The New Republic

Huh?

I think the police in this video were like, walking IN FRONT of the march, you know, to keep some semblance of order. At first, the marchers aren't doing anything but talking trash, when they start throwing a few things, the police largely stop and turn around. It's not like the british cops were running from a riot or something.

Probably in Peretz's mind, Muslims yelling is cause for police violence.

- mmathog

January 20, 2009 at 2:32am

Yup, just watched all 10 minutes of this or so, nothing gets broken, no one is attacked, no one gets even the least bit harmed. Just a whole lot of provocative yelling and chanting.

- mmathog

January 20, 2009 at 2:38am

if you're referring to Palestinian civilians than yes, they lost the battle of Gaza.  If your suggesting that Israel won this bout with Hamas than you're simply delusional.  They still have the ability to fire rockets and Israel is retreating.  I'm not sure what else there is to say.  The only lesson taught here is that Israel can't do anything to terrorists that lob rockets at it besides make their recruiting mission easier.

- Maxblum13

January 20, 2009 at 3:38am

With respect to Hamas, if you were being sworn in tomorrow as POTUS, what is the first thing you would do with the Football?

Also, what would your top priorities in the region be?

It's just a psychological test

In fact, human psychology never ceases to fascinate me. We can never be certain of why someone chooses to do one thing rather than another. There are just too many unique, individual experiences and relationships we are not privy to, to ever fully grasp the motivation and intention of another human being.

You see this manifested a lot on true crime television. Over and over and over and over again someone kills someone else and out of the woodwork come all these people swearing, "there is no way he could have commited this crime.....he wouldn't hurt a fly."

But he could and he did.

Generally, that stuff always bores me though because it is so obvious. Instead, what particularly tantalizes me is bumping into people who have absolutely no idea this might also be true regarding how they have come to understand themselves.

It seems that some personalities are oriented [by nature?....by nurture?....by God?] to reduce everything down to a liturgical sense of reality. Almost every aspect of their lives are filtered through this....reality sieve?

And I don't mean this in a judgmental sense. Quite the contrary. I wish only that they could teach me how to do it.

But then, paradoxically, I recognize how, if they could, they would already be familiar enough with the illusory nature of identity to basically be just like me.

I guess I'll just have to wait until they have a pill for it.

george walton

- iambiguous

January 20, 2009 at 3:41am

Yeah, pretty incendiary stuff here!  And thanks for the link to that blog...is this where you go for serious commentary??

- benberger

January 20, 2009 at 4:53am

What a web site! Are you in the story about the Obama supporters celebrating his inauguration by defacing the flag?  

How can you trust anything from this website?  It's on a par with those tabloids that report on aliens inside people's faces.

- Shane Fergessen

January 20, 2009 at 6:47am

It seems to me the real headline is that HAMAS won the battle of London/Europe/Media.  

No one is paying attention to the atrocities Hamas is inflicting on Fatah supporters -- and per Palestinian eyewitnesses, there are thousands under house arrest, hundreds being tortured and maimed once IDF pulled back. No one pays attention to the harm Hamas has inflicted on Christian Palestinians.

That's just Palestinians brutalizing Palestinians -- who cares about that?

Perhaps  the most important riddle of our time:   When is a War Crime Not a War Crime?

- pw01ws

January 20, 2009 at 9:15am

If you encounter anyone who can say with a straight face that Hamas won the war, save your breath and send them this link to King Arthur's battle with the Black Knight:

www.youtube.com/watch

- willjames77

January 20, 2009 at 10:26am

Those are some whackjob websites. I am blocked out of watching many videos at work so can't comment on that, but I think unless people start to go on a rampage destroying property police should generally give them space instead of engaging in a full scale riot making things a lot worse. Yes, these jihadists are nuts, but the next protest could be gays, or could be railway workers, etc. At the first taunt from some idiot I would hate to see the cops bust everyones head. As I said, I didn't see the video so can't comment specifically on this incident.

As to winning the battle of London, who the hell cares? The one thing the British still have not gotten into their heads is that nobody really cares. Just because the British speak English doesn't mean we have to give undue attention to what they say. The sun has set on that empire generations ago. To be honest, I don't really care that the Brits are getting bent over by the same people they used to bend over when they ruled those countries. Give me even greater reason to ignore them.

- blackton

January 20, 2009 at 10:32am

In the first video, agreed with others that the police are essentially escorts.  If you look at the protest handlers or whatever you call them, dressed in the orange vests, they're imploring protesters to behave: "Stop it (throwing things, marking cones in this case)!  We don't need the bad publicity.".  Not that it's working, but that seems to be the case.  Near the end of the video, another person dressing in traditional dress speaking good English also implores protesters to behave.  The police take their shots when needed, and from what you see on the video, they're good shots.  I think it's attempt by some group to have a non-violent rally.  And the camera man making the comments, he's just trash talking.  In fact, it appears the camera is there to record any unwarranted police crackdowns which would then be quickly posted on every jihadi site on the planet.  It's a good thing the police show some self-control.

- jet

January 20, 2009 at 10:35am

will james, I love that scene (I presume it is Monty Python) I do wish Israel did not stop this war until they decapitated all of the leadership of Hamas to give the next set of Hamas leadership something to think about. In most organizations becoming the leader is something to be strived for, for Hamas if they continue their aggression it should only be a death sentence.

Interesting how Hezbellah completely hid, some solidarity. Who says deterrence doesn't work?

- blackton

January 20, 2009 at 10:37am

When Sharon went into the West Bank to stop the suicide bombers, he succeeded despite condemnation from the press and the left. When Olmert went into Lebanon, he succeeded in stopping Hezbollah bombings in the north, despite even more bitter condemnation from these sources and claims of "victory" by Hezbollah. Therefore, I would be surprised if the incursion into Gaza does not stop the Qassam barrage into southern Israel.

- r-ennis

January 20, 2009 at 11:40am

The comments on that weird site seem to involve shock and horror that the cops aren't using tear gas and/or truncheons to attack the crowd.  But the crowd don't seem to be doing anything illegal, and the police appear to be maintaining a loose protective cordon around the marchers as they move.

- ironyroad

January 20, 2009 at 1:58pm

A Palestinian spokesperson  threatens Europe with Muslim minority

islamineurope.blogspot.com/.../palestinians-threaten-europe-with.html

- noga1

January 20, 2009 at 2:09pm

George Walton: How profound, How many advanced degrees do you have in psychology? Blackton: I too wished that Israel would finish Hamas off to the greatest extent they could. But the international pressure was sure on for a cease-fire and the Israelis wanted to ratchet down Operation Cast Lead before Inauguration Day.

- liberal reformer

January 20, 2009 at 2:26pm

The Palestinians in London won the battle before the events in Gaza.  Bernard Lewis was right. Europe is well on the way to becoming a Muslim dominated continent. David Pryce Jones is also correct in observing that  blood would have to be spilled  to stop this Muslim take-over.

- nhrds

January 20, 2009 at 3:00pm

liberal:

George Walton: How profound, How many advanced degrees do you have in psychology?

George:

How many would I need to convince you I don't have any?

gw

- iambiguous

January 20, 2009 at 3:01pm

As I said, a loose protective cordon.

- ironyroad

January 20, 2009 at 3:25pm

George Walton: It was a joke.

- liberal reformer

January 20, 2009 at 3:48pm

“'Israel won, but could have gone deeper'

Jan. 20, 2009

Haviv Rettig Gur , THE JERUSALEM POST

Israel clearly won the latest round with Hamas, but could have gone deeper into Gaza and done greater damage to the organization, according to military analysts in the US media who were visiting the region this week.

"I think you achieved what one Israeli general called 'changing the reality' in which Hamas operates, but I think you were too restrained and could have gone deeper into Gaza," Lt.-Gen. Thomas McInerney, a 35-year veteran of the US Air Force and a Fox News military analyst, told The Jerusalem Post Monday after touring the Gaza periphery and receiving briefings from Israeli officials.

The military analysts' trip was organized by the New York-based Project Interchange, affiliated with the American Jewish Committee.

The Gaza fighting is seen in the US as a healthy demonstration of Israel's capabilities, according to Lt.-Col. Rick Francona, a former US Air Force intelligence officer in several theaters and military analyst for NBC News.

Unlike in the wake of the 2006 Second Lebanon War, "the conversation in the US revolves around Israeli decision-making - what's the endgame? Are they going to remove Hamas? It doesn't question Israel's capabilities. You've won the battle," Francona said.  

Both analysts said Israel seemed ready to face down Hamas in a long-term fight.

The cease-fire was "just the end of this round, and that seems to be Israeli policy right now. The best Israel can go for is to manage the conflict until Hamas can be made to go away," said Francona.

"The Israeli public's support for this war mutes global opinion," noted McInerney. "When a nation is united in its right to defend itself, it makes it more difficult for Europeans, the Left or the Arab media to counter that."

Even so, said McInerney, "your leadership is too sensitive about world opinion. I know why Israel didn't [drive deeper into Gaza] - you have an election coming up and a new [US] president taking office, but you need to gain the freedom of operation in Gaza that you have in the West Bank." Commenting on the unilateral cease-fire announced on Saturday, he suggested that "Israel did not want to destroy Hamas. I believe you should have."”

www.jpost.com/.../Satellite

- jacksondyer

January 20, 2009 at 4:44pm

The only reason to care about what happens in Britain is that the BBC still has tremendous negative influence on world opinion about Israel and how that negative media coverage, filtered through media in this country, affects the actions of our government.

- r-ennis

January 20, 2009 at 6:02pm

nhrds,

If you openly want to symphatize with the likes of Filip DeWinter, Geert Wilders and Jean-Marie Le Pen, you should do so. However, you should then also beware that most people think that you are a nut-job who has lost every touch with reality. Your solution of violence here is the same solution as blowing up Hamas with the Bomb. Most people in those rallies in Europe don't at all symphatize with Hamas, they merely protest against the deaths of thousands of innocent people, which they see as a result of Israel's surge. Every society and culture has its crazy people and unfortunately it is always those people who get drawn into the spotlight.

Unlike in the US, in Europe we don't immediately associate all muslims with violence, terrorism and extremism. And rightly so, since we have a longer history with muslims in Europe than there is in the US. It is time that people like you start seeing them more like we do, if you want to be taken seriously about European issues.

Thomas

- yzon

January 20, 2009 at 8:08pm

Yzon: If rockets  were not continually being fired out of Hamastan, there would be no Palestinian civilian casualties. Your take on Muslims in Europe is unintentionally hilarious. This longer history has not resulted in wisdom and has not led to the assimilation of the people of the Koran in country after country in northern and western Europe. The US has done far better in this regard.

- liberal reformer

January 20, 2009 at 10:06pm

yzon, your comment to nhrds is a cheap shot.

"If you openly want to symphatize with the likes of Filip DeWinter, Geert Wilders and Jean-Marie Le Pen, you should do so."

He never said that he sympathized with the fascist Le Pen or DeWinter. (I don't think Wilders belongs in their company.)

- jacksondyer

January 20, 2009 at 10:09pm

yzon, you are a fucking imbecile and a liar. I was born and grew up in Romania, a country that was occupied for about 450 years by the Turks, in the name of Allah. They were a phenomen - ally cruel, backward and corrupt occupier.

The other countries nearby the same treatment got by Islamic imperialism - Hungary, Bulgaria, all the former Yugoslav countries, Greece, Austria. All these countries got rid of the Turks only at the price of really bloody independence wars, in which the Islamic Ottoman empire showed hpw far and with how much pleasure it liked to murder. No wonder that the Evil Ottoman Empire ended up in a act of genocide against the Armenians.

You're a real bastard, yzon. A third of Europe was destroyed by Islamic imperialists, and you have the guts to tell us that Europeans know better? You fool, you clearly disregard all history because your McDonald's culture hasn't heard of the Ottoman Empire, hasn't heard of how hard it was to get rid of it, or of Arabs in Spain and France (Martel is probably just a brandy for you, cretin), hasn't heard of Islamic terrorism that kept Miguel de Cervantes, like thousands of others, as prisoners of Islam.

Here's a sincere and very personal wish: may you live under Islam. May you and those dear to you live through what so many Europeans lived under Islam!

- sleepyavl

January 21, 2009 at 12:23am

Lib ref: "If rockets  were not continually being fired out of Hamastan, there would be no Palestinian civilian casualties"

I agree, and I did not takte a stance in this issue, I just clarified their view.

Futhermore, the presence of muslims in countries like the Netherlands and Germany during the past 30 years, has led to muslims being integrated into society. They have learned to combine the Koran with living in a western country. In Holland, we have about 800.000 Muslim immigrants on a population of 16 million, in 2050 this will be 1/3rd of the total population. The most pressing issue, narrowly followed by the financial crisis, in our politics today is how we should cope with this large group of muslims. And every study shows that most Dutch (enlightened) muslims are coping very well with the challenge of adapting to western norms and values. Their unemployment rate is going down and they are having more and more opportunities. We are learning step by step how to handle the Koran and how to insert its values in ours without giving away the store. Thus, I think thirty years of co-operating with muslims has indeed given them a legitimate place in West European societies.

Jackson, Wilders does belong in their company, but point taken.

- yzon

January 21, 2009 at 7:46am

Sleepy,

Take a breath. Good. Now, if you want to base your view of Islam solely on the atrocities during the reign of the Ottoman Empire and the occupation of Spain and France from 733 until 1492, you should also base your view of Christianity on the many crusades, or, just to name another example, the way Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castille got rid of the Jews and the Muslims in the name of Christ.

Your argument is that Islam stands for destruction, violence and terrorism, because they did so almost a hundred years ago? In the latter decades of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st, Islam in Europe is not what it has been. Muslims have shown that they are very well capable of living up to Western norms and values. And if you don't believe me, you can come and visit me in the Netherlands. I'm not that bad a person once you get to know me. It is just, lets call it  'extremely unconventional', to imply that, in the 21st century, Western Europe will come to live under reign of corrupt, violent and backward Islamist Emperor.

- yzon

January 21, 2009 at 8:39am

"Futhermore, the presence of muslims in countries like the Netherlands and Germany during the past 30 years, has led to muslims being integrated into society. They have learned to combine the Koran with living in a western country. In Holland, we have about 800.000 Muslim immigrants on a population of 16 million, in 2050 this will be 1/3rd of the total population. yzon

This is wildy optimistic, you forgot the small issue of Theo van Gogh's murder as well as the case of Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

"Netherlands: the pillars are shaken"

"Since the murder of film director Theo van Gogh last year by a radical Islamist, there has been tension between communities in the previously tolerant Netherlands. The debate risks presenting immigrants as troublemakers rather than as the victims of an unjust social system."

By Marie-Claire Cécilia

mondediplo.com/.../04netherlands

"‘Integration’ in France and the Netherlands; Understanding the crisis of national models"

www.mb.utwente.nl/.../special_session.doc

"Hirsi Ali and the failure of a multicultural society"

by Aboeprijadi Santoso

www.commongroundnews.org/article.php

You need to do a little more research on the issue.

On another note, if the Arabs can complain about "Jewish occupation" and resort to violence at what point will it be justified for European and not just right wingers to complain about "Arab or Muslim occupation" and also resort to violence, yzon?

- jacksondyer

January 21, 2009 at 11:22am

"Your argument is that Islam stands for destruction, violence and terrorism, because they did so almost a hundred years ago?"

No, yzon, Sleepy's argument is that  Islam stands for destruction, violence and terrorism, because they behave that way today in countries ranging from the Sudan and Algeria to Pakistan and Thailand, England and beyond.

- jacksondyer

January 21, 2009 at 11:25am

For what it's worth, CNN is reporting 1300 Palestinian fatalities, and 22,000 buildings destroyed. That works out to one person killed for about every seventeen buildings taken down. Strikes me as pretty amazing. I'm confident that German and Japanese cities that had a similar number of buildings destroyed had exponentially more casualties.  Leaving aside the blurry definition of "civilian" in this context, when none of the enemy fighters wear uniforms, and all of them hide behind their families and legitimately civilian neighbors, it looks like extraordinarily accurate targeting by the Israelis. I'd say there's no remotely likely way Hamas or any of their fellow travelers can credibly claim anything other than a crushing defeat here.

As far as controlling demonstrations goes, the Ottomans used an early variant of napalm on demonstrators in Gaza a few hundred years ago. Given the target-rich environments presented by Hamas funeral processions in recent years, one has to credit the Israelis for not following suit.

- Robert Powell

January 21, 2009 at 11:27am

Sleepyawl says: "The other countries nearby the same treatment got by Islamic imperialism - Hungary, Bulgaria, all the former Yugoslav countries, Greece, Austria. All these countries got rid of the Turks only at the price of really bloody independence wars, in which the Islamic Ottoman empire showed hpw far and with how much pleasure it liked to murder. No wonder that the Evil Ottoman Empire ended up in a act of genocide against the Armenians."

I take it , then, that you would disagree with Slavoj Zizek when he observed:

"Regarding Islam, we should look at history. In fact, I think it is very interesting in this regard to look at ex-Yugoslavia. Why was Sarajevo and Bosnia the place of violent conflict? Because it was ethnically the most mixed republic of ex-Yugoslavia. Why? Because it was Muslim-dominated, and historically they were definitely the most tolerant. We Slovenes, on the other hand, and the Croats, both Catholics, threw them out several hundred years ago.

This proves that there is nothing inherently intolerant about Islam. We must rather ask why this terrorist aspect of Islam arises now. The tension between tolerance and fundamentalist violence is within a civilisation."

www.spiked-online.com/.../00000002D2C4.htm

- noga1

January 21, 2009 at 11:38am

"I take it , then, that you would disagree with Slavoj Zizek when he observed"  Noga

With Zizek one must be sure to look at this whole argument and not just one or two comments:

"Disputations: Still The Most Dangerous Philosopher In The West"

by Adam Kirsch

www.tnr.com/.../story.html

- jacksondyer

January 21, 2009 at 11:57am

"Regarding Islam, we should look at history. In fact, I think it is very interesting in this regard to look at ex-Yugoslavia. Why was Sarajevo and Bosnia the place of violent conflict? Because it was ethnically the most mixed republic of ex-Yugoslavia. Why? Because it was Muslim-dominated, and historically they were definitely the most tolerant. We Slovenes, on the other hand, and the Croats, both Catholics, threw them out several hundred years ago.” Zizek

One swallow, does not a summer make, Noga.  While Muslim society was “tolerant” in Bosnia, which like Muslim Spain before it, was a frontier society. Frontier societies tend to be more tolerant than established societies, as sociologist Max Weber had observed.

Look at the US which was for a long time a frontier society and where tolerance was extended towards Jews and others.  Now, tolerance is not the same as acceptance.

If Islam can boast of Bosnia it also has to account for the extreme intolerance of Iranian society (which my have introduced color coded clothing to differentiate Muslims from non Muslims early on) as well as Saudi Arabia which shows no tolerance much less acceptance of non Muslims.

Zizek’s argument is a-historical and self serving.

- jacksondyer

January 21, 2009 at 12:17pm

"As far as controlling demonstrations goes, the Ottomans used an early variant of napalm on demonstrators in Gaza a few hundred years ago. Given the target-rich environments presented by Hamas funeral processions in recent years, one has to credit the Israelis for not following suit."

This is fascinating Robert Powell.

Do you have  book source or a link for this information?

Given that the Turks have been very loud in their condemnation of Israel actions in Gaza this should be broadcasted all over the internet.

- jacksondyer

January 21, 2009 at 12:21pm

Jackson, a few points here.

1. All the data I used and will use are from the Jaarrapport Integratie 2008, published by the Dutch Governmental Statistics Bureau. It is the overview of integration of the previous year. However, it is in Dutch and it is 266 pages long, so I am going to ask you to believe me on this. The link anyway:

www.cbs.nl/.../2008b61pub.pdf

2. Living in The Netherlands, I am quite aware the things happening here around me, mainly because the are HAPPENING AROUND ME. I read papers and I encounter people everyday. The Pillars Are Shaking? Really?? I thought they had fallen down some 30 years ago. Maybe some new pillars I don't know about. It feels strange to hear from someone 4000 miles away, even someone as witty and intelligent as you, what is happening right next door to me. Yes we have had some problems with integration of muslims, just as we have had problems with the integration of Indonesians and the folks from Surinam. Unfortunately, again, it is always the crazy people, like Van Gogh's murderer, who get drawn into the spotlight.

3. There are 800.000 immigrants of Arab descent in the Netherlands, of which the overwhelmingly large part is a practising muslim. Nevertheless, there is only a 15% unemployment rate in the dempgraphic group, meaning that 85% actively participates in society. I am sure the numbers in countries like the UK and Germany are not very different. So you might want to be cautious when you compare these muslims to the ones living in Iran, Pakistan, Thailand, Sudan, or the Ottoman Empire, for that matter.

4. I am a 20 year old college student, born, raised and still living in The Netherlands. I am Caucasian, voted for the right-wing liberals in the previous elections and I am considered to be right-wing by my peers. About a quarter of my friends and half of my soccer squad are Jewish, and I have only a few muslim friends. Yet it has been implied, by Sleepy, that I am anti-semite, and by you, that I approve of muslim violence and disapprove of Israeli violence. I don't know the solution to the Gaza problem. What I do know is that innocent people are dying on both sides. If you believe this is the solution for the Gaza problem, I respect that, I am just not sure that it is. However, if 1300 people have to die in order to save more innocent lives in the future, so be it. But beware, when you, blinded by rage, treat people who disagree with you on this issue bad, for example, call them anti-semites or put words in their mouths they have never used, don't be surprised when suddenly nobody stands next to you anymore.

- yzon

January 21, 2009 at 1:05pm

jacksondyer: My Zizek quote was ironically meant.

I was thinking that if we take into consideration what we know about Islamic regulations concerning minorities, this observation that "historically [Muslim rulers] were definitely the most tolerant" makes some sense.

Minority members knew who they were, and where they stood, in the pecking order grid.  They were legally bound by a set of laws and rules which dictated to them every nuance of their obligations, conduct and rights relative to the Muslim owners of the land. When your own inferiority is inscribed into law, and when you know that any breach of it may entail painful judgments, and maybe death, you are not likely to walk with your head held high when you pass your Muslim neighbour in the street. Nor are you likely to pursue justice in court when your Muslim partner cheated you, since by law, your testimony counted for half the value of your adversary's. When a system is slated against you, legally, you adjust your ways and expectations and forgive a multitude of insults, slurs and crimes committed against you. It is an excellently efficient way to maintain the "tolerance" of a bellicose majority.

Hugh Fitzgerald explains how the kind of tolerance, suggested by the oft repeated Koranic injunction: "There is compulsion in religion" really worked:

"... the observable behavior of Muslims over 1350 years. What have Muslims done, when they have conquered, by force or otherwise, non-Muslim lands and peoples? They offer three possibilities: death, conversion, and, at least to those who can be classified as ahl al-kitab or "people of the book," permanent status as dhimmis, with a host of political, economic, and social disabilities which together added up to lives of humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity, at times relieved -- but only at times -- by the occasional mollitude of a particular Muslim ruler. A slim reed on which to base one's happiness. And so, over time, many non-Muslims, in order to avoid this condition of degradation, humiliation, and physical insecurity, converted to Islam. "

- noga1

January 21, 2009 at 1:12pm

Yzon, let's leave the personal out of this.

As far as I know no one here thinks you are antisemitic, I don't.

If sleepy thinks so he will let you know. He is not shy and neither am I.

- jacksondyer

January 21, 2009 at 2:58pm

Noga1, thanks for the Hugh Fitzgerald quote.

I am glad we agree on Zizek.

- jacksondyer

January 21, 2009 at 3:05pm

As for the other points, we agree to disagree.

- yzon

January 21, 2009 at 3:22pm

I posted this earlier but it didn't show:

How do you explain the following, yzon?

“During an anti-Israel march, Dutch parliament member Harry van Bommel chants “Intifada!” while in the background can be heard another chant: “Hamas, Hamas, Joden aan het gas!” (”Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas!”)”

www.hurryupharry.org/.../amsterdam-january-3-2009

“Socialist Party MP Harry van Bommel says that in the wake of consultations with the Dutch Auschwitz Committee, he has decided not to attend the Auschwitz Remembrance ceremony on 25 January. According to a press release on the Dutch Auschwitz Committee’s website, the organisation convinced the Socialist MP not to attend. Mr Van Bommel was severely criticised by fellow MPs and numerous organisations in the Netherlands last week after he called for a new intifada against Israel during a demonstration. He was also criticised for doing nothing while marching in the midst of a group shouting “Hamas, Hamas, all the Jews to the gas” and other anti-Semitic chants.”

- jacksondyer

January 21, 2009 at 3:48pm

Or this:

"Anti-Semitism and Hypocrisy in Dutch Society"

Manfred Gerstenfeld

www.jcpa.org/.../phas-22.htm

from the article:

"Verbal and violent anti-Semitism in the Netherlands is probably greater today than it has been during any other time in the last two centuries except the Nazi occupation.

Excessive Dutch tolerance has become an incentive for crime. Developments in anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism are a good indicator of what is happening in Dutch society at large.

Due to the relatively high crime rate among the Dutch Moroccan community and international Arab anti-Semitic hate propaganda, Jews are above average targets for their racists' behavior. Easily recognizable Jews often try to hide their identity in public.

There are other reasons why the international image of the Dutch attitude toward the Jews should be corrected. The Dutch government has still not publicly acknowledged the major assistance of the Dutch bureaucracy in the preparatory stages of the murder of Dutch Jews by the Germans during the Holocaust. It also continues to misrepresent the post-war discrimination against the Jews in the Netherlands. "

"Anti-Semitic Songs in the Tramway"

"You have to kill Jews, but it is forbidden." At the beginning of May 2004, I entered Amsterdam tramway no. 24 from the front. In the back were four youngsters between the ages of thirteen and fifteen, chatting in fluent Dutch. They looked Middle Eastern or North African, and were most probably of Moroccan immigrant ancestry. They did not even notice me sit down.

After a few minutes, one of them began to sing. The words of one of the songs was this essay's opening sentence, which rhymes in Dutch. No one reacted in the tram, which runs from an affluent neighborhood in Amsterdam South to the Central Station. The youngster continued to sing other songs. The "kill the Jews" song was apparently part of his repertoire. It was not specifically directed at me; I sat more than ten rows ahead of him and was not wearing a skullcap. If anything, he could only see my back.

When I spoke with some Dutch Jewish friends later, they said that there was nothing exceptional about this occurrence. One replied that in such cases she goes over and asks the singer: "Who taught you that?" She said that she is one of the few Dutch Jews who is so fed up with the Netherlands that she is preparing to leave for Israel. She also mentioned that some of her gentile neighbors say things like, "It is not very nice what you people are doing to the Palestinians," thus holding her, as a Dutch Jew, responsible for Israel's actions. Her ancestors have lived in the Netherlands for centuries....."

read the rest.

www.jcpa.org/.../phas-22.htm

- jacksondyer

January 21, 2009 at 3:51pm

For God's sake Marty, this is your worst yet. These cops look to me like they're doing a pretty good job policing a legal march.  No riot, no disarray, minimal disorder; democracy well served.

Should we shoot them? Okay, let's kill the Palestinainas first, then the sympathisers, then the neutrals. Pretty soon, Marty you'll be a lonely old man.

- kinninmont

January 21, 2009 at 5:25pm

I am always suspicious poster like kinninmont who are "recent arrivals" and start to abuse either the host or other posters.

This is kinninmont's second post here.

Who are you kinninmont?

- jacksondyer

January 21, 2009 at 5:42pm

Too bad you started about cheap shots, Jackson. If you want to rub in my face that integration is not fully operative yet and that there are still nut-jobs in The Netherlands, such as Harry van Bommel, you are absolutely right. Really, normal people have stopped caring about Harry van Bommel a long time ago. Like the Michelle Bachmann of our Parliament. If you came to tell me that The Netherlands are a nation where anti-semitism is frequent, whatever possible obscure relation this may have to integration: I knew that, because, once again, I live here and see these things happening. And no, I don't in any way sympathize with this. Maybe I have, unintentionally, given the impression that Amsterdam is a Walhalla of tolerance, where everybody hold hands and pay with hugs instead of with Euro's. If so, I did not mean to say this, and I sincerely apologize if I have caused any confusion. However, what I do want to make clear is that when I see the discourse of this blog, with its talkbackers, with people like nhrds who call for bloodshed in order to get rid of muslims in Europe, and sleepy, raging about how 19th century muslims are the very same as the ones living in Western Europe nowadays, I think it is better to leave the issues concerning muslims in Europe to the Europeans.

- yzon

January 21, 2009 at 11:14pm

"If you came to tell me that The Netherlands are a nation where anti-semitism is frequent, whatever possible obscure relation this may have to integration: I knew that, because, once again, I live here and see these things happening. And no, I don't in any way sympathize with this."

Two quick points your individual experiences or mine are not the issue.

We are discussing Muslim inspired antisemitism in Holland. If you are going to excuse every incidents by calling its perpetrators nut job then there is no point in continuing our discussion.

" However, what I do want to make clear is that when I see the discourse of this blog, with its talkbackers, with people like nhrds who call for bloodshed in order to get rid of muslims in Europe, and sleepy, raging about how 19th century muslims are the very same as the ones living in Western Europe nowadays, I think it is better to leave the issues concerning muslims in Europe to the Europeans."

Most posters here don't share hrds' views and your bringing him up is  a red herring.

In any case, nothing anyone posts here is as consequential as people in Holland led by a Parliamentarian cry out "gas the Jews."

I don't think you Jewish countrymen consider this a joke.

Finally, what is the good of taking about Muslim integration into Dutch society if they bring with them their homespun Jew hatred. What kind of assimilation is that? Who is really assimilating into which culture?

This is what you need to ask yourself rather than come here trying to convince us what a wonderful liberal country Holland is.

Holland was not very liberal for Jews most of whom were killed during the second world war with the assistance of many Dutch collaborators and it not very liberal for Jews today if they are forced to listen to threats of being sent to the death camps.

Don’t tell me about you, and don’t tell me about  individual nut cases, tell me about why Jews can’t walk around Holland wearing kippas without some Muslim threatening them to kill them or beat them up?

- jacksondyer

January 22, 2009 at 12:04am

Jackson: "This is what you need to ask yourself rather than come here trying to convince us what a wonderful liberal country Holland is."

And again, he creates easy arguments to fight. If you, for once, would read closely, you should notice that I never said that Holland was liberal, nor that it is tolerant, for the simple reason that they aren't. It has been a misconception that Dutchmen are tolerant. Instead, they are just extremely egocentric. They tolerate everything, as long as it does not directly interfere with their personal surroundings. This is the complete opposite of tolerance, it is disengagement. How do you think that so many Jews have been abducted from The Netherlands during WWII? Like the previous article stated, precondidtions for anti-semitism have been present in Dutch society long before muslims arrived. And I agree, if you were Jewish, there would probably be better places to live then Amsterdam-De Baarsjes, or Amsterdam Bijlmer. But then again, I think you also have some corpses buried in your own backyard, I'd be happy to name a few. Nevertheless, if this does not satisfy you in your quest for open doors, I don't know what will.

As for your question

"what is the good of taking about Muslim integration into Dutch society if they bring with them their homespun Jew hatred. What kind of assimilation is that? Who is really assimilating into which culture?"

Unlike you in the US, we are not pre-occupied with the question of Israel. You firmly believe you are right when it comes to Israel. The problem here is, so are the muslims. In a country where you don't have an Arab population of 5%, this may present no problem, but with us, it does. We have decided that we first want the muslims to have a place in society. To have jobs with equal pay, equal opportunities. To have muslim children read Western literature, in combination with the Koran, to gradually teach them about Western values, instead of directly imposing them. Islam is not a very flexible religion, and muslims are not very flexible when it comes to letting go of their cultural values.

Thus, gradually trying to come closer to eachother is believed to be a better way of integrating 800.000 people than to impose all Western values immediately. You may not agree with this, but so far there is no West-European country that has not taken this path. With only 40.000 Jewish people, the Israeli question is not that high up our list of priorities, offensive as this may seem to you.

And finally, yes, of course there are laws that prohibit singing *Hamas, Hamas, alle Joden naar het gas, or something equally awful. Harry van Bommel will be prosecuted. Where we, fortunately, do not have laws against is thinking 'wrong' things, or having 'wrong' cultural upbringings.

*If you are interested in the chant 'Hamas...gas', it is interesting to note that this chant is, strangely enough, by origin NOT a song against the Jewish people. As weird as this may seem, it stems from soccer. Amsterdam's soccer team Ajax, has always had many Jewish players, fans and employees. For this reason, they fans have named themselves Joden (Jews). Being the most successful club in Dutch soccer history, and being from the capitol, Ajax have many rivalries, the most extreme of which is with Rotterdam's Feyenoord. The very small groups of extreme fans of both clubs have, over the years, developed awfully insulting and sick songs, such as: And In The Spring We'll Throw Bombs On Rotterdam (referring to the German bombing of Rotterdam in 1940), and Hamas, Hamas alle Joden naar het gas. It is up for discussion if this has contributed to anti-semite feelings.

- yzon

January 22, 2009 at 2:15pm

"But then again, I think you also have some corpses buried in your own backyard, I'd be happy to name a few. Nevertheless, if this does not satisfy you in your quest for open doors, I don't know what will."

This is beneath you, yzon.

What are you talking about? Go ahead name the corpses in "my own back yard."

I am very well aware of antisemitic chants in Dutch soccer games. I don't know this excuses anything.

"Thus, gradually trying to come closer to each other is believed to be a better way of integrating 800.000 people than to impose all Western values immediately. You may not agree with this, but so far there is no West-European country that has not taken this path. With only 40.000 Jewish people, the Israeli question is not that high up our list of priorities, offensive as this may seem to you."

We weren't talking about Israel but about antisemitism.

As you said above, the presence of almost a million Arabs in Holland changes everything. You are being very honest here.  

You will have to live with them, not me.

For me it is enough to know the Holland has joined the orbit of Islamic influenced countries. I expect that within a few generations Holland will no longer be a country with Western values.  

Not my problem, yzon. You have made your bed, now lie in it.  I feel sorry, though,  for those Dutch people who hate the idea of living in a Shariah influenced environment. I suspect that many of them will leave Holland for other more open societies.

As for the remaining Jews I suspect that they will be among the first to leave.

- jacksondyer

January 22, 2009 at 3:35pm

Jackson: The Adam Kirsch piece on Slavoz Zizek (pronounced Slavoy Zheezhek) was a demolition job. Zizek's rejoinder was pathetic and Kirsch disposed of him nicely in his reply. I have tried reading this mad Slovenian but he is unreadable.

- liberal reformer

January 22, 2009 at 3:48pm

Jacksondyer: I too am worried about the rise of Islamism in Europe. A tolerance that tolerates intolerance is an absurdity. The support that the Archbishop of Canterbury tenders to those British Muslims who wish to institute sharia for those of their confession is a travesty.

- liberal reformer

January 22, 2009 at 3:52pm

liberal reformer said:

"Jacksondyer: I too am worried about the rise of Islamism in Europe. A tolerance that tolerates intolerance is an absurdity. The support that the Archbishop of Canterbury tenders to those British Muslims who wish to institute sharia for those of their confession is a travesty."

Oh absolutely, but I wonder if it's too late for Europe?

They seem to have a choice between accommodation and collaboration with Islaimicism or an ultra right wing backlash which also not a good thing.

Notice that yzon  claims to be a conservative. God (that's with a small g)  help the Dutch, I am afraid the land of Rembrandts and Vermeer is about to be overrun.

- jacksondyer

January 22, 2009 at 5:08pm

I haven't followed yzon's posts enough to judge whether his (her?) ideological self-identification is supportable but there are anti-Semites on the right in Europe, of course, and some British Tories are quite anti-Israeli.

- liberal reformer

January 22, 2009 at 7:06pm

Ho, ho, wait here..

Jackson, I am not a conservative, I merely voted for the conservative liberals (VVD), because they are liberal., not because they are conservative. If I were a conservative, I would have voted for the Christan Democrats (CDA), the real conservative party in Holland. Furthermore, if elections were held right now, I would vote for the progressive liberals (D66). Nevertheless, being liberal is considered to be right-wing in Holland. This just so you can put my postings in a context.

Lib Ref: Don't bother to follow my posts, they are as irregular as they are scarce. However, in Holland there is almost no right-wing anti-semitism, it all comes from the left, like stated in the article posted by Jackson. The only right-wing anti-semites are neo-nazi's, who, ironically enough, vote for the same party as the majority of the Jewish population, namely Wilders' Freedom Party.

We should do this again sometime.

Thomas

- yzon

January 23, 2009 at 12:46pm

"Thus, gradually trying to come closer to each other is believed to be a better way of integrating 800.000 people than to impose all Western values immediately."

This reminds me of the famous  Ramadan - Sarkozy televised debate, in which Ramadan suggested a ten-year moratorium on the stoning of adulterous women by way of easing European Muslims into Western values culture without causing them too much trauma.

- noga1

January 23, 2009 at 3:25pm

...This reminds me of the famous  Ramadan - Sarkozy televised debate, in which Ramadan suggested a ten-year moratorium on the stoning of adulterous women by way of easing European Muslims into Western values culture without causing them too much trauma...

I saw that, incroyable, simply incroyable. Where in this vale of tears is there some sanity to be found?

- basman

January 23, 2009 at 4:46pm

yzon, I take back the rudeness, but not the substance. And I realize that you haven't answered anything about the 400+ hundred years enslavement of Eastern Europe by Islam because you don't know a thing about it. That is not bad. What IS bad is that you cannot learn. Ignorance has no excuse.

noga1: I understood your Slavoj Zizek quote ironically indeed. The man is a Communist party activist and nothing more. In high school I've had a bastard like this as a teacher. He had been sent to indoctrinate the math and physics kids  as we were. The fucking Party (Communist, what else? may those fucking anti-Semites rot in hell with their Nazi brothers) was sending this obtuse and authoritarian recently-urbanized peasant to teach us the ways of the world, which path integration wasn't apparently not good at. Slavoj Zizek is very similar to that charlatan. If that bastard traveled abroad after 1990, he probably is now like Zizek, though obviously not as well-known as the con-man maestro from Slovenia.

- sleepyavl

January 23, 2009 at 9:12pm

sleepy, rudeness forgiven.

I am aware of the unspeakable deeds of Islam to Eastern Europe. I have not experienced myself, but a few of my study-mates are from Eastern Europe, and they have brought it up often enough for me to know. These acts are unforgivable, and I know what Islam is capable of, as it is shown on a daily basis in countries like Pakistan, Sudan and Indonesia. We all agree on that.

Where we disagree, concerns enlightened muslims. The largest part of Muslims in Holland (and the rest of Western Europe, I am sure) are enlightened. They accept basic Western values, such as shaking hands with women instead of stoning them publicly when they commit adultery. I believe they are significantly different than the Ottomans, and that they will sufficiently integrate into the Dutch society over time. With such a large group of enlightened muslims, I find it hard to believe that we Dutch will all live under Islam someday. Perhaps this is naive, but I am rather accused of naivité than negativism or cynicism.

Finally, if I have in any way insulted you with my first comment, I apologize because this was not my intention. When I find somebody as ignorant as nhrds, I am tempted to say stupid things.

- yzon

January 24, 2009 at 1:17pm