Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Menu There is no diplomatic solutionIsrael should declare three nos;
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
YouTube is the new progenitor of antisemitic hate speech. Just look up the myriad of clips ranging from Holocaust Denial to World Domination theories to Khazar Origins/ Replacement Theology. I’ve found 50 copies of the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion on YouTube, at one time, and in French and Spanish, too. Some of the material is skinhead, others are clearly coming from Churchs in Texas, others apparently from Russian sources. There are no comparable anti-Christian sites.
Its outrageous and people need to protest by going to the ” …more” listing at the top above the dialogue box and clicking ‘Hate Speech” and protested. The numbers indicate the exact time location in the clip of the offending material.
Just to add that I have an 1815 copy of Eugene Labaume’s “Circumstantial Account of the Campaign in Russia” and in which he fully discusses the disastrous Napoleonic Campaign in Russia and the subsequent retreat from Moscow, he talks about passing through “Jewish villages, where their lives are too dreadful to describe” (paraphrased). He mentions their half-alive verminous condition and lack of all necessities for a minimum life. This event was in 1812, over 65 years before Wilhelm Marr was heard from.
On this campaign he was acting as Secretary to the Regent, meaning Eugene Beauharnais, the stepson of Napoleon, and regarded by all, historically and personally speaking, as a most exemplary person, honourable and sensible. A good person.
Labaume’s real career was that of a diplomat.
He made a great case for Europe being hostile to Jews throughout past 1500 yrs and little has changed for the better vis a vis the Jews. My question is not convincing or trying to convince Europe to suddenly alter her historical views of Jews which I consider impossible and a lost cause but spend Jewish efforts to convince the Jews to get their sorry asses out of Europe posthaste. I could never understand why Jews seem to have an unfathomable need to fight to be where they are unwelcome especially in light of the history of Jews in Europe. Jews in the past may have had limited to no choice but to stay put but not so today.
Jews who elect to stay on in Europe with all of the danger signs today are now and will be in the future complicit in whatever harm befalls them. Seems they enjoy and welcome victim-hood. For me they are beyond caring I really dislike stupid people. That includes Lord Sacks who should be shouting from the rooftop for Jews to get out now while they can with all of their assets.
Yes, it was brilliant….as a collection of words, most of which are well known by every thinking person. But………. “Anti-Semitism is not about Jews……”.Who ever heard such nonsense from a brilliant speech…… “Anti_Semitism reappeared in the 1870s. To Sacks it seems that it was caused by Wilhelm Marr and Drumont, who was revived by the Dreyfus Trial…. Any ordinary undistinguished social history will tell you about both of these men. Sacks0 doesn’t mention the rampaging religious Anti-Semitism (LOOONG before the MIddle Ages) which continued unabated right through recorded history from the original Laws passed against Jews by the early Christian Churches and the National Rulers they influenced throughout the Western World. There are in existence Anti-Jewish Laws from the 3rd century. This is documented fully by Solomon Zeitlin in he definitive book “The Rise and Fall of The Jewish State”.
Sacks briefly passes over the Inquisition as just being a “new” word. He never mentions The huge massacres of Jews by the Crimean Tartars and Cossacks in the 11th cent. as an ongoing persecution of all Jews within reach. 17th cent. Chmielnicki, who slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Jews is not even mentioned. And he never mentions at all, the periodic [ogroms against Jews by Muslim majority countries, dating from about the 8th cent.
Vicious Russian Anti-Semitism as a State Policy for hundreds of years right up to the defeat of Russia in 1917 deserves not even a word, although it was because of this, that Lord Sacks ended up in Britain and became Lord Sacks…
Far from Anti-Semitism re-appearing in the 1870s, Disraeli, born at the beginning of that century, although converted to Christianity since he was about 13, was derided and openly mocked all his life as a Jew, a dirty greasy Jew, his hair, in ringlets as a fashion style was described as “Jewish”, his prominent nose, his flamboyance, and indeed everything about him, right through his parliamentary days.
(It was his famous saying that..”when your ancestors wore animal skins and painted themselves blue, dancing around a wood fire, my ancestors were princes and kings in Jerusalem” (paraphrased). He also made one of the wittiest remarks I’ve ever heard…as follows.. When asked to describe the difference between a disaster and a catastrophe, he replied….. “if my honoured opponent Mr. Gladstone were to be walking along the Embankment, and slipped, falling into the river, close to drowning, this would be a disaster….BUT…if someone jumped in and pulled him out alive,…THAT would be a catastrophe”….. (paraphrased)).
SO whilst Sacks’ words are nicely arranged in beautiful, mellifluous sentences, he missed out a lot he could have included, instead of his theory that Anti-Semitism is not about Jews. The whole World KNOWS it’s about Jews, even those who use their Anti-Semitism to criticise Israel, and believe that this does not make them Anti-Semitic. If they were not already Anti-Semites, then their criticism could be taken as such….but I ask you and every sentient person, “how many believe that criticising Israel today has nothing to do with at least, latent Anti-Semitism.
The very glaring and abysmal history of the Jews throughout history, precludes ANYONE from criticising Jews with no tinge of Anti-Semitism creeping in. Sacks mentioned the 1930s. Well… I have a very large collection of 1930s books, and from many years before, leading to the 1930s, written many of them, by famous, even philanthropically and otherwise benevolently inclined, writers, and almost without exception, the villain is always either a greasy Jew, or a hook nosed person betraying his Hebraic roots, or his lisping speech betraying his origin..or similar pejorative descriptions, never for a moment thinking that there was anything Anti-Semitic in their writings. It was an endemic trait, seeming born in them, their genes, their blood or from somewhere else I am not scientifically qualified to pronounce.
So, for me, Sacks concocts beautifully simplified (for the masses) phrases, an interesting but unproven and indeed a nicely laid out but wrong theory. We Jews know what we know what we know about Anti-Semitism, that Sacks, from his elevated height rarely encounters, except by description of others. I remember him saying a year or two ago that Israel was a divisive influence on Jews, that those in Europe should embrace BDS, or leave. I think he was strongly criticised by Shmully Boteach for it. It’s somewhere in Arutz Sheva.
Anyway, Lord Jonathan, when I want a speech mellifluously made at a bar mitzvah or wedding I’ll call on you. Otherwise not…
He should have gone on to tell the parliamentarians just how they are complicit in their support for UN resolutions singling out Israel and
in their direct attacks on Israel which invoke a double standard and their distortion of international law as it pertains to the Arab/Israel conflict. He should also have mentioned their support for the violation of Oslo by building housing in Area C. The list is endless.