Are European leaders anti-Semitic

This article from the Jerusalem Timesargues that European leaders appear anti-Semitic. It provides the following reasons:
[li]Jewish cemeteries and synagogues are under assault, particularly in France. The Or Aviv synagogue in Marseilles was burned to the ground last Sunday. A cemetery in Strasbourg and a synagogue in Lyons were targeted by anti-Semitic vandals, while a gunman in Toulouse opened fire on a kosher butcher shop. [/li] [li]Though President Jacques Chirac and Prime Minister Lionel Jospin both condemned the attacks, they have failed to speak out with sufficient urgency or zeal.[]Synagogues in Antwerp and Brussels were damaged by firebombs last week. []Two Orthodox rabbis visiting Germany from America were assaulted after emerging from prayers in a Berlin synagogue. The rabbis were surrounded by a group of six to eight men who, after inquiring as to whether the two were Jews, proceeded to beat and kick them, requiring one of the victims to be treated at a hospital. [/li][li]A Holocaust memorial in Berlin was vandalized, with swastikas spray-painted on it. [/li][li]Despite the restraint which Israel showed in the face of intensifying Palestinian terror, the sympathies of Europe’s chattering classes remain fully behind Yasser Arafat. [/li][li]French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine said Israel’s counter-terror campaign is “pure repression.” [/li][li]The EU agreed last Tuesday to provide an additional $44 million to the Palestinian Authority, effectively rewarding it for using terrorism. [/list=1] I’m unclear what this article means by an additional $44 million. In addition to past money? Or, in addition to the amount normally provided?[/li]
If it’s the latter, then their action seems striking. Is Europe unconcerned about the bombing of innocent Israeli civilians? If Europe feels strongly about warfare by Israel, but has no problem with warfare* against* Israel, then, what is one to think?

December you are one of those persons who instills in me the crave to argue the other side, not necessarily because I disagree with some of what may underlie your position but because your reasoning and your arguments are just full of holes. If you ever happen to agree with me, please don’t say so because I am sure I’ll end up arguing against you. At any rate:

1- “Jewish cemeteries and synagogues are under assault” Oh yeah? By “European leaders”? Wow, I missed that one. Look there have been isolated incidents just like there were isolated incidents of attacks against people who looked middle-eastern in America (and who sometimes were not middle-eastern at all). So give me a break. Europe has its share of idiots just like any other place on earth.

2- “President Jacques Chirac and Prime Minister Lionel Jospin both condemned the attacks, they have failed to speak out with sufficient urgency or zeal” Define sufficient. Sufficient for what or who. I’ll tell you what. Don’t vote for them next time.

3- “Synagogues in Antwerp and Brussels were damaged by firebombs last week” This is a repetition of #1. See #1 for answer.

4 “Two Orthodox rabbis visiting Germany from America were assaulted …” Same thing. Are you going to list every single incident? And what’s this to do with “European Leaders”?

5- "A Holocaust memorial in Berlin was vandalized, with swastikas spray-painted on it. " Ok, I get it. There have been assaults and vandalism. None of that in the USA, huh?

6- “Despite the restraint which Israel showed in the face of intensifying Palestinian terror, the sympathies of Europe’s chattering classes remain fully behind Yasser Arafat” I might disagree with the “chattering classes” if I knew what they were but please explain to me why this makes them “antisemitic”.

7- "French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine said Israel’s counter-terror campaign is “pure repression.” Hell, I’ve even seen people on this board say the same thing. Where will it end? we are surrounded and infiltrated.

8- “The EU agreed last Tuesday to provide an additional $44 million to the Palestinian Authority, effectively rewarding it for using terrorism” Well, that’s your interpretation.
At any rate, where does it follow from all of the above that European leaders are antisemitic? Your logic escapes me.

The EU has a position and a view of things with which I may not fully agree. A lot of that may be blamed on Israel and the US not having done a good job of winning them over. So next time you say “screw Europe, we don’t need them, we can go alone and do what we want” think of the consequences.

A letter in today’s NY Times makes some similar points.

Note also the linked article.

One member of the German Parliament agrees(from the NY Times Week in Review)

just like? Weak comparison.

According to these reports there have been 400 incidents against Jews in France. AFAIK there were one or two against middle-eastern-looking people in the US. And, the President immediately denounced them. The US perpetrators can expect the harshest of punishments.

Also, no Jew did anything against France, whereas some middle-eastern looking men did commit an atrocity against America.

See this thread over in The Pit: Dictionaries do not win complex debates, you aholes.**

I admire your nonchalence, sailor. Would you be equally calm if southern Black churches were being torched?

Now, I get it. The EU may be anti-Semitic, but, it’s Israel’s fault that they are. :rolleyes:

Well duh some European leaders are antisemetic. And some are anti-Arab. Are any of those leaders going out of their way to act on their beliefs? Nah. They are just good politicians.

They pander to their own self-interests like all politicians. They need Arab goodwill. Business is business, afterall. Israeli goodwill is not worth soliciting. And there are more voters in the combined Arab community, left-wing pro-Paletinian, and right-wing anti-everybody blocs then there are Jews or anyone in those countries who gives a hoot about them. In many of these countries (like France and Germany) Jews will always be “others”, not “really” French or German or whathaveyoueven if it is six generations of residence. The society as a whole will not really care, it is not one of “them” being attacked, it is one of those people, one of those who threaten the purity of our culture. Turning a blind eye to the actvities of antisemites (skinhead or Arab) is just good politics until it is reaching “unseemly” proprtions. (And, history shows, sometimes even then.) You expect a politician to behave otherwise?

sailor, what exactly would be the consequences of ignoring what the EU states it wants?

  • but it’s a complex issue.

Anti-semitic crime, oversimplifying: Muslims are currently one of the largest, if not the largest, minorities in Europe. A minority of the muslims are fundamentalistic and militant. A minority of the minority commit politically motivated crimes against, among other, Jewish institutions. When the mid-East heats up, so does the level of violence in Europe.

The attitude - even among politicians - is that these are common crimes, the perpetrators are common criminals and that there are laws, police and courts in place to deal with them and hopefully lock them up after due process. Thugs, to be dealt with by the law. Does the Jerusalem Post try to make the point that these crimes are being investigated with less diligence than other crimes ? I very much doubt that.

The Neo-Nazis are pathetic media whores, nothing more. If they could garner the same amount of attention by being neo-commies or neo-royalists, there they would be.

As for the “chattering classes” (charming term), one can safely accuse them of anything - who’ll come to the defense of the “chattering classes”, after all ?

But if the Jerusalem Post is trying to tell you that the public debate is dominated by a pro-Arafat (and, in extension, pro-terrorism) POV, they’re being less than truthful, IMHO. I might suspect that the JP tries to sell the viewpoint that anyone criticizing the current Israeli action is “pro-Arafat”, which is of course a false dilemma. But yes, there’s criticism of the Israeli action in European debate. In the US debate, too, AFAIK.

As for the 44 million: The EU (and the US, btw.) gives foreign aid to impoverished people. I haven’t heard of any new appropriations (and I very much doubt any have been made), but the palestinians rely squarely on foreign aid for some of the most basic commodities - food, water, medicine. I have a hard time believing that removing the basic wants of life would make fewer people sign up to blow themselves up.

S. Norman

December… at some point crying “anti-semitic Leader” is quite possibly going to backfire on you if the criteria you use is to toss a large net into a complex group of European societies and drag in every random act of anti-semitic violence and political decision making that you deem to not to be sufficiently and unequivocally pro-Israel.

Keep doing this and at some point the charge of anti-semitism will lose it’s moral heft and all you’ll get are eyerolls even if the charge is warranted in a specific circumstance.

Don’t forget that many “Arabs” and many “Palestinians” are considered “semitic.” So giving money to Palestinians is hardly evidence of “antisemitism.”

Uh, sjgouldrocks

Main Entry: an·ti-Sem·i·tism
Pronunciation: "an-ti-'se-m&-"ti-z&m, "an-"tI-
Function: noun
Date: 1882
: hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group
If you really think that it means all Semetic groups then you also probably think that “canary yellow” is a dog yellow (because the root of canary is canus = dog) and that a street sweeper is a politician (because the roots literally means “city worker”). And we all know that politicians are really much more what they sweep up.

I’m happy to say our Prime Minister is still behind Israël, though his supposedly successor- the dumb sod; Melkert- is not.
Which is why I shall vote for another party this year than my beloved labour party.

This anti-semitism has got to stop

Our country saw anti-semitism at its worst during WW2.

The “chattering classes” had the nerve to go on
strike during the occupation of our country.

I hope and believe we keep supporting Israël, otherwise we have learned nothing.

What I said

What I should have said

Watched Fox and Friends this morning- I find the untintentional humor attractive. I was particularly taken with their suggestion that today they would be portraying the Palestinian view (after presenting a pro-Israel view for the previous week or two). When the Palestinian spokesperson came on, the ‘journalist’ interrupted him, spoke over him, contradicted him without evidence and generally rabbitted the Zionist view for ten minutes or so.

In the past two weeks I have seen Netanyahu and other Israeli spokes-persons afforded uninterrupted airtime to defend the Israeli position.

Some balance, some journalism!

Here’s an article from Reuters with a “balance” that you might approve of, Pjen. It describes an arson attack on a Jewish seminary, the most recent of many such attacks. It mentions no attacks at all on Muslim institutions. The final sentence:

In Reutersworld there’s no moral difference between those who attack Jews and the Jews who were attacked. It’s all just “tensions between them.”

Right? :rolleyes:

Seems perfectly balanced to me.

If the Muslim leaders prefer to discuss ‘tensions between the communities’ rather than say, ‘muslim aggression’ then its still worth talking. The description ‘tensions’ is not attributed to anyone- may come from the Muslims, the Government, or may be a coinage of Reuters. In Britain we have learnt to talk of the attacks by the Irish Republican Army against the British State (terrorist activities by Bush’s current definition) and the activities of the British Government against the IRA as ‘The Troubles’ and have learned to talk of ‘differences between communities’ rather than ‘a war on terror’, and do seem to be sorting this ‘little local difficulty’ out. Sometimes it is wise in negotiations for the words used to fail to reflect the emotions signified.

If you are not aware of French Politics, the most dangerous race/religion to have in France is Arab/Muslim- massive anti-immigant feelings from the Right Wing of French politics aimed at the Arab/Muslim population. Many attacks, many deaths. The Government has even tried to ban muslim female headgear of any type (even a simple scarf) from French Schools! I am not sure whether Yamulkas are banned.

Your quotation of the above as biased probably goes to show how acclimatized you are to the generally pro-Israeli, anti-Palestine views of most of the US press and media. There seems to me to be nothing wrong with that Reuters report at all.

I assume you are happy with Fox’s coverage of the situation in the Middle East. ;j

The french government didn’t try to ban head coverings for muslim girls. Some teachers and school directors did. On the basis that :

-religion shouldn’t be displayed overtly in schools (secularity is a big deal in France)

-The scarf is a symbol of women’s oppression

-Parents are supposed to force their daughters to wear the scarf.

Most of the people opposed to wearing scarfs in schools were actually left wing. But later the extreme-right jumped in the bandwagon.

So, some years ago, girls wearing scarves have been excluded from several high schools. The government let the courts settle the issue, and they ultimately stated that scarves could only be prohibited when there could be a safety issue (for instance when using machines or during physical education). And concerning the display of religious symbols, though the court ruling wasn’t extremely clear, it has to be really obvious to be prohibited ( a T-shirt with “I love Jesus Christ” in big letters would probably be forbidden, for instance)

And the Yamulkas (I assume it’s what I know as “kippas”) never were prohibited (they were pretty common in my high school), and it was an obvious flaw in the arguments in favor of the scarves ban.

The Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (warning: PDF) documented dozens of incidents of violence and intimidation in the first month after September 11. The majority undoubtedly went unreported, since scared immigrants aren’t prone to run to the police.

It sure sounds to me like you’re justifying racist violence in some cases. I can’t imagine the relevance of the ethnic look of the alleged terrorists.

to answer you subject line

antisemetic: no
sceptical at Israel: yes

Europe are far more critical towards Israel than USA

Thanks for the link. I had been unaware of most of those incidents.

No, I certainly didn’t mean to justify racist violence. The relevance was that another poster seemed to be justifying French violence against Jews, when s/he wrote:

My point was that these situations were not parallel.

Let’s apply Pjen’s concept of “balance” to his/her own post. S/he wrote:

According to Pjen’s thesis, the above is biased, unfair, one-sided reporting. A “perfectly balanced” description would have explained merely that there was

Right? :smiley:

Uh no december, “tension between Muslim Arabs and Right Wing patriots” would be balanced.:wink: