Thursday, January 31, 2008

Arab Racism

Arab Racism

One of the accusations which the various Arab countries (including Egypt and Jordan which have peace treaties with Israel) often make against Israel is that "Zionism is racism". Defining Zionism, the national liberation movement of jews, the victims of racism, as racism is particularly cynical, yet it seems that the Arabs have succeeded to convince the leaders of some nations, themselves victims of racism, to support this vicious accusation.
The latest attempt to define Zionism as racism was at the 2001 UNESCO conference which was held in Durban, South Africa. The resolution which was initiated by Arab countries enjoyed the support of most participants. Especially painful was the support of such African leaders as Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu. Some Western countries, however, notably Australia and Canada, objected and accused the conference of hypocrisy. The Canadian delegation, for example, issued the following statement:
"Canada is still here today only because we wanted to have our voice decry the attempts at this Conference to de-legitimize the State of Israel and to dishonor the history and suffering of the Jewish people. We believe, and we have said in the clearest possible terms, that it was inappropriate - wrong - to address the Palestinian-Israel conflict in this forum. We have said, and will continue to say, that anything - any process, any declaration, any language - presented in any forum that does not serve to advance a negotiated peace that will bring security, dignity and respect to the people of the region is - and will be - unacceptable to Canada."
It was for that reason that both Israel and the United States under the leadership of Secretary Colin Powell, himself no stranger to racism, pulled their delegations from the conference. The final text adopted by the conference drops all direct criticism of Israel, but does recognize the Palestinians’ right to self-determination and expresses concern at their plight under foreigh occupation.
That was only the latest attempt to define Zionism as racism. In November 1975, the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379 declared that "Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination" In December 1991, the General Assembly rescinded this resolution through Resolution 4686.
All those years the Arab countries continued to promote this false notion. It is therefore of interest to check how different things are on the other side of the fence, namely in the Arab countries. Even though there are many blacks who live in those countries the question whether they are subject to racism was academic for a long time and one had to resort to circumstantial evidence in order to answer it. One well-known fact is that most Arabs refer to blacks as "Abed" which means "slave" in Arabic. This seems to say something about the situation of racism in the Arab world. Today, due to the recent events in Darfur and the active role that the Arab Janjaweed play in the slaughter of black Africans there, this question has become more urgent and relevant than ever before. It is time for the UN and the whole world to fight it NOW

Labels: , , , , ,

Holocaust Hypocrisy [Arab Muslim racism, fascism against Israel]

Holocaust Hypocrisy [Arab Muslim racism, fascism against Israel]
Holocaust Hypocrisy

January 31, 2008 From

Anti-Semitism destroyed 6 million Jews in World War II. Today, a subtler yet similarly dangerous anti-Semitism pervades the international community and threatens to end the Jewish state.

Brad Macdonald

Brad Macdonald

On Sunday, Western governments and institutions around the world held ceremonies to honor the memories of the 6 million Jews massacred during World War ii. International Holocaust Remembrance Day—January 27, the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau, the largest of the Nazi death camps—was created by the United Nations in 2005 as a yearly reminder of the Holocaust in an effort to ensure it never happens again.

Despising Hitler’s form of anti-Semitism is not difficult. It killed 6 million Jews. But centuries of history show that hatred for the Jews manifests itself in various shapes and shades. Anti-Semitism is arguably humanity’s ugliest, most persistent ideological wart.

Anti-Semitism is cyclical. It starts out small and unnoticeable; untouched, it grows, and as it does it takes on a distinct form and shape. When it becomes large, noticeable or painful, the host takes action and cuts it down to size. Down but not out; it does not disappear—it merely goes underground. And after a while, it begins to reemerge. And though it may look different—mutated, or darker, or shaped differently—it is the same old ugly, painful wart.

Venerating the Jewish victims of the Holocaust is an important and worthy gesture. But for world governments and the international media to solemnly condemn Hitler’s anti-Semitism, yet at the same time actively, to one degree or another, condone, even promote, the demise of Jewish statehood is to resurrect the same anti-Semitic wart.

It’s also rank hypocrisy.

Sixty-three years have passed since Hitler attempted to destroy the Jews as a race: Today that same anti-Semitic spirit is being directed, subtly, at the Jewish state. “What anti-Semitism once did to Jews as people, it now does to Jews as a people. First it wanted the Jewish religion, and then the Jews themselves, to disappear; now it wants the Jewish state to disappear,” wrote Melanie Phillips (City Journal, Autumn 2007; emphasis mine throughout).

Same wart, different mutation. And it’s making a mockery of the international community: Despite the tears, the pious speeches honoring the dead, promising the Holocaust will never be repeated and condemning Nazi Germany, the reality is that the international community, by diluting its support for Israel and throwing its weight behind the enemies of Israel, is condoning the systematic obliteration of the Jewish state.

Take the UN, for example. Beneath its goodly platitudes and rare and often benign bouts of pro-Israel rhetoric such as UN Resolution 60/7 (International Holocaust Remembrance Day) sits a long and sordid legacy of anti-Semitism, intolerance for Israeli actions, and inequality against the Jewish people and state.

For decades, and by its own admittance, the UN has consistently marginalized and persecuted Israel, while at the same time aiding and abetting the actions, often illegal, of Israel’s enemies, especially the Palestinians. Over a period of 40 years, 30 percent of resolutions condemning specific states adopted by the UN Human Rights Commission were directed against Israel. In 2006-07, all of the Human Rights Council’s condemnatory resolutions passed were against Israel.

In 2001, the UN sponsored the World Conference Against Racism (wcar), in Durban, South Africa. “Far from a forum promoting tolerance among peoples and nations,” reported the National Post,wcar became a festival for hateful screeds against Israel and the West by some of the most repressive regimes in the world, cheered on by ngos from Europe and North America” (January 25).

Now the UN is planning the second wcar for 2009, and reports from planning meetings suggest Durban ii “will be worse than the first” (ibid.).

Fact is, UN leaders can decry rampant global anti-Semitism, pass a token resolution encouraging member states to commemorate the victims of the Holocaust and conduct conferences which on the surface appear to be designed to combat global racism, but as long as this organization maintains an obvious agenda of marginalizing Israel while abetting and legitimizing the actions of Israel’s enemies, it will remain one of the world’s foremost bastions of hypocrisy.

The same goes for Europe, the historical fountainhead of anti-Semitism. For many years after World War ii, it remained publicly circumspect in its treatment of Jews. But that time is over. Europeans today, despite the yearly memorial ceremonies and commensurate tears, speak openly about the diminishing sense of Holocaust remorse. Surveys conducted in June and September of 2002 by the Anti-Defamation League showed that 58 percent of Germans, 57 percent of Spaniards, 56 percent of Austrians and 52 percent of Swiss believe “Jews still talk too much about the Holocaust.”

“Europe is reawakening its old demons, but today there is a difference,” reported British parliamentarian Denis MacShane last September. “The old anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism have morphed into something more dangerous. Anti-Semitism today is officially sanctioned state ideology and is being turned into a mobilizing and organizing force to recruit thousands in a new crusade—the word is chosen deliberately—to eradicate Jewishness from the region whence it came and to weaken and undermine all the humanist values of rule of law, tolerance and respect for core rights such as free expression that Jews have fought for over time” (Washington Post, Sept. 4, 2007).

Same wart, new mutation.

One poll, conducted by the University of Bielefeld in 2004, showed that 51 percent of German respondents agreed with the statement, “What the State of Israel does today to the Palestinians is in principle not different from what the Nazis did in the Third Reich to the Jews.” In the Arab world, the portrayal of Israelis and Jews as modern-day Nazis is part of the everyday repertoire of anti-Semitic lies.

Now this insidious form of anti-Semitism, which Manfred Gerstenfeld labeled “Holocaust inversion” in the Wall Street Journal this week, has become worryingly popular in the West.

This distortion of history is particularly widespread in the Muslim world. But it is also gaining currency in the West, where it is no longer just the domain of the extreme left. Last year, a German bishop visiting Israel compared Ramallah to the Warsaw Ghetto. Portuguese Nobel laureate for literature José Saramago in 2002 compared Ramallah even to Auschwitz. …

Portraying Jews as Nazis, Israeli prime ministers as Hitler and the Star of David as equal to the swastika is almost routine in the Arab world. This trend has also reached Europe, where during the anti-Iraq war protests, for instance, many demonstrators held placards depicting similar images. In the Netherlands you can now buy T-shirts and greeting cards showing Anne Frank wearing a kaffiyeh, the traditional Palestinian headdress, wrapped around her neck like a scarf. In other words, the Palestinians are the new Jews, which makes the Israelis the new Nazis.

Political cartoons have emerged as malign vehicles of anti-Jewish sentiment. Gerstenfeld continues:

Holocaust-inversion caricatures appear also occasionally in Western mainstream papers. In July 2006, the Norwegian daily Dagbladet carried a drawing showing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert as SS Major Amon Göth, the commander of a Nazi death camp depicted in Steven Spielberg’s Schindler’s List. A 2002 cartoon in the Greek daily Ethnos showed two Jewish soldiers dressed as Nazis, with Stars of David on their helmets, thrusting knives into Arabs. Its caption reads: “Do not feel guilty, my brother. We were not in Auschwitz and Dachau to suffer, but to learn.”

Even the United States, Israel’s strongest ally, has embraced a foreign policy that dilutes its support of the Jewish state by appeasing and legitimizing Arab ambitions toward Jerusalem and Israel. Washington’s latent anti-Semitism was revealed in two major events last year: first, the Annapolis peace talks, and second, the release of the infamous National Intelligence Estimate (nie).

In the wake of the Annapolis peace talks, Caroline Glick wrote: “This week the Bush administration legitimized Arab anti-Semitism. In an effort to please the Saudis and their Arab brothers, the Bush administration agreed to physically separate the Jews from the Arabs at the Annapolis conference in a manner that aligns with the apartheid policies of the Arab world which prohibit Israelis from setting foot on Arab soil.”

Less than a week later, the U.S. released the nie, making the groundbreaking announcement denying the existence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program—which signaled a revolutionary change in America’s foreign policy in the Middle East. Yossi Klein Halevi responded in the New Republic:

America, even under George Bush, is hardly likely to go to war to stop a program many Americans now believe doesn’t exist.

Until now, pessimists here could console themselves that a last-resort Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities would likely draw wide international sympathy and even gratitude—very different from the near-total condemnation that greeted Israel’s attack on Saddam’s reactor in 1981. Now, though, the nie will ensure that if Israel does attack, it will be widely branded a warmonger, and faulted for the inevitable fallout of rising oil prices and increased terror.

The sense of betrayal within the Israeli security system is deep. After all, Israel’s great achievement in its struggle against Iran was in convincing the international community that the nuclear threat was real; now that victory has been undone—not by Russia or the European Union, but by Israel’s closest ally.

The nie essentially amounted to America’s betrayal of Israeli statehood.

In Britain, anti-Semitism is exceedingly worse, and manifests itself in multiple ways. Jews in Britain are four times more likely to be attacked because of their religion than are Muslims; synagogues are regularly attacked; schoolchildren are routinely persecuted; rabbis are punched and knifed; and British Jews are forced to hire security guards for protection at weddings and community events.

In 2006 Denis MacShane chaired a committee of British parliamentarians to examine anti-Semitism in Britain. Their report showed that beyond the physical attacks and persecution there was also “what we described as anti-Jewish discourse, a mood and tone whenever Jews are discussed, whether in the media, at universities, among the liberal media elite or at dinner parties of modish London. To express any support for Israel or any feeling for the right of the Jewish state to exist produces denunciation, even contempt,” MacShane wrote (op. cit.).

Same wart, different mutation.

Over the past few days, Western politicians and the media have made plenty of worthy statements about the Holocaust, condemning Hitler’s actions and promising that history will never be repeated. History shows, however, that platitudes are no match for rank anti-Semitism. The proclivity of Western governments and the Western media to refrain from supporting Jewish statehood while at the same time throwing their weight behind Israel’s enemies, is indicative of an international community that is turning its back on the Jewish state.

Adolf Hitler despised the Jews as a race; today large swaths of the international community are against Israel as a state. Do we really believe the difference between these two forms of anti-Semitism is enough to prevent another Holocaust?


Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Canada Abandons UN Racism Conference [which is hijacked by Arab racism and Islamic bigotry 'lobby']

Canada Abandons UN Racism Conference [which is hijacked by Arab racism & Islamic bigotry 'lobby']

OTTAWA (AP) — Canada has withdrawn its support for a U.N. anti-racism conference scheduled to take place in South Africa next year after deeming it to be anti-Israel, a government official said Wednesday.

The so-called Durban II conference "has gone completely off the rails" and Canada wants no part of it, said Jason Kenney, Canada's secretary of state for multiculturalism and Canadian identity.

"We'll attend any conference that is opposed to racism and intolerance, not those that actually promote racism and intolerance," he said.

Kenney said that during the 2001 World Conference Against Racism in Durban, Arab and Muslim countries criticized Israel, prompting Israel and the United States to walk out in protest. But he added that Canada remained to speak up for Israel.

The U.N. declined to comment directly on Canada pulling out of the conference, but U.N. spokeswoman Marie Okabe said "racism is too important an issue for member states not to work out their differences."

Kenney said his government was left with no choice but to abandon the process, expressing displeasure with Libya elected to chair the gathering, Cuba appointed vice-chair, and Iran named to the organizing committee.

"This (Iran) is a country whose government has publicly expressed its desire to eliminate the only Jewish country in the world," he said.


Canada Calls UN Led Anti-Racism Conference a ‘Gong Show’ of Hatred ...

The United Nations held its first World Conference Against Racism in Durban way back in 2001. That conference was marred by anti-Semitic bigotry


Exposing the anti-Semitism of Durban II

Tue. Jan 29 - 4:47 AM
HYPOCRISY, the popular 19th-century American journalist and satirist Ambrose Bierce once observed, could be defined as "prejudice with a halo."

As false halos go, there are few bigger – or shinier, in that cheap, glittery way – than the one now swaying precariously over the United Nations’ so-called Human Rights Council. Since the council was formed as part of former secretary-general Kofi Annan’s "UN reform" a few years back, the world’s supposed watchdog for violations of human rights has been able to officially condemn just one country for abuses of those rights: Israel.

If that sounds familiar – you’re right, it is. The council’s disgraced predecessor, the equally misnamed UN human rights commission, also chose to devote itself, one might say religiously, to Israel’s alleged infractions of human rights in its interminable conflict with the Palestinians.

Now, these human rights bodies have every right to investigate Israel’s behaviour and, when appropriate, rebuke the Jewish state for actions going beyond being reasonable measures of self-defence. But to focus almost exclusively on Israel, while ignoring – or downplaying the seriousness of – all other incidents elsewhere in the world, including what’s often brutal suppression of people’s human rights, is utterly wrong.

Of course, the fact that the countries which sat as members of the old commission, as well as the nations making up the new council, have often been the very countries that have compiled the most disgraceful human rights records means we are discussing hypocrisy being practised at a very high level (to paraphrase Bierce, where the angels sing).

Which brings us to the news the UN’s Human Rights Council is now busy planning a second UN conference on racism in 2009, to be held, as the first one was in 2001, in Durban, South Africa. Who’s in charge of the planning? Two countries with among the most appalling human rights records on the planet: Libya and Iran.

For anyone who’s forgotten what happened in Durban six-and-a-half years ago, that so-called conference on ending racism in the world witnessed demonstrations of virulent anti-Semitism directed against both Israel specifically and Jews in general. One example of many: Copies of the so-called Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a well-documented forgery (most likely created by the Russian czar’s police) that purports to be the secret plans for a Jewish world takeover, were openly sold within the conference area.

Equally repulsive was the canard – put forward forcefully in Durban in 2001 – that Western nations had a responsibility to pay hefty reparations to Africa to atone for their role in the transatlantic slavery trade. That, however, ignores several facts.

Some Africans themselves were complicit in that trade. Slavery itself (though the transatlantic trade was ended by the British in the early 19th century) was not outlawed in a number of African states until the latter part of the 20th century (Mauritania, for example, banned slavery in 1981 but only criminalized it in 2007). Experts believe today that some 27 million people worldwide (many in African countries, such as Niger) are in some form of human bondage. Saudi Arabia, where black slaves were sold well into the 20th century, only outlawed slavery in 1962.

The U.S. and Israeli delegations, to their credit, walked out of the Durban conference in disgust midway through; Canada, though critical of what transpired, stayed.

With Libya and Iran at the helm for Durban II, we know what to expect – more anti-Semitism, this time more explicitly ingrained in the conference’s agenda. In December, 41 countries in the UN General Assembly, including Canada, voted against $6.8 million US in funding for the conference, to protest the anti-Semitic themes emerging in planning for the event. The measure, backed by Arab countries and supporters, however, easily passed. So last week, Canada exercised some true international moral leadership, becoming the first nation in the world to announce it would not attend the conference.

The government’s secretary of state for multiculturalism, Jason Kenney, told reporters Canada wanted no part of a Durban conference that would promote, not combat, racism.

Good for the Tories. We should refuse to take part in this sham. That so many in the world continue to promote hatred against Jews is despicable. To do so under the banner of the UN, founded to promote world peace, and the auspices of that body’s "human rights" council, is Orwellian.

Hopefully, Canada will soon be joined by other countries which honestly value human rights, leaving the cesspool that will be Durban II to those with tarnished halos and no sense of shame.


Racists cry racism at U.N. conference At the Durban debacle, racists cried racism and anti-Semites paraded their ... If Israel is running an apartheid/racist state, it's doing a damned shoddy job. ...

There They Go Again, Those Arab Racists ... when it comes to Israel, why not on the African ... Israel, where 7th century Arab imperialist invaders and 20th century Arab ... Arab racism marches on...

muslim racism ... and Arab nations and their sympathizers, has accused Israel of racism, but the ... of Islamic and Arab states and other anti-Israel forces, and whose conclusions ...

F L A M E : Racism in the Islamic World: How can peace prevail in the ... ... for decades to terminate the increasingly violent Arab-Israeli conflict. ... and Arab nations and their
sympathizers, has accused Israel of racism, but the ...

"Terrorism and Racism: The Aftermath of Durban," by Anne F. Bayefsky ... Arab Reactions to September 11 / Fomenting the Battle Against Israel / Searching ... Minister of the United Arab Emirates, said "Israel can't be a member of ...

Reality Check On Racism ... United Nations Conference Against Racism, Israel is being singled out as ... The Arab countries continuously provoked Israel and brought about each war and ...

The Arab racism of playing Israelis' fear of Arab terror as "racism ...


There you go, a racist "anti racism" conference headed by: Libya - another Arab racist oppression and totalitarian state with OIL, Iran, another Islamic totalitarian fascist radical Islamic state that persecutes all, especially its minorities - with OIL.
Bent on not giving Israel any right to exist and to promote the "logic" & justification for genocide, if that's not the epitome of RACISM, What is?


Labels: , , , , , , ,

Islamic Movement head charged with incitement to racism, violence [Arab racism & Islamic bigotry even inside Israel]

Islamic Movement head charged with incitement to racism, violence [Arab racism & Islamic bigotry even inside Israel]

January 29, 2008

By Yoav Stern, Haaretz Correspondent

Ra'ad Salah, anti-Semitism

The head of the Islamic Movement in Israel's
Northern Branch, Ra'ad Salah, was charged Tuesday in Jerusalem Magistrate's
Court with incitement to violence and racism, over a fiery speech he gave a year
ago in which he invoked the blood libel.

During the speech at the
February 16, 2007 protest in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Wadi Joz, Salah
accused Jews of using children's blood to bake bread.

"We have never
allowed ourselves to knead [the dough for] the bread that breaks the fast in the
holy month of Ramadan with children's blood," he said. "Whoever wants a more
thorough explanation, let him ask what used to happen to some children in
Europe, whose blood was mixed in with the dough of the [Jewish] holy bread."

"Great God, is this a religion?" he asked. "Is this
what God would want? God will deal with you yet for what you are doing."

The rally was called to protest the planned Mughrabi bridge construction
in Jerusalem's Old City. Addressing the 1,000-strong crowd and assembled press,
Salah accused Israel of attempting to rebuild the Jewish Temple on the Temple
Mount while drenched in Arab blood.

"Whoever wants to build a house of
God should not do so while our blood is still on his clothes, on his doorposts,
in his food, in his drink, being passed along from one terrorist general to the
next terrorist general," he said.

"You are inciting against us, do not
let the ranks on your shoulders tempt you," he continued. "These ranks and stars
on your shoulders were made from the skulls of our martyrs. They are ranks of
shame, not ranks of splendor. These are ranks of disgrace, not ranks of honor."

Following the speech and Friday prayers, the crowd began rioting and
throwing stones at police. According to the prosecution, Salah's speech
constituted a "call to commit acts of violence and encouragement of acts of
violence, which given the content and context, there was a real possibility that
it could lead to acts of violence."

The prosecution said Salah made the
remarks "with the objective of inciting racism."

In an interview with
Ashams radio, Salah said in response that, "I am willing to repeat before the
court all the things I said at the Friday sermon in Wadi Joz or any other
meeting with journalists."

"Our statements are the products of
conviction, and I will not recant," he continued.

Salah said the
decision to indict him, along with Sunday's decision to close the case against
officers involved in the deaths of 13 Israeli Arabs in the October 2000 riots,
was part of an attempt to pressure and threaten Israeli Arab society. "They want
us to be good little boys," he said.

Salah was released from prison in
2005 after serving some two years for having contact with a foreign agent, as
well as financial crimes related to the Islamic Movement.


Israeli-Arab Islamic Chief Indicted For Incitement, Blood Libel


Labels: , ,