Trending Topics:

Thane Rosenbaum and Jonathan Mark suggest Arab Muslims don’t belong in America

Media Analysis
and on 76 Comments

Here’s a hot-tub full of Islamophobia and xenophobia. Last week the Jewish Broadcasting Service held a roundtable on whether the Democratic Party is turning against Israel and much of the discussion was about three women elected last year to Congress, Rashida Tlaib of Detroit, Ilhan Omar of Minneapolis, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortes of Bronx/Queens. Both Tlaib and Omar are Muslims and have endorsed Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel, which all members of the JBS panel said is an anti-semitic movement.

The dialogue below about Muslim immigrants– “new” people, who come from “anti-Semitic” places, who believe in “sharia” law and are therefore incapable of accepting American democracy–  took place between Jonathan Mark, an associate editor of the New York Jewish Week, and Thane Rosenbaum, a Distinguished Fellow at NYU Law School. Rosenbaum said, “you simply do not belong in a constitutional democracy, I’m sorry.”

Thankfully they were answered by Eric Yoffie, a Reform rabbi who formerly headed the Union for Reform Judaism and who writes regularly for Haaretz.

Jonathan Mark: What I’d like to point out is that the three people we’re talking about, Tlaib and Omar and Octavio-Cortez [sic], they’re not three people. They are representing tens of thousands of people in their districts, aside from getting their appointments to top committees. Queens is not the Queens that you remember and I remember, Octavio-Cortez is [not] representing Forest Hills and Rego Park, she’s representing a district that’s overwhelmingly… Hispanic and not people of any rem – all the new pharaohs who “didn’t remember Joseph“, like in Crown Heights where the Blacks there didn’t remember Selma, that’s just the way it is.

And I think a big issue we haven’t touched on at all, is migration. And immigration is a favorite issue, it’s the nurtured baby issue of the Democratic Party right now. And where are these people from? None of them are… this is like the dirtiest word in America or to bring up, but Tlaib’s district is all new people, Omar’s district is all new people. They all come from a part of the world that’s anti-Semitic according to ADL polls and all kinds of international polling.

Thane Rosenbaum: John, just so we’ll be clear since you didn’t say the word, I’ll say it. You mean Muslims?

Mark: Yes.

Rosenbaum: Oh, OK, I’m sorry. Watch– Eric Yoffie’s gonna have a heart attack. Yes, we meant Muslims you’re … allowed to actually call them–

Eric Yoffie: We don’t want any new people in this country [sarcastically]. Let’s build that wall!

Rosenbaum: I’m not in favor of that. I’m just saying, This is the Obama strategy, you can’t actually use the word Muslim in a sentence.

Mark: Right, that’s why I just call them Democrats if I’m going to call them anything. But what’s interesting is, The Black in 1965 if he said “I don’t want pro apartheid people from South Africa coming to America,” that would be perfectly normal and Jews would support them but why can’t I say I don’t want people who are essentially anti Jewish apartheid people coming to America?

Rosenbaum: Who overwhelmingly might– because the polling is very clear throughout the Muslim and Arab world, in some countries 70– in Egypt 90% of the people believe in a strict adherence to sharia law–

Mark: Right.

Rosenbaum: And if you believe in a strict adherence to sharia law you simply do not belong in a constitutional democracy, I’m sorry. That has nothing to do with, it’s just saying, you don’t get the Statue of Liberty concept–

Mark: Right.

Rosenbaum: You don’t get the concept of pluralism and liberalism.

Yoffie: So Muslims are out?

Rosenbaum: No! I’m just saying to not recognize that there might be a legitimate argument to say “Well, y’know, to compare all immigrants to the same — Jews came to this country and embraced–”

Yoffie: Most Muslims who come to this country are not Arabs first of all, they’re from other areas. And so –

Mark: We’re not talking about Trinidad Muslims, we’re talking about people from a certain part of the world, and so where the problem is, is if let’s say tomorrow, Tlaib and Omar and Octavio-Cortez all resigned, they would all be replaced by the exact same kind of people because that’s who their districts are. Their districts are not nuanced districts.

Yoffie: I suggest we be careful about our language and the impressions that we create, and the notion that we fear the other, and the notion that we have to keep away people who might somehow be contrary to our values and concerns. That has led to a great deal of bigotry and hatred in the country right now. It’s led to terrible divisions from which we are all suffering. Jews have to be very, very careful about how they look at these issues from a values point of view and from a practical point of view.

Rosenbaum heads the Forum on Law, Culture and Society at NYU Law School. He is a novelist, whose website says that  he “serves as the Legal Analyst for CBS News Radio” and “moderates an annual series of discussions on culture, world events and politics at the 92nd Street Y called The Talk Show.”

Jewish Broadcasting Service panel. From left to right, Betty Ehrenberg of the World Jewish Congress, Thane Rosenbaum, Mark Golub of JBS, Eric Yoffie, and Jonathan Mark.

Jonathan Mark also said that Democrats critical of Israel “are looking for blood” and the pro-Israel side employs too much nuance; and he wishes Ilhan Omar had not apologized for saying that the Congress supports Israel because of money.

We’re bringing nuance to a knife fight. They are looking to kill literally the Jewish state… I am sorry she apologized, because I would wish these statements follow her around like dripping blood. Because otherwise what I see whenever I read about her now: they say what she said, then they say she apologized. As if she recanted after serious introspection, instead of she was being forced to apologize. It’s meaningless.

 

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

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

Other posts by .


annie
About Annie Robbins

Annie Robbins is Editor at Large for Mondoweiss, a human rights activist and a ceramic artist. She lives in the SF bay area. Follow her on Twitter @anniefofani

Other posts by .


Posted In:

76 Responses

  1. eljay
    eljay on February 26, 2019, 12:38 pm

    … Jonathan Mark also said that Democrats critical of Israel “are looking for blood” … and he wishes Ilhan Omar had not apologized for saying that the Congress supports Israel because of money.

    … They are looking to kill literally the Jewish state … I would wish these statements follow her around like dripping blood. …

    Even as they hypocritically advocate, engage in, support and/or defend their preferred brand of evil, Zionists can’t seem to refrain from engaging in blood-libel and victimhood.

    • Misterioso
      Misterioso on February 27, 2019, 10:05 am

      @eljay, et al

      “Rosenbaum: And if you believe in a strict adherence to sharia law you simply do not belong in a constitutional democracy, I’m sorry. That has nothing to do with, it’s just saying, you don’t get the Statue of Liberty concept–”

      Mr. Rosenbaum, you neglected to note that your beloved “Israel” does not “get the Statue of Liberty concept.”

      To be brief:
      Regarding Palestinian Arab citizens of “Israel,” i.e. west of the green line: They are and always have been governed under an apartheid system:

      Hendrik Verwoerd, then prime minister of South Africa and the architect of South Africa’s apartheid policies, 1961: “Israel, like South Africa, is an apartheid state.” (Rand Daily Mail, November 23, 1961)

      Jacobus Johannes Fouché, South African Minister of Defence during the apartheid era, compared the two states and said that Israel also practiced apartheid. (Gideon Shimoni (1980). Jews and Zionism: The South African Experience 1910-1967. Cape Town: Oxford UP. pp. 310–336. ISBN 0195701798.

      “Former Foreign Ministry director-general invokes South Africa comparisons. ‘Joint Israel-West Bank’ reality is an apartheid state”
      EXCERPT: “Similarities between the ‘original apartheid’ as it was practiced in South Africa and the situation in ISRAEL [my emphasis] and the West Bank today ‘scream to the heavens,’ added [Alon] Liel, who was Israel’s ambassador in Pretoria from 1992 to 1994. There can be little doubt that the suffering of Palestinians is not less intense than that of blacks during apartheid-era South Africa, he asserted.” (Times of Israel, February 21, 2013)

      Video: Israeli TV Host Implores Israelis: Wake Up and Smell the Apartheid
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyyUvxHLYr4

      In its 2015 Country Report on Human Rights Practices for Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories the U.S. Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor acknowledges the “institutional and societal discrimination against Arab citizens of Israel.” (U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor)

      “Construction, Not Destruction”
      “While Israeli Arabs constitute 20 percent of the population, Arab communities’ jurisdictions occupy just 2.5 percent of the state’s land area, and the process of approving new construction in Arab towns takes decades.” (Haaretz Editorial, April 4, 2017)

      One example of apartheid within Israel:
      “Jewish town won’t let Arab build home on his own land ”
      Excerpt: “Aadel Suad first came to the planning and construction committee of the Misgav Local Council in 1997. Suad, an educator, was seeking a construction permit to build a home on a plot of land he owns in the community of Mitzpeh Kamon. The reply he got, from a senior official on the committee, was a memorable one. ‘Don’t waste your time,’ he reportedly told Suad. ‘We’ll keep you waiting for 30 years.’” (Haaretz, 14 December 2009)

      Adi Ophir, professor of philosophy, Tel Aviv University: “…the adoption of the political forms of an ethnocentric and racist nation-state in general, are turning Israel into the most dangerous place in the world for the humanity and morality of the Jewish community, for the continuity of Jewish cultures and perhaps for Jewish existence itself.” (1998 issue of “Theory and Criticism,” published in Israel)

      Ilan Pappe, then professor of political science at Haifa University: “[Israel’s] political system [is] exclusionary, a pro forma democracy – going through the motions of democratic rule but essentially being akin to apartheid or Herenvolk (‘master race’) democracy.” (“Jerusalem Report,” Feb. 14/2000)

      Ronnie Kasrils, a key player in the struggle against the former South African apartheid regime, minister for intelligence and a devout Jew: “The Palestinian minority in Israel has for decades been denied basic equality in health, education, housing and land possession, solely because it is not Jewish. The fact that this minority is allowed to vote hardly redresses the rampant injustice in all other basic human rights. They are excluded from the very definition of the ‘Jewish state’, and have virtually no influence on the laws, or political, social and economic policies. Hence, their similarity to the black South Africans [under apartheid].” (The Guardian, 25 May 2005)

      Shlomo Gazit, retired IDF Major General: “[Israel’s] legal system that enforces the law in a discriminatory way on the basis of national identity, is actually maintaining an apartheid regime.” (Haaretz, July 19, 2011)

      Israel is the only country in the world that differentiates between citizenship and nationality, i.e., “Israeli” nationality does not exist, only Jews and non-Jews, and each citizen carries an appropriate identity card. While the implications of this absurdity for discrimination and racism against non-Jews are obvious, it has been upheld by Israel’s Supreme Court.

      The effect of Israel’s blatantly racist “Citizenship Law” and more than fifty other restrictions Arab citizens have to endure is well expressed by writer and Knesset member, Ahmed Tibi, “…dutifully defining the state [of Israel] as ‘Jewish and democratic,’ ignores the fact that in practice ‘democratic’ refers to Jews, and the Arabs are nothing more than citizens without citizenship.” (Ma’ariv, 1.6.2005)

    • captADKer
      captADKer on February 27, 2019, 7:47 pm

      MLK was a supporter of zionism and AFTER the “occupation”.

      • Talkback
        Talkback on February 28, 2019, 9:06 am

        When and how did MLK openly support Zionism per se??? And was he a supporter of occupation?

  2. ckg
    ckg on February 26, 2019, 2:22 pm

    Excellent piece, Phil and Annie. I love MW for publishing stories that I can’t find elsewhere. Jonathan Mark is a bit confused about Rashida Tlaib’s Detroit area district. It’s not “all new people” or even close. Michigan Public Radio said about the district, “Just over half the voters are African Americans, with the rest a mix of whites, Arab Americans and Latinos.” Tlaib’s district was recently represented by John Conyers who supported the AIPAC line. Conyers’ district had been racially gerrymandered to ensure a safe seat for Conyers and thus maintain African-American representation in Congress. Conyers resigned following misconduct allegations. The vast majority of immigrant-rich Dearborn is in Debbie Dingell’s district, not Tlaib’s.

    • JWalters
      JWalters on February 26, 2019, 5:25 pm

      Thanks for clearing up those Zionist “confusions” about the facts. Fully agree on the immense value of Mondoweiss for real facts.

      • ckg
        ckg on February 26, 2019, 10:43 pm

        You’re most welcome, JWalters. I should probably add that the demographics of Tlaib’s district make her vulnerable to a primary challenge, and astute AIPAC wonks are undoubtedly already scouting suitably compliant candidates.

    • Misterioso
      Misterioso on February 27, 2019, 10:18 am

      @ckg, etal

      For the record:

      http://www.ujfp.org/spip.php?article6938&fbclid=IwAR1tWqos2CwDxoA6ZAAovftkSwTNb0SNplt7w_ujpxlusgyZbcgrdu0ZY7o&lang=fr

      TRANSLATED FROM FRENCH

      “Jewish Union for Peace (France),” February 19, 2019

      “We are Jewish and we are anti-Zionists”

      “By National Coordination of the UJFP”

      “We are Jews, heirs of a long time when the great majority of Jews believed that their emancipation as an oppressed minority passed through the emancipation of all humanity.

      “We are anti-Zionists because we reject the separation of the Jews from the rest of humanity.

      “We are anti-Zionists because the Nakba, the premeditated ethnic cleansing of the majority of Palestinians in 1948-49, is a crime that needs to be repaired.

      “We are anti-Zionists because we are anti-colonialists.

      “We are anti-Zionist because we are anti-racist and because we reject the apartheid that has just been formalized in Israel.

      “We are anti-Zionists because we defend everywhere ‘living together in equal rights.’

      “At a time when those who unconditionally defend Israeli policies despite the occupation, colonization, the blockade of Gaza, the arrested children, the mass imprisonment, the torture made official in the law … prepare a liberticidal law assimilating anti-Semitism, which is our intimate history, to anti-Zionism,

      “We will not be silent.”

      The National Coordination of the UJFP, February 18, 2019

  3. Brewer
    Brewer on February 26, 2019, 3:30 pm

    Thanks for putting this discussion up.
    I have seen little else that engenders such hope for the future in quite some time for, if this is the level of intellect defending the apartheid State, it is finished.
    How that fellow with the hair got to be a Distinguished Fellow at NYU Law School is a mystery. One could drive a truck through the holes in his arguments.
    The pre-suppositions and huge omissions involved put this discussion on a level with those of religious zealots arguing over the number of angels occupying a pinhead.
    Garbage in, garbage out.

    • marc b.
      marc b. on February 26, 2019, 4:35 pm

      i think weiss (phil, not bari) chose a photo of that goofball for a reason. (not that i’ll make it to the cover of any fashion magazine). really, how long do you think he spends on his hair in the morning? if you can’t be einstein, then the next best thing is einstein’s hair! you just don’t roll out of bed looking like that. or come up with his half wit commentary overnight, that takes some teasing out too. sartre and james replaced by BHL’s chest hair. my youngest is in high school muddling through Aristotle ‘s Ethics and Boethius’s Consolation of Philosophy. you have to wonder what for at this stage in the game.

      • annie
        annie on February 26, 2019, 6:23 pm

        he’s definitely into his hair. i visited his website and he’s got a photo of himself only much younger w/the same look. this is a person trying to hold onto a youthful appearance while spouting hateful commentary.

      • RoHa
        RoHa on February 26, 2019, 9:18 pm

        Aristotle is famous for brushing his hair forward to hide his receding hairline. He also hides it under a cowboy hat.

        http://existentialcomics.com/comic/277

        This practice led the other members of Plato’s Academy to doubt his intellectual integrity, and so, when Plato died, they chose someone else to be the head of the Academy.

        This annoyed Aristotle, and he went off and set up a school for ballroom dancing.

        I don’t recall anything about Boethius’ hair.

    • JWalters
      JWalters on February 26, 2019, 5:58 pm

      “if this is the level of intellect defending the apartheid State, it is finished. … One could drive a truck through the holes in his arguments. The pre-suppositions and huge omissions involved put this discussion on a level with those of religious zealots”

      Spot on, every point.

      I’d offer one amendment to your theory. Rather than a low level of intellect, I suggest the intellect is fine and we’re looking at a low level of morality.

      As you note, they have HUGE omissions in their analysis. That is practially guaranteed to lead to a faulty analysis. The huge omission is the entire Palestinian story. This omission is a tactic used 100% of the time by Zionist proponents, totally dishonest, and revealed on camera in The Lobby.

      Realistically, these men ABSOLUTELY KNOW they are omitting that mountain of facts, dishonestly. In today’s internet world there is NO WAY they do not know. So why are they being intentionally dishonest? Realistically, there seem to me two possibilities.

      1. The monumental historical event. Bari Weiss has explained that the rebirth of Jewish sovereignty is such an important historical event that the decades of terrorism, murder, and robbery of the innocent people in Palestine are of comparatively no matter. The ancient Torah instruction to “leave nothing left alive that breathes” while taking over ancient Israel is thus re-enacted today.

      Or 2. The money. The ethical core of the Jewish community would normally be the religious leaders, the rabbis. But today even the rabbis are under the thumb of the Big Money people.
      “Rabbis want to criticize Israel but fear donors”
      http://mondoweiss.net/2014/09/rabbis-criticize-donors

      My guess is that these guys are all conscious swindlers, with the money motive, doing their act to keep the cult members, with the “monumental historical event” motive, in the cult pen. On the cult aspect, a Jewish therapist born in Israel has written “Why I left the cult”
      https://mondoweiss.net/2016/10/why-i-left-the-cult

      • Elizabeth Block
        Elizabeth Block on February 27, 2019, 9:46 am

        We’re also looking at an appalling ignorance of history. Jewish history. It is not all that long ago – one or two generations – that Jews were regarded as unfit for American democracy. I don’t remember that, but my grandfather sure did.

      • Brewer
        Brewer on February 27, 2019, 2:01 pm

        Watched it again. You are correct, its theatre.

      • JWalters
        JWalters on February 27, 2019, 6:03 pm

        Brewer, the term “theatre” is spot on, concise and accurate. I’ll be using that, thanks!

      • JWalters
        JWalters on February 27, 2019, 6:16 pm

        Elizabeth, perhaps your grandfather’s generation had heard those tropes about banking being taken over by a few Jews, then the newspapers, and then the government, and eventually winding up in a situation much like today.

        “What is anti-Semitism except for a vast conspiracy theory? Right? That the Jews somehow control the banks, the newspapers, the centers of power, and so forth.” – Zionist Mona Charen

        Charen’s statement are in a panel discussion here.
        https://venue.streamspot.com/video/dc5e9be71c
        An article discussing that panel is here.
        https://mondoweiss.net/2019/02/democratic-michelle-goldberg/

      • RoHa
        RoHa on February 28, 2019, 1:18 am

        And were Jews fit even for American democracy? It seems to me that no-one is fit for it until they’ve been practicing it for a while. And sometime not even then. The British have been trying it for quite a while, but I’m not convinced they’re ready for it.

  4. marc b.
    marc b. on February 26, 2019, 3:35 pm

    it really is f*cking depressing, the level of discourse. racist, yes, but worse, really, stupid. i can’t credit the person, because i’ve forgotten who recently wrote it, but we are witnessing the degeneracy of the entitled class, what’s-her-face weiss being one particularly insipid example. and, equating criticism of AIPAC with anti-Semitic blood lust: there really is no room for dialog with someone that unhinged.

  5. mikeo
    mikeo on February 26, 2019, 4:31 pm

    Rosenbaum: And if you believe in a strict adherence to sharia law you simply do not belong in a constitutional democracy, I’m sorry. That has nothing to do with, it’s just saying, you don’t get the Statue of Liberty concept–

    So presumably he’s consistent and also believes ultra-orthodox Jews do not belong in a constitutional democracy?

    🤔

    • MHughes976
      MHughes976 on February 26, 2019, 6:14 pm

      If you believe in the existence of God and that his will and wisdom can become known to us then the function of human authorities, in any form including democracy, is surely to work out how God’s will should be put into effect and to act accordingly. It can’t make sense to think that we could actually, by arguing and votng or by any other means, come to know better than God. This thought is often treated, especially when found in religions other than our own, as a rejection of our secular institutions. But it isn’t really, it’s just assigning them an instrumental rather than an absolutely sacred role. If you think that everyone has as much ability as everyone else to recognise the will of God then there is at least a strong reason for democracy. If you think that God’s nature is to set someone in authority then you move by some degree towards monarchy.

      • RoHa
        RoHa on February 26, 2019, 7:35 pm

        “If you think that God’s nature is to set someone in authority then you move by some degree towards monarchy.”

        I’m not sure that follows. Could not God’s nature be to set in authority the person chosen for the role by the people?

        (I don’t believe in God, but I am convinced that the Jade Emperor wants me to have the Mandate of Heaven. He isn’t helping me to convince others, though.)

      • eljay
        eljay on February 26, 2019, 8:40 pm

        || MHughes976: If you believe in the existence of God and that his will and wisdom can become known to us then the function of human authorities, in any form including democracy, is surely to work out how God’s will should be put into effect … ||

        Done! It’s name is “Pope”…but not Carol “High School Confidential” Pope.

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976 on March 4, 2019, 1:47 pm

        Sorry for late reply on interesting point. I suppose that the voice of the people can be regarded as the voice of God and the person elected by the people accordingly said to be elected by God also. I think that Jeff Sessions at the height of the ‘separation of immigrant families’ crisis last summer invoked the famous ‘powers that be’ passage of Romans 13 in a way that suggested – or at least that was mocked for supposedly suggesting – that God has elected Trump. On the other hand there is some instability in this degree of belief in divine election. If the ruler is in power by human vote then the question of re-election by another vote may arise. But how can you claim the right even to consider not voting for someone on whom God has set his seal? This may be reasonable answers to this question but they may get complex and the question may nag until you just start accepting that the president should have a life term in office, that his children should be very seriously considered as the group from which his successor should emerge and so on.

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976 on March 4, 2019, 5:23 pm

        And further apologies to you, eljay, for late reply to pertinent comment. Have you looked at the Dictatus Papae of 1075? A real Protestant nightmare. There is certainly a problem about reconciling a polity formed by an agreement in a place and at a time – a social contract – and a divine mandate of universal character.

      • RoHa
        RoHa on March 5, 2019, 2:06 am

        “But how can you claim the right even to consider not voting for someone on whom God has set his seal?”

        You can consider it when you think that the Mandate of Heaven has been withdrawn. Of course, you have to guess when that happens, but you guess when it’s bestowed in the first place.

        No doubt there is a committee of which reviews the allocation of Mandates, and sends its recommendations to the Jade Emperor*, and it would be handy if they sent a copy to us, but perhaps making our own assessments is one of our duties.

        (*Given the way things are, the idea of the Jade Emperor running things through his Heavenly bureaucracy seems much more believable than a perfect, omnipotent, and omniscient being running the show.)

      • Mooser
        Mooser on March 5, 2019, 11:39 am

        ” I am convinced that the Jade Emperor wants me to have the Mandate of Heaven.”

        Let Dowager Empress Cixi is run things from behind the throne, and you’ll do fine.

  6. Spring Renouncer
    Spring Renouncer on February 26, 2019, 5:24 pm

    It’s a sad truth that many American Zionists are racist, because they are devoted to a racist ideology. My good friend is Jewish American. Their parent is a refugee, who emigrated from Eastern Europe decades ago. The parent claims to be socially liberal, but right wing in terms of economics and foreign policy. In reality, he or she is rabidly islamophobic and especially opposed to refugees from the Muslim World.

    The parent is nice personally, but seems earnestly and obsessively frightened by the prospect of Muslim refugees bringing anti-Semitic violence to the US. They point to universities as an example of where this is already occurring. I find this position problematic, but also deeply hypocritical and ironic.

    In the early 20th the same type of racist, xenophobic and nativist fear mongering was deployed by “native” (white) Americans against immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe. The archetypical targets of this hate were Jewish refugees fleeing persecution in Europe. They were tarred with the antisemitic trope of “Jewish Bolshevism” and seen as disloyal infiltrators incompatibile with white Christian American society. Such sentiments led to a quota on immigration from Eastern/Southern Europe that proved deadly during the Holocaust. These attitudes remained prevalent in the US until the 1950-60s.

    I find it so unfortunate that my friend’s parent is replicating the same xenophobia that was so unjust to the Jews a few decades ago, and applying it to Syrians and Yemenis now. Nationalism is a curse that begets blindness and dehumanization.

  7. gamal
    gamal on February 26, 2019, 6:36 pm

    “in Egypt 90% of the people believe in a strict adherence to sharia law–”

    Sharia, I have no idea what that means in this context, “strict application” what?..anyway Aisha for whom the Prophet is branded a paedophile was approached by a guy who wanted her advice about order of verses in the Quran before dictating them she says inter alia

    “If the first thing to be revealed was: ‘Do not drink alcoholic drinks.’ people would have said, ‘We will never leave alcoholic drinks,’ and if there had been revealed, ‘Do not commit illegal sexual intercourse, ‘they would have said, ‘We will never give up illegal sexual intercourse.’ ”

    the misperception of fiqh, which is entirely theoretical, as if it were the application of law in the Sharia system is something I would have thought a NYU legal academic would have known and thought relevant, as Aishas aside makes clear you really can’t expect too much from people, which is the aspect of Sharia called rikhsa (alleviation, permission) expressed as 2:286 “Our Lord, do not us burden beyond what we are able to bear” in Baqarra, Qadis, judges are not usually legal scholars, that not being their role, they consult with legal scholars for the Qadi social harmony, probity and prosperity are the goals.

    here’s an article not read it all but it seems ok, the influence of Halacha on Sharia and vice versa,
    not polemical.

    https://www.encyclopedia.com/religion/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/jewish-and-islamic-law-comparative-review

    • Brewer
      Brewer on February 26, 2019, 9:05 pm

      One would not think it necessary to explain the nature of Sharia, Canon and Halakha law and their equivalence to a “Distinguished Fellow at NYU Law School”.
      Perhaps JWalters is correct in deducing “a low level of morality” rather than ignorance.

  8. lyn117
    lyn117 on February 26, 2019, 6:38 pm

    I guess “nuance” is one of the new buzzwords Zionists are using to describe their views. I don’t know what it means other than “I don’t really have a good argument so I’ll try to be subtle about what I’m saying”

    • Peter in SF
      Peter in SF on February 26, 2019, 11:53 pm

      Zionists have been talking about “nuance” for years. I hear the word on call-in shows and read it on discussion boards when Zionists use it to express their opposition to defenders of Palestinians.

    • RoHa
      RoHa on February 27, 2019, 1:57 am

      I think it means

      “The facts are so totally against my position that I have to pretend that there are additional complications you don’t understand and I do.”

      • Rashers2
        Rashers2 on February 27, 2019, 5:38 pm

        +1; so do I.

  9. Kay24
    Kay24 on February 26, 2019, 7:03 pm

    They must wish they had their way, and could stop Muslim immigrants from coming in to the country. This is nothing but an effort to demonize those who dare to criticize Israel, and their prejudice shows. We can imagine the outrage had his been said about Jewish immigrants.

    Here are interesting stats from the CATO institute, which shows they are wrong:

    “The fact that Muslim Americans are dominated by immigrants could lead to the conclusion that the views of Muslim Americans will reflect the views of Muslims worldwide. But this is not the case. They are rapidly adopting American social views and liberalizing their religious views to accommodate.”

    https://www.cato.org/blog/muslims-rapidly-adopt-us-social-political-values

    • RoHa
      RoHa on February 26, 2019, 9:41 pm

      That survey is good news.

      (Except that I can see that a fair number of people in Guinea Bissau are going to Hell.)

      • Mooser
        Mooser on February 27, 2019, 12:47 pm

        Uh-oh, “RoHa” is in loco parentheses again.

    • Rashers2
      Rashers2 on February 27, 2019, 7:00 pm

      @Kay24, thanks for pointing out this study. Its findings don’t, however, surprise me based on my first-hand knowledge of British Muslims (mostly male). Most in my circles of friends and good acquaintances are of Pakistani, Bengali or Turkish heritage. Many adhere strongly to their religious beliefs but their attitudes and social values are closer to those to be found in the urban social “mainstream”. I have encountered no misogyny or disrespect for the position or independence of Western women nor have the British Muslim men whom I count as close or social friends ever evinced homophobia or articulated any anti-Semitic sentiments in my presence.
      Last week, a young Pakistani friend in the West Midlands of England, who had been living on “indefinite leave to remain” in the UK and works as an institutional carer, messaged me to tell me that his British citizenship had come through. Even at 3,500 miles’ remove, it was palpable that he was over the moon about it! I truthfully replied that I was delighted, very proud to call him a fellow-countryman and could think of few who would make a greater contribution than he to our society.

      • Kay24
        Kay24 on February 27, 2019, 8:13 pm

        That is an interesting perspective to the immigrant situation regarding Muslims. The majority do seem to assimilate easily, and are just like immigrants of other nationalities and religions. All they want is the opportunity to work hard, live comfortable lives, and make sure their children get the education, they are unable to get in the nations they come from. It seems the demonizing of Muslims, which has been a hate campaign, for years, have resulted in the misconception that they do not assimilate, and are all extremists. Pity.

  10. Sibiriak
    Sibiriak on February 26, 2019, 9:00 pm

    Many people in mostly Christian countries believe values clash with Islam – poll

    Large numbers of people in Christian-majority countries in the west see a fundamental clash between Islam and the values of their nation, according to a survey.

    * * *

    The YouGov poll on religious attitudes found in four western countries, respondents had less favourable views of Islam than other religions. In France, 49% said they felt fairly, or very, unfavourable towards Islam, compared with 19% who were unfavourable towards Judaism, 15% to Christianity, 13% towards Hinduism, 14% to Sikhism and 9% to Buddhism.

    In Germany, 53% of respondents were unfavourable towards Islam, compared with 10% to 22% who were unfavourable to other religions. In the US and Britain, smaller proportions (37% and 32%) were unfavourable towards Islam, with a similar range viewing other religions negatively.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/03/people-in-christian-majority-countries-values-clash-islam-poll

    =========================================================

    Decathlon drops French sports hijab after politicians threaten boycott

    […]The French sports store Decathlon has cancelled a plan to put a sports hijab on the market in France after several politicians, including one from Emmanuel Macron’s centrist party, called for a boycott.

    The retailer’s plain, lightweight running headscarf, which covers the hair but not the face, is already on sale in Morocco and was to be extended to France and worldwide. But after a social media storm and outrage from some politicians against Muslim head coverings, the company backtracked and said the garment would not go on sale “at the present time” in France.

    Agnès Buzyn, the health minister in Macron’s government, said of the garment: “It’s a vision of women that I don’t share. I would prefer if a French brand did not promote the headscarf.”

    Aurore Bergé, from Macron’s centrist party, La République En Marche, tweeted her opposition, saying she would boycott the store which she accused of not respecting French values.

    She said: “My choice as a woman and citizen will be to no longer trust a brand which breaks with our values.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/26/decathlon-drops-french-sports-hijab-after-politicians-threaten-boycott

  11. smithgp
    smithgp on February 26, 2019, 10:38 pm

    That video is too nauseating to watch. Next article.

  12. wondering jew
    wondering jew on February 27, 2019, 12:41 am

    please note that eric yoffe considers corbyn an antisemite. i think corbyn’s: “you zionists don’t appreciate the british sense of humor” is answered by most british zionists, with “we are british” and is seen by zionist jews as evidence of judeophobia or to be more precise the british attitude towards immigrants, even 140 years after immigration, is we are british and you are visitors. just because someone waves a red flag that doesn’t remove that british snobbery. and jews call that snobbery (when they are its target) antisemitism.

    • eljay
      eljay on February 27, 2019, 8:28 am

      || wondering jew: … i think corbyn’s: “you zionists don’t appreciate the british sense of humor” is answered by most british zionists, with “we are british” … ||

      The non-Jewish ones, sure. But the Jewish ones keep insisting that they – like all Jews – are actually ancient Israelites exiled from their ancient / historic / eternal / one true homeland. Corbyn’s confusion is therefore understandable.

      || … and is seen by zionist jews as evidence of judeophobia or to be more precise the british attitude towards immigrants, even 140 years after immigration, is we are british and you are visitors. … ||

      The “british attitude towards immigrants” appears to coincide with the British Zionist attitude toward British Jews.

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew on February 27, 2019, 4:14 pm

        Try this on: If one person feels offended and says, “you are being hateful” and the “offender” says, “No, I’m being clever.” odds are they are being cleverly hateful.
        Try these on:
        Bob Dylan is a Zionist, therefore Bob Dylan does not understand American music.
        Woody Allen is a Zionist, therefore Woody Allen does not understand American humor.
        Bernie sanders is a Zionist, therefore Bernie Sanders does not understand American politics.
        Allen Dershowitz is a Zionist therefore Allen Dershowitz does not understand American jurisprudence.
        These are all nonsense, of course. And accusing British Zionists of not understanding british humor is nonsense of course. hateful nonsense. Clever (not all that clever really) hateful nonsense.

      • eljay
        eljay on February 27, 2019, 5:33 pm

        || wondering jew: Try this on … accusing British Zionists of not understanding british humor is nonsense of course. hateful nonsense. Clever (not all that clever really) hateful nonsense. ||

        Try this on, y.f.:
        I agree that it’s hateful nonsense and I think Corbyn should apologize for his comment and cease and desist with making any more similar comments.

        Try this on, too:
        Zionists insist on conflating Israel with all Jews and all Jews with Israel. They routinely leverage that conflation to smear with accusations of anti-Semitism (and even “Jew hatred”) people who rightly condemn Israel for its past and on-going colonialism, (war) crimes and supremacism. Not only are these actions unclever, hateful nonsense but the former is anti-Semitic and the latter is destructive…and Zionists use both knowing full well their impacts.

        Do you agree with me that Zionists should:
        – apologize for and stop conflating all Jews with Israel and Israel with all Jews; and
        – apologize for and stop smearing people with baseless and destructive accusations of anti-Semitism?

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew on February 27, 2019, 5:49 pm

        I don’t make it my business to condemn other people. the only reason i touched on corbyn is because he was called by ocasio cortez and she’s my business. a congressperson from my city. so i feel personally involved in her politics.
        i think that bds is meant to create a situation that would probably end in catastrophe for the jewish project of statehood. that project is on shaky turf in many ways, but the solution that bds has in mind would probably result in a lebanon at best. the solution that netanyahu has in mind, well, it’s not clear that he has a solution in mind, he has the status quo and its worsening in mind. so i understand people who feel they have no choice but to endorse bds. but i feel that zionism was a jewish revolution which declared that unilateral disarmament was no longer feasible and i agree with that impulse. although it is not leading in a good direction.

        did i write enough or do you have some specific statement that i must approve word for word for you to be satisfied. eljay?

      • eljay
        eljay on February 27, 2019, 7:10 pm

        || wondering jew: I don’t make it my business to condemn other people. … ||

        Bullshit, y.f. You condemn people here on MW all the time. Hell, you just finished condeming Corbyn for his “Clever (not all that clever really) hateful nonsense” comment.

        || … the only reason i touched on corbyn … ||

        Right, you didn’t condemn him, you “touched on” him.  ;-)

        || … did i write enough or do you have some specific statement that i must approve word for word for you to be satisfied. eljay? ||

        y.f., this is truly pathetic. I asked you a very simple and straightforward question. I know that you know that I asked you a very simple and straight forward question. Instead of answering it, you churned out a bunch of babble and now you’re playing some sort of victimhood card. Why don’t you man up and just answer the direct question directly?

        Do you agree with me that Zionists should:
        – apologize for and stop conflating all Jews with Israel and Israel with all Jews; and
        – apologize for and stop smearing people with baseless and destructive accusations of anti-Semitism?

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew on February 27, 2019, 8:01 pm

        eljay- you share corbyn’s personality. no, i will not make a blank condemnation for your edification. show me a statement and i will comment on it.

      • Peter in SF
        Peter in SF on February 28, 2019, 4:23 am

        wandering jew:

        And accusing British Zionists of not understanding british humor is nonsense of course. hateful nonsense. Clever (not all that clever really) hateful nonsense.

        Corbyn was referring specifically to some “Zionists who were in the audience on that occasion”, and said that these particular Zionists showed by their behavior that they “don’t understand English irony”. You ought to apologize for mischaracterizing his remark: Corbyn was not saying that because these people were Zionists, they didn’t understand English irony (or “british humor” in your formulation); he was saying that the behavior of these particular Zionists (who berated a Palestinian speaker) showed that they didn’t understand English irony.

        The American Zionist speakers in the video here also show that they do not understand American values. They talk about each “people” deserving a country that it can control. Americans don’t think of “peoples” within America: it is literally a foreign concept, something that applies, if it does, only abroad. Let’s face it, what they’re talking about is more understandable in the original German: they’re talking about a Volk — as in that slogan Ein Volk, ein Reich, ….

        Americans do understand the ideal of equal rights for everyone who lives in the same country. But they don’t talk about that in this video. But even if we try to apply their Volk thinking to the U.S., well, let’s see: African-Americans would count anthropologically as a “people” because they have a common history and culture, for sure, but then the logic of these Zionist TV guests leads us to the conclusion that African-Americans deserve to have an independent country of their own. That’s why Americans avoid all thinking of “peoples” within the U.S. and think instead of the rights of “people” (as in Leute, not Volk).

      • eljay
        eljay on February 28, 2019, 7:43 am

        || wondering jew: eljay- you share corbyn’s personality. no, i will not make a blank condemnation for your edification. show me a statement and i will comment on it. ||

        First there was babble, then victimhood and now indignation…but still no direct answer to a direct and straightforward question.

        I can’t imagine the effort it must take, day in and day out, to steadfastly:
        – defend a preferred brand of evil;
        – selectively oppose justice, equality and respect for human rights and international laws.

      • Talkback
        Talkback on February 28, 2019, 8:54 am

        wondering jew: “And accusing British Zionists of not understanding british humor is nonsense of course. hateful nonsense. Clever (not all that clever really) hateful nonsense.”

        And accusing Corbyn of hate is nonsense of course. hateful nonsense. Stupid (no, very stupid) hateful nonsense.

        wondering jew: “i think that bds is meant to create a situation that would probably end in catastrophe for the jewish project of statehood.”

        Thank you for your hopeful and kind words. That’s very encouraging.

      • amigo
        amigo on February 28, 2019, 1:42 pm

        Try this on Yonah Fredman aka Wandering Jew.

        “imagine, sitting and eating white bread and mayonnaise with your neighbors, but then going home and chowing down on some pastrami on rye, mit a pickle and chicken soup,”Yonah Fredman

        https://mondoweiss.net/2017/07/israeli-solomon-schechter/

        I take it yonah , that the neighbours you are referring to are non Jews and the twats dont, know how to eat properly.

        I don,think you are in a position to be calling out anyone for antisemitism or any hateful comments about others.

    • Mooser
      Mooser on February 27, 2019, 12:03 pm

      “think corbyn’s: “you zionists don’t appreciate the british sense of humor”… evidence of judeophobia “WJ”

      You don’t think Corbyn was paying us a compliment? After all, don’t we have our own, essentially separate sense of humor?

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      Maximus Decimus Meridius on February 27, 2019, 5:39 pm

      You’re several months behind on your anti Corbyn smears.

      The ‘don’t get British irony’ non-event was debunked in the last round (or was it the round before that? Hard to keep up) of faux antisemitism hysteria. If you watch the video – I suggest a quick google search – it’s plain as day that Corbyn is referring to a small ground of fanatic Zionist hecklers who, in the well-known fashion of fanatic Zionist hecklers, were trying to disrupt a political meeting.

      Anyone who watched it in good faith – I suspect you haven’t watched it at all – knows it’s not in any way antisemitic, whatever Eric Yoffe – whoever the hell he is – might choose to think.

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew on February 27, 2019, 7:49 pm

        mdm – You’re right. corbyn is not an antisemite. i’ve encountered his type many times in ny street corner arguments. he’s just a twat. (sorry. can’t think of a better word.) 100% pure twat. if someone disagrees with me or doesn’t like the rhetoric it’s because he doesn’t appreciate british irony. what a twat!

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew on February 27, 2019, 7:59 pm

        by the way people who are wary of using the word twat would probably out of lack of linguistic finesse find some other word to call him, like anti semite. but you’re right. he’s just a twat.

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew on February 27, 2019, 9:39 pm

        i suppose supercilious is the best english pg word, but if one expands one’s horizons there’s nothing better to describe that sophomore college attitude that knows the world and you are nothing than the t word.

      • Brewer
        Brewer on February 27, 2019, 11:46 pm

        Oh dear WJ.
        “Twat” is a slang term for female genitalia.
        Shall we subject your use of it to the same scrutiny as you apply to Corbyn?
        Are you a misogynist?

      • eljay
        eljay on February 28, 2019, 7:45 am

        || wondering jew: mdm – You’re right. corbyn is not an antisemite. i’ve encountered his type many times in ny street corner arguments. he’s just a twat. (sorry. can’t think of a better word.) 100% pure twat. … what a twat! … he’s just a twat. ||

        Earlier in the day:

        || wondering jew: I don’t make it my business to condemn other people. … ||

        y.f. is nothing if not amusing.  :-)

      • Maximus Decimus Meridius
        Maximus Decimus Meridius on February 28, 2019, 8:12 am

        That’s some really astute political analysis you’ve got going on there, ‘wondering Jew’.

        Have you ever considered a career as a TV news ‘expert’? Your level of informed, sophisticated analysis would be perfect.

  13. YoniFalic
    YoniFalic on February 27, 2019, 6:28 am

    There have been a lot of studies of Muslim attitudes toward Sharia.

    http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/

    Overall Sharia is somewhat more progressive than Halakhah. There is statistical evidence indicating that Jewish women preferred to pursue lawsuits in sharia courts instead of Jewish battei din.

    Legal anthropologists find the Sharia judiciary in the central provinces of the Ottoman Empire to function as well and as fairly as contemporary legal systems in the UK, France, Switzerland, and Germany even though a Sharia legal proceeding (like a Halakhic proceeding in a beit din) differs immensely procedurally from European legal proceeding.

    • RoHa
      RoHa on February 28, 2019, 1:14 am

      On point I find annoying. There is a tendency to treat Islam and Shari’a as monolithic. In fact, there are many varieties of Islam, and I know of four Sunni schools of Shari’a. There may be more. I don’t know how many schools of Shi’ah law there are, but I’m sure Gamal can tell us.

      • YoniFalic
        YoniFalic on February 28, 2019, 3:07 pm

        In the central Ottoman provinces the Ottoman legal system represented Sharia law and Sharia judicial proceedings in their most highly evolved state.

        The Anglo-American Common Law system and the Ottoman Sharia system developed along with the world.

        A major problem with the Rabbinic Jewish Halakhic system results from the absence of a need for similar development even in areas and at times when it was given some autonomy.

      • gamal
        gamal on February 28, 2019, 5:43 pm

        “but I’m sure Gamal can tell us”

        Well I could do something I suppose. It is a bit more complex in the Sunni world than 4 schools only, at its height there were 21 or so schools they didn’t disappear but were incorporated into the 4. Most interesting of these was the jaririyya of Tabari which had a profound influence, he rejected as absurd the notion of a woman’s word counting for 1/2 that of man in a fine piece of reasoning and ‘ethnography’, he rejected restrictions on female authority and social, commercial and religious participation, in a line of reasoning that is very well known and influential.

        The Shia Jaffari school of the 12ers is interesting as a) more than one of the eponymous Sunnis studied under him and weirdly even though the Shia have a dreamy semi-sufi reputation in the west they maintain the mautazila rationalist approach much more than the “sunnis”

        The British in India appalled by the variegated micro systems of Sharia they found there systematized ‘Sharia’ in a way not done before and leading to the observation that the East India Company produced a ‘F.A Rule Book Sharia’ whose effects are still felt today.

        That legal scholar best known for his extra curricular activities Rumi produced one of the most beautiful defences of ‘tolerance’ following Shams..he asserts that there is no ‘sharia’ without full awareness that..

        “In essence there is no division and numeration nor is there diversity and separation. In the beginning we were all of the same infinite essence. Without beginning without any end of one core we were, like rays of the sun. Like water we were unknotted. Whether it is blasphemy or faith it is produced by and belongs to God, Moses and Pharoah both can be found within, since the Beloved is only one all religions and peoples are one . Strictness and intolerance are signs of immaturity, you only drink blood as a foetus” from the Mathnawi little paraphrased, but still that’s the law.

      • gamal
        gamal on February 28, 2019, 5:57 pm

        “from the Mathnawi ”

        also known as the “Quran in Persian” but few people in the west read it to help their understanding of the Quran, perhaps the rough parables put people off.

  14. TerryHeaton
    TerryHeaton on February 27, 2019, 8:29 am

    What I find absolutely fascinating about this is that we don’t have to go back too far in history to discover highly similar language used to justify the murder of Jews. Assimilation into the culture – or the refusal to assimilate – formed the core of “The Jewish Question” in Europe and beyond in the 19th and 20th Centuries and led directly to Hitler’s “Final Solution.” Final solution to what? The Jewish Question. So here we have the basics of what is essentially The Muslim Question, and there’s no logic I can find in these statements by people who should certainly know better. Sharia law? Jewish law? I guess it all depends on whose fatted calf is being whacked.

  15. Ossinev
    Ossinev on February 27, 2019, 10:26 am

    The latest development in the ongoing increasingly boring “Institutionalised A/S in the Labour Party” farce is currently unfolding with the Labour MP Chris Williamson now the focus of attack largely I think because he has been a principled and highly effective critic of the false A/S allegations.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47385108

    Apparently it is now Anti – Semitic to defend yourself or your political party if accused of “Anti- Semitism”. And it is an even greater crime to suggest that the accusations are part of a plot or a conspiracy of any kind. His particular “crime” which kick started the HC operation ?
    “Mr Williamson, who is a close ally of Jeremy Corbyn, told activists Labour had been “too apologetic” over anti-Semitism and was being “demonised as a racist, bigoted party”

    Chris Williamson has been one of the few Labour MP`s who has called out this disgusting smear campaign for what it is so HC it would appear have sent out instructions that he is next on the UK Zios and UK Zio lap dogs hit list. And guess what who immediately pops up to lead the charge none other than the leading lap dog Tom Watson who is becoming increasingly absurd.All the more so since he is refusing to do the “decent” thing and join the other Labour Party defectors. I can`t think of an exact equivalent of “Benjamins” but it is definitely all about them.

    Worth listening to Chris Williamson. He is no soft target.

    As he says this is becoming increasingly Orwellian.

    What is needed as he has said is a clear fight back. The best way forward IMHO is for local Labour Party constituency parties to hold meetings to get members views on this disgusting anti Corbyn campaign and to ask individual constituency MP`s to clearly state their position and views. Time to smoke out and shame the rats.

  16. punterweger
    punterweger on February 27, 2019, 12:21 pm

    This jew should do less wondering and more reading, but thanks for giving me the opportunity to post the best debunking of this silly anti-Corbyn accusation once again.

    [Jerry Haber, Facebook post Saturday 25 August 5pm]
    — Did you hear that Jeremy Corbyn, in a speech in 2013, said that British Jews weren’t really British even if they were born there?
    — Really? He said that?
    — Well, he intimated that British Jews couldn’t grasp English irony and didn’t understand history.
    — Really? He was referring to Jews?
    — Well, he didn’t SAY Jews, but he said that about UK Zionists, which is a left-wing code term for British Jews.
    — Hang on, he made a reference to UK Zionists as a group?
    — Well, not exactly. Actually, he was referring to some pro-Israel members of the audience who came up and started arguing with the Palestinian ambassador who had presented the history of Palestine and used irony when he said, “You know I’m reaching the conclusion that the Jews are the children of God, the only children of God and the Promised Land is being paid by God! I have started to believe this because nobody is stopping Israel building its messianic dream of Eretz Israel to the point I believe that maybe God is on their side. Maybe God is partial on this issue.”” which apparently some of the Zionists thought he meant without irony (We do not have a transcript of what they said) . And Corbyn referred to “the Zionists in the audience.”
    — So, you mean to say he did not refer to British Zionists as a whole, but he was saying that the Palestinian ambassador, who is Armenian Palestinian, had a greater grasp of English irony, than these Brits who had lived in England all their lives?
    — Yes, that’s about it.
    — So, in effect, he accused pro-Israeli members of the audience, whom he referred to as “Zionists”, which they are, and who argued with the Palestinian ambassador, with being humorless and misunderstanding history, compared with the Palestinian ambassador.
    — Yep.
    — Well, that makes the man clearly an anti-Semite, doesn’t it?

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      Maximus Decimus Meridius on February 27, 2019, 5:42 pm

      Yup. That’s pretty much the shape of it.

      Call the antisemitism police. Though they’re probably run off their feet investing years old retweets from minor politicians.

    • RoHa
      RoHa on February 27, 2019, 11:30 pm

      “UK Zionists, which is a left-wing code term for British Jews.”

      I can’t find that in my left wing code book.

      But my book was published in 1963, so it might be a bit out of date.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on February 28, 2019, 5:01 pm

        “I can’t find that in my left wing code book.”

        Try: “British Jews”, which is a code word for the Left Wing”.

        No, that’s from a even earlier edition.

      • Keith
        Keith on March 1, 2019, 12:34 am

        MOOSER- ” No, that’s from a even earlier edition.”

        Different times, different tactics.

      • Mooser
        Mooser on March 1, 2019, 11:31 am

        “Different times, different tactics.”

        That’s right. These days, anything but imperial capitalism is anti-Semitic.

  17. Rashers2
    Rashers2 on February 28, 2019, 6:01 pm

    @Kay24 Lest anyone get there first, there have been some high-profile cases in the UK of “gangs” (read “groups”) of young- to early-middle-aged Muslim men convicted of grooming young Caucasian girls (mostly, it seems, teenagers around or over the age of consent) for sexual gratification and making them dependent, for money or for narcotics, on their exploiters. The MSM has reported that this is a “cultural” phenomenon owing to Muslims’ differential views on gender inequality, on (female) sex before marriage and on (female) promiscuity. The MSM’s angle, to anyone attuned to looking for media feed-stock for populist agendas, has been highly tendentious, emphasising the “otherness” of Muslims and how they are “not like us”, the “we” of “us” being the now largely mythical, hard-working, respectable, white working class Brits of the 1950s/60s/70s.
    Running this kind of story is manna for journalists, who know they’re pushing at an open door by stoking Islamophobia in Britain or anywhere in Europe. That there are Muslim men with bad attitudes, prepared to prey upon the weaker, more susceptible in a society is not exactly falling off one’s chair territory, any more than is saying that domestic violence is most easily concealed in relatively closed communities such as the enclaves of Orthodox Jews in London, where it would not be considered “outsiders’ business” or that priests and youth leaders can exploit their positions of trust to abuse children. It is however, no more correct to conclude that it is the typical behaviour of Muslim men to seek out and sexually enslave white girls than to conclude that every second Orthodox home harbours a wife-beater or that every Roman Catholic priest is a raging paedophile; it is patently not the case.
    I’m not an academic sociologist with a research budget so I can go only on my anecdotal experience, which is that the Muslims I know tend to have very similar preoccupations to the atheists, Jews, Christians and Hindus I know, namely keeping a job or running a business, paying utility bills, putting bread on the table and looking after their dependants.

Leave a Reply