Tag Archives: islam

Jews and “New Jews”, The Poisonous Victim Narrative

Jewish and Muslim leaders link arms in silent march to honour victims of shooting at Ozar Hatorah school in Toulouse

James Kirchick explains Why ‘Islamophobia’ in Europe Cannot Be Equated With Anti-Semitism, Either in Nature or Degree, at Tablet Magazine:

Much of what passes these days for “Islamophobia”—a conversation-stopping word meant to render any and all criticism of Islam as “racist”—simply cannot be equated with anti-Semitism, either in nature or degree. To express qualms about the reactionary attitudes prevalent in many Muslim communities about women, as did the late Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn (who was murdered for his heresy), is not racist, nor is it in any way comparable to the bigotry directed at Jews, historically or today. In the United States, FBI statistics show that, since Sept. 11, anti-Semitic attacks have far outnumbered anti-Muslim ones. In Europe, mobs do not rampage and attack Muslims or mosques following Islamic-inspired terrorist attacks, as Jews are regularly assaulted whenever tension flares in the Middle East.

None of this should obscure the fact that there are important similarities between the Muslim and Jewish experience, of both today and yesteryear. Muslims, Reed College Anthropology Professor Paul Silverstein told the San Francisco Chronicle in 2006, are “the object of a series of stereotypes, caricatures and fears which are not based in a reality and are independent of a person’s experience with Muslims.” Replace “Muslims” with “Jews” and you get a serviceable definition of anti-Semitism. In Europe today, both Muslims and Jews have been the targets of campaigns aimed at outlawing their traditional religious practices, namely, circumcision and the provision of kosher or halal food. Claiming their real motive to be concern for the “bodily integrity” of children or “animal welfare,” militant European secularists portray Muslims and Jews as barbaric peoples stuck in the past. Living in Germany two years ago at the height of the country’s anti-circumcision hysteria, I was confronted with provocative advertising campaigns that effectively likened Jews and Muslims to child molesters. French far-right leader Marine Le Pen, who likes to fashion herself a friend of the Jews, has called for banning not only the headscarf but also the kippah in public.

Nothing new here – just your typical jewish double-talk and hypocritical in-your-face moralizing. Muslims are innocent victims, just like jews, only less so. Whites are the Other, the common enemy, their mutual victimizers, stereotyped as “hysterical” “militant” “provokers” whose “stereotypes, caricatures and fears are not based in a reality”.

Kirchick illustrates how the jewish narrative is extended into a more generalized victim narrative, a narrative in which “racism” and “islamophobia” are both similar and yet incomparable to “anti-semitism”. This reflects the archetypical role of the jews as the first and foremost victim-narrators. The term “new jews” makes this role explicit, designating some group as junior victim-narrators, like the jews, and implying a special status, like the jews. Thus “new jews” are righteous, but not as righteous as the real jews, who otherwise wouldn’t need to be invoked, much less get to have a say in it.

The fact is that the jewish narrative and its terms are used proactively and aggressively, not defensively. The target of their aggression, their characteristic psychopathologization and demonization, is Whites. Their anti-White narrative has been institutionalized and is now a commonplace in the judaized corporate media.

This long-term jew-led assault has put Whites collectively on the defensive, leaving us disoriented and demoralized. In reality Whites, who according to the jewish narrative control everything, have no political representation as such. Leaders who openly and unapologetically identify with and advocate White interests have been excluded or hounded out of power as “racists”. The consequences of this have been disastrous for Whites.

Just one tip of one bloody iceberg has come to light in Rotherham. Unsurprisingly, there have been efforts to mischaracterize the harm as self-inflicted or as a consequence of partisanship. It is neither. What is evident in the revelation of this long-term and wide-spread predation is not only the humiliation of being colonized and despoiled by hostile aliens, but the enervating way in which it has been directly facilitated by the jews and their poisonous narrative.

My Cousin and I Against the European Stranger

‘We’re all Muslims, we’re all Jews’, Israel Jewish Scene, Ynetnews, 6 Sep 2012 (my emphasis):

An initiative of the Foundation for Ethnic Understanding, the conference participants adopted a joint declaration calling for “‘zero tolerance’ against religious leaders of any faith who misuse their pulpits to incite religious bigotry.”

Conference co-sponsors include the European Jewish Congress and the Great Mosque of Paris.

The Gathering of European Jewish and Muslim Leaders attracted some of Europe’s most prominent Jewish and Muslim religious leaders who came out strongly against the recent increase in verbal and physical attacks on the two communities.

“There is no conflict between Judaism and Islam,” said Rabbi Marc Schneier, president and co-founder of The FFEU, “There is, however, a conflict between those who believe in tolerance and those who want to destroy life.”

Dalil Boubaker, rector of the Great Mosque of Paris, addressed the gathering’s opening event, emphasizing that “the holy Koran deeply respects all of the three Abrahamic faiths.”

The rector called on the religious leaders gathered in Paris’ famed city hall, Hotel de Ville, to “lead together to end racism and xenophobia in Europe.”

‘Assault on all people of faith’

Moshe Kantor, the president of the European Jewish Congress, added that “the recent attacks against our religious practices in Europe are an assault on all people of faith and they are indeed an attack on freedom of expression, the very basis for a free, democratic and tolerant European society.”

Rabbi Schneier then called on the participants to take the dialogue – which has been built up over the past four years through FFEU-driven initiatives of rabbis and imams – to the next level.

“We began in 2009 by hosting a delegation of European religious leaders to Washington and New York, with the hope of opening of a window of dialogue between the two communities,” recalled Rabbi Schneier.

“Through subsequent meetings in the US and Europe, a bond was forged and the leaders began to intensify their cooperation on areas of mutual concern like the governmental attacks on ritual slaughtering and circumcision in Europe.

“Today it is imperative for both sides to realize that a people who fights for their own right is only as honorable as when they fight for the rights of all people.

“The Jews of Europe stood up for their Muslim brethren when governments began to restrict the building of minarets, and American Jewry defended American Muslims from Islamaphobic incidents by stating ‘We are all Muslims.’

So much double-talk about “tolerance” and “rights” – straight out of the well-worn jewish playbook.

It’s unrealistic to imagine that outlawing their cultural practices would make them all leave, but it would make a good start. Their complaints and concerns for their own narrow identity and interests serve as a graphic reminder just how much they see common cause with each other, and yet how alien, alienated and alienating, they are to us.

The Foundation for Ethnic Understanding is based in New York and appears to be staffed mostly by jews dedicated to pursing the best interests of jews.

Where Jihad and Counterjihad Agree

Farha Khaled’s Caroline Glick Cited As One of Israeli American Tipsters By Gates of Vienna Where Fjordman Appears To Be Back surveys and connects a good portion of counterjihadist dots, linking names with pseudonyms, blogs and photos.

Khaled describes herself as:

Freelance writer. Columnist for the Saudi based Arab News. My op eds focus on exposing Islamophobia.

Khaled begins her article by asserting that Gates of Vienna is a “white supremacist blog which published ‘Fjordman'”, “regularly publishing essays promoting white supremacism”. The bulk of the article goes on to associate various counterjihadist ideologues with GoV.

Here is one of the more meaty, lucid portions (links preserved):

Far right Islamophobic activists have forged alliances of convenience with radical Zionists and regard Israel as an ally, not least because they see Israel’s treatment of Palestinians as a role model for how Muslims should be treated. Hard line Zionists see it as an opportunity to lessen the growing Muslim influence in the USA or Europe which they see as detrimental to a greater Israel. Stooges like Geert Wilders are funded in the hope they can halt Muslim immigration and influence. Marginalised as they are, some European nationalist groups are willing to shed their traditional Jew hatred in an attempt to find allies, but as often happens in marriages of convenience, it doesn’t take much for cracks to appear.

Pamela Geller’s association with the EDL caused waves when Roberta Moore claimed they had Jew hating members and were not sufficiently pro Israel. In Europe, German newspaper Der Spiegel probed this alliance in ‘The Likud Connection‘ showing how some marginalized right wing populists are going the Geert Wilders way. This bizarre coupling has split the far right movement in Europe which has traditionally been anti-semitic.

The counterjihadist network Khaled analyzes is a jewish movement. It is dressed up as Westerners concerned with a defense of the West, but it is in fact dominated by jews and others whose first and foremost concerns are for the best interests of Israel and jews. There are no prominent counterjihadists who defend the best interests of Whites as a people, separate and apart from jews. While they readily distinguish jews and muslims for special consideration, positive and negative, they regard other distinctions between people as wrong, especially if race or “white” is involved. They regard any distinction of Whites from jews as roughly comparable to the threat to jews they see coming from islamization – unthinkably evil.

Khaled engages in similar doublethink, but to a different end. She blithely conflates counterjihadist bigotry in favor of jews with “white supremacism”. She carries on about “islamophobia” as if fearing or resenting being colonized and ruled by aliens is a mental disorder. Khaled has adopted and adapted characteristically jewish rhetoric. She paints her muslim Us as the helpless, blameless victims of a “hate”-filled Them, ascribing bizarre, pathological motives to Them, smearing Them collectively using guilt-by-association.

This rhetoric is fundamentally dishonest as well as bigoted. Counterjihadists see Us and Them as jews and their enemies, while Khaled sees the Us/Them divide being between muslims and their enemies. Both agree that Whites are not entitled to an identity of our own, much less to decide for ourselves who our enemies are.

Just as jews living amongst Europeans have done for centuries now, muslim intellectuals today excuse and direct attention away from their own group’s transgressions by finding fault instead in someone else. As with the apologists for jews, apologists for muslims zealously defend their own group identity and interests while moralizing against “hate” and “racism”, trying to guilt-trip Whites for expressing any kind of identity that excludes them.

Khaled finds it scandalous that Anders Breivik commented at Gates of Vienna. As it happens, Breivik took issue with Diana West’s “anti-sharia” strategy and more generally with the unwillingness of counterjihadists to face the demographic threat posed by immigration:

Why havent you or any of the other current authors on the Eurabia related issues/Islamisation of Europe (Fjordman, Spencer, Ye`or, Bostom etc.) brought up the “D” word? I assume because it is considered a fascist method in nature, which would undermine your/their work? Why would it undermine their efforts when it is the only rational conclusion, based on the above argument? As far as I know, it’s not illegal in Europe to suggest deportation as a future method when discussing future hypothetical World Orders (correct me if im wrong though, Im not 100% sure, lol)!?

The answer, as unwilling as Breivik was to face it himself, is that counterjihadism is about serving the best interests of jews. Thus the concern to not appear “fascist”, meaning “nazi”, meaning anti-jew, takes priority over the identification with or concern for the best interests of Europeans as a people. Should Europe be lost, oh well, the struggle against islamic jihad (in defense of jews) will continue elsewhere.

When Baron Bodissey republished Breivik’s comments he also linked Daniel Pipe’s apologia, Norway’s Terrorism in Context. To distinguish his position from Breivik’s Pipes quotes a similar statement from Breivik’s book:

The reason why authors on the Eurabia related issues/Islamisation of Europe — Fjordman, Spencer, [Bat] Ye’or, Bostom etc. aren’t actively discussing deportation is because the method is considered too extreme (and thus would damage their reputational shields). . . . If these authors are to [sic] scared to propagate a conservative revolution and armed resistance then other authors will have to.

The portion omitted by Pipes is telling:

This would un-doubtfully undermine their work and probably disallowing them to publish any future books. However, the warning about Islam has been repeated for more than two decades and it is apparent that 40 more years of dialogue, without action, would have a devastating effect on Europe.

Indeed. Like the other leading lights of counterjihadism, Pipes doesn’t care as much about the devastating effect on Europeans as he does about what’s best for jews.

(Thanks to Flanders for the link.)

Norway Attacks – Anders Behring Breivik

Police dismiss initial fears Norwegian terror attacks were work of Islamist organisations:

The massacre in Norway was the work of a man with extreme right wing views who hated Muslims, police said this morning.

Officers found a series of raving internet posts by 32-year-old Anders Behring Breivik, who was arrested for gunning down children on the island of Utoya yesterday.

National police chief Sveinung Sponheim told public broadcaster NRK that the suspected gunman’s Internet postings ‘suggest that he has some political traits directed toward the right, and anti-Muslim views, but if that was a motivation for the actual act remains to be seen’.

Six foot tall and blond Breivik is reported to have arrived on the island of Utoya and opened fire after beckoning several young people over in his native Norwegian tongue.

Reports suggest he was also seen loitering around the site of the bomb blast in Oslo two hours before the island incident.

Pictured: The blond Norwegian, 32, arrested over ‘holiday island massacre’ and linked to Oslo car bomb blasts:

Authorities now claim 91 people were killed – in Oslo and on Utoya Island, 50 miles north of the capital, it was claimed.

Norwegian police said at least 84 were killed at Utoya alone and described the killings as of ‘catastrophic dimensions’ and ‘the work of a madman’.

Teenagers on the Norwegian holiday island of Utoya had to ‘swim for their lives’ and hide in trees when the gunman fired indiscriminately at them.

Around 700 had gathered on the island for a meeting of the youth wing of the ruling Labour party.

Apparently Breivik targeted Norway’s treasonous elite and their children rather than muslim aliens.

2011 Norway attacks at Wikipedia:

Public broadcaster NRK and several other Norwegian media identified the suspected attacker as a blond and blue-eyed Norwegian who expressed right-wing and anti-Muslim views on the Internet.

National police chief Sveinung Sponheim told public broadcaster NRK that the gunman’s Internet postings “suggest that he has some political traits directed toward the right, and anti-Muslim views, but whether that was a motivation for the actual act remains to be seen.

He is reported to have written posts on the anti-Islamic[41] website document.no (all his apparent and unconfirmed writings listed; available on this site only in Norwegian).

Via Google Translate:

2009-12-03 01:21:04

Hlund, Fjordman, Hårstad, Rust

I’m NOK much later in the game than him when I have only been politically active for 13 years. I førstegenerasjonsdhimmi (Generation Y). I was active Oslo FrP / FpU in the first 6-7 years (in the cultural conservatives + laissez faire capitalist / liberal camp) and contributed to the Progress Party’s success before I stopped. I felt the time was more important to help develop / promote the political doctrines abroad especially British, German, French, American). I ran the business a few years while I studied and earned a few million so I could finance a inntektsløs politically active life. I now use these funds to be able to work full time to further develop / promote the Vienna Academy (Vienna school of thought) that Fjordman, Bat Yeor, Spencer + many others have already contributed so much till. The last three years I worked full time with a cultural conservative works that will help to further develop / promote these political doctrines further.

Anyway, I consider the future consolidation of the cultural conservative forces on all seven fronts as the most important in Norway and in all Western European countries. It is essential that we work to ensure that all these 7 fronts using the Vienna school of thought, or at least parts of the grunlag for 20-70 year-struggle that lies in front of us.

The book is called, by the way 2083 and is in English, 1100 pages).

To sums up the Vienna school of thought:

– Cultural Conservatism (anti-multiculturalism)
– Against Islamization
– Anti-racist
– Anti-authoritarian (resistance to all authoritarian ideologies of hate)
– Pro-Israel/forsvarer of non-Muslim minorities in Muslim countries
– Defender of the cultural aspects of Christianity
– To reveal the Eurabia project and the Frankfurt School (ny-marxisme/kulturmarxisme/multikulturalisme)
– Is not an economic policy and can collect everything from socialists to capitalists

Frankfurt School (kulturmarxisme) is a very ambitious unofficial ideology (and quite unknown to most) and they have succeeded in most areas (except to smash capitalism, European Christianity and European identity, traditions, culture). Vienna school is more a defense against this where we often use the Marxist ‘own creations against them (sexual liberation, feminism, liberalism, anti-racism, anti-autoriære arguments).

Vienna school of thought is far from a complete ideology but consists of principles and ideas that are constantly under development. It is unofficial and does not necessarily ever to be recognized.

“Vienna school of thought” is Breivik’s term for the milieu centered about Gates of Vienna.

Thanks to Chechar for calling attention to Breivik’s comments here.

From For the Record, at Gates of Vienna:

I know Fjordman personally, I know exactly what he looks like, and he does not resemble the alleged murderer in the slightest.

Furthermore, I was in conversation with Fjordman all day today, starting before the shootings, during the slaughter, and afterwards. If he was shooting up Utøya, he was doing an amazing job of communicating with his friends the whole time, even after he was thrown in a jail cell.

Let’s Blame the Jew-Haters


Let’s blame the Jews, via Pat Condell on Israel, Jew-Hatred, and Islam at Gates of Vienna.

Pat Condell is a counter-jihadist favorite. He’s a proud (if unconvincing) anti-“racist”. He mercilessly bashes muslims. He gleefully ridicules Christians. And for some strange reason he just loves “the jews”.

Condell starts off mocking the strawman that jews “control the world” because their numbers are so small. By the end he is so overcome with enthusiasm for his (adopted?) tribe that he forgets about the numbers and waxes orgasmic about what a substantial force for good they are. He wishes the world really was ruled by “the jews”. It’s the most creepy display of jew-worship I have seen since, ohhh how many days has it been since Netanyahu got all those standing ovations from Congress?

Condell makes a point about muslims being taught from childhood to hate jews. So what should we make of jews teaching their children and everyone else that their tribe’s time amongst Europeans has been one long string of anti-jew oppression and violence? According to the jewish version of history every conflict jews have ever had with Europeans is entirely to blame on evil Europeans blinded by spontaneous jew-hate. It’s fair to say that by teaching this kind of one-sided view of history jews are teaching everyone to hate Whites. Maybe Condell’s next video will be about this. It could start with a review of the flash mob of journalists, pundits and politicians who suddenly turned into jewish history experts and explained their seething hate to Sarah Palin a few months ago.

I won’t be holding my breath. From the way Condell sneers at Europeans it’s clear he’s already absorbed those lectures and thinks Whites suck. He’s concerned about Europe being overrun by muslims because it’s bad for jews. I wonder if this is the only motive behind all his anti-islam and anti-Christian tirades. I’ve never heard him speak so emotionally or favorably about Britons. Is he not capable of loving his own kind? Or is that what he’s doing when he gushes in favor of jews?

There are two final points to make about Condell’s “control the world” bluster. First, since he likes to go on and on about Islam it would be trivial to mock him in the same terms. What do earnest counter-jihadists think when somebody paints them as morons who say muslims control the world? Second, Condell titles his diatribe “Let’s blame the jews”, which he means to be taken ironically. He blames the jew-haters. What he’s saying, to use his own dishonest way of characterizing such things, is that the jew-haters control the world. What an idiot.