it was a "very big problem." Only 8% said it was not a problem at all."
Source: article by Haviv Rettig Gur in TJP
"A wide-ranging new poll of French adults has found that French views of Israel, while not favorable to the Jewish state, are more nuanced and complex than Israelis usually believe.
While Israel lags behind the Palestinians in overall support among the French, it is Hamas leaders - not Israel - who receive greater blame for Gaza's humanitarian situation. Similarly, while they express clear opposition to Israeli military operations in Gaza, the French oppose boycotting Israel by a factor of three to one. A large majority of the country acknowledges a real problem with anti-Semitism, and Iran comes in as the top stumbling block to peace in the region in French popular opinion.
The poll, made available to The Jerusalem Post on Thursday, was conducted for The Israel Project by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, a major polling and strategy firm, during the first two weeks of April. It surveyed 853 adults throughout France and 451 opinion makers, and has a margin of error of 3.36%.
Overall, the French do not view Israel favorably. More than a third (35%) of French respondents said they viewed Israel unfavorably, while just a fifth (21%) said they viewed the country in a positive light.
Similarly, the Palestinians enjoy nearly twice as much support (27%) as the Israelis (14%), though the largest group of respondents (32%) said they did not support either side.
It is not surprising, therefore, that a large majority of the French disapproved of Israel's Operation Cast Lead in January: 77% opposed the action, while just 3% said they "strongly approved" of it.
Yet when pollsters raised other issues, they discovered nuances in the French views on Israel. More French respondents blamed Hamas leaders for Gaza's humanitarian situation (36%) rather than Israeli leaders (26%).
Fully 83% feel that a two-state solution is the "only realistic solution" to the conflict, but an identical 83% said it was "not realistic right now."
Though the French are skeptical of the chances for peace, blame does not rest too heavily on Israel's shoulders. Indeed, the poll seemed to indicate that the French viewed all parties - with Iran at the forefront - as responsible for the conflict.
The most widely cited obstacle to peace in the poll was Iran's "arming and funding of terrorists" (79% of respondents said stopping this activity was "very important" to "establishing a lasting peace"). Next in line was the Palestinians' shooting of rockets into Israel (75%). Israeli military incursions in Gaza came in as the third-most cited obstacle (73%), but this was followed closely by the Arab states' refusal to "accept Israel's right to exist" (69%) and the continuing "teaching of hate" in Palestinian schools (65%).
A significant majority of the French also said they believed anti-Semitism was a serious problem in their country, which has seen a number of violent attacks against Jews and Jewish institutions in recent years. Fully 69% said anti-Semitism was a problem, with almost two-thirds of that group (41% of all French respondents) saying it was a "very big problem." Only 8% said it was not a problem at all.
Asked to explain the source of the anti-Semitic sentiments in the country, some respondents said it was found primarily among Muslim immigrant groups, while others said it was inspired by events such as Operation Cast Lead.
The French do not trust Iranian intentions in the region, according to the poll. Besides the aforementioned support for terrorism, fully 76% of the French believe the Iranian nuclear program is focused on developing nuclear weapons. Just 14% disagree with that assessment.
In fact, the French increasingly see Iran as a direct threat to their country. Fully 73% of respondents believed an Iranian nuclear weapon would be a threat to France, up from 64% in December 2007.
Yet while this sense of danger has inspired a majority of the French to support increased sanctions (61% vs. 30% opposed), respondents were strongly opposed to military action against Iran, even multilateral action. The poll showed that 79% wanted either diplomacy or increased sanctions, while just 13% recommended multilateral military strikes to stop Iran's nuclear program.
Respondents said they were specifically aware of Iran's desire to destroy Israel, but a majority (68% to 23%) opposed an Israeli strike against Iran."
Tuesday, 19 May 2009
Sunday, 17 May 2009
View from America: Eyeless in Antwerp - Intifada at the opera
"But the Antwerp Samson must also be understood as part of the ongoing campaign to delegitimize the State of Israel. Essential to this trend is the claim that the Jews aren't really the Jews. In order to treat Israel's right of self-defense against terrorists and states that seek to destroy it as inherently immoral - a standard no rational person would seek to impose on any other country - you have to impose a new identity on the Israelis. The most popular way of doing so is to claim that the Jews are Nazis. Such claims have become popular in Europe as well as throughout the Muslim world. Such juxtaposition is both offensive and an absolute falsehood, since Israel doesn't seek to exterminate the Palestinians as the Nazis did of the Jews, merely to try and stop them from committing mayhem."
The operatic perversion of 'Samson' is a symptom of cultural decline and hate.
Source: article by Jonathan Tobin in TJP
"The impact of opera on contemporary politics is fairly limited these days. Unlike the 19th century, when new operas by composers like Giuseppe Verdi would often be seen as important political statements, the contemporary lyric theater is usually the preserve of an elite that most people don't care about. But every once in a while something can happen at an opera house that makes its way onto the news pages.
Such an event happened earlier this month when a new production of Camille Saint-Saëns' biblical set piece Samson et Dalila had its premiere at the Flanders Opera in Antwerp. A two-man directing team, Omri Nitzan, an Israeli, and Amir Nizar Zuabi, a Palestinian, conceived the new staging of the opera. But rather than a conventional rendition of what was written as a fairly static work for the theater, Nitzan and Zuabi decided to turn the piece on its head. In their version, the Philistines oppressing the Hebrews were portrayed as Israelis and the Hebrews as the Palestinians.
According to The New York Times this included scenes in which "Jews, in fancy dress, dance atop a shiny, black, two-tiered set, oblivious to the swarm of robed Palestinians under their feet." Elsewhere in the show, "Dalila's Jewish handmaidens, in red underpants, sprawl on their backs, legs spread in the air, helping to seduce Samson" and "Israeli soldiers clad in black humiliate blindfolded Palestinians and shoot a Palestinian child, who reappears as a kind of leitmotif during the opera." And after "Israeli soldiers dance orgiastically with their phallic rifles," the character of Samson, wearing a "dynamite-loaded vest" ends the opera with a suicide blast.
SHOCKING AS this may sound, in the world of opera today such "artistic license" is far from rare when it comes to putting on the classics. Anyone entering an opera house these days is as likely to see the works of Mozart, Verdi or Wagner set in a time and place that the composer never envisioned as they are a traditional staging. Political agendas, almost always with a left-wing slant, as well as the sort of vulgarity seen in Antwerp, are commonplace.
The rise of a generation of directors who commit vandalism rather than bringing new insights is a fact of life in contemporary opera, especially in Europe. It is a symptom of the same deconstructionist school of thought that has turned the study of literature on its head with pseudo-scholars claiming there is no such thing as objective truth and that the text of any work can be separated from its original meaning with impunity.
BUT THE ANTWERP Samson must also be understood as part of the ongoing campaign to delegitimize the State of Israel. Essential to this trend is the claim that the Jews aren't really the Jews. In order to treat Israel's right of self-defense against terrorists and states that seek to destroy it as inherently immoral - a standard no rational person would seek to impose on any other country - you have to impose a new identity on the Israelis.
The most popular way of doing so is to claim that the Jews are Nazis.
Such claims have become popular in Europe as well as throughout the Muslim world. Such juxtaposition is both offensive and an absolute falsehood, since Israel doesn't seek to exterminate the Palestinians as the Nazis did of the Jews, merely to try and stop them from committing mayhem.
But when Nazis aren't available, turning the tables on the Jews vis-à-vis the Palestinians will do just as nicely. Yet one of the problems that vandals such as Nitzan and Zuabi run into when they parachute their ideology into innocent operas is that the text often contradicts them. This requires their Belgium audience (which, unlike an audience in say, New York, probably understands the French language in which the piece is sung) to believe that when in the first act Samson rallies the Jews to overthrow their Philistine oppressors, "Israel romps ta chaîne" - Israel break your chains - he doesn't really mean "Israel" but Palestine. This is interesting because in this oratorio-like opera, the Jews are the good guys but don't get very much interesting music to sing. By contrast, the Philistines get all the good numbers including a really stomping Bacchanale just before the Temple of Dagon comes crashing down on their heads.
This artistic atrocity aroused the ire of Antwerp's Jewish community, but when one Jew expressed his outrage and fear that the production would stir up anti-Semitism to the general director of the opera, reportedly he was told "that if the situation for Jews were really so precarious here, they should leave."
Interestingly, New York Times critic and columnist Michael Kimmelman reacted to this invitation for the Jews to leave Europe with dismay about the bad taste of the comment but not to slander against the State of Israel and supporters. "Rage," Kimmelman wrote about the incident, "is a perfectly sane response to the Israeli occupation. And all art is political in the end."
One can argue in response that had the Palestinians been even marginally interested in sharing the country and living in peace with the Jews, they might have accepted any number of peace offers over the course of the last century.
Even more to the point, Gaza, the setting of the final scene of the opera, is currently occupied by Hamas, not Israel.
THE INVERSION by which the Islamist murderers of Hamas bent on annihilation of Israel become the soulful Jewish sufferers in "Samson" is more than just another play on the familiar David becoming Goliath theme that has gained traction ever since the Jews started winning wars of self-defense rather than being slaughtered en masse. Put in the context of an opera whose point is the triumph of faith over violence and sex, it is a way by which contemporary Jews can be stripped of any connection to their homeland and their heritage.
The fact that one of the persons responsible for this is an Israeli Jew does not make it any less misleading. That is especially true when this sort of work gives a boost to the revival of anti-Semitism in Europe.
Kimmelman thinks this sort of a Samson could not have been produced in New York, where presumably the Jews are not ready to be told to flee. As it happens, the production of the piece performed at the Metropolitan Opera since 1998 does take the opposite point of view. That version, created by English Jew Elijah Moshinsky, has the effrontery to portray the Jews in Samson as, well, Jews. Though no uniformed Nazis are seen onstage, Moshinsky's direction evokes the Holocaust with Jews in religious garb being oppressed by an enemy whose prime characteristic is a primitive and violent paganism.
This, too, may be a case, as Kimmelman says, that proves that all art is political. The difference is that one director's vision is based on the truth and the other on a lie. The trouble is, in an intellectual milieu in which those concepts no longer exist, it is all too easy to imagine a world in which Israel and the Jews can be eliminated too."
The writer is executive editor of Commentary magazine where he contributes to the Contentions blog at www.commentarymagazine.com. jtobin@commentarymagazine.com
The operatic perversion of 'Samson' is a symptom of cultural decline and hate.
Source: article by Jonathan Tobin in TJP
"The impact of opera on contemporary politics is fairly limited these days. Unlike the 19th century, when new operas by composers like Giuseppe Verdi would often be seen as important political statements, the contemporary lyric theater is usually the preserve of an elite that most people don't care about. But every once in a while something can happen at an opera house that makes its way onto the news pages.
Such an event happened earlier this month when a new production of Camille Saint-Saëns' biblical set piece Samson et Dalila had its premiere at the Flanders Opera in Antwerp. A two-man directing team, Omri Nitzan, an Israeli, and Amir Nizar Zuabi, a Palestinian, conceived the new staging of the opera. But rather than a conventional rendition of what was written as a fairly static work for the theater, Nitzan and Zuabi decided to turn the piece on its head. In their version, the Philistines oppressing the Hebrews were portrayed as Israelis and the Hebrews as the Palestinians.
According to The New York Times this included scenes in which "Jews, in fancy dress, dance atop a shiny, black, two-tiered set, oblivious to the swarm of robed Palestinians under their feet." Elsewhere in the show, "Dalila's Jewish handmaidens, in red underpants, sprawl on their backs, legs spread in the air, helping to seduce Samson" and "Israeli soldiers clad in black humiliate blindfolded Palestinians and shoot a Palestinian child, who reappears as a kind of leitmotif during the opera." And after "Israeli soldiers dance orgiastically with their phallic rifles," the character of Samson, wearing a "dynamite-loaded vest" ends the opera with a suicide blast.
SHOCKING AS this may sound, in the world of opera today such "artistic license" is far from rare when it comes to putting on the classics. Anyone entering an opera house these days is as likely to see the works of Mozart, Verdi or Wagner set in a time and place that the composer never envisioned as they are a traditional staging. Political agendas, almost always with a left-wing slant, as well as the sort of vulgarity seen in Antwerp, are commonplace.
The rise of a generation of directors who commit vandalism rather than bringing new insights is a fact of life in contemporary opera, especially in Europe. It is a symptom of the same deconstructionist school of thought that has turned the study of literature on its head with pseudo-scholars claiming there is no such thing as objective truth and that the text of any work can be separated from its original meaning with impunity.
BUT THE ANTWERP Samson must also be understood as part of the ongoing campaign to delegitimize the State of Israel. Essential to this trend is the claim that the Jews aren't really the Jews. In order to treat Israel's right of self-defense against terrorists and states that seek to destroy it as inherently immoral - a standard no rational person would seek to impose on any other country - you have to impose a new identity on the Israelis.
The most popular way of doing so is to claim that the Jews are Nazis.
Such claims have become popular in Europe as well as throughout the Muslim world. Such juxtaposition is both offensive and an absolute falsehood, since Israel doesn't seek to exterminate the Palestinians as the Nazis did of the Jews, merely to try and stop them from committing mayhem.
But when Nazis aren't available, turning the tables on the Jews vis-à-vis the Palestinians will do just as nicely. Yet one of the problems that vandals such as Nitzan and Zuabi run into when they parachute their ideology into innocent operas is that the text often contradicts them. This requires their Belgium audience (which, unlike an audience in say, New York, probably understands the French language in which the piece is sung) to believe that when in the first act Samson rallies the Jews to overthrow their Philistine oppressors, "Israel romps ta chaîne" - Israel break your chains - he doesn't really mean "Israel" but Palestine. This is interesting because in this oratorio-like opera, the Jews are the good guys but don't get very much interesting music to sing. By contrast, the Philistines get all the good numbers including a really stomping Bacchanale just before the Temple of Dagon comes crashing down on their heads.
This artistic atrocity aroused the ire of Antwerp's Jewish community, but when one Jew expressed his outrage and fear that the production would stir up anti-Semitism to the general director of the opera, reportedly he was told "that if the situation for Jews were really so precarious here, they should leave."
Interestingly, New York Times critic and columnist Michael Kimmelman reacted to this invitation for the Jews to leave Europe with dismay about the bad taste of the comment but not to slander against the State of Israel and supporters. "Rage," Kimmelman wrote about the incident, "is a perfectly sane response to the Israeli occupation. And all art is political in the end."
One can argue in response that had the Palestinians been even marginally interested in sharing the country and living in peace with the Jews, they might have accepted any number of peace offers over the course of the last century.
Even more to the point, Gaza, the setting of the final scene of the opera, is currently occupied by Hamas, not Israel.
THE INVERSION by which the Islamist murderers of Hamas bent on annihilation of Israel become the soulful Jewish sufferers in "Samson" is more than just another play on the familiar David becoming Goliath theme that has gained traction ever since the Jews started winning wars of self-defense rather than being slaughtered en masse. Put in the context of an opera whose point is the triumph of faith over violence and sex, it is a way by which contemporary Jews can be stripped of any connection to their homeland and their heritage.
The fact that one of the persons responsible for this is an Israeli Jew does not make it any less misleading. That is especially true when this sort of work gives a boost to the revival of anti-Semitism in Europe.
Kimmelman thinks this sort of a Samson could not have been produced in New York, where presumably the Jews are not ready to be told to flee. As it happens, the production of the piece performed at the Metropolitan Opera since 1998 does take the opposite point of view. That version, created by English Jew Elijah Moshinsky, has the effrontery to portray the Jews in Samson as, well, Jews. Though no uniformed Nazis are seen onstage, Moshinsky's direction evokes the Holocaust with Jews in religious garb being oppressed by an enemy whose prime characteristic is a primitive and violent paganism.
This, too, may be a case, as Kimmelman says, that proves that all art is political. The difference is that one director's vision is based on the truth and the other on a lie. The trouble is, in an intellectual milieu in which those concepts no longer exist, it is all too easy to imagine a world in which Israel and the Jews can be eliminated too."
The writer is executive editor of Commentary magazine where he contributes to the Contentions blog at www.commentarymagazine.com. jtobin@commentarymagazine.com
Friday, 15 May 2009
Belgians rapped for accepting ‘anti-Semite’ cartoonist Ben Heine
Source: JTA
"PARIS (JTA) -- A Belgian satirical weekly criticized Belgian society for accepting a cartoonist who has insulted Jews and mocked the pope. In its cover story Thursday, the French-language Père Ubu weekly asked why Ben Heine -- "an anti-Semite of the worst kind," according to the article, who also "crudely" caricatured Pope Benedict XVI in April -- was still accepted in mainstream Belgian society.
The paper said Heine was a regular contributor to a Christian daily, La Libre Belgique, was paid to speak [in fact to draw] at a rally for the moderate cdH Christian political party [in fact they dropped the Christian label a few years ago, and call themselves "humanists"] and until recently was hired as a history and religion Catholic school teacher.
Heine participated in a 2006 drawing competition in Iran on Holocaust denial and was censored for comparing Israeli politicians to skull-brandishing Nazis. A recent cartoon showed a crucified Jesus wearing a condom on an erect penis. Here, nobody gives a damn," about Heine’s views and whether he is marginalized, the paper editorialized.
The weekly reproduced some of Heine’s controversial cartoons in the issue, including the most recent showing the pope throwing away a condom and commenting, "I have no penis anyway.""
Heine was "banned from deviantART permanently" because of the cartoon above.
Carlos Latuff depicts Ben Heine/James Bond dealing with the "Zionist (Ku Klux Klan) gang".
Cartoon by Ben Heine presented at the Teheran negationist cartoon contest nazifying Jews (a favourite theme).
More nazification and demonization of Jews and Israel:
"PARIS (JTA) -- A Belgian satirical weekly criticized Belgian society for accepting a cartoonist who has insulted Jews and mocked the pope. In its cover story Thursday, the French-language Père Ubu weekly asked why Ben Heine -- "an anti-Semite of the worst kind," according to the article, who also "crudely" caricatured Pope Benedict XVI in April -- was still accepted in mainstream Belgian society.
The paper said Heine was a regular contributor to a Christian daily, La Libre Belgique, was paid to speak [in fact to draw] at a rally for the moderate cdH Christian political party [in fact they dropped the Christian label a few years ago, and call themselves "humanists"] and until recently was hired as a history and religion Catholic school teacher.
Heine participated in a 2006 drawing competition in Iran on Holocaust denial and was censored for comparing Israeli politicians to skull-brandishing Nazis. A recent cartoon showed a crucified Jesus wearing a condom on an erect penis. Here, nobody gives a damn," about Heine’s views and whether he is marginalized, the paper editorialized.
The weekly reproduced some of Heine’s controversial cartoons in the issue, including the most recent showing the pope throwing away a condom and commenting, "I have no penis anyway.""
Heine was "banned from deviantART permanently" because of the cartoon above.
Carlos Latuff depicts Ben Heine/James Bond dealing with the "Zionist (Ku Klux Klan) gang".
Cartoon by Ben Heine presented at the Teheran negationist cartoon contest nazifying Jews (a favourite theme).More nazification and demonization of Jews and Israel:
.jpg)
Wednesday, 13 May 2009
On Norwegian Jewry, by Tom Segev
"A doctoral dissertation on the subject by historian Bjarte Bruland contains details about the property of a woman - who was murdered at Auschwitz along with her children - restoration of which was held up because it was impossible to establish in what order the children had been put in the gas chamber, and therefore it was not clear from a legal standpoint who inherited what.""In the history of the Jewish people, 2,000 Norwegian Jews merit no more than a footnote, but an exhibition now showing at Beth Hatefutsoth Diaspora museum in Tel Aviv presents their story as a microcosm, a window onto the vagaries of fate that befell all European Jews.
Up until 1851 Jews were not allowed to live in Norway, by dint of the second clause in the country's constitution, which also barred Jesuits and monks from migrating there. Once the ban was repealed, Eastern European Jews made their way to Norway; most of them actually wanted to go to America, but did not have the money to get that far. They tried - with great difficulty - to assimilate into local culture and become Norwegian patriots. A few posed for photographs dressed in the Norwegian army uniform; one kept the flag that was sewn on to the sleeve of his uniform when he played for the national soccer team.
Their story, as displayed in Beth Hatefutsoth, ranges from a 1920 notebook, attesting to the fact that a boy named David Fein made great effort to learn the letters of the Hebrew alphabet, to anti-Semitic posters that were pasted up around towns.
During World War II, the pro-Nazi government of Vidkun Quisling confiscated the property of all the country's Jews, and the Germans deported nearly 800 of them to death camps. The catalog for the exhibition, held under the auspices of the Royal Norwegian Embassy to Israel, states that about a decade ago, Norway became the first country to complete the process of restoring property and paying compensation to Jews for their losses and suffering caused during the Nazi occupation.
Beneath this diplomatic phrasing lies a half-century of abuse. Like the Swiss, the Norwegians prevented the restoration of many Jews' property by means of all kinds of regulations and bureaucratic trickery.
A doctoral dissertation on the subject by historian Bjarte Bruland contains details about the property of a woman - who was murdered at Auschwitz along with her children - restoration of which was held up because it was impossible to establish in what order the children had been put in the gas chamber, and therefore it was not clear from a legal standpoint who inherited what.
A few hundred Jews live in Norway today. These include ex-Israelis, members of kibbutzim who moved there when the female volunteers they met here returned home."
Source: Haaretz
Exhibition: Wergeland's Legacy, Beth Hatefutsoth, the Museum of the Jewish People
Norway: The Courage of a Small Jewish Community; Holocaust Restitution and Anti-Semitism, Interview with Bjarte Bruland and Irene Levin (JCPA)
On present day Norway, see:
Norway, Israel and the Jews blog
Monday, 11 May 2009
European Union invites extremist Muslim representatives to interfaith dialogue
"Instead, whether by oversight or by deliberate action, three of the four Muslim invitees taken by Commission President José Manuel Barroso and European Parliament President Hans-Gert Pöttering included Muslim representatives who have links to organizations affiliated with the international Muslim Brotherhood, an extremist organization known for supporting jihad against the West." (Moshe Kantor, European Jewish Congress President)
EU invites extremist Muslim representatives to interfaith dialogue and criticises Jewish representatives who declined the invitation ...
Source: article by Yossi Lempkowicz in EJP
"BRUSSELS (EJP)--- European Commission President José Manuel Barroso deplored Monday that some religious Jewish leaders boycotted a meeting of EU officials and European religious leaders over the inclusion of "anti-Semitic" extremist Muslim groups.
The meeting was co-hosted by the presidents of the European Commission and the European Parliament.
"The commission regrets the fact that some of the invited Jewish religious leaders have decided not to participate in this EU dialogue," Barroso said at the press conference.
"This meeting aims to foster dialogue and build on common ground, regarding the importance of this economic and financial crisis and we believe it is important to contribute."
He added: "It is time for unity and not for isolation on such an important topic."
In fact, the conference of European Rabbis (CER) declined the invitation to attend the interfaith gathering with the support of the European Jewish Congress (EJC), while a representative of another group, the Rabbinical Center of Europe (RCE), was present.
"It is inappropriate that organizations such as the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe, or individuals who in the past made, or endorsed, anti-Semitic statements and who are clearly linked to the radical Islamist movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood should be present at such gatherings," said Rabbi Aba Dunner, executive director of the CER.
Rabbi Levi Matusof, from the Rabbinical Centre of Europe, told a press conference after the meeting at the European Commission:"This is a dialogue between the religious leaders and the European institutions, it is not an intra-religious dialogue between the religious leaders."
The European Jewish Congress (EJC), an umbrella political representative group for Jewish communities around Europe, supported the CER’s decision to boycott the EU meeting.
"At the very root of any meaningful interfaith dialogue is the critically important issue of tolerance, acceptance and mutual respect. Sadly, today’s European interfaith gathering reflects neither that spirit nor its practice," EJC President Moshe Kantor said in a statement.
"Instead, whether by oversight or by deliberate action, three of the four Muslim invitees taken by Commission President José Manuel Barroso and European Parliament President Hans-Gert Pöttering included Muslim representatives who have links to organizations affiliated with the international Muslim Brotherhood, an extremist organization known for supporting jihad against the West".
"This undermines the important interfaith efforts that so many European leaders have worked to strengthen," the EJC said.
The Jewish group particularly mentioned the presence at the meeting of Prof. Tariq Ramadan, who, it said, "is a divisive and conflicted individual who has been known for promoting and defending the 'clashes of civilizations' ideology."
"There is simply no excuse for those who either preach hate or are affiliated with extremist religious organizations to be invited to any official interfaith gathering in Europe, especially under the patronage of the Presidents of the European Union and the European Parliament," it said."
EU invites extremist Muslim representatives to interfaith dialogue and criticises Jewish representatives who declined the invitation ...
Source: article by Yossi Lempkowicz in EJP
"BRUSSELS (EJP)--- European Commission President José Manuel Barroso deplored Monday that some religious Jewish leaders boycotted a meeting of EU officials and European religious leaders over the inclusion of "anti-Semitic" extremist Muslim groups.
The meeting was co-hosted by the presidents of the European Commission and the European Parliament.
"The commission regrets the fact that some of the invited Jewish religious leaders have decided not to participate in this EU dialogue," Barroso said at the press conference.
"This meeting aims to foster dialogue and build on common ground, regarding the importance of this economic and financial crisis and we believe it is important to contribute."
He added: "It is time for unity and not for isolation on such an important topic."
In fact, the conference of European Rabbis (CER) declined the invitation to attend the interfaith gathering with the support of the European Jewish Congress (EJC), while a representative of another group, the Rabbinical Center of Europe (RCE), was present.
"It is inappropriate that organizations such as the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe, or individuals who in the past made, or endorsed, anti-Semitic statements and who are clearly linked to the radical Islamist movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood should be present at such gatherings," said Rabbi Aba Dunner, executive director of the CER.
Rabbi Levi Matusof, from the Rabbinical Centre of Europe, told a press conference after the meeting at the European Commission:"This is a dialogue between the religious leaders and the European institutions, it is not an intra-religious dialogue between the religious leaders."
The European Jewish Congress (EJC), an umbrella political representative group for Jewish communities around Europe, supported the CER’s decision to boycott the EU meeting.
"At the very root of any meaningful interfaith dialogue is the critically important issue of tolerance, acceptance and mutual respect. Sadly, today’s European interfaith gathering reflects neither that spirit nor its practice," EJC President Moshe Kantor said in a statement.
"Instead, whether by oversight or by deliberate action, three of the four Muslim invitees taken by Commission President José Manuel Barroso and European Parliament President Hans-Gert Pöttering included Muslim representatives who have links to organizations affiliated with the international Muslim Brotherhood, an extremist organization known for supporting jihad against the West".
"This undermines the important interfaith efforts that so many European leaders have worked to strengthen," the EJC said.
The Jewish group particularly mentioned the presence at the meeting of Prof. Tariq Ramadan, who, it said, "is a divisive and conflicted individual who has been known for promoting and defending the 'clashes of civilizations' ideology."
"There is simply no excuse for those who either preach hate or are affiliated with extremist religious organizations to be invited to any official interfaith gathering in Europe, especially under the patronage of the Presidents of the European Union and the European Parliament," it said."
Sunday, 10 May 2009
Norway's F.M. Jonas Gahr Støre and the tactics of Israeli diplomacy
"There is something slightly troubling over this anecdote. Can we reasonable suspect that Israeli ambassadors would establish a tactic of regularly accusing their host nations of being Europe’s most anti-Israeli country? And why, in a book of 342 pages, does Støre only make such an observation of Israel ?"Discrediting and poking fun at Israel has become a European speciality.
Source: piece in Norway, Israel and the Jews blog
"Jonas Gahr Støre [photo] is Norway’s Minister of Foreign Affairs. In November 2008 he published a book on Norway’s foreign policy - "Making a difference" (Å gjøre en forskjell, Cappelen Damm). On page 136 in the chapter "The Middle East" he writes the following (unauthorised translations):
"During my first meeting with Israel’s ambassador to Norway, Myriam Shomrat, the Israeli message was clear: Norway is the country with the strongest anti-Israeli attitudes in Europe. I stood in doubt and wondered about the analysis. Some months later I discussed the Middle East with my Irish colleague in Dublin. I quoted the Israeli ambassador. "That must be wrong,” said the Irishman, “The Israeli ambassador here in this country says that Ireland is the worst!". I think others have received the message."
There is something slightly troubling over this anecdote. Can we reasonable suspect that Israeli ambassadors would establish a tactic of regularly accusing their host nations of being Europe’s most anti-Israeli country? And why, in a book of 342 pages, does Støre only make such an observation of Israel ? Be that as it may, visit Wikipedia’s section on Støre and you find the following:
"He also makes an amusing revelation of Israeli diplomatic tactics in Europe. In her first meeting with Støre the Israeli ambassador Myriam Shomrat stated that Norway is the country with the strongest anti-Israel attitudes in Europe. Støre doubted this, and talked about it with his Irish colleague in Dublin. He could tell of how Israel’s ambassador had said precisely the same thing about Ireland."
It is unfortunate that Norway’s Minister of Foreign Affairs be quoted in this fashion. One of the salient features of Wikipedia is that it allows users to edit its contents. This site proposes that Støre makes use of this feature as soon as possible."
- Gry Larsen, political adviser to Norwegian FM, no friend of Israel
- Norway NGO funding: boycotts and apartheid rhetoric instead of peace and coexistence
- Norway's pro-Israel opposition leader under 24-hour guard
- Norwegian envoy equates Israel with Nazis
- For Norwegian F.M. Europe much too lenient with Israel
- Norway Funding PA Hate Media
- Norway says it has severed Hamas ties
Friday, 8 May 2009
Germany: ban on Israeli flags during rally upheld
"During a protest against Israel's Operation Cast Lead organized by the radical Islamic group Milli Görüs [Turkish] that attracted 10,000 protesters in Duisburg, two police officers stormed the apartment of a 25-year-old student and his 26-year-old girlfriend and seized Israeli flags hanging on the balcony and inside a window. [...] If the police unit had not removed the flags, "it could have come to a big escalation" and "jeopardized life and limb" of those present, Richter said."
Source: article by Benjamin Weinthal in TJP
"A legal opinion submitted by law professor Jürgen Vahle to the Interior Ministry of North Rhine-Westphalia state in late April upholds the propriety of a police ban on and seizure of two Israeli flags during a violent anti-Israeli demonstration in January.
The report, a copy of which was obtained by The Jerusalem Post, asserts that "the entry by force in two apartments" and "the securing of the flags was lawful."
During a protest against Israel's Operation Cast Lead organized by the radical Islamic group Milli Görüs that attracted 10,000 protesters in Duisburg, two police officers stormed the apartment of a 25-year-old student and his 26-year-old girlfriend and seized Israeli flags hanging on the balcony and inside a window.
According to Vahle's report, the protesters threw "chunks of ice, pocket knives and cigarette lighters" at the Israeli flags.
North Rhine-Westphalia's domestic intelligence agency (Protection of the Constitution) cited in its 2008 report the anti-Semitic and militant Islamic group Milli Görüs, the organizer of the anti-Israeli protest, as a threat to the democratic structure of the federal republic.
The student, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he fears for his safety, told the Post that two weeks after the removal of the flags "a couple of young folks" hollered in front of his apartment, "Damn Jew, come outside."
He displayed the Israeli flags in January to "show solidarity with a republic [Israel] in the Middle East that is surrounded by dictators but is viewed as a pariah state. I was in Israel and find the land super."
Asked about Vahle's report, the student said, "False questions were poised."
Given the background of the radical Islamic group Milli Görüs, he asked, "why was a police unit of 280 officers present at a demonstration where 10,000 protesters" were present?
Vahle's report drew mixed reactions from police union officials. Frank Richter, chairman of the police union (Gdp) in North Rhine-Westphalia, told the Post that the "special relationship between Israel and Germany is good" but the entry into the apartment was "legal according to the police statute."
If the police unit had not removed the flags, "it could have come to a big escalation" and "jeopardized life and limb" of those present, Richter said.
However, another "legal opinion could reach a different result" and there "were alternatives" to removing the flags, Rainer Wendt, head of the police union (DPolG), told the Post. Wendt criticized the Vahle report and said, "Everything that is lawful does not mean that it is right." It was "not part of police conduct to rip down Israeli flags," he said. According to Wendt, the seizure of Israeli flags should be "assessed politically and psychologically."
German police had a "special responsibility" toward the Jewish state and the confiscation of Israeli flags damaged the German-Israeli relationship, he said."
Source: article by Benjamin Weinthal in TJP
"A legal opinion submitted by law professor Jürgen Vahle to the Interior Ministry of North Rhine-Westphalia state in late April upholds the propriety of a police ban on and seizure of two Israeli flags during a violent anti-Israeli demonstration in January.
The report, a copy of which was obtained by The Jerusalem Post, asserts that "the entry by force in two apartments" and "the securing of the flags was lawful."
During a protest against Israel's Operation Cast Lead organized by the radical Islamic group Milli Görüs that attracted 10,000 protesters in Duisburg, two police officers stormed the apartment of a 25-year-old student and his 26-year-old girlfriend and seized Israeli flags hanging on the balcony and inside a window.
According to Vahle's report, the protesters threw "chunks of ice, pocket knives and cigarette lighters" at the Israeli flags.
North Rhine-Westphalia's domestic intelligence agency (Protection of the Constitution) cited in its 2008 report the anti-Semitic and militant Islamic group Milli Görüs, the organizer of the anti-Israeli protest, as a threat to the democratic structure of the federal republic.
The student, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he fears for his safety, told the Post that two weeks after the removal of the flags "a couple of young folks" hollered in front of his apartment, "Damn Jew, come outside."
He displayed the Israeli flags in January to "show solidarity with a republic [Israel] in the Middle East that is surrounded by dictators but is viewed as a pariah state. I was in Israel and find the land super."
Asked about Vahle's report, the student said, "False questions were poised."
Given the background of the radical Islamic group Milli Görüs, he asked, "why was a police unit of 280 officers present at a demonstration where 10,000 protesters" were present?
Vahle's report drew mixed reactions from police union officials. Frank Richter, chairman of the police union (Gdp) in North Rhine-Westphalia, told the Post that the "special relationship between Israel and Germany is good" but the entry into the apartment was "legal according to the police statute."
If the police unit had not removed the flags, "it could have come to a big escalation" and "jeopardized life and limb" of those present, Richter said.
However, another "legal opinion could reach a different result" and there "were alternatives" to removing the flags, Rainer Wendt, head of the police union (DPolG), told the Post. Wendt criticized the Vahle report and said, "Everything that is lawful does not mean that it is right." It was "not part of police conduct to rip down Israeli flags," he said. According to Wendt, the seizure of Israeli flags should be "assessed politically and psychologically."
German police had a "special responsibility" toward the Jewish state and the confiscation of Israeli flags damaged the German-Israeli relationship, he said."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
