Sunday, 29 December 2013

Many Europeans in the Counterjihad movement have their view of what is happening to us still shaped by the Bat Ye'or's book Eurabia, tracing a supposed conspiracy between EU officials and Arab states to islamise and Arabise Europe. She has also written other books about the more ancient past. Realistically, most people won't be able to devote this time and effort required to properly evaluate books like these. It's important to know from the outset, therefore, whether an author is reliable or not.

So let's examine a recent screed ("The Nazi Inheritance" or "Inherited Nazism") Ye'or published on the website
The European Union is moribund.

It faces the absolute detestation of the European peoples, who blame it for all the ills that are currently overwhelming them: subversion of their values and culture by a nihilist multiculturalism, destruction of national identity, planned suppression of history, impregnation of Europe by a Palestiniast ideology that combines jihadism, antisemitism and rejection of the non-Muslim, dissolution of social homogeneity by an open-doors immigration that imposes its own requirements, economic chaos.

The EU, however, continues to rage, like Hitler in his bunker, against its primordial victim: Israel. 40 years ago, and most explicitly in its Declaration of Venice in June 1980, it invented "the Palestinian people" on the demand of the Secretary General of the Arab League, Chedli Klibi in his press conference in Paris on 6 December 1979.

The first paragraph is promising enough, but then the text, like her book, lapses into a borderline-psychotic anti-European hatefest, in which she accuses Europeans of wishing to "complete the Shoah" by putting diplomatic pressure on Israel. By claiming EU officials do not represent the peoples of Europe on this issue, she limits her hatred to them rather than ordinary Europeans, a bit like the unconvincing distinction we sometimes hear made between Zionists and Jews. In fact, this is one issue where EU officials probably do represent the will of the people. Most Europeans do sympathise with the "Palestinians". I don't share their sentiment myself, but I don't deny that it exists. I think it arises largely from historical ignorance and a natural human tendency to sympathise with whoever appears to be the underdog.

Ye'or here claims that the EU invented the "Palestinian people" 40 years ago, which would be 1973, but she then specifies the years 1980 and 1979 when this was supposedly done.

To evaluate this claim, I went to a newspaper archive and did a search on "Palestinian people".

In the Times newspaper, on September 26, 1969, I found the following article, titled "Islamic states urge Israeli withdrawal":
After three days of debates marred by a serious incident between Pakistan and India, the Islamic conference decided today that all Muslim states would help the Palestinian people to recover their "stolen rights".

On March 16, 1973, there is an article titled "China pledges support for Palestinians":
Dr Zayyat, the Egyptian Foreign Minister, today wound up a four-day visit to Peking during which China renewed pledges of strong support for the Arabs in their conflict with Israel.

There are many other similar articles.

Resolution 3236 of the UN General Assembly, dated 22 November 1974, also mentions the "Palestinian people".

So the claim that the EC invented the "Palestinian people", whether in 1979, 1980, or 1973, is simply false as a matter of historical fact.

Enveloping itself in the rhetoric of Virtue, Peace, Truth and Justice, the European Community led by France and Germany, resorted to this expedient to mitigate the peace accords between Egypt and Israel (March 1979) which it fought tooth and nail in order to save its Arab policy.

The effort wasted, the Arab world, sickened by the incapacity of its European peon to have the peace talks cancelled, hounded Egypt from the Arab League and interrupted the profitable relationships of the Euro-Arab league. Snubbed and humiliated by its Arab allies, the EC moved reluctantly towards recognition of this peace which it accepted against its will but avenged itself with the Declaration of Venice a few months later.

Here, citing no evidence at all, Ye'or claims that the EC opposed the Camp David peace accords and had fought tooth and nail against them.

Again, I visited newspaper archives to evaluate this claim. On Sept. 3, 1978, I found, in the Times, an article titled "Germans impress on their Syrian guest that Europe welcomes the Camp David peace initiative":
Dr Helmut Kohl, the west German opposition leader, has begged President Assad of Syria to use his influence to stop the shooting of Christians by the Arab peace-keeping force in Lebanon. The force is composed largely of Syrian troops.

Dr. Kohl's request was made during a talk with President Assad here yesterday evening. It was accompanied by appeals in the conservative newspaper Bild and from other Christian Democrats to end what one called "the cruel persecution of our Christian brothers" and the partly deliberate destruction of their homes and villages.


Although little has been disclosed of their discussions, government leaders are also thought to have raised the issue with President Assad on the second day of his five-day state visit. It is understood that he was told they were concerned about the whole situation in Lebanon.

The Government has seized the opportunity to explain why it and the whole European Community, of which West Germany currently has the presidency, welcome the Camp David talks which President Assad has so bitterly criticized.

It is clear that West German and Syrian positions are poles apart, so much so that President Scheel who had welcomed President Assad at a state banquet last night, ignored protocol and rose again after his guest's reply to emphasize that he did not agree with all the points President Assad had made.

The Syrian leader had described Egypt's peace initiative as an "isolated action" whose "regrettable results are taking place under our eyes."

So, yet again, the claim Ye'or makes is shown to be completely false as a matter of historical fact. The EC welcomed the Camp David peace initiative and tried to persuade Arab countries to participate in it and to facilitate it.

For reasons of time, I'm not going to translate Ye'or's whole article, debunking it bit by bit. Suffice to say that it is a hysterical, unfactual rant filled with Nazi metaphors, a few examples of which are quoted below just to give you the flavour:

To complete the Shoah, it was enough to reduce the Jewish state to dimensions that were tiny and indefensible...

But a detail comes to mind: is the EU going to provide the trains or lorries to deport hundreds of thousands of Israelis, the majority of them refugees from Europe and the Arab countries? Is it going to supply the same transports for animals and merchandise that were used for the same thing in 1940? Nostalgic for the good old days when the Jews were being deported, their homes, apartments and goods pillaged from Europe to Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Morocco, Tunisia, Libya? Who will come to choose what? Who will decide between the looters? The UNRWA or Javier Solana who goes so far in his admiration of Arafat as to resemble him physically? Miguel Moratinos who begged the Arab delegates at the Euro-Arab meetings to give him the time to persuade Israel to perpetrate its own suicide? Who will be the commissioners responsible for making sure the deportation takes place properly, Védrine? Claire Short? Ashton?

Ye'or concludes with false claims about the recent Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe proposal on the genital mutilation of children.
The old hatreds of the years 1933-50 are unfolding in a Europe which is blinded and at the edge of the abyss. But it clings to a lifebuouy to create discord and diversion in its macabre ritual: the prohibition of Jewish circumcision, but not the circumcision prescribed by Islam.

First, as the article I quoted yesterday made clear, there was, regrettably, no proposal that circumcision should be banned. Second, there was no suggestion that Muslim circumcision should be permitted while Jewish circumcision was not. Yet again, these claims are utterly without foundation.

Why does this matter? Because Ye'or's book Eurabia has set the tone for much of the European wing of the Counterjihad movement. Fjordman, for example, has cited it approvingly. It shapes the worldview of many of those involved in resisting the advance of Islam. But as this article makes clear, Ye'or is a deeply unreliable guide to either historical or present-day events. Animated by an almost deranged zeal, she seems to feel entitled to conjure up "facts" that exist only in her imagination. Knowing that almost none of her readers will go and do the counter-research required to evaluate her claims, she can rely on their naivety, ignorance and blind trust in her good faith to have her preposterous conspiratorial screeds accepted as authentic accounts of history. It is interesting that Ye'or is the one responsible for popularising the term "dhimmi". I haven't read her books about more distant history yet, but I can't help wondering how reliable those are given that everything I have read of hers that I am capable of evaluating has failed the test.

It is clear that she is motivated by a deep-seated and only thinly disguised hatred for Europeans, as well as a passionate attachment to her own people and their own ancestral homeland. It does strike me as rather curious that her hatred for Europe and her attachment to Israel does not apparently extend as far as wishing to leave one and go and live in the other, but I suppose that's of secondary importance. What matters most of all is that the Europeans who have been duped into accepted Ye'or's warped worldview, and its emanations throughout the Counterjihad movement, wake up and realise that they have been suckered. The Ye'or interpretation of history is just another paranoid Jewish conspiracy theory that, like Marx's, indirectly, and probably subconsciously, expresses Jewish contempt for Europeans by attributing base and hateful motivations to them. It is essential that we Europeans detach ourselves mentally from the false constructs propagated by the Jewish-dominated part of the Counterjihad movement (almost all of it) and develop an authentically European opposition to Islam instead, grounded in our own interests and worldview.


Anonymous said...

Interesting that a possibly senile, possibly anti-European person would not hesitate to choose Europeans over Muslims after having a modicum of direct experience. I agree that that reluctant "lesser of two evils" attitude does not belong in the movement to preserve Europe.

Anonymous said...

Historical fact

Souhaila Andrawes was given the task to "make the Palestinian voice heard all over the world", according to herself in this interview with Der Spiegel who talks to her after German police had located her in Oslo.

"Es begann damit, daß ich eines Tages nach Bagdad zu Wadi Haddad gerufen wurde. Es war eine große Ehre für mich, mit ihm an einem Tisch zu sitzen. Er war für uns Palästinenser eine Legende. Er sagte: "Souhaila, vergiß deine christliche Nächstenliebe. Du mußt jetzt ein hartes Mädchen spielen und dieses Gefühl von Härte auch in deinen Augen ausdrücken, denn die sind zu sanft. Ich weiß, daß du niemandem etwas zuleide tun kannst. Wir werden auch niemandem etwas antun. Aber man soll unsere Stimme überall in der Welt hören."

Andrawes was interviewed as the only surviving hijacker after the Lufthansa flight to Mogadishu in 1977.

The captain had big green eyes, she recalls, as she points out that she tried to prevent her fellow hijackers from shooting him.

"Er hatte große grüne Augen."


As I understand, Bat Ye'or, she talks about the Brotherhood's overall intentions of infiltrating Europe, and the West, in every way possible using "Palestine" as the spearhead.

Backing up this, is "The Project", about which the Swiss journalist Sylvain Besson has written, and where the Brotherhood explains more in detail how they are planning to infiltrate The West on their way to the ultimate goal, the caliphate.

Bat Ye'or is drawing attention to the way infiltration has succeeded in that the European institutions themselves - with the help of the invisible, infiltrating, hand of the Brotherhood - are making the Palestine cause, Europe's cause, and by this, enforcing islam in Europe.

Anonymous said...

Souhaila Andrawes says to Der Spiegel, that she wanted to show that she was willing to die for the Palestinian cause, when asked why she gave the victory sign after the Germans had stormed the plane.

She explains that a Somali had told her that one of the Germans who stormed the plane, seemed ready to shoot her as he could see that she was still alive.

"Ich wollte zeigen, daß ich bereit war, für die Sache Palästinas zu sterben."

Anonymous said...

Infiltrating education system

In one video interview Bat Ye'or talks about how in the 70s the mohammedans were going to infiltrate European shools and universities, as only one way of infiltrating. This corelates absolutely with the Brotherhood's "Project" of 1982, which additionally, is said to have striking resemblance with Qaradawi's book "Priorities of the Islamic Movement in the Coming Phase" (1990).

In 1990, they also produced the Sharia Rights Cairo Declaration, which, on purpose, in good islamic tradition, is a bad copy of The Universal Human Rights.

According to this 1990 Cairo Sharia Rights, one of the sharia rights is any muslim's the right to "seek asylum" anywhere. Knowing the idea of islam and its caliphate, it is easy to understand why it is a muslim's right to settle down in any which country of his wish.

All over Europe we can see with our own eyes that this Cairo Declaration is being followed to the point.

By using "the Palestinian cause" as its spearhead, it is all building up to a point where Europeans are going to have to cooperate against Israel, and then, according to their plan, they - the mohammedans - will win over their enemy numero uno.

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

And that's what matters, right? The fact that the greatest civilisation the world has ever known, comprising 500 million people, is extinguished is just a stepping stone on the way to what really matters, destroying a small country of 5 million people. It's a good illustration of the almost pathological moral myopia Jews typically display, as well as their tendency to construct fantastically paranoid conspiracy theories, much like their fellow Semites, the Arabs. We Europeans need to be wary of this nonsense and start seeing things from our own perspective instead.

There is no question that Muslims, individually and through organisations, are trying to islamise the world. Unfortunately, that fact alone doesn't back up the many preposterous and demonstrably false claims Ye'or makes in her books and articles.

Anonymous said...

Europe for Europeans! The vast majority of Jews have shown themselves to be treacherous in their support of multiculturalism and laws against free speech. Jews go to Israel. Muslims go to Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Morocco or any Islamic country of your choice. Both must go. Europe for Europeans!

Anonymous said...

Daniel Bar-Tal is known at TAU for his anti-Israel/anti-Jew stance. Among many things, he asserts that Jews were wholly responsible for the 1948 'tragedy' inflicted on the 'palestinians".

Like all pro-arab-anti-Jew revisionists, he ignores historical context and facts, including that the arab pals are a 1960s invention, and cherry picks details of events (mainly from the arabs' versions) to delegitimize the Jews.

The poll was conducted between December 19 and 21, before the recent series of terrorist attacks and Israeli air strikes in the Gaza Strip. It surveyed the opinions of 502 randomly selected Israeli Jews, a representative sample of that population, according to Prof. Daniel Bar-Tal of Tel Aviv University.

More than 64 percent of respondents said Israeli schools should teach the “Palestinian narrative.”

Respondents in the Center and Left overwhelmingly supported the idea – 70.9% and 89.6%, respectively.

Those on the Right were split within the margin of error, with 53% supporting teaching the Palestinian view.

Bar-Tal said the results indicate that the Jewish public is more open than the government to learning about the Palestinian narrative.

“Both sides present [their] own narrative, and it’s not surprising in many respects,” he said. “You don’t expect that Palestinians will present the Jewish narratives, and you don’t expect that Israeli schoolbooks will present the Palestinian narratives… Each of them is focusing mostly on the negative side that the ‘other’ did to us.”

Yosef Kuperwasser, director- general of the Strategic Affairs Ministry, said seeking to learn about the Palestinian narrative is reasonable. But, he said, “know that it has a very limited relationship with history.”

“History tells us that most elements of the Palestinian narratives are very problematic.

And the way that some people want to teach the Palestinian narrative is very questionable,” said Kuperwasser, who has been critical of Palestinian curricula in the past.

He called for reciprocity on the Palestinian side.

“I don’t believe that the other side, the Palestinians, is anywhere close to learning the Israeli Jewish narrative,” Kuperwasser said.

Anonymous said...

Zaba said...

Doing better: you only seem to be glossing over the made up part of the 'pal narrative'.
All of it.

The true 'pal narrative' is too well documented to ignore, and thus your choice of an easily disproved theory cannot be tied to ignorance.

And re your conclusion:
It is essential that we Europeans detach ourselves mentally......

Watching the muzlim invasion of Europe from here in the New World,
I thought you already had.......

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

Try being a little less cryptic. Then people might understand what you're saying.

Anonymous said...

B.Y.'s book on dhimmitude should not be bashed! She did not invent the word "dhimmi," it has existed for 1,400 years. Your article does not cite a single historical inaccuracy in her book "Dhimmitude." If there are inaccuracies in that book, I would hope they are discovered and corrected, but the book so often quotes directly from historical sources that I doubt there is much inaccuracy. Further, her book on dhimmitude is badly needed as antidote to the current politically correct meme that Muslim rule of Infidels was a model of tolerance and pluralism. Her book gives you all sorts of historical documents, for instance the Pact of Omar, from which to quote when arguing against the current politically correct Islamophilia. Without her book, we Islamo-accurates would have a hard time gathering up such a wide array of historical documents on our own. - So please consider the possibility that BY's pro-Israel bias distorts her scholarship only on Palestinian issues. We shouldn't badmouth her dhimmitude book without any proof of inaccuracies therein. If anything, we should encourage others to write more dhimmitude books to expose the preposterous fiction of Muslim tolerance.

Anonymous said...

Great new word
- islamoaccurates



Blog Archive

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews