"Intolerance Toward Islam" Under Scrutiny

Based on media reports, North-Americans are being led to believe that Europe is crossing yet another bleak period with regard to its Jewish populations. Thomas Friedman, the New York Times columnist, regularly reminds Americans of how the "European press" keeps stirring up "anti-Semitism" whenever it criticizes the policies of the Sharon government toward Palestine and the broader Middle East.

There is no question that European nations have had a long history of willful attacks and atrocities committed against its Jewish populations. For the record, though, until Ariel Sharon came out of his post-Sabra and Chatila silence to unleash the second 'Al-Aqsa' Intifada and then assume the Israeli presidency, most European countries had faced growing concerns of racism, as well as social and professional discrimination not so much against Jews, but their Muslim populations. 'Christian' Europe's relationship with the 'Jews' had at long last entered the peaceful pastures of mutual respect. Statistics gathered in France, with the largest Jewish population in the European Union numbering at 600 000, had only been pointing to steadily decreasing acts of anti-Semitism.

That there has been a shift over the past year and a half is becoming increasingly clear. On the other hand, anti-Muslim violence in France especially has never stopped increasing ever since the events that led to the founding of the anti-racist group, "SOS-Racisme", in 1984. Still, detailed investigation by public associations or NGOs into "intolerance towards Islam" has occurred at a far lower rate. This is why the study drafted by France's Commission nationale consultative des droits de l'homme (CNCDH-National Consultative Commission on Human Rights) is timely, and the Le Monde article on the subject deserving of a translation.

It would require a long paper, a carefully argued one, refined through respectful inferences, to distinguish today's anti-Jewish acts in Europe from the long history of anti-Semitism. As the case so often is, however, the longer the analysis the more diluted the point. Let it suffice for the present purposes to say that prior to 2002, acts of racial violence were primarily aimed at France's 4-5 million strong North-African Muslim population. Since 2002, France and Europe's Jews have been increasing targeted--though nothing suggests that racist acts have decreased against Muslims. The point here is not to determine who might or might not be the greater victim. The task is to give a just hearing to anyone against whom individual, collective and/or institutional discrimination is committed, and use of the measure of the law to act on it.

<snip>

http://www.counterpunch.org/madarasz12052003.html

The piece provides some useful context and detail to some of the other pieces we have been reading over the past couple of weeks.

I know that Counterpunch is not everyon'es favorite site either, but the piece in question reads as failty balanced, at least to me.

nice spin...gibberish..but nice spin

Many feel that was his intention--to torpedo what was left of the peace process and bring down Barak, thus paving the way for his own rise to power.

the PA used his visit as an excuse...he was within his rights to visit the site...

Arafat was just waiting for an excuse. Besides, would you say an abused wife had unleashed a beating because supper was late?

What is not clear, at least to me, is whether he actually helped initiate anything or just tried to take advantage of a popualr uprising.

Korine-a
$ 50,000 / month to terrorists
Telling children to become martyrs
PA tv putting vile anti-semitic programs
Stealing $ 3,000,000,000 from his people

yeah...just tried to take advantage of a popualr uprising.

Besides, calling him an opportunist is not exactly praise.

Lying, stealing, bloodthirsty ,maniacal war criminal.

I like that better.

Are their any Muslim or Arab leaders that you think might be more willing to work for peace?

Indeed, I wonder: Is there any peace agreement that you would ever support?

Just wondering--your stuff is so full of venom.

(edited to remove undue venom)

I have posted several excellent voices of reason from
arab /muslim sources.

And youre second question is disgusting.

Heres an idea, ed...dont presume you know me.

Dont make assumptions and dont accuse me of vile shit.

I mean, there was that Carter cartoon the other day.

And footballs aside, I am serious in asking--is there any sort of peace deal that would be acceptable to you?

I get no sense of that anywhere in your recent posts.

of course, I would accept many peace deals....

Geneva?

The Road Map?

The Barak-Clinton 2000 proposal?

The Saudi intiative?

Just to name some recent efforts.

...are ones that are making negative comments about Arabs/Muslims. If I'm wrong, feel free to show me what articles you've posted because I may have missed them and they'd be worth a read...


Violet...

Of course, there's a few folk here who'll throw hissy fits about you describing Sharon as such, but the shoe fits him perfectly as well. But you wouldn't disagree, would you Don?


Violet...

as far as corruption is concerned. What happened to those investigations (where his family members were also involved)?

To Drdon; Much of that goes for Sharon as well!

he's fucking useless as a revolutionary these days--he & the caste of bosses he lords over were more interested in positioning themselves into being seen as useful to US-Israeli interests rather than being wholly useful and devoted to what should be their own interests, and this process blinded them to how badly those below them were being fucked over consistantly ever more by those they were courting. The propagandists for the Israeli side spin this differently in their narrative, very differently as a sort of conspiracy against their poor helpless angelic selves, but that's all it is and with enough insight into comperable historical situations one realizes how common his type of statist parasite is and how useful he actually is to what you support. (that should come as a shock considering the radically different tone you read from JPost editorials, real horror-show I know, but it's true)

And yes, he did just piggyback a popular uprising, that had jack shit to do with him, as his type will always try to (to the bosses of even their own same nationality, a genuinely popular uprising is always seen as more catastrophic and dangerous than even the most horrific thing they are rising against, thus it must be brought under control and directed from above in order for the leaders to position themselves as being useful to the other side in suppressing it). It was, in fact, as much a revolt against their failed policies as quisling servants to US-Israeli interests that produced no positive result, in fact was just a slide downwards in every respect in the face of the lies and failed promises of their so-called "partner", as much as it was an uprising against the Israeli occupation itself.

You think the Palestinians resist the occupation just because their bosses tell them to? You'd have a pretty piss poor understanding of the world if you really think that, as the official pro-Israeli propagandist narrative requires one to.

"Arafat was just waiting for an excuse. Besides, would you say an abused wife had unleashed a beating because supper was late?"

This is completely false.

The truth is that when Arafat heard about Sharon's plan to visit the Temple Mount (which was INTENDED as a provocation, obviously), he called Barak and asked Barak to stop it because Arafat knew what would happen. Barak said, "there is nothing I can do to stop it."

Trying to compare Israel and the Palestinians to an abused wife and her abusive husband by painting Israel as the victim is also completely false. When a nation is carrying out a brutal, oppressive and long-term occupation in territory that doesn't belong to it, it's a bit of a stretch to see how anyone can put it in the role of victim...

btw, not only did Arafat ask Barak to stop Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount, he sent along the army and police with Sharon to crush any sign of protest....

Violet...

At the time the mainstream Palestinian leaders were still positioning themselves as being pawns to US-Israeli wishes (Arafat/PA, for instance, were investing in tourism apparatus at the time, hotels/etc and the Gaza airport particularly--the latter of which has been ripped all to hell by the Israeli occupation forces since then), the popular uprising against the occupation appeared beneath them and partially against the quisling caste of bosses & bureaucrats as much as being against Israel. Their choice to go along with it was a matter of ensuring their political survival and class dominance, not a sign of their provocation as the lazy propagandist will consistantly suggest.

Has anyone read the full article yet?

http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,59662,00.html

'Neo-Nazis, Extremist Jews Unite'

"French neo-Nazis formed an alliance with extremist Jewish groups on the Internet to publish a torrent of hate messages directed against Arabs and Muslims, according to a report by a leading anti-racist group"