Tuesday, 19 November 2013

The European Jewish Congress (EJC) has called on European leaders and institutions to seriously study the results and take appropriate action after the release of a survey on anti-Semitism by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), showing a substantial rise in the number of Jews who have been subjected to anti-Semitic attacks.

The survey, which took place during September and October comprising approximately 6,000 respondents from Sweden, France, Belgium, Britain, Germany, Italy, Hungary and Latvia, shows that a quarter of respondents said they avoid visiting places and wearing symbols that identify them as Jews for fear of anti-Semitism.

“We commend FRA for conducting this serious and in-depth study on a matter of such importance," said Dr. Moshe Kantor, President of the European Jewish Congress, "However the fact that a quarter of Jews are not able to express their Jewishness because of fear should be a watershed moment for the continent of Europe and the European Union,”
“The Jewish reality in Europe is of great concern and the authorities need to deal with incidents of hate and intolerance in a holistic manner to really combat these manifestations before it is too late.”

“We would like to see concrete steps being taken, including creating legislation to specifically deal with anti-Semitism and racism, bolstering law enforcement agencies and ensure a zero-tolerance approach to anti-Semitism, even, and perhaps, specifically, when opinion-shapers and decision-makers engage in these forms of hate.”

More troubling were the results from the survey showing that the number of reported number of anti-Semitic incidents is much lower than the actual number of anti-Semitic incidents, because according to the report, 82% of respondents to the survey admitted that they did not report the most serious incidents to any authority of organization. Two thirds of respondents to the survey said that reporting incidents was either “not worth the effort” or otherwise ineffectual.

“This is the most damning indictment of the report." Kantor said. “European Jewry simply has little faith or trust in the process of law enforcement, legislative or judicial processes on large parts of the continent.”

“We also need to do more to educate towards tolerance and respect for the other. The rise of extremism means that democracy has to protect itself, and the response of governments needs to be to put democracy first, like the response of the Greek Government when it stopped government funding for the neo-Nazi party ‘Golden Dawn’. This is not just a problem for Jews, but it is a problem for all Europeans and the identity and spirit of the European Union depends on taking these steps.”
Source: EJC

So they're calling for even politicians themselves to be even more subject to thought crime legislation than they are already. If this had been the European Islamic Congress calling for the same things, you can be sure the Counterjihad websites would have covered it extensively. But when it's Jews calling for hate speech laws and state indoctrination programs, not a word must be said.

Do Jews bear moral responsibility for this? How many putatively representative Jewish organisations need to campaign for the criminalisation of free expression without a word of protest from other Jews before responsibility kicks in?


Anonymous said...

via Iron Burka


A theological peace process, really?

Posted Jérôme SEGAL

Representatives of the New-York based Foundation for Ethnic Understanding (FFEU), Rabbi Marc Schneier and Imam Shamsi Ali came to Vienna on November 7th to promote their program for action in Europe. On the occasion of the 75th anniversary of Novemberpogrom (called "Kristallnacht" by the nazis), the first severe and simultaneous pogroms in Germany and Austria. The two men demonstrated their unity of purpose by presenting their program to improve relations worldwide between their two religious communities.


Both religious leaders insisted on the necessity to re-read the holy texts. Ali explained that the Hadiths represent the important oral traditions in Islam. Thus, for instance, the sentence of the Quran which says Muslims shall not “make friend” with Christians or Jews is due to bad translation of the term “wali” the meaning of which is that of a “religious teacher” rather than that of a “friend”. By the same token, Schneier explained that the concept of the term “chosen people” should be interpreted as bearing responsibility to guard and promote monotheism but does not imply being superior to others. The theological peace process they advocate is based on such re-reading of the texts.

Both men promote “rationalization of the understanding of religion”, but Schneier’s explanation may sound like an oxymoron. Asked about their views on homosexuality, both became somewhat unease. The rabbi it clearly an “abomination” in the Torah but that he would accept homosexuals if they have “no other choice” and “born that way” (sic). The Imam seemed a bit more open, avoiding the answer saying he is not interested in the sexual orientation of the mosque-goers. If they really want to rationalize religion, since the capital punishment for adultery has been cancelled and since they are now thinking of considering homosexuals as equal humans, it could be wiser to reconsider the position of both religions regarding disputed topics like the forced circumcision of babies and children or the ritual slaughtering, opposed to basic children or animal rights. The “Muslim-Jewish interfaith luncheon”, they organized in Vienna, presented as the first event of this kind in Austria might not suffice to deepen this approach.

Anonymous said...

white advocate
"Do Jews bear moral responsibility for this? How many putatively representative Jewish organisations need to campaign for the criminalisation of free expression without a word of protest from other Jews before responsibility kicks in?"

Dont hold your breath waiting = its never going to happen. l used to defend Jews then l worked out they dont defend whites so l gave up, now l dont care what happens to them, that doesnt mean l wish ill upon them but l just dont care any more.

Anonymous said...

In a move described by a leading civil rights group as a “dark day for European democracy,” Moshe Kantor, President of the European Jewish Congress (ECJ) and former president of Poland, Aleksander Kwasniewski, have called on the European Union to establish national surveillance units to monitor citizens of all 27 EU member states suspected of “intolerance.”

Of course the Jewish Zionist organization promoting such suppression knows that it will never be enforced against the ultra-racist Jewish extremists who in the media who constantly show disrespect and complete opposition to the expression, preservation of European identity, Muslim Identity, or any identity that opposes Jewish supremacism.

The target is Europeans and non-Europeans in Europe who dare to oppose the racist Zionist, tribalist overlords of media, government and international finance.

Every imperialist, racist, supremacist power acts to criminalize criticism of itself. This is true of Jewish supremacism as well as any other oppressive imperialist power. Today, imperialism is no longer the preserve of a few nations, but the greatest danger to all nations is the globalist Zionist, tribal imperialism that seeks to control the politics, economy and media of every nation in the service of the most racist entity on earth.

Reality Check said...

The Jews wanted open borders, and welcomed the Muslims. Now the Muslims are terrorizing the Jews and the nonJews of Germany, but it is wrong for the nonJews of Germany to attack the Muslims for their intolerance of Jews and nonJews, because ... if that is allowed, the Jews could be criticized as well, and we can't have that!

Anonymous said...

The people of Greece have a right to support Golden Dawn or any other political party of their choice. Why is a Jew who doesn't live in Greece telling Greeks what to do? Arrogant swine.

Anonymous said...

If I were in a political position of influence, my reply to Moshe would be along these lines:


Thank you for your input and concerns, but we already have an abundance of laws designed to protect everyone from physical harm and theft. We do not wish to go any further into the realm of telling people what they can say or even think. The harm to the free expression of ideas as we now have in various "hate speech" laws and tribunals has gone quite far enough.

Additionally, having dabbled with multiracialism in our countries for decades now through the importation of large numbers of non-Europeans, we can now clearly see that this was a mistake. Contrary to your ideas about all people being raceless creatures of equality, foreigners bring with them their own ideas about how people should live and behave. They bring their own religions, cultures, and mannerisms, many of which are incompatible or clash with those of native Europeans. Diversity is no strength, but rather has a Balkanising effect on nations when the diversity reaches a certain numerical level. Diversity can only be tolerated successfully in very small numbers. Numbers small enough such that the diverse population cannot harm the culture and heritage of the native people. These we seek to preserve.

Whilst your concerns are taken seriously, you should expect no special treatment above and beyond what any European would otherwise receive. In fact, your complaint further illustrates that diversity is no strength.

In the final analysis, we find that Providence was right all along. People do live more happily and peacefully among their own kind, and in their own nations, with well defined borders. This would solve a multitude of social and cultural problems between diverse groups of people.

Is there not a single political leader who can respond in this way? No? Then they are the real traitors in my view. I do not attribute any special powers to Jews at gaining power and influence to the point of destroying a nation. Rather, it is the non-Jewish elite who make it so.

Anonymous said...

This survey appears to be based upon presumption, not actuality, of 'crime', in that it states that "the reported number of 'anti-semitic' incidents is much lower than the actual number of anti-semitic incidents" --- itself an illogical statement --- because the "real" numbers of incidents go unreported due to supposed victims having no faith in the police or legal system to properly investigate them. This is the type of remark one reads and hears often, certainly amongst the majority population whose concerns are relegated beneath those of minorities. And minorities certainly do magnify presumed slights, insults, 'discrimination' and 'crimes' against their groups (often these 'incidents' turn out to be internecine or false or committed by the presumed victims themselves). Would anyone care to be charged, tried and convicted on the basis of a purported, unreported 'incident'? These statistics of supposed incidents, reported and 'unreported', are dubious, should be challenged, and the continuing and undeviating assault on our freedoms of speech, belief and assembly should be resisted and overturned.

Roni said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Roni said...

The problem with the guys of the 'European Jewish Congress' (and others) is that they behave themselves as polliwogs. They are, mentally, living in a puddle and think it is the big ocean. They have not the ability to see reality on eye level. I’ll give here some examples. Have they ever bothered themselves to known that Siv Jensen, the leader of the Progress Party in Norway, had taken part in pro Israel demonstrations in Oslo? With risk for her own life? If they had read the book of Eirik Eiglad ‘The Anti Jewish Riots in Oslo”, they could have known that the riots were as violent as the Cartoons Riots of 2006, by the Danish embassy in London. Siv Jensen lives under threats, but she is a brave woman. The same can be said about Pia Kjaersgaard, the ex leader of the Danish Folk Party. She and other DF members took part in the pro Israel demonstrations; as the manifestation in Copenhagen, on 10th January 2009 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxIlsCK3oWg). Lars Hedegaard of the ‘Danish association for Free Speech’ is taking part in every pro Israel demonstration in Copenhagen or Malmö. The pro Israel attitude of the Dutch Geert Wilders is well known. The same can be said about many anti Islamizations blogs in Europe as the German ‘Politically Incorrect’ etc.

If they are looking for anti Jewish sentiments, they can easily find them in the rows of the left wing ‘Gutmenschen’: the Quislings of our time. Silencing the Counter Jihad movement is giving power to the Fifth Column of Sharia helpers.

Anonymous said...

This a clear case of problem, reaction, solution. The jewish left wing agenteurs create the grounds for massive immigration to occur ( especially Muslim). Then they give the Muslim immigrants social advantages and keep the citizens from complaining though political correctness social oppression( with the help of the media). When things are ready to explode they introduce the anti Muslim pro Israel lackey( GEERT WILDERS) to bring Europe closer to the Israeli agenda, of course later on asking for support and financing will be much easier for the Zionists.

Anonymous said...

Geert Wilders is a Zionist Jew ?

Apparently the self styled savior of western civilization(whatever that is) isn't so western after all. Looks like I'll have to "upgrade" Wilders status from shabbos goy to to full blown Judeofascist ,although a quarter Jewish, would be considered a full Jew under rabbinical law,married to Krisztina Marfai, a Jewess from Hungary

Pretending to be atheists and/or members of other faiths is a very old tactic employed by Sabbatean Jewry so this is hardly surprising. As if visiting "israel" 40 times, living on a kibbutz(illegal "israeli" settlement) for years, wearing a kippa and banging his head on the wailing wall, and reporting to the local "israeli" embassy once a month while claiming to be a Mossad agent wasn't enough gefilte fishy enough. I've long suspected that Wilders was a member of the vile Judeofascist cult of death but now it's confirmed.

Anonymous said...

Digging into Geert Wilders ancestry The rumour had been circulating for years: Geert Wilders is an 'Indo' (an Indonesian-European, an ethnic mix that originated when the Dutch colonised Indonesia). A genealogist said he had found several Indonesian ancestors of the populist Dutch politician known for his rabid anti-immigrant and anti-Islam ideas. Now anthropologist Lizzy van Leeuwen describes how his roots can be seen as the driving force behind his outspoken views. In an article in the left-wing weekly De Groene Amsterdammer Van Leeuwen asks: "Is it possible that the post-colonial and family history have made Wilders what he and his politics are today?" The article is an intellectual attempt to analyse what drives Wilders to say that "all immigration from Islamic countries should be halted" and that "all fundamental problems in the Netherlands are related to immigration". The conclusion reached by Van Leeuwen is that these statements - plus the fact that he dies his hair peroxide blond - are indeed related to his genealogical link to the largest Islamic country. Wilders has been calling himself a 'Dutch freedom fighter'. But given that his mother's roots lay outside of the Netherlands, Van Leeuwen says a sense of 'displacedness' is the recurring, underlying motive in his statements. The 6-page article reveals that Wilders' grandmother, Johanna Ording-Meijer, came from an old Jewish-Indonesian family and that Wilders lied about this in his 2008 biography.

Anonymous said...

However, Van Leeuwen, an expert on the position of Indo-Dutch people in the post-colonial age, goes beyond the notion that a politician known for judging others on their ethnic roots can himself be traced to foreign ancestors. Van Leeuwen went into the national archives to find the sad story of Wilders' grandfather on his mother's side. Johan Ording was a regional financial administrator in the Dutch colony who suffered several bankruptcies and was fired while on leave in the Netherlands in 1934. He was reduced to begging when the government refused to give him a pension, but later made it to prison director. Van Leeuwen suggests that Wilders is out to avenge the injustice done to his grandfather. But more than anything, he was defined by his Indo-roots, she says. Indonesia was a Dutch colony until 1949 and many mixed-race people moved to the Netherlands after the Indonesian independence. Van Leeuwen describes how these people were put in the same 'cultural minority' box with labour immigrants from Turkey and Morocco, whom they felt no connection to at all. More so, they had always felt very patriotic about the Netherlands and harboured strong sentiments against Islam, the dominant religion in their motherland. Van Leeuwen explains how this group has long been part of extreme-right movements (many supported the Dutch Nazi party NSB in Indonesia in the 1930s) while others belonged to the far-right of the right-wing liberal party VVD. She puts Wilders' statements in the conservative and colonial tradition of this group, which strongly believed in patriotism and "European values". Van Leeuwen's analysis goes beyond the personal level: "The fact that Wilders obviously operates in a post-colonial political dimension, without it being recognised, says a lot about how the Netherlands dealt with, and still deals with the colonial past. Keep quiet, deny, forget and look the other way have been the motto for decades. Because of that, no one could imagine that what happened in Indonesia 50 years ago could still have its impact on modern-day politics." And the hair? Van Leeuwen says his died mop is a "political symptom not taken serious enough". She thinks it was a brilliant move to step away from his Indonesian roots and hide his post-colonial revanchism. Although this may also be an example of his "classic Indo identity alienation." Wilders has not responded to the publication.

Anonymous said...

Who'd have thought it eh? Scumbag Wilders isn’t the little white boy he paints (rather, peroxides) himself to be.

And his Jewishness, even at low levels, I see the old familiar trick of Judaic inversion, turning him into a Zionazi - in more ways than one.

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

Why is Wilders a scumbag? What exactly is wrong with what Wilders is proposing?

Roni said...

@Cheradenine Zakalawe. Wilders is a scumbag, becouse Anonymous of 10.22 h is - as much as I can see a non white Muslim who is very excited to discover that somewhere in the 19th century Wilders had a Malayan Jewish grandmother (halfbread). Why I think so becous he call him Zionazi. However Wilders is for the Dutch very importent as he is the only one who tries hard to break the wall of the plague of multiculturalism.

Blog Archive

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews