WSJ columnist says ‘I’m almost grateful’ for attack on kosher supermarket that killed four

Middle East
on 48 Comments

Bret Stephens, the Wall Street Journal columnist, says he was “almost grateful” for the attack on the kosher supermarket in Paris in January in which four Jews were killed because it demonstrated that Europe has a problem with anti-Semitism.

Now with the attack on the kosher supermarket, I think [the anti-Semitism is] at last out in the open, and in that sense I’m almost grateful that this happened, that at last I think Europe is coming to recognize that it has a real problem with anti-Semitism that can’t be denied or can’t be passed off as a function of a reaction to Israeli policy.

Stephens, a neoconservative who is also deputy editorial page editor of the Journal, said the attacks on the supermarket and the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo proved that the rightwing understanding of terrorism is right: it comes out of a “clash of civilizations,” because Arab and Muslim societies have fundamental differences with the west on such core values as freedom of speech. The attacks disproved the leftwing view of radical Islamism: that these attacks grow out of western policies in the Middle East, from support for Israel to the invasion of Iraq.

Stephens makes his comments at minute 36 of this video broadcast on C-Span last weekend from a panel on the French terrorist attacks on February 18 at the French-American Foundation in New York (which cost $50 a head to attend). Here is the entirety of his analysis of the January 9 attack on the kosher supermarket, in which Muslim extremist Amedy Coulibaly killed four Jewish hostages before he was killed by police:

The attack on the kosher supermarket or the kosher grocery I think also ought to be an occasion for a certain amount of clarity. I started covering the Middle East when I was based in Brussels for the Wall Street Journal in the late 1990’s and early part of the last decade. And even then and especially after the outbreak of the so-called second intifada in the fall of 2000, I sensed that there was a great deal of anti-Semitism on European streets and it was anti-Semitism coming in both a kind of vulgar and high-tone variety, the vulgar variety which is the sort you would encounter if you walk through my largely Muslim neighborhood in downtown Brussels towards the canal but also a high-toned variety which typically went by the anti-Zionist catchphrases, but anti-Zionist catchphrases that had a weird reflection in traditional anti-Semitic tropes. Just to give you an example of what I mean, I’ll never forget shortly after the outbreak of the Second Intifada, The Economist had an editorial — one of their leaders, and the Economist is a serious magazine, maybe the best magazine in the world — there was a line that said Israelis are a superior people — I’m not sure if I’m quoting this exactly but I’m getting the spirit of it largely right– the Israelis are a superior people, their talents are above the ordinary, but they must curb their greed for other people’s land. And I thought, Boy, if that’s not an antisemitic trope: those clever Jews, superior, but greedy.

There was a great deal of that. It was very hard to sit in Brussels and have dinner time conversations with the class of commissioners and foreign policy people in Brussels and not get a great deal of this. So now with the attack on the kosher supermarket, I think it’s at last out in the open. and in that sense I’m almost grateful that this happened, that at last I think Europe is coming to recognize that it has a real problem with anti-Semitism that can’t be denied or can’t be passed off as a function of a reaction to Israeli policy.

Stephens’s comments are reminiscent of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu saying in 2008 that the 9/11 attacks on the U.S. had been good for Israel. “We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq,” he said, because these events “swung American public opinion.”

I recommend the entire conversation at the French-American Foundation. Sylvie Kauffmann, editorial director of Le Monde and an opinion writer for The International New York Times, is fascinating. She says that French Jews were shocked by Benjamin Netanyahu’s call for them to move to Israel and that it was a “positive” sign that Jewish organizations at last broke with Israeli policy and rebuked Netanyahu.

Watching this panel on C-SPAN, I found support for my belief that Israeli actions are driving the rise in anti-Semitism in Europe. If classical anti-Semitism has an implacable Christian religious character, if 19th and 20th century anti-Semitism had a sociological-reactionary character that was also implacable and bigoted, this anti-Semitism is focused on Israeli actions. No prejudice is justifiable, and anti-Zionists must be sure to distinguish between criticizing the Jewish state and criticizing Jews. But as Kauffmann makes clear, the identification by Jewish organizations of all Jews with support for Israeli actions is dangerous.

Thanks to Adam Horowitz for Netanyahu point.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

48 Responses

  1. Krauss
    March 5, 2015, 2:25 pm

    Today, there is no question that most of the anti-Semitism in Europe comes from muslim – especially Arab muslim – immigrants. That’s just a reality.

    But I would say two things in response:

    1. Historically, anti-Semitism in the Arab muslim world has been much more muted than in Christian Europe. It really began to flourish after WWII. This is something Zionists don’t want to think about, instead they want to blame Islam, like Bret.

    2. And two, what, exactly, happened in the postwar period in Jewish life? Oh yeah, a Jewish state built on the Nakba and endless occupation.

    You could make a seperate point that the Islamic world has been falling behind generally, and that’s correct. So I wouldn’t blame Israel entirely. The anti-Semitism we see from that part of the region is partly bound up in the reactionary and degraded state it currently it is in, and that has typically targeted religious minorities generally.

    You see that in the attacks on Christians, on muslim minorities like the Yazidis and more moderate streams of Islam. In this sense, it mirrors the backwardsness of Christian Europe during its religious wars. A lot of anti-Semitism during that epoch was a by-product of the attacks on various Christian minority sects by larger streams. If you’re going to attack these religious offshoots, why not go after the Jews, too?

    In both cases, the root causes are religious and social stagnation. Neither, however, is essentialist in nature. Islam itself has and can again be the flower of civilization. To say otherwise is to be blind by basic historical reality, both of the Arab muslim world and of the Christian-dominated West.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      March 5, 2015, 2:35 pm

      ” muslim minorities like the Yazidis”

      The Yazidis are Christians.

      • gamal
        March 5, 2015, 4:27 pm

        “The Yazidis are Christians.”

        no they are assuredly not. Yazidi religion is syncretic, having large elements of Sufism, reputedly Zoroaster and Mithras, and other gnostic disciplines they also indulge in some Christian practices, we are still making shit up in the middle east.

      • Walid
        March 5, 2015, 8:38 pm

        “muslim minorities like the Yazidis” (Kraus)

        “The Yazidis are Christians.” (MDM)

        Yazidis are Kurds and sort of a neither nor group, but a lot closer to Moslems than to any other group. They are actually rooted in the 11th century by the blending of Moslem Sufism with Judaism and Christianity and a touch of Zoroastrianism that would put them closer to the mystical Druze Moslems. Since they revere a fallen angel that had been rehabilitated, they are mistakingly thought to be devil worshipers and therefore in everyone’s crosshairs.

      • seafoid
        March 5, 2015, 10:42 pm

        I thought they were related to the Parsis

    • Chu
      March 5, 2015, 4:19 pm

      “You could make a seperate point that the Islamic world has been falling behind generally, and that’s correct.”

      [I think you meant to say ‘i could’]

      If the Islamic world is falling behind, is the Judaic World at the very forefront of the global system then? Because I think about the occupation and blatant connivance of the Jewish state (its occupation & ethnic cleansing, etc). If you think back, there were more Islamic contributions to Medieval Europe than Jewish contributions.

      • marc b.
        March 6, 2015, 9:04 am

        If the Islamic world is falling behind, is the Judaic World at the very forefront of the global system then?

        well, yeah, that’s the paradox. (or maybe irony is more accurate). really, who wants to admit intellectual authorship of this [email protected] mess, particularly the States? increasingly inequitable, increasingly corrupt, increasingly ignorant, increasingly incompetent. and, no, this isn’t a generational whine about ‘kids these days’, I am referring to institutional corruption (see education, military, financial sector, and the sciences), the ascendance of wealth as the primary if not sole marker for success and societal worth. this, in my opinion, is part of the reason Weiss has chosen to distance himself from the circle jerk of ethnic self-celebration, where, contrary to that douche bag stephens, many successful people who identify themselves as jewish, and attribute their success to their Jewishness, insist on the public recognition of how ‘clever’ they are, their wealth being a symbol of cleverness.

      • seafoid
        March 6, 2015, 10:06 am

        The Fed is currently propping up a lot of financial wealth and not very successfully.
        Bernie Madoff syndrome is always a risk- he was well connected, Jewish and successful.

    • Mooser
      March 5, 2015, 5:56 pm

      “Today, there is no question that most of the anti-Semitism in Europe comes from muslim – especially Arab muslim – immigrants. That’s just a reality.”

      Sure, Krauss, whatever you say.

      • Walid
        March 5, 2015, 9:41 pm

        “Sure, Krauss, whatever you say” (Mooser)

        You have a point, Mooser, it’s not about Muslims or Arab Muslims and in fact, it’s not necessarily all about Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, it goes beyond that; From the Guardian last summer:

        “… If the French establishment has harboured a deep vein of anti-Jewish sentiment since long before the Dreyfus affair, the influence of radical Islam, many Jewish community leaders say, is plainly a significant contributing factor in the country’s present-day antisemitism. But so too, said Gardner, is a straightforward alienation that many young Muslims feel from society. “Often it’s more to do with that than with Israel. Many would as soon burn down a police station as a synagogue. Jews are simply identified as part of the establishment.”

        While he stressed it would be wrong to lay all the blame at the feet of Muslims, Peter Ulrich, a research fellow at the centre for antisemitism research (ZfA) at Berlin’s Technical University, agreed that some of the “antisemitic elements” Germany has seen at recent protests could be “a kind of rebellion of people who are themselves excluded on the basis of racist structures.”

        Arfi said that in France antisemitism had become “a portmanteau for a lot of angry people: radical Muslims, alienated youths from immigrant families, the far right, the far left”. But he also blamed “a process of normalisation, whereby antisemitism is being made somehow acceptable”. One culprit, Arfi said, is the controversial comedian Dieudonné: “He has legitimised it. He’s made acceptable what was unacceptable.”

        A similar normalisation may be under way in Germany, according to a 2013 study by the Technical University of Berlin. In 14,000 hate-mail letters, emails and faxes sent over 10 years to the Israeli embassy in Berlin and the Central Council of Jews in Germany, Professor Monika Schwarz-Friesel found that 60% were written by educated, middle-class Germans, including professors, lawyers, priests and university and secondary school students. Most, too, were unafraid to give their names and addresses – something she felt few Germans would have done 20 or 30 years ago.

        Almost every observer pointed to the unparalleled power of unfiltered social media to inflame and to mobilise. A stream of shocking images and Twitter hashtags, including #HitlerWasRight, amount, Arfi said, almost to indoctrination. “The logical conclusion, in fact, is radicalisation: on social media people self-select what they see, and what they see can be pure, unchecked propaganda. They may never be confronted with opinions that are not their own.”

        http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/aug/07/antisemitism-rise-europe-worst-since-nazis

      • seafoid
        March 5, 2015, 10:51 pm

        “Arfi said that in France antisemitism had become “a portmanteau for a lot of angry people: radical Muslims, alienated youths from immigrant families, the far right, the far left -”

        No mention of political economy and who is expected to shoulder the burden of falling income and reform. The more the economic situation looks like the 1930s, the more likely that politics will.

        Capital vs Labor is brutal.

      • Kris
        March 5, 2015, 11:24 pm

        @Walid: “it’s not necessarily all about Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, it goes beyond that…;

        I read that Guardian article to which you linked, Walid. Everything depends on how you define “antisemitism.”

        Here are the article’s main points.

        (1) last summer, while Israel was decimating Gaza, there was a big spike in attacks on European Jews, just as there is every time Israel “mows the grass” in Gaza.

        (2) Economic and social inequities tend to promote violence in marginalized groups.

        (3) Jewish groups like the ADL and the equivalents in Europe report that antisemitism is a huge problem.

        (4) “Antisemitism” is becoming socially acceptable.

        From the article:

        “In 14,000 hate-mail letters, emails and faxes sent over 10 years to the Israeli embassy in Berlin and the Central Council of Jews in Germany, Professor Monika Schwarz-Friesel found that 60% were written by educated, middle-class Germans, including professors, lawyers, priests and university and secondary school students. Most, too, were unafraid to give their names and addresses – something she felt few Germans would have done 20 or 30 years ago.”

        Why were those Germans writing to the Israeli Embassy and the Central Council of Jews?

        A. To express hatred towards Jews in general? (Antisemitism.)
        B. To make threats against Jews in general? (Antisemitism.)
        C. To express their outrage at Israel’s brutality towards the Palestinians? (Criticism of Israel is “antisemitism” to Israel’s defenders, but not to anyone else.)

      • Walid
        March 6, 2015, 1:25 am

        “Everything depends on how you define “antisemitism.” (Kris)

        Agreed, Kris, it’s a buzzword used mostly by Zionists for dramatic effect. In its simplest form it mean “anti-Jewish”, which is much more dramatic and racist to the point. There’s no doubt Israel’s actions have a direct effect on anti-Jewish acts, but Jews have Israel to thank for that since Israel keeps harping on Israel and the world’s Jews being one and the same. Now you have Netanyahu claiming or pretending to be speaking for all the world’s Jews.

        Seafoid touched on what it’s about in France; the marginalized in France could just as well torch the police station as they would a syngogue. So it’s not really about Jews there but about attacking Jews that to them represent the establishment. You have it in the obviously racist humour of M’bala and those that flock to see him that aren’t Arabs or Moslem.

        Last week I saw an interview on TV of the head of the French CRIF political lobby and VP of the WJC. The interviewer wanted to talk about the French leaving France but Roger Cukierman was so obsessed with Arabs and Moslems that irrespective of what was asked of him, his answer always included something to do with Arabs being at the root of France’s problems. It’s all part of the victimhood act. It was nauseating.

        CRIF is the French equivalent of AIPAC as to political clout but it also acts as the umbrella for 140 Jewish organizations. For its annual dinners held in February, mostly every French legislator would give a right arm to be invited and the President of France is automatically present each year. This year, the French Moslem leaders decided to boycott the event because Cukierman has been shooting off his mouth day after day on how France’s troubles are all the Moslem youths’ responsability.

      • seafoid
        March 6, 2015, 1:42 am

        14000 letters over 10 years to the Israeli embassy

        I wonder how many letters the Russian embassy got in the 90s about Chechnya. Just saying.

        How many ot the 14000 were anti Zionist ? and how many genuinely anti-Semitic ?

        Are we supposed to accept what Israel does to Gaza because if we don’t it may be construed as anti-Semitic ?

      • gamal
        March 6, 2015, 3:20 am

        “In both cases, the root causes are religious and social stagnation. Neither, however, is essentialist in nature. Islam itself has and can again be the flower of civilization”

        Why thank you Daddy, how sweet.

        “essentialist in nature” sounds like a shampoo.

      • MHughes976
        March 6, 2015, 9:25 am

        About definitions – any definition can be ‘neutral’ or ‘loaded’. Loaded definitions imply a value judgement, as when you say ‘Anglophobia’ is ‘any form of unjustified hostility to at least some English people’; neutral ones do not – as when you say ‘Anglophobia’ is ‘any form of hostility to at least some English people’.
        The neutral def leaves it open whether some forms of hostility to poor old us, therefore some forms of Anglophobia, are indeed justified. If you use the loaded def any form of hostility to us which was actually justified would not, on that def, amount to Anglophobia.
        People seem to dislike loaded defs but they’re perfectly legitimate and useful.
        Another thing to note is ‘quantification’, which is needed if terms are to be properly used. I said ‘at least some English people’. Some definitions of ‘Anglophobia’ might be in universal terms – ‘hostility to any and all persons who are English’. This def does not apply when any significant subset of English people are exempt – if someone has best friends who are English (s)he is not Anglophobic in the universal sense, but may still be seriously hostile and prejudiced against some English people (say some of our literary figures – would never read a Booker Prize winner) in some important ways.
        The problem is rhetorical darting between different defs, as when it is noted as a matter of fact and without expressed value judgement that hostile sentiments are being expressed against some English people and then in the next sentence or the next second a loaded def, in which these sentiments are taken to be by definition absurd or prejudiced, makes its appearance.
        That said, I call ‘anti-Semitism’ ‘prejudice against at least some things characteristically Jewish’: a loaded def, since ‘prejudice’ is an opprobrious term. I do indeed believe that Zionism is unjustified but I do not pin the badge of ‘anti-Semitism’ on myself for two reasons: first, that I share the Mondoweiss doubts about the authentic Jewishness of Zionism and second, that I consider my objections to Zionism to be rational rather than prejudiced. Others, of course, use the term ‘anti-Semite’ so that it does apply to me and there’s nothing I can do about that, seeing that everyone is free to use words as may wish.

      • Mooser
        March 6, 2015, 10:50 am

        “Now with the attack on the kosher supermarket, I think [the anti-Semitism is] at last out in the open, and in that sense I’m almost grateful that this happened”

        That’s quite enough anti-Semitism for me, right there. Wonder how many people might be “almost grateful” if Stephens…nah, let’s not go there.

        Anyway, any time Krauss wants to do a comparison between “Muslim anti-semitism” and other types, I’m all ears. I think the Muslims have a long, long way to go to even get in the running.

        Of course, if we want to forget about the Holocaust, and compare on that basis… Oh wait there’s humor here, turns out the Muslims were the only people in the world who could do that for us, make us forget….

      • Giles
        March 8, 2015, 11:01 am

        “..the centre for antisemitism research..”.

        You just can’t make this sh*t up.

    • oldgeezer
      March 6, 2015, 2:33 am

      @Walid

      Even assuming each of the 14,000 letters were from unique individuals over the ten years we are talking about .017% of the population. That is less than 2 individuals in every 10,000. That zionists and their supporters want to make hay out of that speaks for itself. That the presumption that the letters were all unique also speaks for itself. That the spike is related to the periods in which Israel’s crimes against humanity as well speaks for itself.

      The devaluation of the accusation of antisemitism rests solely on the heads of zionists who have attempted to shield their racist creed (screed would also apply) behind Jewish people.

      Nobody really cares about the label anymore. If one is to be called an antisemite for being pro human rights and equality then it is a meaningless term. If the trend keeps up then it will at some point become a badge of honour as they not only devalue the term but lend credibility to those who are actually anti Jewish and wish them actual harm. Individuals of the Jewish faith would be better off by not only disavowing zionists but taking steps to marginalize them. They are a threat to mankind as a whole and an abomination on the human race.

      • seafoid
        March 6, 2015, 5:05 am

        Anti- Semitism is very like the boy who cried wolf at this stage.

        Zionism calls Wolf Blitzer but that’s different.
        Crying anti-Semitism over disgust at what Israel did to Gaza last summer is very stupid.

        The power of the anti-Semitism meme only applies where rights are respected and justice trumps force. If Israel won’t play by the rules then anti-Semitism is severely devalued.

        Does the Torah say anything about how dangerous hypocrisy is ?

      • DavidDaoud
        March 6, 2015, 9:32 am

        “Individuals of the Jewish faith would be better off by not only disavowing zionists…”

        • If Muslims of every persuasion are expected to disavow the actions of IS/ISIS, it seems to me that ordinary everyday Jews everywhere should stand up and speak out against Zionism/Israel.

        If not identical, very similar at least.

      • Giles
        March 8, 2015, 10:10 am

        “Are we supposed to accept what Israel does to Gaza because if we don’t it may be construed as anti-Semitic ? ”

        Of course. That has been the game for a long time.

    • mikeo
      March 6, 2015, 8:11 am

      “Today, there is no question that most of the anti-Semitism in Europe comes from muslim – especially Arab muslim – immigrants. That’s just a reality.”

      Untrue. For instance in the UK:

      “For this reason, whites perpetrated 44 percent of the anti-Semitic incidents in England, the lion’s share, while Arab or North African belligerence comprised a mere 10 percent. Surprisingly, South Asian offenders made up 37 percent, and only 8 percent were described as Black. According to the numbers, the “Arab-Israeli conflict,” as it metastasizes into Europe, is driven principally by whites, not by Jews or Arabs. I would argue that the same is true in the Levant.”

      http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/02/23/the-fallacy-of-anti-semitism-rising/

    • eGuard
      March 7, 2015, 5:37 am

      That’s just a reality.

      Sigh. Since Mondoweiss is moderated, there should be this rule: Accusations of anti-Semitism must be sourced at first mentioning.

  2. a blah chick
    March 5, 2015, 2:39 pm

    “I started covering the Middle East when I was based in Brussels for the Wall Street Journal in the late 1990’s”

    He covered the Middle East…from Brussels. I guess the cabbies are more knowledgeable there.

    “I sensed that there was a great deal of anti-Semitism on European streets and it was anti-Semitism coming in both a kind of vulgar and high-tone variety, … a high-toned variety which typically went by the anti-Zionist catchphrases,”

    Got that, anti-Zionism is just high- toned anti-semitism.

    “the Economist is a serious magazine.. there was a line that said Israelis are a superior people …their talents are above the ordinary, but they must curb their greed for other people’s land. And I thought, Boy, if that’s not an antisemitic trope: those clever Jews, superior, but greedy.”

    Haven’t we had Zionists touting all the Nobels Jews have won? As for them being land greedy Stephens must have slept through much of the “so-called” occupation.

    He’s the poor man’s Goldberg.

    • Mooser
      March 6, 2015, 10:57 am

      “As for them being land greedy Stephens must have slept through much of the “so-called” occupation.”

      What “occupation”? I’d bet money Stephens is in the ‘won-it-fair-and-square-in-a-war’ school of fraught.

      • Mooser
        March 7, 2015, 11:33 am

        Whoa just noticed that “high-toned variety”. He really stepped in it there.

  3. Blownaway
    March 5, 2015, 2:41 pm

    At the Golden state Warrior game last night the conversation around me was all about sip ac. While I couldn’t hear everything what caught mey attention was one comment that aipac is targeting right wing religious Christians in their campaign against Obama. Interesting conversation at a basketball game

    • amigo
      March 5, 2015, 3:08 pm

      “While I couldn’t hear everything what caught mey attention was one comment that aipac is targeting right wing religious Christians in their campaign against Obama. “Blownaway.

      Teaching someone from scratch can have it,s moments but when you have to de program them first , it can really get tough.

      Was this conversation during the break or during the game.If the latter , bad game , huh.

  4. Pixel
    March 5, 2015, 4:49 pm

    Taking the lead from the group of Frenchmen/women – who happened to be Jewish, who attended Bibi’s talk there, if I were a guest at his address to Congress, here, at the conclusion, I swear to god, I would have jumped up and started singing “The Star-Spangled Banner” at the top of my lungs.

    Dems would have jumped in and, as the chorus would begin to rise to a crescendo, the Republican’s would be forced to join in – or not.

    What a moment THAT would have been!!

    • ritzl
      March 5, 2015, 8:01 pm

      Great comment, Pixel.

      This is one of the things I love about this site. Where I would have put that sentiment in sarcastic terms, something like “…except theyes probably don’t remember the words…”, you put it in such positive, aspirational terms.

      I appreciate that about you and so many others here. I really, really do. That uplift/voice is so necessary.

      Peace.

    • Walid
      March 6, 2015, 1:47 am

      “What a moment THAT would have been!!”

      We’ve all seen it before but just for the heck of it and to see the shock on Netanyahu’s face one more time; this spontaneous breaking out of La Marseillaise in answer to Netanyahu telling the Paris synagogue congregants that they were not safe in France and to come home to Israel:

      La Marseillaise – English lyrics

      Arise children of the fatherland
      The day of glory has arrived
      Against us tyranny’s
      Bloody standard is raised
      Listen to the sound in the fields
      The howling of these fearsome soldiers
      They are coming into our midst
      To cut the throats of your sons and consorts

      To arms citizens Form your battalions
      March, march
      Let impure blood
      Water our furrows

      What do they want this horde of slaves
      Of traitors and conspiratorial kings?
      For whom these vile chains
      These long-prepared irons?
      Frenchmen, for us, ah! What outrage
      What methods must be taken?
      It is us they dare plan
      To return to the old slavery!

      What! These foreign cohorts!
      They would make laws in our courts!
      What! These mercenary phalanxes
      Would cut down our warrior sons
      Good Lord! By chained hands
      Our brow would yield under the yoke
      The vile despots would have themselves be
      The masters of destiny

      Tremble, tyrants and traitors
      The shame of all good men
      Tremble! Your parricidal schemes
      Will receive their just reward
      Against you we are all soldiers
      If they fall, our young heros
      France will bear new ones
      Ready to join the fight against you

      Frenchmen, as magnanimous warriors
      Bear or hold back your blows
      Spare these sad victims
      That they regret taking up arms against us
      But not these bloody despots
      These accomplices of Bouillé
      All these tigers who pitilessly
      Ripped out their mothers’ wombs

      We too shall enlist
      When our elders’ time has come
      To add to the list of deeds
      Inscribed upon their tombs
      We are much less jealous of surviving them
      Than of sharing their coffins
      We shall have the sublime pride
      Of avenging or joining them

      Drive on sacred patriotism
      Support our avenging arms
      Liberty, cherished liberty
      Join the struggle with your defenders
      Under our flags, let victory
      Hurry to your manly tone
      So that in death your enemies
      See your triumph and our glory!

  5. PeaceThroughJustice
    March 5, 2015, 6:16 pm

    It wasn’t widely reported here, but the supermarket gunman (Amedy Coulibaly) conducted a telephone interview with a French radio station during the stand-off. His message: “Leave the Muslims alone and we will leave you alone.”

    “Each time, they try to make you believe that the Muslims are terrorists. But I was born in France. If they hadn’t attacked elsewhere, I would not be here.”

    Nothing about “being Jewish.”

    http://rt.com/news/221503-paris-gunman-argues-hostages/

    BTW, back when Bret Stephens was editor-in-chief of the Jerusalem Post in 2003, he named Paul Wolfowitz the paper’s “Man of the Year” for his role in starting the Iraq war.

  6. Atlantaiconoclast
    March 5, 2015, 8:54 pm

    “No prejudice is justifiable, and anti-Zionists must be sure to distinguish between criticizing the Jewish state and criticizing Jews. ” I agree, however, I don’t believe this standard is applied to other groups. As a Southerner, I know full well that my fellow Southerners are STILL called out for our past and remaining racial hangups. And what about the frequent reference to the Christian Right? If its ok to call out Christians who are on the right, why is it not ok to call out certain Jews, like for example, the ones who largely believe in, revere, and/or follow to at least some degree the anti Gentile Talmud? I refer to these types as Jewish supremacists. I’m not Jewish so I can’t say how many Jews follow every jot and tittle in the Talmud, but I know that for many Jews, its influential to varying degrees on their thinking. Or what about “the Jewish neocons” ? Is that phrase off limits, but “Christian Right” is not? If so, why? I just don’t like double standards.

    • Mooser
      March 6, 2015, 11:02 am

      ” I’m not Jewish so I can’t say how many Jews follow every jot and tittle in the Talmud, but I know that for many Jews, its influential to varying degrees on their thinking.”

      What on earth do you think is in the Talmud?

      • seafoid
        March 6, 2015, 11:06 am

        The Talmud says that Jews should whine 24/7 because it gives political cover for land appropriation and colonialism.

        It’s also very clear on the fact that things like kindness and decency towards others are far less effective than bombing them.

        And that blowing up sewage installations is kosher if it means you keep the land.

        I just checked this with the top Talmud scholar in Kiryat Arba ,Mooser, and he’ll break your legs if you object.

      • Mooser
        March 7, 2015, 11:39 am

        “I just checked this with the top Talmud scholar in Kiryat Arba”

        Well, I guess I can’t argue with him.

  7. seafoid
    March 5, 2015, 10:47 pm

    “Bret Stephens, the Wall Street Journal columnist, says he was “almost grateful” for the attack on the kosher supermarket in Paris in January in which four Jews were killed because it demonstrated that Europe has a problem with anti-Semitism” –

    That’s like a special burnt offering. Thanks to the 4 for dying so the WSJ can get a column out. Taking one for the team. Selfless.

    These right wing notions that the rich world is a vacuum with no link to anywhere else are nuts. If 3 Muslims are killed in the US it’s a lone wolf gunman with no system implications but if 4 Jews die in Europe there is an anti-Semitism crisis

    I suppose this article is part of the US right/left echo chamber series.

    • Kay24
      March 6, 2015, 7:46 am

      You are absolutely right. The difference when Muslims are killed versus Jews killed, is so obvious.

      Zionists like Stephens, seize that opportunity, to increase the outrage volume, and the cries of “woe is us, we are targets again”. Whenever Muslims are killed, it is not only played down, but the first reaction is to find a reason to not connect it to a racial attack. I guess they are comfortable with Israel attacking and killing Arab Muslims in their neighborhood, by the thousands, so a couple or more in the Western world, does not really matter now, does it?

      What is it with these zionists, they revel in the deaths or misfortunes of others, and try to benefit from these tragedies. It is ALL about what they get out of it.

  8. bryan
    March 6, 2015, 3:27 am

    “I’m almost grateful that this happened, that at last I think Europe is coming to recognize that it has a real problem with anti-Semitism that can’t be denied or can’t be passed off as a function of a reaction to Israeli policy”.

    America has a significant number of Moslem immigrants (not quite as high as Europe for simple geographical and historical reasons). America has significant numbers of violent, deranged and fanatical psychopaths (at least as high as Europe). America has easy access to weapons and a history of shoot-by killings, massacres and similar atrocities (far higher than Europe). Yet if four people were killed in a shoot-up in a Brooklyn kosher supermarket no American journalist would generalize from this to argue that America “has a real problem with anti-Semitism that can’t be denied or can’t be passed off as a function of a reaction to Israeli policy”. Double standards are supposedly the hall-mark of an anti-Semite, but in truth pro-Israel US journalists are equally prone to the phenomenon.

  9. eljay
    March 6, 2015, 7:38 am

    Bret Stephens, the Wall Street Journal columnist, says…

    Now with the attack on the kosher supermarket, I think [the anti-Semitism is] at last out in the open, and in that sense I’m almost grateful that this happened, that at last I think Europe is coming to recognize that it has a real problem with anti-Semitism that can’t be denied or can’t be passed off as a function of a reaction to Israeli policy.

    It’s nice that he’s “almost grateful” that Jewish people were murdered. But as long as Zio-supremacists like King Bibi, JeffB and others insist that…
    – Israel represents all Jews; and
    – all Jews are responsible for the actions of some Jews,
    …a (greater?) percentage of anti-Semitism can indeed be passed off as a function of a reaction to Israeli policy.

    (I wonder how much more aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction, torture and murder Israel has to undertake before Mr. Stephens “almost gratefully” recognizes that Palestinians face a real problem at the hands of Zio-supremacists and the supremacist “Jewish State” in Palestine.)

  10. retired
    March 6, 2015, 4:34 pm

    Bret Stephens has long functioned as a spokesman for higher-up neocons. He has been the editor of the Jerusalem Post (Murdoch owned) and for a while now, a leading columnist at the Wall Street Journal (Murdoch owned). He makes a lot of appearances on Fox. He is a pawn in a game that Murdoch is playing, and this is a rather new mission he has now, maybe the theme of “clash of civilizations” which has always been a favorite of the more intellectual neocons. The targets of the new campaign might be wealthy donors of the Wall Street/business world of either party, and aspiring young politicians of the Republican Party. The same ones who flocked to Adelson’s cattle call in Vegas last year.

  11. Sulphurdunn
    March 6, 2015, 6:36 pm

    The Zionists are becoming desperate to find new immigrants willing to go to Israel and not getting them, or at least not the ones they want.

  12. Scott
    March 7, 2015, 12:54 am

    I thought it was kind of interesting, in the biography of an idea kind of sense, when Stephens said his grandmother knew Trotsky in Mexico. I mean how many of those guys in Alcove no. 1 (or their parents) actually knew the man?

  13. Kay24
    March 7, 2015, 10:09 pm

    If anyone wants to see Stephens get his zionist talking points against Iran, get flattened by an entire panel, watch Fareed Zakaria GPS tomorrow. He ends up looking lame, and totally WRONG, about Iran, especially facts. It is enjoyable!

    • Mooser
      March 8, 2015, 6:19 pm

      “He ends up looking lame, and totally WRONG,”

      And then, after that , we can see if the amnesia phase of the syndrome kicks in, and Stephens ends up saying the same old stuff next time.

      • Kay24
        March 8, 2015, 10:11 pm

        He most probably will. I cannot see any new talking points, because they have uttered every lame one possible. His half baked theories did not fly here, and he looked ignorant.

        They must love Israel so much, to risk looking like that.

Leave a Reply