“The secret of all victory lies in the organization of the non-obvious.” -Marcus Aurelius
This is Clare Lopez’s presentation at the OSCE, the European body that seeks to criminalize criticism of Islam as hate speech, today in Warsaw.
According to those watching the conference via live stream, this odd set of remarks by the Turkish delegate was a response to Clare’s presentation, as well as the rest of the interventions by Center for Security Policy personnel.
The rationale in this video is excellent.
One can safely take it to the bank.
But there is another variable not mentioned. That of the actual discussion as to the right of Israel to exist as a state.
To quote a good friend of mine, and of this site,
“If you do not support the right of Israel to exist, you may as well turn on the ovens yourself”.
It is with sorrow that I have come to agree with this statement. No other nation seems to be under discussion as to its right to merely exist, even though a lot of countries were minted at pretty much the same time and under similar conditions. In fact Pakistan was created more recently than Israel and under conditions that more closely resemble the ones that Israel is accused of, rather than actually the ones under which it was forged.
Pakistan was created because Muslims would not agree to be part of a pluralistic state when the British decided to let India become an independent entity free of British colonial rule. They wanted the new nation to be Islamic and under the sharia. When that idea was rejected, well the rest is a rhyme of what Muslims always do when not allowed to rule over everyone else. Create a new Islamic State then branch outwards.
The right of Israel to exist is a separate matter, or rather should be, from criticism of its policies and history. But I have never heard from the popular left any discussion about any other nation’s right to exist.
So in this kinds of discussions I find myself having with locals on occasion they generally go like this.
Generic lefty: “The problem with criticism of Israel is if you say anything bad about the country, you get labelled an antisemite!”
Me: Thats because in every case I have encountered, critics of Israel are using antisemetic arguments, even if they themselves do not think of themselves as antisemites.
No one who calls Israel an apartheid state ever mentions the fact that there are two cities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia that wont even allow non Muslims in.
No one who talks about the Israeli security wall ever mentions any other border wall from the great wall of China to the Egyptian walls to protect themselves from the exact same people.
No one who talks about Israeli policies ever mentions other nation’s identical policies as problematic, or even fact checks if Israel even has those policies under criticism.
No one who talks about the Jewish lobby ever seems to think the Muslim lobby, which is backed by Saudi oil money and the UN’s OIC and its fifty odd nation states influence might also affect how Canadian and US policies might get set. And its pretty obvious these days exactly which lobby is winning out there.”
That usually ends the discussion. Not because I won it. But because they decide that I am proof of their assertion, that anyone who criticizes Israel gets labeled an antisemite.
Press release from the Rt. Hon. Geert Wilders MP
In the Netherlands, the BDS movement has raided shops where Israeli products are on sale. “France has already banned this movement. In our country, however, it can freely commit such anti-Semitic actions,” says PVV MP Raymond de Roon. “We want the government to distance itself from these utterly disgusting actions.”
Parliamentary questions by Mr De Roon and Mr Wilders (both PVV) to the Minister of Foreign Affairs on the labeling of Israeli products:
1.) How do you assess the actions of the labeling Sharia police in Dutch shops (*)?
2.) Do you agree with us that this action is an indication of anti-Semitism?
3.) Do you agree that this action does not bring peace in Israel any closer?
4.) Will you distance yourself from this anti-Semitic action?
5.) Is the government prepared to ignore, like other European countries, the European Commission’s “interpretative notice” (**), which will hamper the labeling of Israeli products from Judea and Samaria?
(*)
https://twitter.com/End_of_Europe/status/735562436833619968/photo/1
and
https://twitter.com/LavieJanRoos/status/735518106093768705
(**)
Wed. May 11 2016. A Jewish deli, already burned down in an act of Arson by “Asians” was burned down again just as it was about to reopen after repairs and renovations.
Ta’am Grill and Bakery in Manchester was due to open just days after the attack – which one of the owners says could have been conducted by “a group of Asian boys”.
Amos Vaisman posted a video on social media showing two men breaking into his shop and dousing it in petrol.
The men then set fire to the building from the bathroom, with the flames spreading rapidly through the various rooms.
[…]
On a post attached to the video he wrote: “We have clear footage of the criminals involved and additional footage of them sending a group of Asian boys to go and buy petrol from the local garage.
(Video of the fire starting at site)
Now lets compare that to related items at the end of the same article:
So when a Muslim structure burns, its “Islamophobic” even though the facts are, a significant amount of the time this happens, it was Muslims who did it, either out of anger, from a competing sect, or to blame the indigenous people of the area in order to get government money to build a larger better newer facility.
When a specific Jewish business is burned not once but twice, its a gang of “Asians”.
Have the people of the Western world bred themselves into a state of suicidal docility?
A few minutes thought will lead us to where this will go, both obvious and less so.
Lets say you are an actuarial. A Jewish person asks for insurance, which is mandatory now of course, to open a deli or any other business that can be identified as Jewish. You check your charts and find that the risk of arson due to ‘crime’ is an order of magnitude higher than for a non-Jewish business. Now the cost of operating is more than one can earn.
Other people who share the same structure also may suddenly not want to allow a Jewish owned or identifiable business to open. They will perceive the risk as coming from the victim, as is the human norm in times of civilizational collapse, as it is recognized that the government cannot and will not act against those who are committing these acts, or as we treat it as a crime and punishment issue and not as a military one, which is what it is, then it doesn’t matter if they do catch the perps because it will make no difference in terms of the risk since there will always be more muslims ready to wage jihad. Again, because it wasn’t a crime per se, in the first place.
The net result will be a net win for the Muslims. They will achieve the first part of the goal, “First comes Saturday, then comes Sunday”. A reference to first, dealing with the Jews and then the Christians.
It is this author’s belief that this cannot change unless we change our view of what is taking place here. Until we understand that war is being waged on us all by Muslims, and that their tactic is to do so in a manner we do not understand, so that we cannot use the proper tools to fight back, we will lose.
There are less than 4 leaders and even potential leaders who appear to understand this, even by inference, in the world today.
The rest of us had better learn to think for ourselves.
One additional thought.
As the “Islamophobic” attack in the link took place in Corsica, it is much more likely that it was a targeted attack against this building because of its purpose. But the history behind it is not what the article indicated whatsoever. It was an illegal mosque operating by very radical jihadis who had really angered the locals many times and many ways. When it became clear that the authorities would not uphold the laws in Corsica, the people did what people should do. They enforced the laws themselves. The crime was the mosque. The response was enforcement. Just not by those who should have done it.
However what I wrote about arson against Islamic buildings in this article holds true for the UK and nearly everywhere else in the West.
Mosques that are attacked in the Islamic world are pretty much all due to Islamic rivalry, Sunni-Shiia conflicts and personal vendettas with the occasional revenge attack by Christians and Buddhists or Hindus where numbers allow and Muslims are heavily on the offensive to take that territory for Islam.
Eeyore for VladTepesBlog
An original translation by Simon XML:
(With much thanks!)
[From Translator]
The Dutch do not have many journalists who speak out against Islam. Joost Niemoller is one. May 5th is Dutch Liberation Day. There is a big ceremony at the Dam in Amsterdam during which the King and all the various notables lay a wreath at the national monument. It’s kind of similar to the Cenotaph in London. This year, the 4/5 May Committee, who organize it all, invited Ahmed Aboutaleb – the Muslim mayor of Rotterdam to give the main speech. It was a dreadful piece of left-wing multicultural tripe, but this open letter published on Niemoller’s website says it far better than I ever could. I could not resist sharing it, so I have done a quick translation into English.
————————————
Dear Mr Ahmed Aboutaleb
I will introduce myself. My name is Jurrien Boiten and I am the grandson of J. H. Boiten, a resistance fighter from Assen who didn’t come home after World War II. Murdered by the Nazis in the Dora concentration camp. So I am one of the relatives of the survivors you briefly mentioned in your speech during the commemoration this year.
Please understand that May 4 and 5 are also special days for me. Then all the emotions resurface. And this year that was even more so the case. When I heard on January 26 of this year that you would give the speech at the Dam I was angry. How could it be that you were asked? But then, Ms. Gerdi Verbeet is the Chairman of the 4 and 5 May Committee and a prominent member of the Labour Party. You are too, and then the relationship becomes clear. I felt that something had been stolen from me. Anyway, you had not spoken yet, so I kept my mouth shut and waited. Your speech was going to make it clear. And it did indeed.
Unfortunately my misgivings came true.
Why was I so upset when your name was called? That has everything to do with your faith and everything you stand for. You are above all a practicing Muslim. Additionally, you are a representative of the multicultural society desired and acclaimed by the left. But above all because of your Muslim background, letting you give a speech during the commemoration for all the Jews murdered in our country during the war is trying to unite the irreconcilable. It’s like a convention of vegetarians where the president of the Association of Butchers as a speaker gives an impassioned speech against eating meat.
You want to live by the rules of the Koran. The Koran is, as you know, a book that oozes hatred of Jews and is full of prejudice about unbelievers. Even homosexuality is strictly forbidden in the Koran. The Koran in that sense is as bad as Mein Kampf. The Koran inspires the faithful to fight against any “infidel”. The barbarians of IS are the ultimate example of this. I am such an “infidel.” Your holy book calls for my destruction. And to this day you have never distanced yourself from that book. Indeed, it inspires you in your daily life.
Several studies show that the growing anti-Semitism in our country is for the most part accounted for by Muslims. How is it that Jewish institutions in our country now need continuous surveillance? The threat comes from Muslims. Why has security been increased in our country? The threat comes again from Muslims.
There is in our country now a consensus about the fact that the multicultural society has failed. But only a few people from the left still refuse to see that. And they unfortunately also sit on the 4th and 5th May Committee.
You are, as I recalled, a representative of the multicultural society. That was also the reason for the committee to invite you. Over the backs of those who died and their survivors they abused the commemoration of May 4, 2016 as propaganda to prove the “success” of a now failed project. Your presence in the eyes of the committee is evidence of the “success” of the multicultural society. Your presence would encourage immigrants and natives to commemorate together. But were these foreigners there then? The NOS [the Dutch equivalent of the BBC/CBC] had to do its utmost to show a picture of such an individual.
For example, were there Muslims at the Dam who felt connected with the history of our country? No, they were conspicuous by their absence. Yet thanks to the sacrifices of those who fell, they too may live in freedom in our country.
The multicultural society is a political ideal. And Memorial Day on May 4 was never intended for making political statements. Memorial Day was never intended to put the spotlight political “successes”. Precisely because in our country there are so many different political views, the commemoration should and can unite people for a short time. A time for forgetting different views. Despite all the disagreements combined – also as survivors – a moment to reflect on the memory of those who lost their lives for the freedom of our country.
Unfortunately, the leftist political clique cannot control themselves and has now snatched the commemoration of the Dutch People in the service of its political objectives.
And then your speech. I hear you politicising over the backs of 686 dead Jewish children from Rotterdam. Because politicians quite often twist the truth if that suits them better. And you are such a politician!
Those 686 children that you mention were not “different” as you say. They were Jewish! They were not “different” because they were Jewish, they were Jewish and were therefore Untermenschen in the eyes of the Nazis. And Untermenschen can be destroyed, because you as a German belonged to the Uber Menschen. And those sub-humans included the Roma, Sinti, the gay and the mentally handicapped.
Stamping them as sub-human was not prejudice, it was a dogma of the Nazis. Prejudices you can talk about with each other. A dogma is fixed irrevocably.
But you deliberately use the word “different”. Because with that word you can create the bridge to today. We often encounter the word “different” in the debate on multiculturalism today. It is also used by those who warn of the increasing Islamization of our society. And because you use the word “otherwise” you simplify the evil ideology of the Nazis. And you therefore equate those who recognize and warn of the danger of Islam in our country with the Nazi killers of, amongst others, my grandfather!
Because, you say, a country (the Netherlands) can fall prey to gut feelings and misguided emotions that disrupt our society. You say, and I quote: “Gut feelings can pave the way to hatred, violence and ultimately even to murder. Even now.”
You are well aware that those who are critical of the growing influence of Islam in the media and in politics are set aside as people who have gut feelings. As people who sow hatred. At people who want to stir up violence. They might even want to incite murder.
Your message is: the Nazis murdered people because they were “different”. And it could happen again by those who warn against the increasing Islamization of our country and point to the being “different” of Muslims. So Muslims are in your eyes the new Jews, the new gays, the new Sinti and the new mentally disabled.
By doing this as a Muslim you abuse the commemoration of May 4, 2016. You equate those who are critical of the increasing Islamization of our country with the Nazis.
While you know quite well that millions of Muslims around the world, including in our country greatly admired Hitler because of the murder of six million Jews.
You also know that in many black schools in our country, history teachers are struggling to deal with the Holocaust in the classroom. You know what is written about Jews in the Koran. You recall 686 Jewish children who were murdered. But do not you say that Muslim armies tried to murder the survivors in four wars in Israel?
And you also forget to mention that on April 25 2004 you felt that the phrase “Cancer Jew” in the current slang of young Moroccans was fine. How credible are you actually when you commemorate Jewish victims at the Dam?
The opportunity given to you to speak at the Dam is another step in the growing Islamization of our country. Even our National Memorial Day is sacrificed. And that is why your call to listen to stories from survivors, eyewitnesses and survivors therefore no longer makes sense. Because these stories are about the struggle against the totalitarian Nazi ideology and its consequences. Because despite the warnings of those stories, the Dutch people permits a similarly totalitarian ideology disguised as the religion of Islam to gain more space in the public domain. An ideology that calls into question more and more freedoms and habits and wants to restrict them. And whose fighters are discounted as the new Nazis by you.
The burden that is thus laid on the shoulders of our children will become even heavier, as they will eventually have to literally fight to preserve and recover freedom of thought and action. The contours of a clash between ethnic groups in our country are becoming more visible.
You end with, “That’s why we remember.” Indeed WE commemorate. We, the white, native Dutch. Except for a few, immigrants were not present at the Dam to commemorate. And even though many have held a Dutch passport for generations, their absence proved once again that they do not identify with the history of our country and therefore not with the country itself. They consume our country and nothing more.
And that’s why I now wonder whether the ultimate sacrifice made by my grandfather and all those other, often nameless, resistance fighters for this country and its inhabitants was worth it. The legacy he and his comrades left us has been squandered and sold off by generations of politicians over the last thirty-five years. With, as sad highlight, the fact that you as a practicing Muslim may speak at our National Remembrance Day, at which upright Dutch people are dismissed as the new Nazis.
With best regards
JHB
Footnote: “Incidentally, I missed you yesterday at the memorial service for Pim Fortuyn. A well-known politician from Rotterdam who was murdered for his views on May 6, 2002.”
Here are some links and videos to a disturbing story about how all the Jewish passengers were pulled off a flight in Spain.
The incident took place on 1 May in Barcelona, and involved a flight from Barcelona to Paris. Most of the passengers were French Jews who had been in Spain for the Passover celebration, and were headed home. I won’t rehash the entire drama, because what I am presenting at the end of this post is the account of a Jewish man on the flight, a Mr. Alain Sayada. His post is in French, but I’ve prepared a rough translation and am copying it below. You can read it to get the full story.
H/T Gates of Vienna
Doesn’t this story go well together with this one from the UK?
***UPATE***
This may be from last year and even possibly 2014. The event is genuine, but it may not be from this month
Here is probably the event
Check out this video:
The caption reads:
Yemen: Thousands march in Sanaa against Saudi-led military intervention
But what do the signs say?
From 7 seconds in:
That sign looks an awful lot like this one:
Translation:
Ansar Allah’s slogan is: “God is great. Death to America. Death to Israel. A curse on the Jews. Victory to Islam.”
That doesn’t seem to be quite the same message as the RT title.
It’s possible that is still what the protest is about, but these are the Houthi sighns and slogans, which have nothing to do with the Saudis.
The Houthis are Iran’s proxy army in Yemen as Hizb’allah is in Lebanon.
In every major terrorist attack in the past few years there has been a Jewish component. The Charlie Hebdo attack had some jihadis murder Jews in a deli. This was met with the contemptible lie by president Barack Obama that it was “some random folks in a deli” that were murdered.
Then there was the attack more recently in Paris. This had a few components. A popular sporting event, a soccer game, and a Jewish owned venue for dance music and drink. (They probably also had ham on the menu) So a very strong target for Muslims.
There was the attack in Copenhagen where a free speech meeting was shot up and then a man killed outside a Synagogue.
In pretty much every attack, the jihadis make sure that there is at least a component of attacks on Jews. So what about today in Belgium?
(And why?)
New York (AFP) – Starbucks shut all of its coffee shops in Belgium on Tuesday, after a Brussels airport outlet was apparently the location of one of the bombs that killed about 35 people.
“Amidst reports of attacks targeting Brussels Airport and a metro station, initial indications are that an explosion took place outside our store within the airport,” the US coffee chain said in a statement.
“This store and all other Starbucks stores in Belgium will remain closed until further notice.”
So what does Starbucks have to do with Jews?
Starbucks in particular has gained a reputation in the local community for notoriously being a pro-Zionist company, yet a lot of that appears to be based on misinformation.In fact, within the last year, any strings that had connected Starbucks to Israel appear to have been cut. The company closed down all six of its locations in that country earlier this year, dissolving its joint partnership with Shalom Coffee Co., which helped operate the Starbucks locations in Israel.
The Arab American piece is quite fair and rational. But the BDS and Islamic groups are not. And this may mean that the choice of location to detonate the explosives constitutes and answer to the question: Where is the anti-Jewish component of this attack?
It would be good to know more about the tactical aspects. Was the Starbucks the best place anyway irrespective of all this? Or like other attacks such as Bombay and Paris, did they actually suffer a tactical loss in order to make a strategic point? In other words, would they have created more terror by choosing a location other than Starbucks which had more potential to do structural damage and create loss of life, and so Starbucks was chosen in order to specifically be anti-Jewish? Or was Starbucks where they wanted to detonate anyway.
This answer may have to wait for an architect to weigh in or better yet, a decent confession by a captive. If indeed we are permitted to know the truth and as Maj. Nidal Hassan has still not been allowed to fully disclose his thinking, we may never know it.
Xanthippa sent in the following addition. The recent attack in Turkey had the bomber following a group of Jewish men before detonation.
This is quite stunning. Even for them.
The Iranian regime has started a widespread campaign to portray the Saudi royal family as Jewish and at the same time, calling Jews filthy anti-Islamic conspirators responsible for all the Middle Eastern crisis and blood shedding. This campaign is well illustrated in a speech by panahian, the most renowned preacher close to the Supreme Leader and tied to revolutionary guards during a state organized rally in defense of Yemeni rebels. He declared: “For the last hundred years, the Jews in the region have been committing atrocities and killing Muslims. We blame anti-Islam Jews and Zionists for the plight of Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Bahrain, and Yemen. We also blame the rich Jews and evil Zionists for all the troubles faced by people in Europe and America. Once we save the region from the evil oppression of the anti-Islam Jews, then we will have also saved the people of Europe and America from the oppression of the Zionists.”