Daniel Greenfield's article: Islamic Anti-Semitism
is Islamic Imperialism
|
 |
|
Posted: 06 Jun 2018 09:00 PM PDT
We ask that the verses
of the Qur'an calling for the killing and punishment of Jews, Christians and
unbelievers be rendered obsolete," the manifesto states.
It cites the murders of Sarah Halimi and Mireille Knoll, two elderly Jewish women murdered by anti-Semitic Muslim thugs, the fact that "French Jews are 25 times more likely to be attacked than their fellow Muslims", and the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Jews from the encroaching no-go zones. "10% of the Jewish citizens of Île-de-France - that is to say about 50,000 people - were recently forced to move because they were no longer safe in some cities and because their children could not attend the schools of the Republic,” it courageously warns. “This is a quiet ethnic cleansing being carried out in in the country of Emile Zola and Clemenceau." The manifesto was written by former Charlie Hebdo editor Philippe Val, who had republished the original Mohammed cartoons from the Jyllands-Posten despite the threats, both terroristic and legal, and its signatories include former president, Nicolas Sarkozy, the former mayor of Paris, Bertrand Delanoë, famed singer Charles Aznavour, actor Gérard Depardieu, and many other significant figures. The moral power and the importance of the manifesto should not be underestimated. After 9/11, it was American Jews who brought attention to the plight of French Jews while their community leaders often preferred to remain silent. Now it is French Jews who speak out, who march and whose LDJ even confronts Islamic thugs in the street while American Jews keep quiet or collaborate. The despicable alliance between AJC and ISNA, and the ADL’s attack on Canary Mission, carry with them the stench of Vichy on the spring wind. When an Islamic terrorist attacked a Kosher supermarket before the Sabbath, asking his victims if they were Jewish before he shot them, Obama dismissed it as a random attack on a “bunch of folks in a deli.” It’s become virtually impossible in the United States to have a discussion about Islamic anti-Semitism without being denounced as an Islamophobe. Why did France and America trade places? France has faced worse terrorist attacks in recent years than we have. But, more significantly, it lacks the politically correct viewpoint consolidation of America. Despite certain views being criminalized, there are all sorts of non-traditional views in public life there that are actively debated, instead of being airbushed or silenced the way they are in the United States. Neither the manifesto nor Charlie Hebdo could exist in the United States. The media in this country censored the Mohammed cartoons more vigorously than the Europeans did. Without any legal threat. And yet, despite its moral courage and its vital message, the manifesto misses the true nature of Islamic anti-Semitism. It’s a lot more than a few verses. The verses are part of a larger Islamic narrative. They’re not random outbursts, but a story. And that story is the primal conflict between Mohammed and the Jews. It begins with the massacre of the Jews at Khaybar and concludes with an end of days that can only come when Muslims exterminate the Jews. It’s not a few intemperate verses. Anti-Semitism is fundamental to the story of Islam. And that story with its visions of a conquest sweeping across the world has not ended. That’s why the violence goes on. Jews and Christians have a paradoxical role in Islam. They are on the one hand, People of the Book, the unacknowledged originators of the ideas and texts that Mohammed looted to found Islam. But their precedence is removed by accusing them of having betrayed Allah and perverted the scriptures. Unlike the polytheistic pagans wiped out by Islam, Jews and Christians are in theory monotheists, with a higher status, but they’re also accused of being mushrikeen, polytheists, who take “partners” with Allah. Jews and Christians had “taken Rabbis and monks to be their lords besides Allah”. (Koran 9:31) The ambiguity of Jews and Christians gave them a special status and a special peril. Ritual humiliations of Jews and Christians were enacted to demonstrate their inferiority and the supremacy of the Muslim. In an honor-shame culture, Islamic superiority had to be demonstrated by humiliating other religions. When Jews and Christians gained independence or won battles, it called the truth of Islam into question. That, rather than a few verses, is what we are dealing with. The verses remain relevant to those Muslims who believe that they are in a zero-sum struggle with every other religion on a battlefield whose scope is as large as the planet and as small as a neighborhood or a building. And that’s the vast majority. You can try to make an idea obsolete when it’s no longer relevant. But the anti-Semitic hatred in almost every country where Jews and Muslims both live shows that anti-Semitism remains quite relevant. Hating Jews, attacking them and even killing them, remains a meaningful part of Islamic identity. The Jews were a primal Islamic enemy. That enmity is written into Islamic scriptures, traditions and prayers. All of that can’t be made obsolete because the Islamic conquest is an ongoing project. It’s not a few verses. It’s the context of the conquest. That’s the mission at the heart of Islam. The Lebensraum and Drang Nach Osten of Islam might pause for periods, but it never actually stops. Iraqis, Pakistanis and Somali migrants pour into Europe seeking Lebensraum. They move into poorer areas associated with immigrants bringing them into contact with earlier Jewish communities. When the second generation, usually more prone to supremacist violence and expansionism than its immigrant forebears, comes of age, the Jewish communities are violently driven out of their homes. The verses that justify it won’t become obsolete until the modes of behavior behind them lapse. Calls for the persecution of Jews and Christians won’t be outmoded relics of another time until Muslims make them so, not by changing words, but by changing deeds. The trouble is that the verses remain entirely relevant because Muslim populations around the world continue to fight religious wars. Muslim hatred of Jews has unique elements. As anti-Semitism usually does. But it’s still a subset of an Islamic supremacism and xenophobia that is endemic and whose consequences can be seen in clashes between Muslims and Christians in Nigeria, Muslims and Hindus in Kashmir, Muslims and Buddhists (and Hindus) in Myanmar, Muslims and Yazidis in Iraq, Muslims and Zoroastrians in Iran, Muslims and Atheists in Bangladesh, and those are just a few of the many examples around the world. Islam is not on good terms with any other religion. Including its own spinoffs, like the Bahai, or its own subdivisions, like the Sunnis and the Shiites. It’s not about the Jews. It’s about Islam. The truth of Islam is validated by violence. Its theological disputes are settled by force. The verses about Jews and Christians are not the problem. They’re a symptom of the problem. As are the terrorist attacks, stabbings, shootings, bombings, no-go zones, sharia police and sex grooming gangs. The response from Muslim clerics in France to the manifesto has been to claim that the verses are meant to be seen in the context of their time and that Islamic wars are only defensive. Historically, that’s nonsense. But everyone would be perfectly happy if they believed that and really lived it. Instead Islamic violence is always deemed to be defensive. Peace can only come from victory, not co-existence. War with non-Muslims who don’t submit to Sharia law is seen as inevitable and necessary. The verses libeling Christians and Jews, and justifying violence against them, are just rationalizing this fundamental Islamic worldview and applying it to specific targets. Islamic anti-Semitism is born of Islamic supremacism and imperialism. Muslims aren’t persecuting Jews just because of anti-Semitic verses in the Koran. They’re persecuting Jews because the Koran is supremacist and imperialistic. That’s why Muslim violence against Jews is not just a problem for Jews. It’s a problem for everyone. Like the Yazidis, Jews are a tiny minority and more vulnerable. That’s what makes them the canaries in the coal mine of Islamic migration. Muslim attacks on Jews in Europe date back over a generation. Long before Paris, Brussels and London were being regularly terrorized; European Jews had already retreated into fortified synagogues, stopped wearing Jewish clothing in public and maximized their security. That was the canary in the coal mine. If Europe had woken up then, it wouldn’t be choking now. American synagogues and Jewish institutions are starting to resemble their European counterparts. A decade ago, armed guards were a rarity outside synagogues. I walk past them all the time now. The French manifesto is an imperfect effort to call attention to a burning problem. It’s an attempt to start an urgent and necessary conversation in France that can’t even be had in the United States. And it’s a conversation that we must have before civilization chokes in the coal mine. (Due to an ongoing family medical crisis, I may have trouble answering emails, but I appreciate all the positive wishes and hopes for a full recovery.) Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation. Thank you for reading.        |
|
Posted: 06 Jun 2018 06:52 AM PDT
"I have a
horrible story to bring you about a woman named Sherita Dixon-Cole,"
Black Lives Matter activist Shaun King began.
Dixon-Cole claimed that she had been sexually assaulted during a traffic stop by a Texas police officer. The story, like so many black victimhood myths about police officers, turned out to be a lie. Body camera footage conclusively disproved it. But by then the damage was done. The Root had posted a photo of the officer as part of a post alleging a racist culture of police rape. “Black women have always… found themselves at the intersection of state and sexual violence, because this country teaches men… that black women are disposable,” it insisted. Behind the pseudo-academic jargon of social justice were the same racial prejudices and tribal fears of victimized women that led to Emmet Till’s death. Only this time the races were reversed. And the vigilantes organized a cyber-lynching party by sending hate and abuse to a completely different Texas cop who shared the same last name. And to his mother. In Timmonsville, South Carolina, Rev. Jerrod Moultrie, who also heads the local NAACP, claimed that a police officer had "racially profiled" him and harassed him "cause I was driving a Mercedes Benz". Once again, body cam video proved that it never happened. But the NAACP announced that it was conducting its own investigation and claimed that there might have been another racist cop. “Racial profiling, in this context, concerns the reasons for stopping a particular vehicle at a particular time, not whether the officer conducting the stop (or any other officer on the scene) is impolite,” it stated. Since it’s impossible to prove that a traffic stop wasn’t racially motivated (the impossibility of proving a negative fuels paranoid fantasies about ubiquitous racism), that’s guilty until proven innocent. Why were Shaun King, the NAACP and assorted black nationalists willing to believe the worst of white police officers? Black victimhood is based on the fragility of black people and the evil of white people. Ta-Nehisi Coates wrote in, Between The World and Me that the police officers and firefighters who died on September 11 “were not human to me. Black, white, or whatever, they were menaces of nature; they were the fire, the comet, the storm, which could — with no justification — shatter my body.” Fragility feeds dehumanization. Coates’ exaggerated sense of his own victimhood had him dehumanize the FDNY firefighters who climbed 78 floors with heavy equipment on their backs to rescue people, regardless of race or color, as inhuman menaces. Not people, but violent forces. The poetry of Coates’ victimhood is marinated in the self-pity of the racist for the prejudices that made him a bigot. And if police officers aren’t really people, it’s easy to believe the worst of them. Sherita was so readily believed, despite the lack of evidence, because her claims clicked with the prejudices of black nationalists. The NAACP went on defending Moultrie because it was easier to believe in a white racist conspiracy than to believe their own lying eyes. That’s what prejudice does to you. Prejudice is at the heart of both the Texas and South Carolina cases. And it’s there churning underneath the recent blizzard of anecdotal claims of white racism. Like all prejudice, it has real victims. The victims are accused of thinking the worst of black people, when it’s actually black nationalists who think the worst of white people. And they justify their prejudices with accusations of racism. The accusations dehumanize white people as innately evil and burdened from birth with white privilege. These accusations are not just false. They’re racist and dehumanizing. Some of these accusations, like those in Texas and South Carolina, like the racist hoaxes at the Air Force Academy, USC, St. Olaf College, Kansas State University, Eastern Michigan University, Capital College, and the University of Maryland, to name just a few in the last two years, are invented. These hoaxes succeed initially because they pander to prejudice. It’s almost a misnomer to call them hate crime hoaxes. They are hate crimes. But the real targets of these hate crimes were white people. These “hoaxes” advanced stereotypes about white evil. They brought their prejudices about white people to life by inventing and faking them. And, if the real culprits hadn’t been exposed, a white male, the likely profile of the perpetrator, could have easily been wrongly accused, convicted of the crime or expelled from a university. Even 24 years later, we still hear a lot about Susan Smith. But there were multiple black Susan Smiths on campuses across the country just last year. The media’s latest racial paranoia trend has been blowing up stories of white people wrongly calling the police on black people. But the reverse keeps happening on campuses. Black nationalists use racial paranoia to manufacture solidarity, sanctifying the martyrdom of the “black body” at the hands of the “white devils”. But while the black body may be a useful metaphor, the white devil are real people subjected to the racist dehumanization that is a necessary part of racial paranoia. And racial paranoia is how you get racism. Hating and fearing another race leads to prejudice, discrimination and violence. Fantasies of black victimhood have led to real white victims. Earlier this year, Kori Ali Muhammad targeted, shot and killed 4 white people in Fresno, California. The Nation of Islam follower shouted "Allahu Akbar" and “Free black people” when he was taken into custody after his killing spree. The black nationalist blamed his crimes on a resentment of white racism. Prejudice doesn’t necessarily lead to racist murders like those committed by Muhammad and Micah X. Johnson in Dallas, but racist murders are carried out by racists who dehumanize other people. And when even saying, “white people” is fashionably derogatory, dehumanization is everywhere. The left insists that racism is about power. It’s not. You don’t need to have power to hate. Everyone has that power. Nor do you need power to carry out a racist attack. Most healthy, able adults have that power no matter what their skin color might be. Racism is about the opposite of power. It’s insecurity masquerading as superiority. The left focuses on institutional racism. Or racism as policy. That’s convenient because it can then talk about power instead of hate. And anyone who is white and has power is by definition guilty. Much like the police officer who stopped an NAACP president in his Mercedes and was smeared for it. The officer probably doesn’t have his own luxury vehicle, nor does he head an organization, but he is white. So were the Founding Fathers. Close enough. But anti-black racism as policy is as exotic as Bigfoot. If it weren’t, we would be taken on tours of segregated water fountains instead of microaggressions and implicit bias training. Disparate impact looks for statistical anomalies and, out of prejudice, attributes them to white racism. Fanatical racism, that of the Klan, the Nazis or the Nation of Islam, is fed by insecurity. Its glorification of its own superiority always gives way to the lurking menace of the Untermensch or the white devil. The master race claims are unconvincing. They’re put forward by history’s losers angry at the past. Insecurity is central to the racial paranoia of Black Lives Matter and countless other black nationalists and their organizations. Black nationalists, like Nazis, the Muslim Brotherhood and every other hate group, are convinced that they can only regain their destiny by destroying those who stole it from them. The only way to become truly superior is to kill those whom they secretly believe are superior. Black victimhood both condemns and sacralizes its own state. Pride is defined by its antithesis. Without the white devil, there is no black nationalism. Black nationalism demands the white devil and summons him forth with hate crime hoaxes, with smears, with word games that distort what racism is and isn’t. Victimhood doesn’t ennoble you. It degrades you even as it teaches you to degrade others. No amount of hate can ever make you proud of your shame. And pretending that hate is love won’t unite you. I have a horrible story to tell you. It’s about where racism really comes from in America. And it’s about who the victims of victimhood are. (Due to an ongoing family medical crisis, I won't be able to reply to most emails. Apologies.) Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation. Thank you for reading.   |
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment