Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 11/25/2025 7:22:46 AM PST by Miami Rebel
Germany’s antisemitism czar has urged a law to ban pro-Palestinian slogans such as “From the river to the sea,” renewing a fraught debate over the country’s historic allegiance to Israel and freedom of speech.
Felix Klein’s initiative would ban chants that could be interpreted as calling for Israel’s destruction. His proposal has the support of German Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt and is now being reviewed by the Justice Ministry, he told Haaretz on Wednesday.
“Before Oct. 7, you could have said that ‘From the river to the sea’ doesn’t necessarily mean kicking Israelis off the land, and I could accept that,” said Klein. “But since then, Israel has really been facing existential threats, and unfortunately, it has become necessary here to limit freedom of speech in this regard.”
Klein, the first holder of an office titled “Federal Government Commissioner for Jewish Life in Germany and the Fight against Antisemitism” since 2018, added that he believed the law must be passed even if it is challenged in court for violating free speech.
Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks and the subsequent and devastating Israel-Hamas war in Gaza tore at the seams of Germany’s national doctrines. The war triggered a sharp rise in antisemitic and Isalmophobic incidents across the country. It also exposed charged questions about when Germany prioritizes its responsibility toward the Jewish state, which became central to German national identity after the Holocaust, and when it upholds democratic principles.
The legal boundaries of pro-Palestinian speech are already far from clear-cut. Currently, courts decide whether a person chanted “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” in support of peacefully liberating Palestinians or in endorsement of terrorism. In August 2024, the German-Iranian activist Ava Moayeri was convicted of condoning a crime for leading the chant at a Berlin rally on Oct. 11, 2023.
Shortly after the Hamas attacks, local authorities across Germany imposed sweeping bans on pro-Palestinian protests. Berlin officials authorized schools to ban the keffiyeh, a symbol of Palestinian solidarity, along with slogans such as “Free Palestine.”
Jewish and Israeli activists were caught up in the crackdown. In October 2023, a woman was arrested after holding a poster that said, “As a Jew and Israeli: Stop the genocide in Gaza.” And police prohibited a demonstration by a group calling themselves “Jewish Berliners against Violence in the Middle East,” citing the risk of unrest and “inflammatory, antisemitic exclamations.”
Earlier this year, German immigration authorities ordered the deportation of three European nationals and one U.S. citizen over their alleged activity at pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Three of the orders cited Germany’s “Staatsräson,” or “reason of state,” a doctrine enshrining Germany’s defense of Israel as justification for its own existence after the Holocaust.
But that tenet is not used in legal settings, according to Alexander Gorski, who represents the demonstrators threatened with deportation. “Staatsräson is not a legal concept,” Gorski told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency in April. “It’s completely irrelevant. It’s not in the German Basic Law, it’s not in the constitution.”
Jewish leaders such as Charlotte Knobloch, a Holocaust survivor and president of the Jewish Community of Munich and Upper Bavaria, have argued that anger toward Israel created a “pretext” for antisemitism. “It is sufficient cause in itself to fuel the hatred,” Knobloch said to Deutsche Welle in September.
In recent months, two German establishments made the news for refusing entry to Jews and Israelis. A shop in Flensburg, which posted a sign saying “Jews are banned here,” is vulnerable to German anti-discrimination law. Not so for the restaurant in Fürth whose sign read, “We no longer accept Israelis in our establishment,” according to anti-discrimination commissioner Ferda Ataman, who said the law does not apply to discrimination on the basis of nationality.
Klein said he has also initiated legislation to expand that law to protect Israelis and other nationalities.
He has a longstanding relationship with Jewish communities in Germany, starting with his Foreign Office appointment as the special liaison to global Jewish organizations. In that role, he helped create a “working definition” of antisemitism for the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance in 2016. That definition has sparked contentious debate, as critics argue it conflates some criticisms of Israel with antisemitism.
Klein believes that anti-Zionism does largely fall in the same bucket as antisemitism. “I think in most cases it is — it’s just a disguised form of antisemitism,” he told Haaretz. “When people say they’re anti-Israel, what they really mean is Jews.”
Share this:
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
“When people say they’re anti-Israel, what they really mean is Jews.”
Thank you Captain Obvious.
You shouldn’t restrict people’s free speech even if you disagree with it but also you should import Muslims into your White country.
Germany is forever cursed. The decadence is manifested in many different ways. Within one hundred years, the German people will be a fossilized remnant.
Well at least Hitler will get his wish that Germany embraced Islam.
We have this in the US——it’s called the foreign aid avalanche of US tax dollars to Israel.
This includes coordinating a joint federal and state commission, serving as a liaison for Jewish communities, and implementing strategies to combat antisemitism in areas like law, education, and civic life.
The commissioner coordinates measures to promote Jewish life and combat antisemitism at the inter-ministerial level. Key duties include: Coordinating a permanent joint commission of the federal and state governments to combat antisemitism and protect Jewish life. Acting as a contact person for Jewish organizations and civil society groups. Developing and implementing strategies, such as the National Strategy Against Antisemitism and for Jewish Life. Supporting public information campaigns and civic education initiatives.
Correct—the folks worried about anti-semitism failed to notice the elephant in the room.
Muslim immigration.
Were they just stupid as rocks?
People should be free to say that phrase.
People should also be free to fight its intention.
Stop importing these as-hats.
Both sides have been saying and praying for thousands of years for this. Germany is a failed state. Good luck chancellor.
Not in Germany. There's certain restrictions that rightfully come with starting a world war that killed 50 million. Should they also be "free" to wave swastikas?
I think that that is a ludicrous statement, but to each his own.
If you’re genuinely interested in Germany, I recommend the History of the Germans podcast.
“You shouldn’t restrict people’s free speech even if you disagree with it but also you should import Muslims into your White country.”
Think you missed a “not” in your second clause, but I know what you meant.
A similar quandary exists with Islam and freedom of religion. I am very much for freedom of religion, except that Islam has proven itself incompatible with Western Civilization.
And for clarity, Islam is not a “relgion” as defined by the SCOTUS in United States v. Ballard or Torcaso v. Watkins.
Religion, as defined legally, emphasize sincere beliefs about ultimate concerns or a higher power, but excludes systems that are predominantly secular, political, or aimed at subverting civil authority.
Islam’s core tenets integrate religious doctrine with mandatory political, legal, social, and military obligations that demand the establishment of a global caliphate—a theocratic state where non-Muslims are subjugated or eliminated. This makes Islam akin to a geopolitical movement bent on conquest and imposition of supremacy, not a protected faith.
Unlike Christianity or Judaism, which are seen as adaptable to separation of church and state, Islam is inherently incompatible with the U.S. Constitution because it views itself as the supreme law, regulating all aspects of life and rejecting secular authority.
This renders it a “dangerous political ideology” masquerading as religion, similar to how courts have denied protections to groups like the KKK when their activities cross into sedition or violence.
Legally, if Islam is reclassified as non-religious, it loses safeguards under the Free Exercise Clause, Establishment Clause, Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), and Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). Government could then ban mosques, restrict Muslim immigration, or prohibit Sharia-influenced practices without constitutional violation.
I go back and forth on this topic all the time: are the people in charge evil or stupid ?
I really can’t decide
No thanks. When Germany actually allows Germans to defend themselves and speak their mind on the ivasion instead of being preyed upon I’ll listen again.
Not ludicrous at all. Germany is being pounded with weak leadership just like America.
100% correct. Angela Merkel mass imported anti-Semitism into Central Europe. She did, to some extent, at the behest of Barack Obama.
The German hero worship of Obama has to be one of the creepiest and most despicable things I've ever seen.
Agreed.
I think different individuals are different on this.
Most are properly ignorant dupes.
That is part of the confusion.
Germans never get it. Well, Europe doesn’t either. You want antisemites to identify themselves. Makes targeting easier. Censoring them helps them hide.
Church of the American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan (2001, Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
The group sought First Amendment religious protections for wearing masks during public demonstrations, claiming it as a “sacrament” of their white supremacist beliefs. The court denied this, ruling that the KKK’s ideology was a “political organization” rather than a protected religion, and its activities (intimidation and subversion of racial equality laws) posed a direct threat to public safety and civil order. The mask ban was upheld as a neutral law serving compelling state interests, overriding any purported religious exercise.
Nation of Yahweh (1980s–1990s, Florida federal courts)
This black supremacist group, led by Yahweh ben Yahweh, claimed religious status for ritualistic violence, including murders framed as “sacrifices” against “white devils.” Prosecutors and courts rejected First Amendment defenses, deeming the group’s tenets a “political and racial ideology” disguised as religion, aimed at subverting civil authority through terrorism and racial warfare. Members were convicted of racketeering and murder without religious exemptions, as the practices were seen as criminal rather than sincere faith-based.
Phineas Priesthood-inspired Militias (e.g., The Order, 1980s, federal courts) White supremacist groups like The Order invoked “Christian Identity” as a religion to justify bank robberies, assassinations, and plans to overthrow the government as “biblical warfare.” Courts denied religious protections, classifying it as a “seditious political conspiracy” rather than protected belief.
In United States v. Bauer (1985), the group’s actions were ruled subversive of federal authority, with no Free Exercise Clause shield, emphasizing that violent political aims negate religious status.
Aum Shinrikyo (1990s, U.S. immigration and counterterrorism proceedings) After the 1995 Tokyo sarin attack, U.S. authorities denied visa and asylum claims for members, rejecting the group’s syncretic “religion” (blending Buddhism, Christianity, and apocalyptic ideology) as a “political cult” aimed at global subversion through bioterrorism. In deportation cases like Matter of Aum Shinrikyo (BIA decisions), it was deemed secular/political in nature, with no First Amendment protections for entry or activities, prioritizing national security.
Scientology in Tax Exemption Contexts (e.g., Founding Church of Scientology v. United States, 1971, D.C. Circuit)
While ultimately granted some religious status, early IRS denials (1950s–1960s) treated Scientology as a “secular for-profit therapy scheme” rather than a religion, revoking tax-exempt status due to its commercial practices and perceived lack of sincere spiritual beliefs. Courts upheld initial denials, noting elements of “political control and financial exploitation” over faith, though later settlements reversed this for the main church.
The idea of free speech is tricky.
It is one thing to say, “People should be able to to own a gun and keep it by their bedside table.”
It is completely another thing if the people in question are schizophrenics in a mental hospital.
If we actually had a “nation”...
Nation (noun) :A body of people united by common descent, history, culture, religion or language, inhabiting a particular area or territory.
....then free speech would be of the utmost importance. Since we have forfeited our right to have a nation then our right to free speech is worthless anyway.
Not in Germany. There's certain restrictions that rightfully come with starting a world war that killed 50 million.
No, there are no such restrictions.
Are there restrictions for other nations that have started wars? Are there restrictions for nations that have practiced slavery, colonialism, Jim Crow?
Do you really want to punish all nations for past sins, or only Germany?
Should they also be "free" to wave swastikas?
Yes.
You either believe in free speech, or you don't.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.