When I was at University in Britain studying for my BA, in my second year one of my classes was in Community Studies. In class a debate came up where one of my classmates was from a British Jamaican background and was talking about how young people from her community struggled to find good jobs or progress in British society. After listening to what she had said I asked her if people from a similar or the same background to her had managed to succeed economically and progress and if they had, had they not made efforts to help others in their community too.

I was thinking of the fact that she was second generation British and that when our great grandparents arrived in Britain, they too were poor, uneducated, had a language barrier and appeared to others as outsiders. There were Jews who were established in Britain long before the large wave in the 1900’s and they too struggled, but the community started small and worked together and eventually progressed and many moved out of the East end and out into the suburbs.

I then mentioned how we have developed services within our community, charities, educational opportunities, youth groups, volunteering opportunities and so on. Today we are in a fortunate position where we can afford to subsidize volunteers to go on Jewish educational trips abroad, to Europe, to Israel sometimes to do exchanges with Jewish communities in other countries…

And the response I got before I even went into depth about how we have progressed was “well that may be the case for you, because Jews have money.”

I was deeply offended, and was not prepared to let it go without making a point, it wasn’t the first time that Jewish stereotypes had been cited to me as truth by students out of ignorance and without even stopping for a pause to consider the possibility that it was a stereotype and could be deemed offensive and particularly when being said directly to the face of a Jewish person.

I then went off on a rant about how dared she make such a comment, implying that Jews have some endless pot of money at their disposal to help themselves to. And then proceeded to tell my personal family story of how my great grandparents arrived here too, poor, 100 years ago with however even less than what their parents arrived with only one generation ago. They had large families and lived in small-overcrowded apartments in areas similar to the communities that she lives in now.

There were not nearly as many  social benefits available to them at the time either. My great grand father opened a Fish and Chip shop and worked long hard hours to keep the family. My grandpa became an Antiques dealer in the Markets in London, and over time through hard work their economic situation improved. It took three sometimes four generations before things got better for many of us, my Uncle spent his life selling Fruit and Veg, my dad has a small business as a hairdresser, my mum also works. Even if by my peer’s standards we do have money, it is through honest, hard earned work.

We are not all Philip Greens and Alan Sugars, and even Alan Sugar himself did not come from money, he is a fantastic success story of someone who started at the very bottom and built his way up to building a multimillion pound business empire.

What we do have in the Jewish community is perhaps a strong sense of Community cohesion. There is a fostered value of giving something back to the community, and many people throughout their lives will give either their time or money towards funding certain projects, or worthy causes both inside and outside the Jewish community. I used to work at the Redbridge JCC; half of the building was funded by the Sugar foundation as well as buildings within King Solomon High School, the Jewish school in Ilford; the community that Sir Alan grew up in.

And much of what the community is able to offer today they were not able to offer back then because it did not have the financial resources, but they had other less costly activities that it offered to its young people.

The Jewish community may have some members, who are much better off than others, but this does not mean that the Jews have money; our services and facilities are only available by virtue of the willingness of the rich to help provide opportunities to those who cannot afford them. And we have set up funds and charities to keep such activities and services available.

She did not like what I had said, and believed that I had inadvertently accused her and her community of being lazy. And perhaps I was, but rather than have her disrespect my family and community with false charges without taking into consideration certain factors involved with her ignorant Jewish stereotypes of Jewish wealth and Power, I would happily call her lazy and also say that as opposed to dismissing what I have to say, maybe she could take some of it on board and reflect on some of the issues that exist in her community, look at our case and see what could be learned and how to apply it to improving the situation within her own community.

But then of course came the charge that it is easier because we are mostly White. Well that may or may not be the case, I have no doubt that there is Racism in the UK and people will use Race as a barrier. But then people will also use religion and culture as a barrier. I remember I used to have lots of problems with part time jobs when I told them at the time that I didn’t work Friday nights because I have dinner with my family, and sometimes I might argue that at times when I mentioned that during an interview, it could be the reason I did not get the job in the first place, and that if I said so after I got a job it is the reason I may have lost a job. Who knows whether that is or isn’t the case for Jews or any other religious community that can’t do certain things at certain times.

I would however argue that there are Indian people in the UK who like the Jews also started off poor, of a different colour skin to the white majority, many also of non-Christian religious backgrounds and spoke different languages. People made fun of them and made jokes about them owning corner shops, but they were also persistent and worked hard, encouraged their children to work hard in school and integrate into British society and today we see less of them in corner shops and more of them becoming doctors, lawyers and accountants.

I was well aware that I was touching very sensitive issues with this discussion, but I refused to sit there and be told that we are just lucky because we are rich, and rule out the possibility for Black people to progress in life in light of ongoing discrimination that exists even in a multicultural society and that I believed firmly that there are ways that they can achieve success as many other groups have and are.

This was further reinforced to me by the fact that I had a few Black friends in my class and she was totally in agreement with me. She lived in Wembley in North London, with her husband; I used to give her a lift home as we both lived in that side of the city and had long chats about how to improve her communities’ situation. She herself had worked hard as well as her father to improve her families economic status and had recently bought a retreat in the south of France with the aim of hosting youth groups weekend and trips away at a reasonable rate for bonding and training events as well as acting as a hostel for whoever wished to book it.

Another friend I had there who at the time deferred from continuing the course because she had a lot of issues at the time and couldn’t continue studying, but messaged me a few months ago to let me know that she was back at the college and was in the process of setting up a charity organisation for young people in Jamaica.

My dad had a Black client who also worked with young Black people in the UK and actually received training from some Jewish organisations about leadership training and then went on to run her own organisation which would run similar activities such as camping, like many Jewish youth groups did and even sent young British Black people on projects to help Africa.

I was very pleased to hear these great, productive initiatives. It is not the first time that Blacks and Jews have worked together and shared ideas, Jews in America were very active in the Civil rights struggle. I am not denying that Racism towards Blacks still exists, no doubt it does, and it should be fought wherever it is manifested. Racism is also still prevalent towards Jews, Indians and others.

Racism is still an issue for many groups no matter how affluent a group may become. And at least in the Jewish case anti-Semitism mutates. Why I think I felt so adamant about not allowing my peer at university to get away with such a statement and wanted her to know that it is a form of prejudice, it is a stereotype and it is not permissible to make such statements is firstly for the same reasons that she may feel that anyone saying something that would in any way be deemed offensive towards her people should be stopped. If someone had made a statement that many Blacks commit crimes and mug people, I don’t think that for one second she or any other reasonable, pluralistic thinking person would stand for it. And if someone did say it, I’m sure it would be challenged by a long speech about how they have been discriminated against, often come from poor backgrounds, live below the poverty line… and put forward some very valid points that even if statistics showed that they did, that the correlation is not caused by virtue of the fact that they are Black but many other factors.

In the same way that I would argue that Jews who may be prominent in certain professions such as banking, are not just naturally good with money. There are historical reasons for this. Dating back to the Middle ages and that some Jews were in fact actually forced into what would become jobs as bankers, by Christians making them money lenders as they did not wish to practice Usury, which Christianity believed to be a sinful practice. There were also very few professions that Jews were permitted to have back then.

Before I made Aliyah, I worked part time in a bar for a few months, I did not mention that I was Jewish, the subject did not come up. Our manager was very stingy, did not pay us well, we got very few tips and we were kept there until the very last minute unnecessarily at times. And then one of the girls who worked there decided to make the comment that “he’s probably Jewish.” And of course at that point I told her that I was Jewish, and she realised she had made a big mistake and had nothing to say really other than “I’m sorry, I didn’t know.” As opposed to had she known, she would have just thought it and not said it.

What is striking is not so much the fact that anti-Semitism still exists, but is how it has become or seems to still be almost politically correct. In many instances people if they do have prejudicial views of certain groups, they are weary first of not saying them to members of that group directly but are also weary of offending those who may just be offended by racist remarks against any group even if they are not of that group themselves. The latter would at least lead one considering making any remark about any group to take that into consideration before opening their mouth.

The average person may not be calling on people to act violently against Jews, but it seems that people are just unaware of their prejudices and the normalization of stereotypes to assumed facts is very dangerous.

I am not uncritical of myself, and aspects in the Jewish community and certainly not of Israel at times. But what alarms me the most about the association of Jews with money and Power is not whether there are Jews with money, power or influence, but the danger that it has that once one comes to accept such stereotypes as true of all Jews, one is not far away from buying into the conspiracy theory of the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion.’

A recent article in Yediot Ahronot, one of Israel’s leading newspapers, titled “Europe: Anti-Semitism up, Islamophobia down” reports that in many European countries, however not as much in the UK that in the past year as a result of a recent study carried out in Germany by the Institute for Interdisciplinary Research on Conflict and Violence at the University of Bielefeld claimed that anti-Semitism has increased over the past year and believe that the global financial crisis to be a possible factor behind the results of the study. The study showed that:

“Compared to last year’s results (as well as those of 2002), the level of resentment against most minorities declined – sexism and racism even considerably, Islamophobia slightly. There were only two exceptions: Homophobia and anti-Semitism.
Hatred of both groups is on the rise as they are considered to be found also among people of a high status.”

“Anti-Semitism is also still widely spread in Europe. The team of scientists from the universities of Amsterdam, Bielefeld, Budapest, Grenoble, Lisbon, Marburg, Oxford, Padua, Paris, and Warsaw found that 41.2% of Europeans believe that “Jews try to take advantage of having been victims during the Nazi era”. The highest degree of affirmation was in Poland – 72%, and the lowest in the Netherlands – 5.6%.

One-quarter of Europeans (24.5%) believe that “Jews have too much influence“, and nearly one-third (31%) agree that “Jews in general do not care about anything or anyone but their own kind.” ”
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3815828,00.html

However, 61.9% say that Jews “enrich our culture”, especially in the Netherlands, Britain and Germany.

But there were some alarming statistics on what people had to say regarding Israel.

“45.7% of the Europeans (apart for France, where this facet of anti-Semitism was not measured) somewhat or strongly agree that “Israel is conducting a war of extermination against the Palestinians.” About 37.4% agree with the following statement: “Considering Israel’s policy, I can understand why people do not like Jews.”
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3815828,00.html

These statistics are very worrying and the report concluded that it believed that it is likely to get worse. Not to mention that the Madof scandal may have also been pounced on to have created some degree of anti-Semitism, in spite of the fact that many of the initial victims of the Madof scandal were Jews and Jewish organisations, who greatly suffered as a result of it.

The Mearsheimer, Walt study and publication of their book The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy, whilst I do not believe the book to be anti-Semitic, or even necessarily anti-Israel has opened various discussions about the power and influence that the Lobby has on US politics, whilst I believe that it was very careful not to regard it as a ‘Jewish Lobby’ and mention that many of its members are not even Jewish and also that it is not always looking out for Israel’s national interest but what it or the current Israeli government at any given time may perceive its national interest to be, is a matter of debate. And certainly the establishment of J Street as another pro Israel Lobby, which although not as powerful, established or influential has paved the way for changes in the relationship and direction that divided American Jews and non-Jews and also the views of many like myself in Israel that America and Israel should take.

But unfortunately its timing is highly problematic. A documentary on the book was first broadcast in the Netherlands on Dutch Television in 2007. And recently in the UK, Channel 4’s Dispatches broadcast their own documentary titled “Inside Britain’s Israel Lobby.” Whilst I believe that there are issues with regard to the Israel Diaspora relationship, and there is the argument that accusations against Israel’s policies are anti-Semitic are used as a political tactic. Which sometimes they are, but there is clearly an anti-Semitism that is hiding behind being anti-Israel.

It isn’t always and some things that may be often regarded as anti-Semitism or anti-Zionism do often have other explanations behind them. For example Pro Israel groups are often concerned about how much negative media coverage Israel receives. And the international concern for making this conflict more of a priority when there are much worse things going on in the world. I don’t think these things are necessarily to do with anti-Semitism. From a media perspective, it is an interesting conflict and the stories will sell news more likely than other conflicts. And the other is the ramification of what happens here in Israel and its effect on other countries across the globe. What happens here unfortunately has more of an affect than a tribal war somewhere in Africa. If Israel has a war, the price of oil might go up for example. What happens in Israel, Palestine and the Arab states have an influence on the “war on terror.”

This is a reason why people are more focused on this issue than on others, because it affects them more. It is also a soft spot in turmoil; it has an emotional affect on many Jews, Muslims and Christians who know this place as the Land of the Bible, where Jesus was from… And has significance to three of the world’s largest religions.

However, defenders of Israel are right to point out a double standard that exists and that is put on Israel in spite of some of the things that it warrants criticism for at times. There seems to be on these issues two rights and two wrongs between the defender and the criticizer. The criticizer may say that Israel has reacted disproportionately militarily at times and acted contrary to International Law. I am not going to delve into issues with regard to implementation of International Law or moral dilemmas in today’s warfare with non-state actors, but also at times the defenders of Israel will respond to the critics criticism disproportionately. Both are ignoring what one another claim. One claims that Israel has done something wrong but not always recognizing that there are much worse things going on in the world or that the other side has also done wrong and is often equally responsible and the defender is ignoring addressing the criticism and the problem, and the critic feels that his point is not being listened to at all. As a result critics of Israeli policy become more militant and angry as they feel that they cannot freely be critical of Israel without the anti-Semitism or anti-Zionist card being thrown at them and the defender of Israel becomes ever more convinced that this disproportional attention that Israel is getting is a double standard and more convinced that Israel will be criticized no matter what she does and must be defended at all costs.

In light of the global financial crisis and what I spoke about earlier regarding the increase in traditional Jewish stereotypes, with nothing to do with Israel, the Israel factor has complicated the matter further and will continue to complicate things with regard to anti-Semitism. As an Israeli, a Diaspora Jew and a Zionist I do not believe that attempting to separate the two issues into an anti-Jewish matter or an anti-Israel matter will do anything to help resolve this problem. To cleanse Jews of anything guilty about them by disassociating themselves from anything to do with Israel is not only unrealistic but also immoral. Israel is a country, it is not perfect, it does good things and it does bad things, like any other country does, it is young and has a lot more problems that are yet to be resolved. People who think that they are being helpful to the Palestinians by trying to delegitimize Israel are sadly mistaken. And whilst I am not calling on non-Jews and Jews to swear unconditional support for Israel it is not helping anyone to demonize Israel, touch sore spots for Jews at a time where holocaust denial is on the rise and where Israel has every reason to be concerned about the possibility of a nuclear Iran posing an existential threat to its existence. The issues in the region are not black or white issues, they are not between right and wrong. They are often to do with right and right and wrong and wrong.

Anyone who knows me will know that I am very careful with who I call an anti-Semite and particularly when someone is critical of Israel I am never the first to dismiss them or accuse them of anything, and will happily listen to what they have to say and respond accordingly, and am critical of those who do use the word too quickly.

Whilst things like the Measheimer, Walt book and the documentaries about the Pro Israel lobbies may not be anti-Semitic, they are certainly not helpful in combating anti-Semitism at a time when it needs to be addressed. As well as what was mentioned in the documentary about the BBC’s choosing to broadcast a documentary about a week after the beginning of the war in Iraq, titled “Israel’s Secret Weapon,” which could be argued was implying that Israel should have been invaded instead of Iraq.

Timing of all these events and the contribution that they make to an ongoing increase in anti-Semitism has been more the factor leading one to believe that there may be some hidden anti-Semitic agenda somewhere behind the scenes.

Last week a Church in London decided to hold a Palestinian solidarity Christmas service which attracted a small number of pro Israel protesters outside the Church. The very idea of one showing solidarity with the Palestinians doesn’t particularly bother me at all, so long as it is not at the expense of all Israelis, and vice versa. I was then forwarded a video taken from this event where one man, who identified himself as John Sullivan who attended the service, decided to speak on camera to some of the protesters. Some of the words that came out of his mouth could not have been described as anything but anti-Israel and anti-Semitic, including:

“Everybody in Britain can see what a nasty unpleasant type of people Jewish people are.”
“You should be part of Britain, Britain is a culture which Jewish people don’t understand. You are not part of my country and I’m British.”
“Jewish people, if you look through the history are vindictive, probably evil, probably very unpleasant.” (John Sullivan)

The video was posted on Youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fUKsDG9v2A) for all to see and over 300 members joined a facebook group in less than a week.

Channel 4’s Dispatches broadcast another documentary in 2007 titled the “War on Britains Jews” presented by Daily Mail columnist Richard Littlejohn where MP John Mann who led the All Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Anti-Semitism in Britain in 2005 referred to the former Mayor of London Ken Livingstone’s remark’s to Evening Standard Journalist Oliver Finegold that he resembled a “concentration camp guard” even after having been told by the Journalist that he was Jewish and found that offensive continued with his remarks and did not believe they would be regarded as racist or even offensive. Mark Garnder of the CST pointed out that many Jews started to question whether or not the Mayor would have said the same sort of thing to a Black man. And the fact that the Mayor was able at the time to get away with the comment or even did not hesitate to make it.

The Jewish community must find a way to expose anti-Semitism for what it is in a way that it sends a message to the world that comments as such made by anyone will not only not be tolerated by Jews but to make it known that it is unacceptable and that it is certainly not politically correct, even if the negative perceptions still exists in peoples minds. How to achieve this will not be easy.

The world became very alarmed about what they could or could not say with regard to Islam, particularly after the incident with the Danish cartoons of Mohammed in September 2005, which started with Danish Muslim organisations protesting against the publication of the cartoons and then led to protests throughout the Muslim world, many of which became violent, resulting in more than 100 deaths. Danish Embassies were set on fire in Syria, Lebanon and Iran, storming European buildings, and desecrating the Danish, Dutch, Norwegian and German flags in Gaza City. Hamas’s Mahmoud al-Zahar issued death threats. The reaction from Muslim leaders varied, some urged the protesters to remain peaceful whilst others encouraged the violence.

This event has certainly been a deterrent if nothing else, and showed us how big a problem could be created by some radicals because of some cartoons being drawn of their prophet when they do not do that and found it offensive. It only makes me think of the amount of hate material published about Jews and Christians from the Muslim world that we simply could not react proportionately even if we wanted to if that was how we went about our objections to offensive material, without inadvertently destroying the planet.

We are not big on violent protests and nor should we be, but we will need to find a way, drawing on our own values and that of Western civilization and our apparently tolerant and anti-Racist, multicultural, peace loving societies that we are a part of to effectively make some examples of those who dare to use the kind of language that John Sullivan does.

We are a small group, our strength is not in our numbers, and what’s more is that it doesn’t have to be. The Jewish community should be looking to find common allies with other groups and make their causes our causes and our causes their causes. We are not asking for anything more than what Britain claims to be, a Liberal democracy made up of many peoples today who protects those who are law abiding citizens and not to discriminate based on Race, Ethnicity, Religion, Gender or Sexuality.

Alex Carson

Hitchens (I know, I know, I think he’s a dick, too) on Palin:

On Saturday night, she [Palin] was due to put on a black dress and be a featured guest at the Gridiron Club dinner in Washington, D.C. It was time to don the fake finery of wit and beauty again. (I do hope this isn’t why the press, which gives this annual gala, went so utterly soft on her “birther” garbage over the course of last weekend.) The person who has been introducing Palin into the more exalted social and political circles of the capital, and who has already arranged her appearance at the Alfalfa Club, is Fred Malek. Two things about Malek are worth bearing in mind.

The first is that he was an important member of the Nixon administration, a senior figure on the Republican National Committee, and the campaign manager for the re-election of George H.W. Bush in 1992. With his Carlyle Group and other corporate connections and his mansion in suburban Maclean, Va., Malek is almost the prototypical “establishment” Washington insider and consiglieri Republican, against whom Palin’s adoring book-tour crowds, in their pathetic dreams, imagine her to be a crusader. But her preposterous book Going Rogue is larded with praise for the wise support and advice of this leathery old Beltway bandit…

[T]he second thing to note about Malek is that he was the man who drew up a list of Jews to be fired from the civil service under the Nixon administration. I am surprised that so many people have allowed themselves to forget this—and that Palin has never been asked a single question about it. In the early 1970s, Nixon, whose White House tapes show consistent evidence of anti-Semitic paranoia, gave orders that the Bureau of Labor Statistics be purged of what he called a “Jewish cabal.” The job of drawing up the list was given to Malek, whose information led to what was called the “reassignment” of some officials within the Labor Department.

NEW YORK (Press Release)– At a time when the United States is looking to Egypt to play a critical role in bringing about a new era of reconciliation and partnership between the Muslim world and the West, an attitude of “business as usual” persists among Egyptian leaders toward the incessant drumbeat of anti-Semitism in the media and society, according to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).

*
Preceding provided by Anti-Defamation League

By Garry Fabian
****

Victorian church newspaper accused of bias

MELBOURNE—A Victorian church newspaper has come under fire for presenting “inaccuracy” and “malicious distortion” in a travel piece about Israel and the West Bank.

Crosslight, a Uniting  Church of Victoria and Tasmania community publication,  published an article by its executive editor, Kim Cain, in last month’s edition, under the headline, “A pilgrim’s regress in the Holy Land”.

In a 1400-word feature in the Melbourne-based magazine, Cain chronicled a tour of Bethlehem and commented on the Israeli government’s determination to “minimise any appearance or concept of political oppression of a people”.

He also lamented Palestinians “losing their houses, lands and hope . to the Jewish
extremists”, referred to Jesus as a Palestinian,  and described “peaceful protests” at the town of  Bil’in -­ without citing reports of 100 Israeli  soldiers having been injured during
demonstrations at the site earlier this year.

Zionist Council of Victoria (ZCV) president Dr Danny Lamm said the article was riddled with “inaccuracy, prejudice and malicious distortion”.

“We are extremely concerned that members of the Uniting Church reading material of this nature will be given a completely distorted view of the reality of life in Israel and the West Bank,” he said this week.

“The Jewish community has had formal dialogue with the Uniting Church over many years, and this is a particularly disappointing result,” Dr Lamm said.

When contacted by a Jewish community commentator however, Cain denied the article was one-sided.  “I believe it’s balanced,” he said. “The article was a reporting of my experience, and it’s more a look at what happens when tourists or pilgrims go to the Holy Land.”

Cain added he had been in contact with the ZCV and encouraged the organisation to make a written submission to the newspaper. In addition, he has also agreed to meet with them to discuss their grievances.

Milestones for progressive congregations

MELBOURNE – The Union for Progressive Judaism (UJP) has unveiled plans for the
celebration of a series of landmark anniversaries next year.

Among the milestones the movement will be  commemorating in 2010 are 80 years of Progressive Judaism in the region, 80 years since the  founding of St Kilda’s Temple Beth Israel, 60 years of the Leo Baeck Centre in Melbourne, 50 years of Sydney’s North Shore Temple Emanuel, 30 years of Temple Shalom on the Gold Coast, 25 years of Progressive worship in Canberra and, a bit further afield, “the 21st” of Hong Kong’s United Jewish Congregation.

The plans were one of the items addressed at the UPJ six-monthly gathering in Sydney earlier this month.

According to the movement’s executive director, Steve Denenberg, events will combine prayer, study and celebration throughout the region, including numerous scholars-in-residence, cantors, entertainers and visitors.

“The leadership of the World Union for Progressive Judaism will be joining our biennial
conference in Canberra in November 2010,” Denenberg said.

The UPJ gathering, one of a series that supplements the movement’s biennial conferences,
drew presidents, rabbis, shaliachs and executive committee members from across Australia, New Zealand and Asia.

Special guest at the event was Naomi Abelson, coordinator of Nothing but Nets -­ a North
American Union for Reform Judaism program sponsored by the United Nations Foundation -­ which seeks to eradicate malaria in Africa.

Speakers at the gathering included Executive Council of Australian Jewry executive director Peter Wertheim, Shalom Institute head Dr Hilton Immerman and Zionist Federation of Australia technology specialist Andre Oboler.

Jewish bodybuilder shows winning form

SYDNEY- Joshua  Gersohn has claimed second spot at the Australian Natural
Bodybuilding titles in Sydney in the under-19 category.

Gersohn, 19, making his national debut in his third year of bodybuilding, claimed the silver placing after presenting a series of poses for the judges in the first round, before performing a one-minute routine to seal his result.

The teenager qualified for the eight-man field after nabbing another second spot in the Central Coast titles earlier this year, but with his time now up in the juniors, he will take some time off to bulk up and compete in the more senior divisions.

Gersohn’s work towards his statuesque physique was 15 weeks in the making -­ three sessions of cardio or weights a day, six days a week, on a restricted diet.

When bulking up, his weight peaked at 100 kilograms, but by competition, extra dieting had his chiselled, bronzed body down to 77 kilograms -­ an effort that does not faze him.

“You feel fitter because you are lighter,” he said. “But in the last week you feel a bit down,
no energy and you have to go through carb depletion and water loading.”

So is the pain worth the gain? “It’s fun ­ great to get on stage; it’s a feeling you can’t
describe. There’s the thrill of seeing how good you can get yourself looking. You see your body’s changes from year to year.

“And there’s the thrill of seeing yourself on stage . it also gives you a lot of experience in
life . if you can manage the dedication needed, you can put up with other things in life and grow on that.”

Spike in the number of anti-Jewish incidents

SYDNEY – Australia has seen an alarming spike in the number of anti-Jewish
incidents during the past year, according to new research released this week.

The 144-page Anti-Semitism Report revealed 962 accounts of anti-Jewish violence, vandalism, harassment and intimidation in the past 12 months.

“That’s more than twice the annual average. [It's] unprecedented,” said Australia/Israel &
Jewish Affairs Council’s director of international and community affairs and former
ECAJ president, Jeremy Jones, who compiled the report.

He released his findings at the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ) annual conference in Sydney on November 29.

“More than in any other 12-month period, Jewish-Australians walking to and from synagogue were abused by passing motorists, Jewish people were confronted with incitement against them in Australian cities, and abusive, offensive and intimidatory emails were received by Jewish-Australians at their homes and workplaces.”

Jones, who has been tracking anti-Semitic incidents in Australia for the past 20 years,
also noted that anti-Jewish propaganda in fringe publications and from extremist organisations remains an “ongoing concern”.

The results were backed by testimonies from heads of Jewish security groups in both Sydney and Melbourne, who said they have also noticed a surge of incidents in recent years.

David Rothman, head of Sydney’s Communal Security Group, said: “Since 2001, there has been a yearly increase in anti-Semitic incidents, verbal abuse and assault that we see on the ground, and reports from the community.”

Amit Bar-Giora, head of Melbourne’s Community Security Group, added: “Although most of these incidents are not of a violent nature, the fact that there has been an increase is of a great concern. We ask [the community] to be alert to any suspicious activity and report them accordingly.”

On a more positive note, Jones disclosed a marked decrease in reports of physical violence against Jewish individuals and property ­ with 27 incidents reported this year, compared with 58 and 46 in the previous two years.

Telephone threats, hate mail and graffiti were also reported at “below average rates”.

“It is important to emphasise that my research over 20 years indicates Australians are
fundamentally tolerant and opposed to discrimination, vilification or harassment of
Jews and other segments of the population, but that a relatively small number of fanatic and offensive individuals are increasingly active in trying to diminish the quality of life of Jewish-Australians,” he said.

“Internationally, Australia scores very well as a successful multicultural society,” he added.

Government funding for school chaplains

CANBERRA- Australian Prime Minster Kevin Rudd has confirmed that funding for school
chaplains would continue until 2011, pledging to invest an additional $42 million in the program.

The initiative was established by the previous government in 2007. Since then, the $115 million pumped into the program has seen around 2700 Australian schools receive funding of up to $20,000 a year towards their chaplaincy.

In a speech to the Australian Christian Lobby’s national conference in Canberra last month, Rudd stressed the importance of chaplains ­- including rabbis -­ in providing care that teachers often cannot offer.

He added: “We will guarantee funding for the next two years until December 2011 for schools currently funded under the National School Chaplaincy Program.

“This will involve a total additional investment of $42 million over the 2010 and 2011 school years.”

During that time, he said the Government would reconsider the program and would call on
community submissions to assess the best way to carry it forward.

“While there is no denying the success of the National School Chaplaincy Program, it could be improved to better accommodate schools in rural and regional areas, small schools and schools in disadvantaged communities,” he said.

Opposition education spokesperson Christopher Pyne had been encouraging the Government to commit to the chaplaincy program’s continuation for some time.

“This program was introduced by the Coalition government and enabled schools to employ a part-time school chaplain,” Pyne said last month.

“According to figures released during [Senate] estimates hearings last week, an extraordinary 97 per cent of participating school principals supported its continuation.”

Pyne, though, was critical of Rudd’s announcement, saying it only provided for the
continuation of current funding, and did not allow schools that were not already receiving funding to apply.

Local shopping centre to light up for Chanukah

MELBOURNE- Chanukah decorations will be on display at the Melbourne suburban Malvern Central Shopping Centre, despite initial concerns that the festival would not be acknowledged.

Chabad House of Malvern’s Rabbi Reuvi Cooper approached the mall with plans to erect a
chanukiah and arrange a candle-lighting ceremony and activities at the venue, but management initially delayed a decision, citing a lack of space.

“We have a totally different floor plan to past years with new tenants . more active casual
leasing and practically every square inch leased out,” Malvern Central’s marketing manager, Rachel Armstrong, said. “We wanted to have decorations, but literally didn’t have the space.”

Armstrong said Rabbi Cooper’s plan to arrange a candle-lighting ceremony and activities could not be realistically accommodated, but that the centre was “delighted” by the prospect of erecting a prominent chanukiah on level three of the complex.

Following an initially hesitant response from Malvern Central, Rabbi Cooper approached the Jewish Community Council of Victoria (JCCV) who, with the support of the Victorian Multicultural Commission (VMC), discussed the matter with senior management to ensure a suitable outcome  was reached. They agreed to place Chanukah decorations alongside the centre’s Christmas paraphernalia.

“This result is a win-win for all parties and a powerful affirmation of multiculturalism and
religious freedom in Victoria,” JCCV executive director Geoffrey Zygier said.

George Lekakis, chairperson of the Victorian Multi-Cultural Commission (VMC), said most
councils and centres are “accommodating” of other faith and cultures and, in particular, of “a host of festivals and events that denote specific holidays and days of religious importance”.

“It’s about getting the right balance between accommodating old and new,” Lekakis told The AJN. “Sense, accommodation and mutual respect is the way forward.”

Armstrong said she hoped the Jewish festival could be “integrated” into the centre’s
celebrations next year, pointing to the Rosh Hashanah programs that the mall ran this year.

She said approaching the shopping centre earlier in the year would allow for a more extensive display in the future, adding that Christmas plans are organised months in advance. Armstrong continued that the centre had not been formally approached to display Chanukah decorations in the past few years, with centre management putting up
its own ornaments, alongside Christmas trimmings.

In other Chanukah news, Prahran Market this week erected a 15-foot chanukiah to mark the Festival of Lights.

Prime Minister and Opposition leader attend leadership forum

SYDNEY-  Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and the newly elected Opposition Leader Tony
Abbot came head-to-head for the first time at the Australia Israel Leadership Forum gala luncheon on Thursday in Sydney.

A gathering of who’s who in Australian politics and the Jewish community, the lunch was also attended by a delegation of senior Israeli politicians, including Vice Prime Minister Silvan Shalom.

The envoy is in Australia this week for a series of meetings with government officials aimed at building relations between the two countries.

Sharing the same stage with Rudd for the first time since being voted in as Liberal leader on Tuesday, Abbot declared: “Australia’s new era of political partisanship could hardly have had a more convivial start.”

He also used the platform to reaffirm his unwavering support for Israel: “I’d like to think
that nowhere in the world [does Israel] have more stauncher friends than us.”

Shalom also spoke to the 500-strong crowd, stressing Israel’s desire to resume peace
negotiations with the Palestinian Authority, as well as the Jewish state’s concern over Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

“The sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council [on Iran] were too light,” Shalom said. “Maybe the time has come has come to take a lateral move by the US, the European Union, Australia, Canada and Japan and others to impose sanctions on Iran.”

Outside the venue in inner-city Sydney, about 40 pro-Palestinian activists took to Martin Place to protest the forum.

Community leaders honour Doc Evatt

SYDNEYr – The pivotal role played by Australia ­ and one Australian in particular ­ in
the establishment of the State of Israel was celebrated at a gala event in Sydney on November 29.

The Tribute to Doc Evatt dinner, hosted by the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ), the National Council of Jewish Women of Australia (NCJWA) and the Zionist Federation of Australia, was held on the 62nd anniversary of the United Nations (UN) General Assembly’s adoption of the partition resolution that led to the creation of the Jewish homeland.

Chairman of the Ad-Hoc Committee on Palestine, Dr H V Evatt was responsible for steering the proposal through. As president of the assembly in May 1949, he also presided over the historic vote that saw Israel admitted to the UN.

The dinner, held at Moriah College, was attended by more than 160 communal leaders, as well as Israeli Ambassador Yuval Rotem, Attorney-General Robert McClelland and Evatt’s daughter, Rosalind Carrodus.

Hailing Evatt as “a shining example of the power of the human spirit, the strength of the will and a commitment to justice that all people should aspire to”, Ambassador Rotem quoted the Doc’s private secretary, who wrote: “The tiny republic, which embodies the age-old dreams of world Jewry and Zionism, was born in 1948 with this man as midwife.”

The sentiment was echoed by McClelland, who also spoke of Australia’s continued commitment to Israel, as well as his own role in addressing communal concerns over security and laws relating to incitement of violence on the basis of race and religion, and the online dissemination of race-hate material.

Mrs Carrodus, who was actually in the General Assembly on the occasion of the May 1949 vote, recalled the historic event. She said: “My mother and I cried, it was so emotional.”

Reflecting on the tribute dinner to her father, she added: “The other night was magical. I was so moved. Everyone loved him and had such high regard for him.”

Expressing her delight with the evening, NCJWA president Dalia Sinclair said: “It was one of my dreams to hold this event.”

She added: “I’d like to see November 29 integrated into the education system and to make
people more aware of its importance. Every day we have to justify why Israel is there, but we shouldn’t have to because we have been given this legitimate right to exist.”

Anti-Israel protesters try to disrupt function

MELBOURNE – Capsicum spray was used on pro-Palestinian demonstrators who tried to storm a hotel where Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard spoke on Sunday.

About 200 demonstrators holding flags and placards tried to force their way into a side
entrance to the Park Hyatt Hotel in East Melbourne.

Guests at a dinner whose guest speakers included Ms Gillard and Israel’s Deputy Prime Minister, Silvan Shalom, were being directed to use the entrance because about 200 of the protesters had blocked the main entrance.

A large group of the protesters came around to the side entrance and suddenly rushed the glass door, trying to force their way in.

Federal and state police already in the hotel foyer and hotel security rushed to block them
getting in, as the demonstrators pounded on the door and shouted ”Free Palestine”.

The spray was used as one protester tried to force the door open, but three protesters still
managed to break through the wall of police to get inside the foyer, where punches were thrown and three protesters were wrestled to the ground.

Uniformed police on duty at other parts of the building formed a line in front of the glass door and police horses were brought in to force back the crowd, which included women and children.

The dinner was organised by the Australia-Israel Leadership Forum, which aims to strengthen ties between Israel and Australia.

Michael Shaik, public advocate for Australians for Palestine, said the group was outraged by ”the hosting of an Israeli delegation at a time when Israel is coming under huge pressure from the rest of the international community to investigate war crime charges regarding its conduct in Gaza and to freeze settlement construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem”.

Acting Senior Sergeant Steve Burke said the protest was held under an agreement with
organisers and had been largely peaceful, but he was disappointed the agreement was broken.

Ms Gillard made no reference to the protest but said ”Australia’s support for Israel remains
strong and remains bipartisan in this country”.

Mr Shalom said Australia was considering a request from Israel to help it rehabilitate the Jordan River.

JCCV supports new anti-discrimination laws

MELBOURNE–The Jewish Community Council of Victoria (JCCV) is delighted to see that the proposed amendments to the Sentencing Act recently announced by Victoria’s Attorney General Rob Hulls MP have now passed through both Houses of Parliament and have received Royal Assent.

The new laws allow harsher sentences to be given to offenders who have been motivated to commit a crime by the victim’s race, religion or sexual orientation.

JCCV president John Searle said that, “Since my assuming the presidency the JCCV has been increasingly active regarding antisemitism, Hate Crimes and crimes against, or vilification of, minority groups. I am delighted to see that the work we have done in presenting submissions to the State Government has been rewarded. I am extremely pleased to see that the legislation received support from both houses of Parliament.

“I believe and hope that this legislation will help to minimise the abuse of minority
groups.  In many respects it reiterates the right of all Victorians to be able to live securely in their own identity.

“These amendments reinforce the government’s commitment and the commitment of all Victorians to live in a harmonious, multicultural society free from vilification or hatred based on a person’s background, race, religion or sexual orientation”.

Searle noted that “The amendments are in line with the work of the JCCV Executive which has been particularly diligent in attempting to combat vilification of all types and ensure that representatives of all groups within the Jewish community are included in community/JCCV events.  It is vital that all members of our own and the wider community are made to feel welcome and that no individuals or sections are excluded”.

*
Fabian is Australia bureau chief of  San Diego Jewish World.  He may be contacted at fabiang@sandiegojewishworld.com

By Ronald S. Lauder

One of the simplest ways to influence public opinion is to present a common enemy. Today, the favourite bogeyman in international affairs is the state of Israel.

Israel-bashing is growing in popularity in many areas. At international sporting events, Israeli athletes are sometimes avoided, sometimes prevented from taking part by immigration officials, and sometimes not even invited. British, Canadian and South African trade unions have been calling for boycotts of Israeli goods. Universities and trade unions campaign for a boycott of Israeli scholars and businesses, and for international sanctions.

The founder of Human Rights Watch, Robert Bernstein, recently exposed this hypocrisy when he criticized his own organization for treating Israel like a pariah state.

The height of cynicism is the attempt by many Islamic countries to delegitimize Israel, to deny it the right to exist. Such propaganda has been ongoing for years and is characterized by both expediency and hatred. This battle is increasingly fought by the governments of these countries in international forums, in particular the United Nations. By leveling false, sometimes slanderous, accusations against Israel and its democratically elected government, they try to undermine its legitimacy.

The UN, it seems, reserves most of its ire for the most liberal, free and progressive country in the Middle East. A country that guarantees and upholds religious freedom and offers all of its citizens, including its Arab minority, the same civil rights, is pilloried by those who blatantly disregard the values of the UN Charter and the Declaration of Human Rights.

In an interview with this newspaper last week, UN human rights commissioner Navi Pillay from South Africa referred to “propaganda which portrayed the [UN Human Rights] council as biased and a venue for bashing Israel”. Propaganda? Not really. The human rights council in Geneva, dominated by vanguards in human rights such as Libya, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, is almost obsessed with Israel’s alleged misconduct. Yet it overlooks, or downplays, crimes committed by Hamas and other terrorist groups. The council’s one-sided resolution on the Goldstone report speaks volumes.

In 2006, then UN secretary general Kofi Annan criticized the human rights council for “disproportionate focus on violations by Israel”, while neglecting other areas with “graver” crises. Things haven’t exactly improved since then – quite the contrary. In fact, at the general assembly in New York, no other Middle Eastern country is denounced in speeches and resolutions as often as Israel.

On most UN bodies, an inbuilt majority of non-democratic countries gives the Israel-bashers a free rein. Sometimes they are even backed by democratic countries. It was sad to see that Ireland was one of five European governments that supported the Goldstone report recently.

Israel-bashing enjoys widespread support in western media, as well as in universities, NGOs, trade unions and international organizations. Yet these critics often turn a blind eye to the realities in the Middle East.

It is ignored that the Iranian regime, which crushed protests this summer and has not been censured for this in the human rights council, has for years not only ideologically opposed Israel, but supported the training of Hamas and Hezbollah fighters, supplied them with weapons and thus sponsored attacks on Israel. Years of rocket fire and suicide bombings targeting Israeli civilians are mentioned only in passing. Sometimes, they are even justified by leading western politicians and newspaper commentators.

These people fail to condemn the Palestinian leadership for not having managed, despite billions of dollars in aid, to build in the autonomous territories structures that can guarantee the economic well-being of the Palestinians and Israel’s security and integrity. Western moralists blame the Israeli occupation – despite the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza more than four years ago, from the main centers in the West Bank prior to that, and from south Lebanon in 2000. The land-for-peace formula worked with Egypt and Jordan; but not with Gaza, at least not yet.

Israel’s staunchest critics often say little about the real human disasters of this world, eg the government-sponsored genocide in Sudan. On the contrary, the Sudanese dictator, Omar al-Bashir, is wanted by the International Criminal Court in The Hague on charges of crimes against humanity; yet to Turkish prime minister Recep Erdogan, who loudly denounced the Israeli offensive in Gaza, al-Bashir would have been welcome at a recent Islamic summit in Istanbul. A few days earlier, Erdogan paid a visit to Tehran to show solidarity with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Whether such double standards can simply be put down to populism, or to prejudice against Jews or the state of Israel, is difficult to establish. The sad result is a large majority of UN states now seem to agree Israel is enemy number one in the world.

Who would have thought that it could ever come to that?

*
Preceding provided by World Jewish Congress

BIELEFELD, Germany (WJC)—Anti-Semitism and homophobia are on the rise in Europe, according to the annual study conducted by the University of Bielefeld’s Institute for Interdisciplinary Research on Conflict and Violence. For the first time, the study included attitudes in other European countries.

According to the findings fear of Islam and hatred of Muslims has dropped slightly since 2008 in Europe, and general xenophobia, sexism and racism have declined as well. Overall, Germans are currently no more xenophobic now than in 2002, when the first study was done.

However, prejudice against Jews and homosexuals is on the increase in Europe. 41 percent of Europeans overall, and 72 percent of Poles, agreed with the anti-Semitic stereotype that Jews try to use the Holocaust for their own benefit. Nearly one-quarter of all Europeans agreed with the statement that “Jews have too much influence.” Almost a third of respondents agreed that “Jews in general do not care about anything or anyone but their own kind.”

The international team of researchers found that French and Dutch respondents were the least xenophobic, while Poles and Hungarians had the highest levels of hatred toward Jews, Muslims, foreigners and homosexuals.

*
Preceding provided by World Jewish Congress

The Smurfs: Communist Allegory with an Undercurrent of Misogyny and Anti-semitism.
By Roi Ben-Yehuda

As a youngster growing up in Israel, the Smurfs rocked my world. I watched every episode, read every book, bought every little figurine, and spend my days drawing Smurf figures on my notebook. I loved the Smurfs so much that I quite my Karate class because of scheduling conflicts.

This month the Smurfs are celebrating a 50-year anniversary. The cartoon, which was the brainchild of Pierre Culliford (better known as Peyo), began in 1958 as a comic in the Belgium magazine Le Journal de Spirou. It was adopted into a cartoon in the United Stated in 1981, and inserted into NBC’s Saturday Morning Lineup where it successfully stayed for eight seasons. Internationally, the Smurfs established itself as one of the most successful and beloved cartoons in television history.

In honor of their 50-year anniversary, I decided to re-visit my little blue friends. I was happy to see that the show still contained its magic: From its opening music, enchanting illustrations, and feel-good uplifting lessons, the Smurfs did not disappoint.

However, watching this show with grown-up eyes has yielded some unexpected surprises.

Surprise number 1: The Smurf’s village is a kibbutz.

In the Smurfs’ collective, every-body works, there is no alienation and exploitation, and the means of production seem to be in the hand of the workers. All the Smurfs look the same – white clothes, and hat – and live in the same mushroom-shaped houses (a classic example of communist architecture). The only exception is Papa Smurf – but he wears a Marx-like white beard and is dressed in red! Like the socialist use of the term “comrade”, in the Smurf’s universe everybody is recognized by the same title “Smurf”: Handy Smurf, Brainy Smurf, Jokey Smurf, and Papa Smurf.

Fittingly, there is no religion in the world of the Smurf. Nor is there a “Rabbi Smurf” either. This is in line with the communist’s rejection of religion as an illusionary by-product of economic exploitation. In a world without exploitation there was no need for religion to function as an existential palliative. If there is anything that actually resembles religion it is a vague type of naturalism – led by figures such as “father Time’ and “Mother Earth”.

The enemy of the Smurfs is the evil wizard Gargamel. Within this communist allegory he clearly represents the greedy capitalist. This is further strengthened by the fact that he wants to capture the Smurfs and turn them into gold. Likewise, his cat Azriel, who symbolizes the capitalist “fat cat”, is obsessed with capturing and devouring the little blue workers.

The irony of the Smurfs as a communist narrative was that while capital did not exist in the Smurfs’ economy, the show was one of the most lucrative cartoons in history. According to Time magazine, aside from its success as a cartoon, the show managed to sell over 300 million Smurf figurines, and market its brand name to over 3,000 products (including Coca-Cola and McDonalds.)

Surprise number 2: Creator of the Smurfs Hated Women.

It doesn’t take much imagination to see that Peyo was no fan of the female species. After all, his original utopia was made up exclusively of male figures, and the one figure that he did eventually create, Smurfette, did not embody the best qualities young girls ought to aspire to. (Note: two other female figures were added toward the end of the show).

While it is not clear how the Smurfs were created in the first place (apparently not through biological procreation), we do know that Smurfette was manufactured by the evil villain Gargamel. In the episode of her inception, Gargamel concocted Smurfette for the purpose of bringing disorder, envy, and jealousy to the communist haven: “A ruthless curse that will make them beg for mercy.” Smurfette’s ingredients were as follows:

“Sugar and spice but nothing nice…A dram of crocodile tears…A peck of bird brain…The tip of an adder’s tongue…Half a pack of lies, white, of course…The slyness of a cat…The vanity of a peacock…The chatter of a magpie…The guile of a vixen and the disposition of a shrew…And of course the hardest stone for her heart….”

In using the motif of woman as seductive agent of discord, Peyo was recycling an old story. In the Bible it is Eve, the first woman, who tempts Adam and brings about the fall of humankind. Likewise in the Greek myth of Pandora, Zeus orders the creation of the first woman as a punishment for mankind’s hubris (punished for accepting the gift of fire from Prometheus). Pandora is made up of such qualities as “a shameful mind and deceitful nature” and it is through her and her box that great evils are unleashed onto the world.

Like Eve and Pandora, Smurfette tries to bring about the downfall of the Smurfs, but unlike her mythological predecessors she fails to do so. In the end, Smurfette is transformed by the goodness and generosity of the creatures she tries to destroy. Her transformation is both within and without – as Papa Smurf magically turns her heart from stone to flesh, and her hair from black and stringy to blond and wavy. From then on, her character, whose special feature/function seems to be her beauty, becomes the ditsy object of desire of every Smurf in the village.

A final insight into the nature of Smurfette comes to us form a biography of Peyo. In it, his translator tells a story of how the animator sold the character of Smurfette to NBC.

“Peyo began by saying that she was “very feminine.” They asked him to be more specific, so he went on to say: “She is pretty, blonde, she has all the characteristics of women…” Knowing the feminist spirit in the U.S.A., I diplomatically translated this as “all the qualities.” I was banking on the fact that Peyo did not understand what I was saying (in English) and the others did not understand what he was trying to say. So naturally they asked him to expand. So he kept on going with: “She seduces, she uses trickery rather than force to get results. She is incapable of telling a joke without blowing the punch line. She is a blabbermouth but only makes superficial comments. She is constantly creating enormous problems for the Smurfs but always manages to blame it on someone else.”

Surprise number 3: Gargamel was the anti-Semitic caricature of the Jew.

Looking at the image and symbol of Gargamel it is apparent that the Smurfs invested their villain with anti-Semitic stereotypes from both the Christian and Communist traditions.

First off, the names Gargamel and his cat Azriel, sound a lot like Hebrew. In fact, Azriel’s name in Hebrew actually means “God will help” (it is interesting to note that in Israel he was simply called “Hathattol” which means something like “caty”). In both Jewish and Muslim tradition, Azriel is the name of the angel of death. In addition, Gargamel’s Godfather was named, Balthazar (another version of God will help – albeit the God “Baal”).

Second, Gargamel looked like the stereotypical image of the Jew. He is old, bolding with unkempt hair, big-nosed, hump-backed, and wears raggedy black clothes. The only thing that Gargamel is missing is a beard and kippah. He is, in short, in the tradition of Charles Dickens’ Fagin, a classic example of the ugly old Jew.

Third, Gargamel is a miserly, two-faced, and diabolic sorcerer who obsessively plots against the Smurfs, and uses his magic powers to capture them so that he can either eat them or turn them into gold.

Gargamel’s personality and occupation are in line with the medieval Christian belief that the Jews possessed malevolent magical powers (originating in the New Testament assertion that the Jews were children of the devil), and that they would employ those powers in order to capture Christians and use their blood for ritualistic food. Similarly, Gargamel’s desire to turn the Smurfs into Gold is in accord with the Communist belief that the Jewish capitalists (whose God was money) sought to exploit the worker.

Finally, the size of Gargamel’s body in comparison to the Smurfs (who stand at three apples high) also adds to his image as the all-powerful Jew. Although in the mind of the medieval Christian and communist the Jew was not known for his/hers impressive physical dimensions, the Jew was understood symbolically as a larger than life figure (who else could have committed Deicide or oppressed the masses?).

In the end, it is clear that in name, appearance, character, and deed, Gargamel comes across as the archetypal Jewish Villain.

What is one to do with this knowledge? Well, considering that most of the harm in this show is to be found in its latent content (the only exception being the figure of Smurfette), one can only hope that by the time the Smurfs makes it into the movie theaters (Paramount Pictures scheduled for 2010), some of the wrongs of the original show will be corrected.

And there is good reason to hope. In a recent news conference, Hendrik Coysman, head of Smurf rights holder IMPS, said:

“There have been dramatic changes in socio-cultural values in the past 20 to 25 years. One of these is girl empowerment. So, there will be greater female presence in the Smurf village and this will, of course, be a basis for new stories and this will probably turn upside down certain traditional situations within the village.”

That said, the Smurfs remains a show that champions values such egalitarianism, cooperation, vegetarianism, environmentalism, naturalism, peace, and love. Despite everything, I would still quite my Karate class if it interfered with my beloved blue show – and that is the smurfing truth!

By Gil Troy, Jerusalem Post, 12-6-09

Excerpt from a testimony I will give on Monday at hearings at the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism.

Allow me a personal note – I hate this topic. I take no joy in pointing out the ugly anti-Semitism afflicting our world today. That the problem is so serious it merits an inquiry of Canadian parliamentarians, violates the post-Auschwitz covenant the world made with the Jewish people after the Holocaust – and into which I was born in 1961. This was supposed to be yesterday’s problem, a stale relic of the old world in Europe. And yet, today, in the new world of the Americas, too many (not all) Jews feel tense on campus, especially if they dare to be pro-Israel.

Today, in the New World, my kids – and others – have had to pass through security guards or other elaborate security systems to enter their Jewish day schools, in Westmount, in Cote St. Luc, otherwise among the world’s safest neighborhoods. Today, in the New World, synagogues have been defaced, graves desecrated, people harassed, for the sole crime of being Jewish. So, I thank you for taking the time to explore this problem. I wish you not only Godspeed but real speed. Please complete your work quickly, solve this problem clearly and make your commission and this whole topic irrelevant, anachronistic – an unpleasant ghost from the past – as swiftly as possible.

Alas, it won’t be so easy. Although this commission has not even issued any recommendations, you are being falsely accused of squelching genuine criticism of Israel and support for Palestinians by invoking the powerful pejorative term “anti-Semitism.” Your critics want us to believe that we cannot distinguish between being critical of Israel and anti-Semitic. They hide their ugly bigotry behind some of the noblest impulses in Canada and the world today, namely the fight against racism. Too many anti-Semites today cross the line while obscuring the line, camouflaging rank bigotry, an aggressive Jew hatred, behind a smoke screen of human rights rhetoric.

Israel and Zionism do not deserve special treatment – just equal treatment. The singling out of Israel, the demonizing of Zionism, have all too frequently descended from the realm of the political to the pathological. It is hard to explain the obsession without mentioning anti-Semitism. Anti-Zionists are honest if not consistent. Too many show their true colors, expressing traditional Jew hatred – throwing pennies at Jewish students during the Concordia riots against Binyamin Netanyahu’s speech on campus in 2002, firebombing a Montreal Jewish day school in 2004, targeting synagogues while supposedly “only” criticizing Israel. Anti-Zionists have repeatedly crossed the line despite their rhetorical attempts at delineating the line between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism.

So, no, it is not anti-Semitic to criticize Israel, to question Zionism. However it is not “just” criticism of Israel, but reeks of anti-Semitism when the criticism is disproportionate – the obsession about Israel continues the West’s historic obsession with “the Jew.” And it is not “just” criticism of Israel, but degenerates into anti-Semitism when Israel is demonized with traditional anti-Jewish tropes, really tics, exaggerating the power of the Jewish lobby, making the Jewish state the one pariah nation, transforming the old big lie of “Christ killer” into the new big lie of apartheid or Nazi-style racist.

//

And it is not “just” criticism of Israel, but resonates with the historic anti-Semitism when Israel is the only nation in the world delegitimized.

ZIONISM IS Jewish nationalism, the idea that the Jews are a people, a nation, not just a religion, tied to one historic homeland Israel, even while being spread out and serving as loyal citizens in countries around the world. That in a world where nationalism remains the major vehicle for organizing polities, nation-states, only one form of nationalism – Jewish nationalism – is rejected reflects the deep-seated bias distorting the debate.

And it is not “just” criticism of Israel, but becomes the new anti-Semitism when the BDS – boycott, divestment sanction movement – actually the blacklist, demonize and slander movement – wants to ostracize Israel, again, alone among the nations of the world. The burden of proof is on the blacklisters. They must explain: Why exile democratic Israel from the family of nations, not dictatorships like Libya, Iran, China, Sudan?

Underlying all this is an essentialism familiar to scholars of anti-Semitism and other forms of prejudice. People poisoned by hatred denounce the actor not the act. To criticize Israeli actions regarding the Palestinians can be justified, but why leap from criticizing actions to negating Zionism and Israel’s right to exist?

Here is the double double standard. First, Israel is held to an artificially high standard and denounced disproportionately. Then, key groups violate core ideals in their zeal to denounce Israel. Gays overlook Muslim homophobia, feminists ignore Arab sexism, liberals forget Israeli libertarianism, to bash Israel. Academics override their professional mission to tell the truth and acknowledge the world’s complexity by caricaturing Israel in simplistic terms. When (some, not all!) gay activists, feminists, liberals and academics violate defining values – and their own group interest – to malign Israel, they are doing what bigots do, leaving the realm of the logical for the pathological.

ALLOW ME to focus on two practical suggestions for fighting this scourge.

First, within the academic world, we need leadership not censorship. When violence erupts, universities have failed. Professors, as the moral authorities on campus in regular contact with students should step in, from across the political spectrum, and foster civility.

Moreover, academic freedom must be preserved, but professorial bullying over politics is “academic malpractice” and must be stopped. The government can help universities establish procedures teaching students what to do when their own professors fail to act professionally in classrooms.

And second, let us fight anti-Semitism by fighting bigotry all over.

Wouldn’t it be great if this commission generated a Citizenship 2.0 curriculum teaching young people how to fight hatred on the Web – and in general cultivating a sense of citizenship on the Web?

Both these suggestions show that the fight against anti-Semitism is a subset of a broader struggle against hatred. I’m an historian. I know there will always be haters, bigots and, yes, anti-Semites. But I also know that civilization relies on good people who are willing to fight the poison, and not just say no to anti-Semitism, hatred and bigotry, but to say yes to higher ideals of democracy, civility, liberty, as you all have done – and are doing.

The writer is professor of history at McGill University on leave in Jerusalem. Based on testimony being given Monday at hearings at the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism, consisting of 23 members of Parliament and one senator from all four parties in the House of Commons, held in Ottawa.

Leader of the British National Party Nick Griffin recently made some new statements of rebranding the policies of the BNP to the British Public in their European election manifesto.

“Freedom, Security, Identity, Democracy. Nobody can criticize them, nobody can come at you and attack you with those ideas, they are sayable… So instead of talking about racial purity we’ll talk about identity.”

Nick Griffin, BNP party leader.

I immediately remembered where I had heard these words used before, it is the same language of former Israeli politician and new head of the Jewish Agency for Israel Natan Sharansky, most present in his latest two books, The case for Democracy and Defending Identity.

In another interview Nick Griffin was asked whether British Indians for example could be British like a white British person. To which he responded that they could be civically British but not Ethnically British.

Britain today, regarding itself as a multicultural society allows for different ethnic groups to retain their own culture and community and also integrate as part of the greater society. Nick Griffin does raise an interesting point that there is to an extent a double standard being imposed on people like himself to identify himself as ethnically British and to exclude those who are not ethnically British but British citizens from being a part of his community and being branded as a racist for doing so. He raised the argument that if he were to go to India he would still be British ethnically and not fully accepted as being Indian even if he were an Indian citizen.

Before we go off the rails with such criticism of his party’s ideas, he does raise some very interesting points worthy of our attention as part of the UK Jewish community and as Zionists. If ever I were given one of those forms where I had to fill in my Ethnicity, I would always mark ‘White Other’ and then write ‘Jewish’ under please specify. I would indicate that I was a UK citizen and born in Britain but I am Jewish, I am part of the UK Jewish community and that is my Ethnic background. I am aware that there are Jews in Britain that view Judaism as a Religion and not as an ethnic background but yet according to the British race relations act 1976, the Jews meet the criteria of an ethnic group.

Under the Race Relations act, 1976, an Ethnic group must regard itself, and be regarded by others, as a distinct community by virtue of possessing the following characteristics:

1) A long shared history, of which the group is conscious as distinguishing it from other groups, and the memory of which keeps in alive;
2) A cultural tradition of its own, including family and social customs and manners, often but not necessarily associated with religious observance. In addition, there are other relevant characteristics, one of more of which will commonly be found and will help to distinguish the group from the secondary community
3) Either a common geographical origin or descent from a small number of common ancestors;
4) A common language, not necessarily peculiar to the group;
5) A common literature peculiar to the group;
6) A common religion different from that of neighbouring groups or from the general community surrounding it;
7) Being a minority or being an oppressed or dominant group within a larger community.

Jews are recognised in Britain as an ethno-religious group, so can a Jew choose their ethnicity according to their choice? Some of us will put Jewish under religion and some under ethnicity. Some Jews may put nothing under Religion if they are not religious. This always confused me, because I have a religion, but I am not religious, I have been brought up with a Jewish background and with its traditions, I had a Bar Mitzvah and I went to Jewish school, but my religious views are atheist. I view my Jewishness as my ethnic-cultural background. And then there are Jews I know who will pick Jewish as their religion and White British as their ethnicity the same as Nick Griffin. Hence the complexities of Jewish identity I guess.

As an Israeli, the issue becomes a little more complicated. My ID card, which every Israeli citizen holds does not mention my ethnicity, however ID cards issued before 2005 did include ones ethnic group under ‘Nationality’ as Jewish, Arab (including Christians and Muslims) Druze or other. As a result of legalities on whether it is permissible to assign ethnicity or nationality to the ID cards it was dropped and today if one is Jewish there will be a Hebrew date of birth as well as a civil date which will not appear on the ID cards of non-Jewish citizens.

I do not believe that the state of Israel would have allowed me to identify my ethnicity or nationality as British if I so desired by virtue of the fact that I am Jewish before 2005. My ID card assigns this component of my identity to being my ‘place of birth,’ the United Kingdom. However Nick Griffin would have been regarded according to the old ID card system as British if he were to have moved to Israel. It would be interesting to know how the State of Israel would have classified for example a British Indian citizen with dual citizenship already becoming an Israeli citizen before 2005.

The United Kingdom does not have ID cards and even on my British passport it does not mention anything of ethnicity, Nationality refers to citizenship and says that I am British. The United Kingdom does have a criteria for what it defines as an ethnic group but it seems at present whether one belongs to one of these groups is for legal purposes up to the choice of the individual. However it seems likely that should the BNP some day come into power they would like to impose a more concrete definition with regard to ones identity into the British system, most likely similar to that of Israel.

Nick Griffin when asked if he hated Muslims responded that:

“We do not hate Muslims, but we do have a concern about the Islamification of Britain.”

Islamic extremism is a concern for the whole world, and particularly to countries that fear those who call for democratic governments to be overthrown or replaced with Sharia law. However the attitudes of the BNP to reinstate a Britain for the British people involving control of immigration and inevitably involves shared concern with the majority of Israeli parties represented in the Knesset, demographics. Zionist leaders speak openly about the “Demographic” threat, referring to the number of Jews living in Israel in relation to the growing number of Arabs. The Arab population in Israel, both Israeli Arabs and often referring to the Palestinian Arabs are referred to in open discussions as a demographic “threat,” or “problem.” It wouldn’t surprise me if the BNP in the change of its use of language from talking about “Racial purity” to referring to it as preserving “Identity” would start referring to ethnic minorities in the UK as posing a “Demographic threat.”

I only wonder if Israel weren’t to be a self proclaimed Jewish state anymore and were just a Democracy where there would be more Thai workers living here permanently and other non-Jewish immigrants coming here looking for a better quality of life, whether the Zionist parties of today would be regarded in the same manner as the BNP. Many people today do regard Zionism as a form of Racism.

The British nationality has been blurred for the British people. Columnist Melanie Philips in her book “Londonistan” attributes this post modernism and abandonment of Britishness in favour of multiculturalism to a feeling of ‘post colonial guilt.’ Where the British have chosen to give up on its heritage and values in order to cleanse itself of its feeling of guilt for the exploitation of the former British Empire.

It is interesting how some Jews can apply two opposing political principles to two different countries. On the one hand calling for Britain to be a multicultural society, which understandably would enable greater freedoms to its ethnic minorities by being so. But at the same time, arguing that Israel has a right to be the state of the Jewish people, and insist that the whole world and the Arab world and particularly Israel’s Arabs accept this.

There are certainly some differences in the content of the BNP and the manner by which they have gone about making their voices heard in the past. Which have been undoubtedly discriminatory and threatening to the UK’s minorities. However this puts me in a rather difficult position as an Israeli and an Ex British Jew.

Zionism and British nationalism do agree on their definitions of Nationality and Ethnicity. And in principle I always believed that Britain had maybe gone too far with regards to not preserving much of its heritage. I was not happy when trading laws changed on Sundays, and there has become in Britain a lack of a connection to its heritage and an extreme reaction by the BNP.

During my time in Britain I never regarded myself as being ethnically British. I considered it my place of birth and my country of citizenship, I was a law abiding citizen and as long as I was granted equal rights, which I was, and the ability to be a Jew as I pleased and had my freedom, I would not pose any threat to Great Britain. Particularly as I was also a Zionist, I understood what was involved in preserving a countries identity, values and culture and believed that if I were a minority living in Israel this is how I would like them to behave. In Israel, the Druze are a good example, as long as they are loyal citizens and accept the country as having a Jewish character then I would be happy to live amongst them in mutual respect.

This was my attitude towards Great Britain, it is a good country that granted the Jewish people refuge there, and is a relatively good host nation for its Jewish community and other minorities in spite of its problems. It has almost become politically incorrect to refer to one group as being more British than another in the UK, even in an ethnic sense. If British nationalism could moderate its form a bit so as to apply respect to all of its citizens then I would most likely support it.

I cannot see how on the one hand I can believe that the Jewish people have a right to a state in the land of Israel. And even have policies and open discussions about preserving a Jewish majority either through immigration or compromising on land as just one example and then deny in principle the right of another nation to their own state. Nationalism comes from the starting point that “there should be a state for every nation.” What that means in a globalized world is harder to put into practice and raises issues of other nations that do not have a state of their own, such as the Kurds.

In a country like Britain where there are many nationalities and ethnicities residing, many with dual citizenship, I guess in a sense it is maybe better to speak of homelands. I guess I do not see an issue if Britain, like many other nations including Israel adopted some sort of law of return encouraging or giving the ‘British’ descendants priority on immigration to Britain. British is a distinct ethnicity yet the British are afraid of offending someone by admitting so. There are British communities that in recent years have ghettoized themselves into communities in parts of Spain for example.

Israel is the Jewish homeland and there are Jews all over the world. India is the Indians homeland and there are Indian communities all over the world, and the same goes for all other Diaspora communities. Britain is the homeland of the British. I do not see anything wrong in that. I have a friend here in Israel who has been working here for quite a few years now, she is not Jewish or Arab, she is a White British girl, she likes it here but Britain is her homeland, that is where her family is from, that is where her culture is and her people. Once I was a Jew living in her country and now she is a Brit living in mine. And I’m fine with that. I do not support the BNP but I am in favour of the British being British. In the words of Israel’s first President, Chaim Weizmann:

“Palestine will be as Jewish as England is English.”

Today it is up to the English to decide whether it wishes to be as ‘English as Israel is Jewish.’

Alex Carson

08.06.2009

As the prospects of an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement seems quite distant at the moment, what with Israel’s last conflict in Lebanon with Hizbullah, Iranian Prime Minister Mahmoud Ahmedinejad calling for Israel to be “wiped off the map”, and recently holding a conference on Holocaust denial and pursuing its Nuclear programme in spite of UN sanctions imposed against it. Hamas gaining more power in Palestinian politics, maintaining their objective of the destruction of the State of Israel therefore not recognising Israel’s right to exist and not a legitimate partner to peace, and Israeli opinion polls not very faithful in its leadership to lead it through a likely next round of fighting with Hizbullah and the possibility of an attempt to take out Irans Nuclear program. Peace not being particularly promising, I would like to talk about final status negotiations.

Various solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have consisted of the vision of two states living side by side, one Jewish and one Arab. The Jewish state would comprise of Israel’s pre 1967 borders (with possible modifications) and a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. The issue of Jerusalem is one area of dispute on whether the city should be divided, shared or come to some other arrangement. The issue that I want to look at is the Palestinian claim for their ‘right of return.’ That the Palestinians who lived within Israel’s borders pre 1948 that have been displaced in refugee camps since then may return to live in their homes in Israel

Is this a legitimate claim?

It is a term that most Israelis and Jews reject, as it would mean political suicide. The Arabs in Israel already have a higher birth rate and taking in thousands more, will almost certainly affect the demography of the Jewish/Non-Jewish ratio of Israel’s population.
But lets just for a minute assume that Israel did agree to some of these Palestinian Arabs to return to Haifa for example. What should be the solution to the issue of the Jewish settlers on the West Bank?

First lets remember that 20% of Israel’s population is not Jewish. The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics estimates that approximately 2.25 million Palestinians lived in the West Bank (excluding Israeli-annexed East Jerusalem) at the end of 2006. And that there are roughly 260,000 Israeli settlers living on the West Bank (excluding East Jerusalem). Constituting just under 15% of the total population of the west bank.

Not all the settlements on the West Bank are the strategic settlements which were encouraged after the 6 day war, as the Israelis felt that after the 6 day war that the pre ’67 boarders were not secure, in fact Abba Eban, Israels former Foreign minister called these boarders the “Auschwitz boarders.” Not only security settlements, but religious settlements emerged where religious Zionists felt that this was a part of God’s plan in bringing about the redemption of the land and that Jews have a religious obligation to settle it and bring about the coming of the Messiah. These are the common reasons that people know regarding the settlers motivations for settling on this land but there are some other cases that are not mentioned as often.

There have been Jewish communities living around Jewish holy sites on the West bank continuously for thousands of years, particularly in the city of Hebron which is where the Cave of the Patriarchs is situated. This was the Jewish capital city before King David united the Northern and Southern Kingdom and moved the capital to Jerusalem. Prior to the 1929 Palestine riots, Christians, Jews and Muslims lived together in the city. In Nablus/Shechem sits Josephs grave, Ramallah is located close to the biblical Bethel, the location where Jacob had his divine revelation dream in Genesis. Jews lived here up until 1948 when the land came under Jordanian occupation, where Jews were no longer allowed to live or enter on the land and were massacred in Hebron and driven out. In 1929, Arabs killed 67 Jews and wounded 60 and Jewish homes and Synagogues were ransacked in the anti-Jewish 1929 Hebron massacre. Two years later, 35 families moved back into the ruins of the Jewish quarter, but after further riots, the British Government decided to move all Jews out of Hebron “to prevent another massacre.”

In this period of history, there were Jews forced out or who fled from land that would fall under Arab rule after the British left and there were Arabs living on land that would fall under Jewish control that also fled or were displaced. There is one difference with the two scenarios. Israel in its declaration of Independence reached out to its non Jewish population and offered them the opportunity to be a part of the new state, or if they wished to they would be free to leave. Many Arab settlements on the road to Jerusalem were destroyed during Israel’s War of Independence, due to being faced with hostilities by their inhabitants when Israeli forces made their way to Jerusalem which was at the time to be an internationally controlled zone with the road linking Israel to the city. Not all the Arab settlements were destroyed, a prime example is the settlement of Abu Gosh, which was not destroyed for not attacking Israeli forces and as a result still exists today. On the West Bank, where east Jerusalem and the Old City fell into the hands of the Jordanians, Millennia old Jewish gravestones on the Mount of Olives were used for the construction of roads and the Jewish quarter of the old city was destroyed, only to be rebuilt after Israel had conquered the city in 1967.

On the part of the Arab states contribution to this conflict, around 750,000 Jews who had lived for centuries in Arab lands arrived in Israel who had been expelled, forced to leave their property behind and leave only with what they could carry on their backs. Some came voluntarily because of the establishment of the state of Israel, however the majority left due to anti-Jewish riots as a result of the conflict in Israel.

Israel’s population more than doubled from having a population of around 600,000 to absorb displaced Mizrachi Jews in the early 50s when the building of the country still very much needed to be done, and struggled to accommodate them as well as they would have liked to, forcing many to live in transit camps. It is this point which is widely overlooked, as more Jews became refugees as a result of the same conflict than Arabs yet the state of Israel solved the problem of the Jewish refugees by absorbing them into Israeli society and today they and their descendants are not living in Refugee camps like their Palestinian counter parts.

If Israel had not absorbed them then there would be millions of Jewish refugees still in transit camps today. Israel cannot be held fully responsible for the Palestinian refugee problem, with the amount of money that the Palestinian authority has received in aid from the Arab world, the USA, the European countries and even from Israel the refugees could have been re-housed in the West Bank, like the Jews who fled Arab lands and the West bank were in Israel.

The Palestinian objectives of the Peace process is that they have their own state, that the Jewish settlements be destroyed and that the Israelis withdraw from the territories, their capital be established in East Jerusalem and that the Palestinian refugees be allowed to return to Israel. So this would mean that Israel would have an even larger Arab population than it already has and that the Palestinian state would have presumably no Jewish population at all. If it is conducted in any way similar to the way the evacuation of the Jews in Gaza was, it would mean that we would be taking part in ethnically cleansing the West Bank of Jews, on behalf of the Palestinian leadership.

Is there not another option?

If 20% of Israels population can be Israeli Arabs, why can’t 15% of Palestine’s population be Palestinian Jews? Why cant the settlers be given a choice, that Israel is withdrawing and they will no longer be under their protection, and that they will be able to remain where they are but must accept that they are under Palestinian Rule now, and that the Palestinians must ensure the safety of its Jewish population just like any other country in the world has a responsibility to safeguard the welfare of its minority populations.

Many of the Settlers may not accept this, and insist that the land be under Jewish rule, we are not speaking about the Jewish right to Rule the land, but the Jewish right to live on the land. From a non Political Zionist perspective, this land is considered holy to Judaism, and although the Jewish state may no longer rule over it, Jews have always had a desire to live by these sites, in the same way that Christian communities choose to live in Israel in Nazareth, Bethlehem and Jerusalem as they are places that are important to Christianity, irrespective of the fact that Israel and Palestine are not Christian.

If any claim for the Palestinian right of return is to be taken the least bit seriously it must be confronted with the issue of compensation for the expelled Arab Jews in 1948 and the Jewish right to be Palestinian Jews. Denial of these claims only demonstrates the Palestinian aim of creating a state completely free of any Jews residing within it. Whether Israel agrees to Palestinian refugees returning or not, doesn’t change the fact that even today 20% of its population is not Jewish and there are Arab ministers represented in the Israeli Knesset.

The history of Palestinian terror goes back a long way before Israels establishment, where former Palestinian Leader Haj-Amin Al-Husseini or the Mufti of Jerusalem had a very strong connection with Adolf Hitler and sought to eliminate the Jewish population of Palestine. In many ways the Palestinian leadership has sought to ethnically cleanse its land of Jews either through force or under our noses through negotiating their deportations. Whilst we sit back and accept that it is ok to deny someone who has lived somewhere their whole life to live where they wish to because they are Jews. Diaspora Jews live in various different countries and are protected by their host nations. They are not forced to leave against their will because they are not protected by Israel.

And after all this, the Zionism = Racism discussion still prevails, whilst there is a failure to see the inherent Racism behind the Palestinian Leaderships agenda.
The Palestinians may have a right to a state of their own, as do we believe we have a right to our own state, but we also have a right to live by our holy sites as Palestinian Jews as do they in the state of Israel as Israeli Muslims or Christians.

Alex Carson

Richard Antou

Muslim student accused of stabbing Jewish prof 

Saudi national entered office, attacked Mideast scholar

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A Muslim anthropology graduate student is being charged with second-degree murder in the stabbing death of a Jewish professor at Binghamton University in Vestal, New York.

The victim is Richard Antoun, 77, professor of Middle Eastern studies and the author of “Understanding Fundamentalism: Christian, Islamic and Jewish Movements.”

The man in custody is Abdulsalam Al-Zahrani, 46-year-old Saudi national.

The attack took place Friday afternoon when the student entered the professor’s office and stabbed him, according to an eyewitness. Campus police tackled the assailant to the ground, while emergency service workers rushed to Antoun’s side.

University President Lois DeFleur issued the following statement Friday: “This afternoon, in an act of senseless violence, the Binghamton University community lost one of its long-time faculty members. … Our hearts go out to the Antoun family and we will provide them with as much assistance as we can in this time of sorrow.”

Abdulsalam Al-Zahrani

New York Gov. David Paterson also released a statement about the victim: “He touched the lives of many students and was respected by his colleagues. Though he will be missed on campus, he will live on in his writing, his research and his students, whose lives he forever changed.”

Antoun received a doctorate from Harvard in 1963 and joined the Binghamton faculty in the early 1970s. He was “a sociocultural anthropologist who has conducted research among peasants in Jordan, urbanites in Lebanon, peasant farmers in Iran and migrants in Texas and Greece,” according to the univerrsity’s website. He retired in 1999 as professor emeritus.

“He dedicated his life to trying to understand the people of the Middle East,” the professor’s sister Linda Miller, of Holden, Mass., told the New York Times. “He never said an unkind word to anyone in his life. “Miller’s husband, the Rev. David J. Miller, said that Antoun had been married to his wife, Rosalyn, for 17 years and had a son, Nicholas, 40.

From Matthew Thompson:

On the back of the card, there is an explanation of how the Fund works: “If you like the idea of making small grants to decent people but don’t want to set up your own fund, email a request for some of these cards to anthony@evelynwilliams.com. You can use them yourself or ask us to post on your ‘grant’ if you want to remain anonymous.”

What an excellent and classy way to take revenge on a nasty old man. It’s almost enough to make you wish there was an afterlife so his ghost could watch and be tormented by what is being done in his name. That would really be hell.”

Albion1983 is a blog run by a proud life member of the BNP (see his certificate here) who states he has been ‘active in Nationalism since 1983′ and was present amongst the revellers at this year’s BNP ‘Red, White & Blue’ festival (see his photos here). Now, we all know that the ‘modern BNP’ is ‘not racist’ and has not time for old guard neo-Nazis. However, apparently Albion1983 didn’t get that memo.

Looking at the Albion1983 blog, we get a glimpse into the heart and soul of the BNP and the leanings of its hardcore of true believers. This is exactly the kind of material that Griffin doesn’t want you to see.

Here’s a screen shot of the main page, just in case the blog suddenly ‘disappears’ (click to enlarge):

Let’s unpack what we see here.

‘Love Your Race’

Starting at the top, in the blog’s title image we see a picture of a white woman and child with the slogan ‘love your race’. This isn’t something Albion1983 has come up with himself, and is actually an image used as part of the ‘Love Your Race’ campaign promoted by the American organisation The National Alliance. The National Alliance (NA) was founded by the late and unlamented Dr William Pierce, a former American Nazi Party member, friend of BNP founder John Tyndall, and author of the race war novel The Turner Diaries (a favourite of Oklahoma bomber Timothy McVeigh, British neo-Nazi terrorist David Copeland, the neo-Nazi terrorist groups The Order and the Aryan Republican Army, the killers of James Byrd, and numerous others). In 2005, the NA launched its ‘Love Your Race’ campaign and it continues to promote the slogan. The group is an openly pro-Nazi racist and anti-Semitic organisation, as you can see from its publications. The NA site only links to five other sites, one of which is the BNP.

Here’s a selection of ‘Love Your Race’ campaign images (including the image found on the Albion1983 blog):

And here’s the image used by Albion1983 again, this time in a post on Stormfront, in a thread on ‘White Nationalism Awareness Materials’.

Saga

An image that links to the website of ‘white nationalist’ singer Saga is placed prominently on the blog, and Albion1983 has also posted a promotional message for the singer’s site.

Saga is – surprise, surprise – an openly pro-Nazi singer. Her albums include original material which praises David Lane of the neo-Nazi terrorist group The Order, as well as cover versions of songs by Ian Stuart Donaldson, singer of the racist skinhead band Skrewdriver and founder of the neo-Nazi ‘Blood & Honour’ organisation, a group so extreme that Shadow Security Minister Baroness Neville-Jones recently wrote to the Home Secretary calling for its proscription.

Here’s Saga performing a song of hers about the threat to ‘the greatest race to ever walk the earth’ at a recent Blood & Honour event in London:

‘Where You Can Find Me’

Should you wish to chat with Albion1983, he helpfully provides links to sites where he posts. They are:

• Green Arrow Forum
• Stormfront
• Prussian Blue Euro Fan Club

The Green Arrow Forum is run by fanatical BNP member and Griffin acolyte Paul Morris, who claims he’s not a Nazi but happily re-posts racist and anti-Semitic material on his ‘Green Arrow’ blog. The oddball Morris believes that ‘we, through Nick Griffin and the British National Party can turn Our Island Nations into the only real paradise on earth for it’s [sic] true people’. He also considers me a ‘rabid Zionist’…

Stormfront hardly needs any introduction, given it is the longest running and most notorious white supremacist forum on the internet.

Prussian Blue are a neo-Nazi singing duo, who are again notorious. Here’s how they explain their choice of name:

Part of our heritage is Prussian German. Also our eyes are blue, and Prussian Blue is just a really pretty color. There is also the discussion of the lack of “Prussian Blue” coloring (Zyklon B residue) in the so-called gas chambers in the concentration camps. We think it might make people question some of the inaccuracies of the “Holocaust” myth.

Their songs cover typical neo-Nazi themes. ‘Gone With the Breeze‘ is an ode to Robert Mathews, founder of The Order. ‘Victory Day‘ looks forward to a coming race war:

Well sit down and listen, to what I have to say.

There soon will come a great war, a bloody but holy day.

And after that purging, our people will be free, and sing up in the bright skies, a sun for all to see.

…

You are my brother and in war we proudly sing.

Our Cause shall never tire.

Our gift to you we bring: A holy creed of Racial purpose, as a mighty Race to defend.

And when we fly our holy flag

Their oppressive reign shall end…

And here’s a popular Prussian Blue t-shirt:

Recommended Blogs

Albion1983’s recommended blogs section reveals yet more extremism.

Day Of The Rope

‘Day Of The Rope‘ takes its name from a chapter of The Turner Diaries in which ‘race traitors’ are executed following the victory of whites in a race war. Here’s an excerpt:

August 1, 1993. Today has been the Day of the Rope – a grim and bloody day, but an unavoidable one. Tonight, for the first time in weeks, it is quiet and totally peaceful throughout all of southern California. But the night is filled with silent horrors; from tens of thousands of lampposts, power poles, and trees throughout this vast metropolitan area the grisly forms hang.

In the lighted areas one sees them everywhere. Even the street signs at intersections have been pressed into service, and at practically every street corner I passed this evening on my way to HQ there was a dangling corpse, four at every intersection. Hanging from a single overpass only about a mile from here is a group of about 30, each with an identical placard around its neck bearing the printed legend, “I betrayed my race.” Two or three of that group had been decked out in academic robes before they were strung up, and the whole batch are apparently faculty members from the nearby UCLA campus.

In the areas to which we have not yet restored electrical power the corpses are less visible, but the feeling of horror in the air there is even worse than in the lighted areas. I had to walk through a two-block-long, unlighted residential section between HQ and my living quarters after our unit meeting tonight. In the middle of one of the unlighted blocks I saw what appeared to be a person standing on the sidewalk directly in front of me. As I approached the silent figure, whose features were hidden in the shadow of a large tree overhanging the sidewalk, it remained motionless, blocking my way.

Feeling some apprehension, I slipped my pistol out of its holster. Then, when I was within a dozen feet of the figure, which had been facing away from me, it began turning slowly toward me. There was something indescribably eerie about the movement, and I stopped in my tracks as the figure continued to turn. A slight breeze rustled the foliage overhead, and suddenly a beam of moonlight broke through the leaves and fell directly on the silently turning shape before me.

The first thing I saw in the moonlight was the placard with its legend in large, block letters: “I defiled my race.” Above the placard leered the horribly bloated, purplish face of a young woman, her eyes wide open and bulging, her mouth agape. Finally I could make out the thin, vertical line of rope disappearing into the branches above. Apparently the rope had slipped a bit or the branch to which it was tied had sagged, until the woman’s feet were resting on the pavement, giving the uncanny appearance of a corpse standing upright of its own volition.

I shuddered and quickly went on my way. There are many thousands of hanging female corpses like that in this city tonight, all wearing identical placards around their necks. They are the White women who were married to or living with Blacks, with Jews, or with other non-White males.

There are also a number of men wearing the l-defiled-my-race placard, but the women easily outnumber them seven or eight to one. On the other hand, about ninety per cent of the corpses with the I-betrayed-my-race placards are men, and overall the sexes seem to be roughly balanced.

Unsurprisingly, the ‘Day Of The Rope’ blog contains numerous racist and anti-Semitic posts, as well as Holocaust denial.

Covert Undercover Nuisance Tactics

This blog is currently unavailable (probably because of legal issues arising from this recent complaint to the police) but was covered in detail in my Centre for Social Cohesion report The BNP and the Online Fascist Network. A pro-BNP and Blood & Honour promoting blog, Covert Undercover Nuisance Tactics’ main contributers are Tommy Williams and Dave Howard. Here they are:

Covert Tactics contributers were present at this year’s BNP Red, White & Blue festival. You can see their reports from the festival in the cache of their blog here. And here’s a video they shot at RWB:

Here’s another video of theirs:

The Albion1983 blog is run by a self-declared BNP life member who has been involved in ‘nationalism’ for 26 years. Nick Griffin claims the BNP has changed and no longer has any links to neo-Nazism and extremism. Albion1983 became a life member of the Party in October 2009. Clearly he feels quite at home in the BNP, despite his obvious pro-Nazi views.

This is the true BNP on show. Behind the ‘moderate’ facade, nothing has changed.

Link

Link

Link

Haaretz/ here

“Every appointee to the American government must endure a thorough background check by the American Jewish community.

In the case of Obama’s government in particular, every criticism against Israel made by a potential government appointee has become a catalyst for debate about whether appointing “another leftist” offers proof that Obama does not truly support Israel.

A few months ago, boisterous protests by the American Jewish community helped foil the appointment of Chaz Freeman to chair the National Intelligence Council, citing his “anti-Israel leaning.”

The next attempt to appoint an intelligence aide, in this case, former Republican senator Chuck Hagel, also resulted in vast criticism over his not having a pro-Israel record.
American Zionists are urging Obama to cancel Hagel’s appointment because of what they call a long and problematic record of hostility toward Israel.
The president of the Zionist Organization of America, Morton A. Klein, described Hagel’s nomination as such: “Any American who is concerned about Iran’s drive to obtain nuclear weapons, maintaining the Israeli-U.S. relationship and supporting Israel in its legitimate fight to protect her citizens from terrorism should oppose this appointment.”
Republican Jews have also protested Hagel’s appointment, citing an incident in 2004 when Hagel refused to sign a letter calling on then-president George Bush to speak about Iran’s nuclear program at the G8 summit that year.
In August of 2006, Hagel refused to sign a letter requesting the UN declare Hezbollah a terrorist organization.
In a speech at the conference of self-declared “pro-peace, pro-Israel” lobby J Street, Hagel spoke about his views on the issue of Israel and the Middle East.
“The United States’ support for Israel need not be – nor should it be – an either-or proposition that dictates our relationships with our Arab allies and friends. The U.S. has a long and special relationship with Israel, but it must not come at the expense of our Arab relationships,” Hagel said.
The latest round of heated debate has been over the nomination of Hannah Rosenthal to head the Office to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism in the Obama administration.
Rosenthal, who is the daughter of a Holocaust survivor, served as a Health Department regional director under the Clinton administration, and held positions in different left-leaning Jewish organizations….
Shortly after the announcement of Rosenthal’s nomination, conservative Jewish web sites began to attack her, some of them declaring that Obama appointed an anti-Israeli to fight anti-Semitism. ……. Rosenthal criticized conservative voices in the Jewish community who she accused of taking over the discourse regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“It’s a scary time, with people losing the ability to differentiate between a Jew, any Jew, and what’s going on in Israel,” Rosenthal said.
In an interview with the new online Jewish magazine, Tablet, Rosenthal said that she loves Israel. “I have lived in Israel. I go back and visit every chance I can. I consider it part of my heart. And because I love it so much, I want to see it safe and secure and free and democratic and living safely,” Rosenthal said”

Posted by G, Z, or B at 10:22 AM

Link

Haaretz/ here

“Every appointee to the American government must endure a thorough background check by the American Jewish community.

In the case of Obama’s government in particular, every criticism against Israel made by a potential government appointee has become a catalyst for debate about whether appointing “another leftist” offers proof that Obama does not truly support Israel.

A few months ago, boisterous protests by the American Jewish community helped foil the appointment of Chaz Freeman to chair the National Intelligence Council, citing his “anti-Israel leaning.”

The next attempt to appoint an intelligence aide, in this case, former Republican senator Chuck Hagel, also resulted in vast criticism over his not having a pro-Israel record.
American Zionists are urging Obama to cancel Hagel’s appointment because of what they call a long and problematic record of hostility toward Israel.
The president of the Zionist Organization of America, Morton A. Klein, described Hagel’s nomination as such: “Any American who is concerned about Iran’s drive to obtain nuclear weapons, maintaining the Israeli-U.S. relationship and supporting Israel in its legitimate fight to protect her citizens from terrorism should oppose this appointment.”
Republican Jews have also protested Hagel’s appointment, citing an incident in 2004 when Hagel refused to sign a letter calling on then-president George Bush to speak about Iran’s nuclear program at the G8 summit that year.
In August of 2006, Hagel refused to sign a letter requesting the UN declare Hezbollah a terrorist organization.
In a speech at the conference of self-declared “pro-peace, pro-Israel” lobby J Street, Hagel spoke about his views on the issue of Israel and the Middle East.
“The United States’ support for Israel need not be – nor should it be – an either-or proposition that dictates our relationships with our Arab allies and friends. The U.S. has a long and special relationship with Israel, but it must not come at the expense of our Arab relationships,” Hagel said.
The latest round of heated debate has been over the nomination of Hannah Rosenthal to head the Office to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism in the Obama administration.
Rosenthal, who is the daughter of a Holocaust survivor, served as a Health Department regional director under the Clinton administration, and held positions in different left-leaning Jewish organizations….
Shortly after the announcement of Rosenthal’s nomination, conservative Jewish web sites began to attack her, some of them declaring that Obama appointed an anti-Israeli to fight anti-Semitism. ……. Rosenthal criticized conservative voices in the Jewish community who she accused of taking over the discourse regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“It’s a scary time, with people losing the ability to differentiate between a Jew, any Jew, and what’s going on in Israel,” Rosenthal said.
In an interview with the new online Jewish magazine, Tablet, Rosenthal said that she loves Israel. “I have lived in Israel. I go back and visit every chance I can. I consider it part of my heart. And because I love it so much, I want to see it safe and secure and free and democratic and living safely,” Rosenthal said”

Posted by G, Z, or B at 10:22 AM

In light of their recent popular referendum banning minarets, and the president of the (mainstream) Christian Democratic People’s Party of Switzerland now calling for a separate ban on Muslim and Jewish cemeteries, I’m thinking of bringing my much-loved bit about Switzerland being the root of all evil out of retirement.

Of course, The Daily Show already beat me to it.

I would like to thank gracious God for the First Amendment. Freedom of speech, religion, of the press, and to assemble.

Some disturbing news from that neutral country of Switzerland.

First, Sunday, a ban was passed throughout all cantons, by majority vote, that would disallow minarets to be placed on top of mosques.  Where are the fighters of religious freedom on this issue?

And even scarier, the campaign posters have large racial overtones, affirming my commentary on BLACK FRIDAY.

And now, emboldened by Sunday’s vote, another Swiss political party is promoting a ban on
the separate cemeteries that Jews and Muslims currently have.

Xenophobia. Hysteria. Racism. Orientalism. Anti-semitism. All driving forces in public policy debates in Switzerland.

I sense history repeating itself.

HT:Polycarp