Posted on 09/11/2011 11:45:42 PM PDT by Eleutheria5
British police allowed about a hundred jihadists chanting offensive slogans to march through central London Sunday and burn a US flag during the memorial events for the 9/11 massacres ten years ago.
At the same time, a group organized by the nationalist English Defense League that gathered to lay wreaths at the U.S. Embassy in London was told to move away in order to avert a possible clash between the groups. Police used force against the EDL group. The jihadis chanted "USA – terror state!", "Burn, burn, USA!" and "Muslims rise up!" as a US flag was burned. One of the protesters spoke into the megaphone and said: "We can tell you that you will never win the war because Islam is [unclear] in Europe and America, and we are winning the war ideologically, militarily, economically!"
Other speakers insisted that the West's war on terror is a war against Islam, and said that the Western soldiers who died fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq "died for nothing." As he was being led away from the US embassy, a leader of the EDL wreath-laying event told policemen: "You have just facilitated the complete humiliation of our whole country."
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
Am glad the 2nd Amendment attack failed by holder and zer0 and Gunwalker is being delivered to its rightful owners.
The Irgun tortured and hung two British soldiers (Sgts Martin and Paice), then bobbytrapped their bodies in order to kill more soldiers. Justify that one.
The Irgun carried out the King David bombing which killed civilian Jews, Arabs and British. Justify that one.
(a bombing that Israelis CELEBRATED in 2006:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing#60th_anniversary_controversy )
The Irgun bombed the British Embassy in Rome, which injured civilian Italians and British. Justify that one.
Yes, the Irgun were terrorists. And I find your justification of them sickening. It would be ironically be more honest if you did admit they were, yet supported what they did.
There is no way, even if you can morally argue for the raids against British military targets (and that itself is another issue where your history is not black and white), that you can justify what was done to the two unarmed and held British sargeants OR the King David bombing OR the Rome bombing.
What you may see as antisemitism will be seen by myself and other people as simply pro-Arabism as opposed to a definate antisemitism.
Even if we agree that the British ‘establishment’ was so, my point still remains, which is that the British public never has been and is not anti-semitic. Yes, we have the extreme neo-nazis, but they are a tiny minority. And not all anti-Israeli leftists are ipso facto anti-semitic. Again, active pro-palestinians/anti-zionists are a minority, its a major issue most British people keep opinions to themselves on rather than be active, and many Britons simply dont care, having become bored with the Israeli-Palestinian issue over many years.
The British public has rejected antisemitic/fascist groups, from Mosley and his BUF Blackshirts in the 30’s to the NF/BNP/EDL groups of recent years and today.
And many of our most iconic and beloved actors, writers and businesses/high streets stores are Jewish. And is their a more powerful British family over the last 150 years than the Rothschilds?.
And as for the ‘establishment’, Jews in fact have attained every high office in Britain, and have had just as much if not more success in their country than Jewish-Americans.
We were voting in a Jewish Prime Minister when America was debating Dred Scott.
Honestly and sincerely, I’ve never claimed that Britons were generally anti-Semitic. Wouldn’t know. Wouldn’t care. Probably not. Unless I’m in the London tubes getting beat on by boot boys and nobody lifts a finger, it wouldn’t occur to me to ponder the question.
My understanding of history, however, is that the Cairo-Khartoum cabal used anti-Semitism to incite Arabs into uniting against Jews. That’s why they were so keen to set up Haj Amin elHusseini, a 21-year-old Turkish WW I veteran, as Mufti, so he’d stir up Jew hatred among the masses.
Since Lord Samuels, the civilian governor appointed after the 1921 pogrom, was Jewish himself, he was probably not anti-Semitic (I believe Theodore Hertzel was), just trying to prove himself worthy of the “Lord” at the beginning of his name by being a bloody-minded bastard and getting in on the Cairo-Khartoum cabal.
I would, however, have thought better of them if they had been anti-Semitic, because then at least they’d have been acting out of personal conviction, instead of cynical opportunism.
From the point of view of many in the ME, it isn’t about “anti-semitism”. Since most “Arabs”, racially, also, are semitic, similar to the Jews (in the ME).
Anti-semitism is a “western” created & coined term. Those in the ME object to the state of Israel - hence, they’re “anti-zionists”, not necessarily anti-semitic.
Many, particularly in the ME, view the creation of the current State of Israel a direct result of WWII & the Nazi Germany. — They suggest that it was the *European Jews* who created the state of Israel (Zionism) after WWII, and immigrated to Israel (the current country), taking over “Palestine” & thereafter throwing out the Palestinians.
The fact that Mohammad had his own pathology about the Jews is a separate yet complementary argument to the creation of “Zionism” (State of Israel).
Additionally & historically, Europe (incl. Russia) has not been “Jew friendly”. — Though, many Jewish tribes (in the ME), prior to, during & even after Mohammad (advent of Islam) lived rather peacefully w/ other “semitic” tribes.
Of course, Mohammad & his disciples killed a whole lot of Jews. But, they did the same to Many other “infidels”.
Bottom line: I guess many in the West & the ME recognize that the Palestine/Israel situation is & has been a political matter, rather than, primarily, a racial or faith-based one.
Many is an unquantified quantity. Jew-hatred is more accurate than anti-Semitism in this context. Our supposedly peaceful coexistence with Arabs is greatly overrated, and those that believe that the Jewish state was an European Jewish invasion are studiously ignoring the millions of Yemenite, Moroccan, Iraqi, Iranian, Tunisian, etc., Jews who migrated to Israel both before and after 1948.
I don’t have an “actual” no. for “many” in the context of my previous post to you. But, I wouldn’t disagree that, overall, “Jew-hatred” is probably an accurate term than anti-Semitism; particularly in Europe.
Also, personally, I don’t know about those non-Iranians you mention. I don’t have actual #s for those Jews who have immigrated to Israel from Iran since 1948, either. But, those who did immigrate to Israel did so, I presume, because Israel, primarily, allowed “Jews” to immigrate to Israel - Not Iranians (as in nationality)? To my knowledge that is still the case.
Also, I personally know at least 10 different Jewish-Iranian families, since my childhood in Iran. 3 of them actually were our neighbours in Iran. All 10 families now live in the US. No Iranian-Jew I went to school with in Iran back in the 1970s spoke Hebrew - they spoke Farsi (Persian). Their parents, the ones my family knew & still know, considered themselves Jewish, but Iranian - not Israeli. That’s not to debate Israel as a nation state.
Anyway, the above is only giving you my experience with Iranian-Jews. Of course, most Iranian-Jews since the Mullahs’ regime (1979) have chosen to leave Iran. Just as many Zoroastrian, Moslem & Christian & Baha’i Iranians have done, for obvious reasons.
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.