THE SPINE MARCH 21, 2010
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
The Baroness Ashton is a very unhappy woman. You can see it on her face, poor lady.
And even the fact that she is now a “peer”--or should one still say “peeress”?--has not visibly altered her look. She is one of those ugly ducklings who has given her life to social causes, a type we all know. Alas, the outcome of such an existence is very rarely happiness. Take her work as treasurer of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), seen as a front by the Soviets, who secretly supplied as much as 38% of its budget. What satisfaction could it possibly have given her, what with the collapse of Communist Russia and each and every one of its brutal satraps?
So she no longer leads the cheering at pathetic Trafalgar Square protests. In fact, she is now a certified VIP, the “European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy”--the more cumbersome the title, the less substantial the job. But she does travel in limos. And perhaps in private jets, too. After all, she is the EUHRFFAASP. Quite a mouthful.
As it happens, there is great discontent among the Europeans about her incumbency. Some of this is related to dismay with the Union itself. But she has had absolutely no experience of any sort in foreign affairs. As late as nine years ago, in fact, she was the chairlady of the Hertfordshire Health Authority and of the board of her children’s school. Very, very wholesome. Still, if Sarah Palin was unsuited for the American vice presidency, as she certainly was, Lady Ashton is at least as unsuited for the job of Europe’s ersatz foreign minister. On the other hand, she comes equipped with a big bag of demands, virtually all of them addressed to Israel: “do this” and “don’t do that.” She doesn’t ask questions, she instructs (as the Quaker dowager on my civil rights “Boycott Woolworth” picket line instructed). These liberal minded folk turn out to be quite doctrinaire. And earnest. With the sweetness of clenched teeth.
Now, in Moscow last week, the Quartet--made up of the United Nations, Russia, the United States, and the European Union--condemned Israel on account of the East Jerusalem housing crisis, which had been hyped up with grotesque cynicism by the Obama administration. And, with even more grotesque cynicism, the four horsemen (two of them actually women) of the apocalypse also condemned Israel for not allowing certain building materials into the Gaza Strip. Again, their faces said it all: They looked as if they were ushering in the Day of Judgment.
As it happens, not. Within hours of their smug condemnations of the Jewish state, five rockets hailing from Gaza had landed in the Negev. One hit a communal agricultural facility and killed a Thai worker. There is nothing like demanding of a beleaguered people that it supply its enemies with materiel facilitating their continuous offense against it.
There is something faintly comic about the Quartet purporting to broker a peace agreement between Israel and the haplessly divided and hopelessly violent Palestinians. After all, the members of the Quartet don’t agree on anything among themselves but the supposed calumnies of Israel. Moreover, the two collective bodies in the foursome are phantoms--one more than the other, I suppose. So take your pick. I’ll take mine.
The truth is that what keeps the U.N. alive is the General Assembly, which affords governments (imaginary and real) the opportunity to send thousands of pompous officials to New York every fall to dine and wine (and to whine on behalf of the wretched of the earth.) I will not repeat my previous anti-U.N. wraps. (You can read some of my thoughts here and here.) But think of me when the Security Council finally debates sanctions against Iran.
Still, the real comedy belongs to the European Union. Yes, there is an enormous bureaucracy that has saved Brussels, which otherwise has only a bronze boy pissing in the street ... and, of course, some lace dealers--finicky, finicky, finicky. (In Antwerp, there are also many Muslims who contribute mightily to the national well-being--not finicky at all.)
The bureaucracy aspires to replace the democratic ethos of the Union’s member states. Some of these aspirations have already been achieved without many people actually voting in E.U. elections because the Union and the nations themselves are so removed from each other. But, now that at least four member states are on their way to bankruptcy, the E.U. has lost is capacity to do what it was supposed to do best. The eurocurrency was a fiction imposed on governments at such different levels of economic development and such different levels of industrial discipline that it was bound to collapse. The fact is that Germany does not want to support Greece--the most desiccated, most deluded, and most corrupt of European societies--in its illusions. (Greeks retire at age 50 with full pensions.) Neither are Germany and the other productive economies of Europe willing to bolster poor Portugal or pathetic Ireland, for that matter. Let them go their own way. And let the different nations of the continent be what they are and want to be.
But, before Portugal and Ireland go on the dole or to the poorhouse, there is also Spain. Real estate has simply collapsed. There is nowhere in the world (save the “fabulous” emirates) where land and houses are so cheap and still go unbought. There is 20% unemployment (if you don’t count the Arabs, illegal and legal, who would raise the number to God only knows what and still sup off a generous social security system that is in the process of falling apart).
Spain is governed, insofar as it is governed at all, by a socialist regime. One of its obsessions happens also to be Israel, perhaps in deference to its many Muslim constituents. Perhaps in deference, as well, to its historic tick about Jews and pure Catholic blood. It’s ironic that Madrid whines for Palestine and does not grasp the urge and surge for Catalonia, to say nothing about the Basque land.
The European Union is on its last legs. It may survive as ghosts survive in books or in film. It may even survive in the Quartet, whatever survival power that has. But it has no power and no moral authority. So perhaps I understand the baroness’ portentousness. It is made of nothing. But it’s not just her, although members of the Labor Party have begun hammering her as “too dull and too dim.”
34 comments
This would be an interesting, thought provoking, though somewhat predictably anti European post if not for Peretz' juvenile comments about this lady's looks. Does he really believe that this middle school misogynistic taunting really helps his argument? Has Peretz looked in the mirror lately and taken stock of his physical, er, charms? Given that self assessment, is it really a good tactic to talk about how others look? Stick with the [usual] anti European perspective. You're on firmer ground there.
- MrCookie1
March 21, 2010 at 10:37am
Yeah the Baroness could use a Chin Implant. But I like her the way she is. A complete incompetent, and she looks it. By the way, did anyone notice that the Whitehouse isn't trumpeting their Nowruz message this year. It was pretty big last year. The President spoke directly to the Iranian People via Youtube. And what a year it was. They have the post up on Whitehouse.Gov, here's a link: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/03/19/president-obamas-nowruz-message This year's message sounds like something George W. Bush would have sent. I think the Big O should have told the Iranians that Nothing Changes on New Year's Day.
- CRS9TNR
March 21, 2010 at 11:01am
"She is one of those ugly ducklings who has given her life to social causes, a type we all know." This kind of gratuitous middle-school and (yes) sexist parenthetical outburst is exactly the kind of dig that blinds readers to what-worthy points you wish to make. Also unhelpful: the increasingly inchoate nature of your prose. It's smugness is one thing I can chew through. It's increasingly lazy constructions and blunt juxtapositions are not. Would Henry have approved of them? Thank god you hire writers more considerate of their readers. You were a great reason I began subscribing to TNR twenty-five years ago. They are why I still subscribe.
- dmillstone
March 21, 2010 at 12:13pm
Yes, Marty's comments on the women’s looks are juvenile, incompetent and irrelevant as Hamilton Hamburger would say. I also wish he had explained in more detail the notion of "sangre pura" (pure Catholic blood lines) in Spain. I don't think most of his readers know enough about the historical context to be able to appreciate that comment. In addition, when Spaniards worried about their "sangre pura" they also made fun of Basque people who were depicted as hillbilly type characters in Spanish literature. This is another lazy post about a worthwhile and serious topic.
- jdyer
March 21, 2010 at 1:06pm
"She is one of those ugly ducklings who has given her life to social causes, a type we all know." may be translated as "I wouldn't marry her, even for her money."
- SMacEachern2
March 21, 2010 at 3:22pm
I thought it was the British aristocracy that marries for money.
- jdyer
March 21, 2010 at 4:15pm
Marty's great love is Mary Robinson.
- ironyroad
March 21, 2010 at 4:44pm
Plus the occasional Harvard lecturer on the make...
- SMacEachern2
March 21, 2010 at 4:50pm
One of the most interesting things about The Spine is Peretz's detachment from any sort of fact-checking, and this post is a good example. Most of it is simply information-free anti-European ranting, but occasionally you do find bald assertions of fact, like "(Greeks retire at age 50 with full pensions.)" In fact, the average Greek retirement age is 61, going up to 63 (http://tinyurl.com/y949cbt). It really doesn't matter if this is slap-happy carelessness or just straight lying, but it's characteristic of The Spine: no assertion of fact in any of Martin Peretz's post can be trusted without verification.
- SMacEachern2
March 21, 2010 at 5:02pm
SMacEachern2 "but occasionally you do find bald assertions of fact, like "(Greeks retire at age 50 with full pensions.)" In fact, the average Greek retirement age is 61, going up to 63" given that most Americans retire at 65 if at all, being pensioned off at 61 is still a pretty good deal.
- jdyer
March 21, 2010 at 6:20pm
SMacEachern2 "One of the most interesting things about The Spine is Peretz's detachment from any sort of fact-checking,..." You mean that Cristianos viejos in Spain were not obsessed with their "pura sangre?" Marty stretches a fact here and there but he doesn't make them up. The problem is his attitude towards feminine officialdom.
- jdyer
March 21, 2010 at 6:24pm
Well so ok the description of the Baroness Ashton is very un-pc and as an older lady I am offended indeed although I have to struggle not to laugh. OK so I am laughing. I can't help it. Not so funny, in fact extremely annoying, is the spectre of the EU telling the Jews to what to do. Under the circumstances. No doubt, however, they have some creative ideas how to turn swords into plowshares especially in Gaza. I certainly would like to hear them, pdq. Anyway I'm curious too how this is going to play out over the long run with the EU. The whole idea of regional governments, economic risk and profit sharing etc is fascinating and I think in many ways the EU has been beneficial. But, it also has un-democratic potential, the power center, decision-making etc are increasingly remote from individual people, local governments etc. Isn't this is a problem with any kind of globalized government or even giant corporations too?
- Sophia
March 21, 2010 at 6:48pm
Yea, she looks like a frump. So do many other women that Marty (and I) admires, I am sure. As for the EU the sooner it dissolves the better for Europe and the world.
- jdyer
March 21, 2010 at 10:08pm
"..."sangre pura" (pure Catholic blood lines) " I have not read this term in my studies of the conversos. What I did read a lot about was the term "Limpieza de sangre", cleanliness of blood from traces of Jewish ancestry. After the forcible conversion of Jews in 1385, and the emergence of the conversos as an upwardly mobile class, it became necessary for Spanish society to contain these new aspirants and stop the proliferation of former Jews into the higher ranks of power and influence*. They passed the law of "limpieza the sangre", that stipulated the need for those ambitious persons who were suspected of having Jews in their past to submit a clean bill of ancestry going back 20(!) generations. (For comparison's sake, the Nazis demanded racial purity that went back 8 generations). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limpieza_de_sangre *a sort of a Mearsheimer&Waltish primitive and explicit attempt to prevent the formation of a "Jewish lobby" _________ "Yea, she looks like a frump. " It's not her frumpiness that repells. It's that expression on her face, a perpetual grimace of haughty disgust and discontent, the kind that one author described as a face that looked like a purse that was never opened for charity.
- noga1
March 22, 2010 at 7:08am
noga1: Interesting that neither you nor Peretz can bear to mention that the concept of limpieza de sangre was directed as much at converted Muslims, and people suspected of being descended from Muslims, as it was at converted Jews, and people suspected of being descended from Jews. I guess it sort of spoils the narrative...
- SMacEachern2
March 22, 2010 at 10:08am
Just read Ashton's impressions on her visit to Gaza in Monday's International Herald Tribune. Reads like a visit by a clueless tourist, so am surprised to read here that she was apparently representing the EU. not exactly as confusing as watching Hillary's address to AIPAC live and then reading the WashPO's coverage an hour later. Hillary actually was vehement in denouncing the Pal dedication of the square to the female terrorist. Very vehement. No one is including that in the print media. Have never been a fan of Hillary, but she did seem to understand that the kerfluffle over the apartments in North Jerusalem is all about pandering to the Palestinian temper tantrums, based on how she covered the issue in front of AIPAC. She will never live down making public HER 45 minute tantrum with Netanyahu. NO coverage of Alan Dershowitz's keynote speech on countering the delegitimization Israel Sunday night at AIPAC, which truly needs coverage before another American soldier dies in Afghanistan.
- K2K
March 22, 2010 at 12:11pm
"No one is including that in the print media." If this is the case, I wonder why.
- ironyroad
March 22, 2010 at 1:26pm
The comment about Muslims and the Inquisition is somewhat inaccurate. The torture and expulsion of Jews en masse but especially the violent nature of the actions against them was not equivalent or the same as the treatment of Moors or Muslims who'd recently converted to Christianity. It's misleading to claim this although later, Moriscos were expelled as well. But as to Muslims and Jews - Moors had of course been a military and imperial power in Spain and when they rebelled against the reconquista the uprisings were indeed harshly suppressed but the way Jews were treated wasn't the same to my knowledge. The Jews had in no sense been a mighty power or members of a great Empire beyond the borders of Spain and also, the way Christians saw and sometimes still see Jews in unique. I am unaware of blood libels against Muslims for example; there is no claim of "Christ killing" and there are entire Muslim states within Europe to this day. There is no equivalence to this in Jewish history at all. So it's important to recognize the vast difference in size and power between the global Jewish community and Islam as well as the way Christianity reacts to Judaism and the treatment of Jews especially in Europe. There were wars between Christian and Muslim powers, but Jews are just not in that category and are vulnerable in both realms. At the time of the inquisition the Ottoman Empire as an example had no equal in the Jewish world - to say the least! - and although the Moors had been vanquished in Spain Muslims as a group were powerful and numerous, they were a serious military and imperial power in Europe as well as in the East. Meanwhile Jews including conversos and marranos (converted and cryptic Jews) were tortured and brutalized to a far greater extent than any other group of people although in the New World the indigenous people were tortured and murdered too in order to save them. I don't believe converted or crypto Muslims were tortured for example; they were simply not mistreated to the same degree; nor were they regarded in religious terms in the same way as Jews and this is true today. One should not have to point out that there is a particularity about the treatment of Jews generally, about the later translation of this into racialism and also about the small size and vulnerable state of the Jewish community which has had to survive in realms both far larger and religiously hostile as well as frequently dangerous. This in itself has made it relatively safe to beat up on Jews. Even today, now that Israel has been reborn, antisemitic attacks, acts of terror against Jews and incitement are rising around the world and ironically, Israel is now blamed for this. It's a vicious circle. And, when Jews were expelled from Spain they were members, as now, of a tiny minority and one which was insecure to say the least. Many of course travelled to the Ottoman Empire where obviously we remained a small minority and de facto second class citizens. There was no Jewish nation or empire or state to which we could return. There was no threat of an attack from an outside power when Jews or Christians who'd converted from Judaism were tortured and murdered. On the other hand Moors who left Spain returned to a Muslim empire or Muslim kingdoms. There was and is no equivalence either in Spain or today and none should be pretended. Claiming such an equivalence is akin to the lie that the world's handful of Jews somehow balance the size, wealth and power of the world's 1.5 billion Muslims not to mention the even greater number of Christians, etc, or the construct that Israel is somehow more powerful or "bad" than 56 Muslim states and who knows how many Christian or other nations including the US, China, Russia, Europe. However, the UN and other august and mighty powers haven't figured this out yet.
- Sophia
March 22, 2010 at 1:40pm
Sophia: I'm not certain why being a defeated representative of a great empire will lead to better treatment at the hands of one's conquerors.... Nor was I addressing the larger issues of Jewish history over this period, merely the pathetic claim that Spanish support for Palestinians today is somehow a throwback to the Inquisition and an expression of anti-semitism. Moriscos certainly were mistreated in ways comparable to conversos and marranos - see for example Chapter 2 (' The ‘other’ within Christian Europe: state-building in early modern Spain') in Heather Rae's _State Identities and the Homogenisation of Peoples_ (CUP, Cambridge, 2002). And they were, as you admit, expelled as well. It doesn't minimise the mistreatment of conversos and marranos to note that other people were mistreated as well.
- SMacEachern2
March 22, 2010 at 2:06pm
ironyroad: "If this is the case, I wonder why." It's not the case. from today's New York Times (http://tinyurl.com/ybfzk28): "...And Mrs. Clinton condemned those who incite violence against Israelis, whether it is a Hamas-controlled city renaming a square after a terrorist who killed Israelis, or Palestinians whipping up anger after Israel rededicated a synagogue in the Jewish quarter of Jerusalem’s old city." But then again, why should facts matter on The Spine, if they get in the way of the narrative...?
- SMacEachern2
March 22, 2010 at 2:10pm
"noga1: Interesting that neither you nor Peretz can bear to mention that the concept of limpieza de sangre was directed as much at converted Muslims, and people suspected of being descended from Muslims, as it was at converted Jews, and people suspected of being descended from Jews. I guess it sort of spoils the narrative..." Typical maceachern antisemitic ventilation, laced by distortions and lies. The link I provided spoke about both Jews and Muslims which I'll bet is where Mac got his knowledge about the subject to begin with. If I wanted to keep the narrative pristine I could easily find a link that spoke of Jewish experience exclusively. Additionally, I'd like to recap what Sophia said: The Moriscos did not have to remain in Spain and suffer under their forcible conversion. They could cross over to Fez and be easily integrated into the Muslim polity the dominated North Africa, enjoying their status as masters. Conversos could only hope to relocate to such countries as were known to tolerate Jews as second class citizens, always a minority, ever the supplicants. It would be too much for a mind like mac's to figure this out on his or her own.
- noga1
March 22, 2010 at 2:12pm
"But then again, why should facts matter on The Spine, if they get in the way of the narrative...?" Speaking of facts and narratives: The link furnished by mceachern leads to an article entitled: Clinton Defends U.S. Criticism of Israeli Plans. It is 650 word long and includes 17 paragraphs in which the NYT reporter meticulously documents all of Israel's crimes and misdemeanors as catalogued by Clinton. In the 15th paragraph, (43 words) he remembers to say: oh yes she also condemned those who incite violence against Israel. 43 to 630 words 1 to 16 paragraphs. Somehow I'm not surprised that this is how Mceachern likes his facts about Israel being provided to the reading public.
- noga1
March 22, 2010 at 2:28pm
ironyroad: "If this is the case, I wonder why." I would love to hear YOUR explanation about that why.
- noga1
March 22, 2010 at 2:29pm
Noga, my initial reaction was that emphasizing her "vehement" (K2K's word) attack on the naming of the square would undermine the legend of how the Obama administration is going easy on the Pals and unfairly targeting Israel for criticism. But, although superficially coherent, that really seems to make no sense -- I confess to being puzzled, but the whole point may be moot as K2K was giving an impression rather than doing an actual survey of print media (s/he only mentions the WaPo specifically).
- ironyroad
March 22, 2010 at 3:06pm
noga1: "The link I provided spoke about both Jews and Muslims which I'll bet is where Mac got his knowledge about the subject to begin with." You might note that, in my response to Sophia, I actually provided a reference for what I said, one that has nothing to do with Wikipedia. You missed that the first time around? "The Moriscos did not have to remain in Spain and suffer under their forcible conversion. They could cross over to Fez and be easily integrated into the Muslim polity..." Sure. A little forced conversion and forced expulsion - hardly worth mentioning, when it happens to Muslims. And I suggest that you work on your reading comprehension. Most of that NYT article is actually talking about Hillary Clinton's expressed support for Israel in her speech. Were that not the case, we wouldn't see sentences like this: "Despite predictions that she would be booed [at an AIPAC meeting], the crowd of 7,000 at the Washington convention center interrupted her repeatedly with standing ovations."
- SMacEachern2
March 22, 2010 at 4:18pm
"Sure. A little forced conversion and forced expulsion - hardly worth mentioning, when it happens to Muslims." Would that that were the case for Jews, either targeted by the Inquisition in 1500 or by the Nazis in 1939. ____________ ironyroad: I don't think I understand your answer but then, why actually say something when you can wisecrack around it, right?
- noga1
March 22, 2010 at 4:35pm
noga1: "Would that that were the case for Jews, either targeted by the Inquisition in 1500 or by the Nazis in 1939." And at other times beforehand, in between, and afterward, as well. There's no competition here: recognising the harm done to one group does nothing to minimise the harm done to another.
- SMacEachern2
March 22, 2010 at 6:17pm
I wasn't cracking wise, Noga. I answered your inquiry (or request) as succinctly and honestly as I could. I mean, I confess to going that route sometimes, but that certainly wasn't one of them, scouts' honor.
- ironyroad
March 22, 2010 at 6:50pm
"There's no competition here: recognising the harm done to one group does nothing to minimise the harm done to another." It was you who suggested there was a competition when you scolded me for noticing that Muslims who were forcibly converted had options which Jewish conversos did not. You will excuse me for not feeling as sorrowful for Moriscos who remained in Spain and bore than sufferings while knowing full well that all they had to do was join Abu 'abd-Allah Muhammad XII as he left Al andalus and settled in Fez, Morocco.
- noga1
March 22, 2010 at 8:32pm
noga1: I noted that the concept of limpieza de sangre was used to discriminate against both people of Jewish ancestry and people of Muslim ancestry. You attempted to obscure that, in a crude attempt to parallel Spanish support for Palestinians today with Spanish anti-semitism 500 years ago. Your dismissal of the suffering of Moriscos because they had the 'choice' of losing everything they had, leaving their homes and fleeing to a new land does you no credit at all.
- SMacEachern2
March 22, 2010 at 9:06pm
"in a crude attempt to parallel Spanish support for Palestinians today with Spanish anti-semitism 500 years ago." ??? I wasn't aware of any discussion of modern day Spain coming into this thread. It proves your own turn of mind that you would make that connection. Silly me. I should have known that your only interest in the history of conversos would be to exonerate some people from their antisemitism. _________ "...does you no credit at all." I count among my ancestors one who was burnt at the stake. And my children's right to a big family was badly tempered with by the Nazis. It is always the same with you. Jews were massacred and decimated but we are supposed to grieve for the Muslims who had somewhere to go to escape those atrocities but chose not to. I will try to do better if you express much grief for the Jews of Arab lands who were forced to leave all their property behind when they fled for their life from the wrath of the Arabs after the establishment of Israel. I'm afraid the matrix of "they all suffered" does not do it for me. Objectively, there should have been something around 200 millions Jews in the world today whereas there are only 12-14 million. Whatever ethnic cleansing the Muslims suffered it does not seem to have had much impact on their numbers today. It seems you are incapable of distinguishing between existential threats and mere suffering or severe inconvenience. I seem to recall that you had the same principle at work when we talked about the the Roma vis a vis Muslim minorities in Europe. You seemed incapable of understanding the substantial difference between the two types of discrimination.
- noga1
March 22, 2010 at 10:58pm
I really wish I could comment on the substance of the post. But, alas, Mr. Peretz hasn't included a recent photo of himself, so i have no way of evaluating the worth of his ideas.
- miceelf
March 23, 2010 at 9:51am
noga1: "I will try to do better if you express much grief for the Jews of Arab lands who were forced to leave all their property behind when they fled for their life from the wrath of the Arabs after the establishment of Israel." That was one of the things I was thinking of when I supplemented your quote about the persecution of Jews ""....targeted by the Inquisition in 1500 or by the Nazis in 1939." My response was, if you'll note, "And at other times beforehand, in between, and afterward, as well." Despite what you think, I don't hate Jews: that accusation is just a reflex on your part. You, on the other hand, have a different metric for suffering when it happens to Muslims: that kind of suffering doesn't seem bother you very much. And the issue with the Roma was fairly straightforward: the spectacle of a right-wing Jewish parliamentarian in Italy cooperating with a fascist in her own party to pass laws that would drive Roma out of the country should offend the sensibilities of anyone who hears it and remembers the Holocaust. Not you, though: Roma, like Muslims, don't really suffer.
- SMacEachern2
March 23, 2010 at 11:02am
"You, on the other hand, have a different metric for suffering when it happens to Muslims: that kind of suffering doesn't seem bother you very much." The metric is not about who the sufferer is but rather what the suffering is and how far it gets from the first fully articulated right in the Universal Declaration of human rights" that "Article 3. * Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person." There is a difference between suffering caused by forcible conversion, suffering caused by expulsion and suffering caused by genocide. There is a difference between being expelled from an area where you live and genocide. There is a difference when the expelled minorities have a place to go where they will be taken in as part of the dominant society and expelled minorities which have nowhere to go, or will be allowed into another country provided they continue to be a persecuted minority. Muslims and Converted Muslims had options which Jews and conversos did not have. The options spelled out the difference between life and death. History shows that Jews were decimated by massacres, expulsions and more massacres. There are 1.4 billion Muslims in the world. It is as the difference is between Muslim minorities in Europe and Roma. Roma are completely vulnerable, their very existence threatened. Muslims minorities seem more worried about their minarets and their rights to separate prayer rooms and to cover their faces or hair. Muslim minorities have 1.4 billion Muslims watching their backs. Who looks after the Roma? The UNHR Commission? A few NGO's? Someone like you, whose heart bleeds only when a Muslim is ostensibly denied one of his religious "rights"? Your only interest in the Roma stems from some tenuous connection you can conjure up that somehow casts Jews in bad light. Apparently it's the one Jewish Italian that is responsible for the persecution of the gypsies. And you dare declare that you don't hate Jews. I wonder what exactly would pass for Jew hatred for someone like you.
- noga1
March 23, 2010 at 8:17pm