Tuesday, 26 August 2014

New members of the European Parliament need to break the cycle of antisemitism in the European Union, writes Robin Sclafani.  
Robin Sclafani is director of CEJI-A Jewish Contribution to an Inclusive Europe. CEJI is a long-term member of the European Network Against Racism.  
New members of the European Parliament need to take responsibility to break the cycle of bias and bigotry, in Parliament as well as within home constituencies and with colleagues.  
Regarding antisemitism, this means:
not linking Israeli politics and actions to Jews in general nor making comparisons with the Holocaust, Nazis, Hitler or apartheid  
not invoking Jewish stereotypes, myths and conspiracy theories in political commentary  
not pitting one community against another by instrumentalizing issues, such as Jewish security or Israel, in order to crack down on another community with discriminatory policies.  
The European Parliament and the European Commission must ensure they are not only spectators to the threat and reality of antisemitism which continues to thrive in the European Union. They must ensure the freedom of Jewish people, with all their diversity, to live in safety and security so that they can continue an active role in European society.  
One concrete action would be to pass hate crime legislation within European Criminal Law so that responses and penalties to bias-motivated crime are considered within common standards across the EU. Another would be to develop initiatives that effectively combat hate speech on the internet and the proliferation of hate ideologies through social media.

I'd love to know what goes through the heads of the activists in the Counterjihad movement when they see stories like this then decide to ignore them. Obviously, much, perhaps most, of the Counterjihad consists simply of Jews seeking to advance the interests of Jews. Their supposed opposition to Islam is, in reality, just an aspect of their pro-Jewish activism. They have no inherent interest in opposing Islam other than that, at this time, they see it as being in conflict with the interests of Jews. And, in general, these people strike me as uninterested in truth or morality except insofar as they perceive truth and morality as being congruent with the perceived advantage of their ethnic group.

Then there are non-Jews like Robert Spencer or Fjordman who are literally on the Jewish payroll. Receiving money from people has a way of subtly influencing the way you think about them. Without even being consciously aware of it, you start to steer your thoughts away from areas that might jeopardise the flow of future funds.

But there must, surely, be at least some genuinely European Counterjihadists who do not receive money from Jews. Yet they makes themselves complicit in this conspiracy of silence. What goes through your heads when you make that decision? Are you actually so brainwashed by mainstream mental conditioning that you react by denouncing anyone who points these facts out as a Nazi? Or do you know they are true as well as I do but simply deem it politic to keep quiet about them because you know that drawing attention to them means losing friends and contacts within the movement? Or because you know being critical of Jews will make it more difficult to persuade mainstream opinion to side with you about Muslims? What is the thought process?

UPDATE: Since I know that many of you kosher Counterjihadists still visit the site, I can only assume that you are too ashamed of your own cowardice to give an honest answer.


  1. Usually if you present an argument that is fact based they won't engage - its as simple as that!