The Islamization of European Anti-Semitism

[msmcghee]

The American Thinker (Sept. 7, 2006)

On Thursday, September 7, 2006, as first reported by the Times of London this past Saturday (9/2/06), an All-Party Parliamentary Enquiry into Antisemitism is expected to issue its finding that anti-Jewish violence has become endemic in Britain, both on the streets and university campuses. A major surge of attacks has accompanied—and followed—the recent conflict between Hezb’allah and Israel. According to the Times, “The report will call for urgent action from the Government, the police and educational establishments.”

However, in referring to the preponderance of the actual attackers, the Times provided only this vague allusion, “Muslims are over-represented,” seemingly oblivious to its own earlier poll whose results were published on February 7, 2006. These data revealed the twisted justification for such violent bigotry: 37 per cent of British Muslims believe the Jewish community in Britain is a legitimate target “as part of the ongoing struggle for ‘justice’ in the Middle East.”

A subsequent (9/5/06) report on the Parliamentary Enquiry in the Jerusalem Post was more forthcoming, and stated explicitly that “Islamic extremists” were responsible for “inciting hatred towards Jews”. As the Jerusalem Post also noted, the Parliamentary Enquiry’s results are consistent with data recently published in The Journal of Conflict Resolution by Yale University biostatistician Dr. Edward H. Kaplan, and Dr. Charles A. Small of the Yale Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism.

Drs. Kaplan and Small examined the views of 5004 Europeans, roughly 500 individuals sampled from each of 10 European Union countries (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom). The authors’ main publicized results confirmed their (rather commonsensical) a priori hypothesis: anti-Israel sentiments strongly and independently predicted the likelihood that an individual was anti-Semitic in a graded manner, i.e., the more anti-Israel (on a scale of zero to 4), the more a person was likely to be anti-Semitic.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5833

[muriel_volestrangler]

1. Rather than take the word of a right wing site about it

why not look at the report itself? http://thepcaa.org/Report.pdf

Or look at a short piece by one of the MPs in the commission? http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/denis_macshane/2006/09/post_354.html

[msmcghee]

3. How did I guess that the first response would be . .

. . "Right Wing Site"?

Their mission statement:

The American Thinker is devoted to the thoughtful exploration of issues of importance to Americans. Contributors are accomplished in fields beyond journalism, and animated to write for the general public out of concern for the complex and morally significant questions on the national agenda.

There is no limit to the topics appearing on The American Thinker. National security in all its dimensions, strategic, economic, diplomatic, and military is emphasized. The right to exist, and the survival of the State of Israel are of great importance to us. Business, science, technology, medicine, management, and economics in their practical and ethical dimensions are also emphasized, as is the state of American culture.

**********************************

Is Israel's right to exist now a right-wing meme?

The report does contain links to the underlying report and Google has further links for research. I'm glad you are following them up. Let us know what you find please.

[MrPrax]

4. Did you not notice the links page?

Recommended Sites

* Lucianne.com
* National Review Online
* The Corner
* MEMRI
* DEBKAfile
* Opinion Journal
* Daniel Pipes

Blogroll

* Hugh Hewitt
* Instapundit
* Kausfiles
* Lileks
* Little Green Footballs
* Pejmanesque
* Powerline
* Professor Bainbridge
* Roger L. Simon

Looks like a duck...? So why since there are numerous references to the British report why would you want people here to help American Thinkers' get 'clicks' then? Is their support for Israel a lot firmer than say progressive or democratic sites in your opinion?

BUT:

Is Israel's right to exist now a right-wing meme?

Dunno...but I can't really think of any other conflict in the world where it's brought up to constantly and then used against ANYONE that might offer a contrary position to whatever passes for Israeli foreign policy...there is a civil war in Sudan pitting Muslims against non-Muslims, but the 'existence' of Sudan is never comes up you notice?

(Mind you, if the Jangaweed and their 'terrorist' supporters had gotten even a tenth of the damage inflicted on Lebanon, then you wouldn't find me posting too much in the negative.)

I wonder how the phrase 'regime change', uttered frequently by the US head of State, is translated in Arabic? I can imagine that is misinterpreted quite often as well and usually by people who wish to obscure the problem, rather than solve it.

:shrug:

[msmcghee]

6. I read the article. It seemed relevant . . .

. . to discussions here.

How about we talk about the content of the article which is the topic. Endless discussions of things like the courtesy links offered at a site that references a study - to discredit the study are kind of distracting - don't you think?

Anti-semitism and violent attacks on Jews in Europe are increasing rapidly. A scholarly connection has been made to the Israel / Lebanon conflict - in that 37% of European Arabs surveyed now believe that Jews in England are legitimate targets for their struggle against Israel.

I'm sorry if this information makes you uncomfortable. You might go to another thread if you don't want to discss it.

[MrPrax]

9. Don't go there...

See these links:

ActForLove
AFL-CIO Weblog
AmericaBlog
Atrios
Bartcop
Billionaires for Bush
BradBlog
Brainshrub
BrownBagBlog
Buzzflash
Com•Log•ic
Crisis Papers
Crooks and Liars
Daily Kos
Daou Report
DCCC
Delilah Boyd
Democracy for America
Democrats.com
Digby
DNC
DSCC
DubyaD40
Evil GOP Bastards
Firedoglake
Hated
Huffington Post
Hughes for America
Media Matters for America
MoveOn.org
MyDD
Oliver Willis
Raw Story
Smudge Report
Take Back The Media
Talking Points Memo
Think Progress
Truthout

Notice a fucking difference -- notice any overlaps? Notice any common sites?
Endless discussions of things like the courtesy links offered at a site that references a study - to discredit the study are kind of distracting - don't you think?

Maybe we should ask Skinner if he feels his links are irrelevent or reflective of the type of debate and articles he would like to see posted on his site?

Now as far a anti-semitism...maybe you can help me out with the math here...

B'nai Brith Canada said 829 anti-Semitic incidents were reported to their anti-hate hot line and offices in 2005. A record 857 were documented in 2004.
Israel Insider

New York, NY, April 5, 2006 … Despite a slight decline, the number of anti-Semitic incidents in the United States remained at disturbing levels in 2005, according to newly issued statistics from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). The League's annual Audit of Anti-Semitic Incidents, issued today, reported a total of 1,757 anti-Semitic incidents in 2005, a 3 percent decline from 2004.
ADL press release

:shrug:

Quite shocking that a country like Canada with a population of 33 million has only HALF the number of reported incidences of a country with 10 times the population?????

Astonishing when one reads that nearly a hundred uniformed Nazis paraded in Madison, WI a week ago? Even more astonsihing when a Nazi ran in a Alabama primary?

But we are lead to believe that statisically anti-semitism is much much higher in Canada than the US?

:shrug:

No...I will wait for a credible agency like HWR or AI to look into the subject, rather than, as you say, 'discuss' this uncomfortable subject of half-baked propaganda served up by the far right (like the Nazis were).

Shame on you....

[msmcghee]

11. Do you know what a red-herring is?

The article discussed anti-semitism in Europe, especially England. It said nothing about the US or Canada.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tom Joad]

17. What about Lebanon's right to exist? It seems more threatened by

Israel than any group or nation threatens Israel.

[msmcghee]

20. I'm not sure exactly how. .

. . Lebanon's right to exist has something to do with anti-semitism in England . . but I'd hate to falsely accuse someone of distraction.

[MrPrax]

24. Jeez didn't notice...

Yeah you would think that US welfare payments, fifth largest, advanced military and 200 nukes would buy some piece of mind, wouldn't you? I guess you can't have 'too much' protection if there is an arms dealer lurking close by.

But you know those Arabs -- even when they are 7 years old and use a water treatment plant, they represent a threat more significant than Tsarist police or the German Nazi party...or at least, to the man with the megaphone standing on a pile of dead children would have us think.

:eyes:

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. Because it *is* a right wing site?

The self-description of the founder, on the right wing Powerline blog:

I am a recovering academic, with degrees and teaching experience in a bunch of fields, and interests which range even wider. I speak Japanese and Chinese, and have spent much of my life interpreting East Asia to Westerners, as well as working with East Asians. In my spare time, I am also a wine maker, and a member of Hugh Hewitt's council of wine guys. I also co-host Lucianne Goldberg's radio talk show on Thursdays, on the Talk Radio Network. (I also call Hugh Hewitt pretty regularly.) I have done a fair amount of work behind-the-scenes in talk radio (a medium I consider to beextremely important in the dissemination of ideas), and have been a prolific poster on Lucianne.com - a kind of pre-blog for me.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/005487.php

Look at their front page, dominated by support for the "Path to 9/11" film, and criticism of Democrats.

Unfortunately, the American Thinker article was written just before the report was actually released, so it doesn't contain any links to the report itself, but was just working second-hand off the other news reports that had seen glimpses.

The report contains various recommendations: such as all police forces to record a separate category for antisemitic crimes, rather than the general racial hatred category - at present, only the forces with large Jewish populations, like London and Manchester, do this; the adoption by the British government of the EU working definition of antisemitism; they ask the Muslim Council of Britain to end its boycott of the Holocaust Memorial Day; they are worried about antisemitism in universities, regarding the proposed Israeli boycott as anti-Jewish in practice, and think Jewish universioty societies are being targetted by other students; they want a discussion of the language used to report both Jewish and Israeli issues in the media, with thought given to how it can communities in Britain.

[msmcghee]

7. I did not realize that the site . .

. . was so RW. Never heard of it before. I only read the article, which seemed reasonably objective and had links and cites for checking. I didn't search further on the website. I certainly don't agree with hardly anything else I found there.

I think that says something, though.

Why should a liberal progressive have to go to a RW site to find something that seems sensible and balanced on the topic of anti-semitism? And why does that article cause such an immediate and strong emotional reaction at a left-wing site like DU?

If the far left manages to successfully create the impression, no matter how far-fetched, that the Democratic party has become anti-semitic and/or opposed to the existence of the state of Israel - then millions of people who call themselves Dems will be looking to support moderate Republicans in the future - or some third party candidate which will have the same effect.

I understand that DU (especially I/P anyway) is not representative of the Democratic Party. However, casual visitors to the site could get that impression.

Americans will not support terrorist militias and fanatical Islamic governments in their struggle to topple the state of Israel. Any suspicion that the Dem party would support such a policy - is what will make Republican control of our government a reality for the foreseeable future - not Rush Limbaugh and Mike Savage. When hard RW sites publish moderate and reasonable articles on the topic of anti-semitism like this - I can see that they have already figured this one out.

[muriel_volestrangler]

10. I did give the link to The Guardian blog by the author

and there were stories on the report from non-right wing sites - you didn't have to go to American Thinker - eg Haaretz.. I wouldn't say the reaction here has been 'emotional'.

Do you think it's the far left that's trying to paint the Democratic party as anti-semitic? Strange, I would have said it was the right, eg Republicans, trying to do that, to attract voters for whom anit-semitism is anathema. I do see a lot of criticism of Israel on DU, but, as the report says repeatedly, that is not the same as antisemitism, and determining if criticism of Israel is also antisemitic, consciously or unconsciously, is very difficult. For instance, it talks about Israel being held to standards that other democracies aren't held to - but there's plenty of criticism of the foreign and defence policies of the US and UK here on DU, as well as of Israel.

[msmcghee]

12. You said,

"I wouldn't say the reaction here has been 'emotional'."

Well, screaming about the fact that I found it on a RW site does seem a bit emotional to me. The vast majority of articles posted in I/P are from anti-Israel and pro-Islamic sites. I don't complain about that because the ideas expressed in those articles are what is relevant - I could care less who published them.

You might look at Mr. Prax's replies also - but then his are always quite emotional on this topic.

Finally, the study points out the "independent and strong" statistical correlation (from other scientific studies) between anti-Israel sentiment and anti-semitism. It is hardly surprising that anti-semites would be opposed to Israel - or that many who are opposed to Israel would be anti-semites.

[muriel_volestrangler]

29. I'll admit post #9 is emotional

though I hadn't read it when I replied earlier. I'm sorry if you thought I was 'screaming' - I didn't mean to, and still cant see my post that way. I don't spend enough time in I/P to be able to judge accurately the sources used - I'd have said most come from neutral news sites, but maybe I just click on the ones with reasonable sounding titles.

It's the author on "American Thinker" who brought in the statistical correlation between anti-semitism and anti-Israeli sentiments. I'm not sure what it's really meant to tell us, though - that anti-semites would be against Israel is not at all surprising, just as people prejudiced against blacks criticise African nations. The report talks about how the two positions can be related:

82. Rather than explaining the distinctions between legitimate and illegitimate criticism of the
actions and policies of the Israeli government, we took the view that anti-Israel discourse
can, at times, become polluted by antisemitism and it is more important in each case to
identify whether or not this has occurred.

83. For example, criticism of Zionism is not in itself antisemitic. However, in some quarters an
antisemitic discourse has developed that is in effect antisemitic because it views Zionism
itself as a global force of unlimited power and malevolence throughout history. This
definition of Zionism bears no relation to the understanding that most Jews have of the
concept; that is, a movement of Jewish national liberation, born in the late nineteenth century,
with a geographical focus limited to Israel. Having re-defined Zionism in this way, traditional
antisemitic notions of Jewish conspiratorial power, manipulation and subversion are then
transferred from Jews (a religious or racial group) on to Zionism (a political movement). This
is at the core of the ‘New Antisemitism’ on which so much has been written. Many witnesses
described how anti-Zionism has become the “lingua franca of antisemitic movements”.

84. The EUMC Working Definition of Antisemitism, quoted in full on page 6, identifies some
of the ways in which antisemitism manifests itself with regard to the State of Israel:
• Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, for example by claiming
that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.
• Applying double standards by requiring of it a behaviour not expected or demanded
of any other democratic nation.
• Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (for example
claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterise Israel or Israelis.
• Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
• Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
The EUMC Definition goes on to state that criticism of Israel similar to that levelled
against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.

85. The issue is further complicated by the fact that anti-Zionist discourse can be polluted
with antisemitic themes in different ways and with different levels of intent. It can be used
deliberately as a way to mask or articulate prejudice against Jews. This is discussed
further in chapter five. It is difficult to counter because one must first identify and explain
the antisemitism behind the language and imagery. For example, a far right party may use
the terms of ‘Zionist’ and ‘Zionism’ instead of ‘Jews’ and ‘Jewish’.

[msmcghee]

31. And I could be guilty of "screaming" . .

. . about others screaming at me. I have noticed the interesting psychological effect that when I read one or two really spiteful or snarky posts direced at me in a thread - that for a while after that any post in that thread that disagrees with my position will feel as if it is also spiteful and snarky - when it may not be.

I suspect that others experience this effect too. However, it is the case that my posts do attract a large amount of venom here - which is the price one pays for disagreeing with those who are so emotionally attached to their position. I'm not complaining - just pointing it out. And I'm not accusing any specific persons here of that. You know who you are. :thumbsup:

I find those 4 sections of the report very interesting. But also, this part of the article is quite interesting:

As the Jerusalem Post also noted, the Parliamentary Enquiry’s results are consistent with data recently published in The Journal of Conflict Resolution by Yale University biostatistician Dr. Edward H. Kaplan, and Dr. Charles A. Small of the Yale Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism.

Drs. Kaplan and Small examined the views of 5004 Europeans, roughly 500 individuals sampled from each of 10 European Union countries (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom). The authors’ main publicized results confirmed their (rather commonsensical) a priori hypothesis: anti-Israel sentiments strongly and independently predicted the likelihood that an individual was anti-Semitic in a graded manner, i.e., the more anti-Israel (on a scale of zero to 4), the more a person was likely to be anti-Semitic.

I'm going to try to find that study at the library.

[geek tragedy]

14. Perhaps it would be good to start a new thread.

Did this get posted in LBN?

[dipsydoodle]

23. It's subject is over a week old

so forget LBN.

edit - almost a week anyway : On Thursday, September 7, 2006, as first reported by the Times of London this past Saturday (9/2/06)

[geek tragedy]

25. When did the actual report get released?

The reaction in LBN to the advance report was APPALLINGLY dismissive.

[dipsydoodle]

27. Like I said

a precis of the report came out about a week ago - it's a UK report don't forget. I can't give you link and I don't attach too much importance to it anyway. If you've got a bright idea how on earth non Muslims can influence the attitude of Muslims towards Jewish people then by all means start a movement.

edit - found this for you : http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2339394,00.html

[geek tragedy]

30. By engaging Muslim leadership and discouraging non-Muslim

political activists from using imagery and rhetoric that is almost indistinguishable from that used by the BNP.

[msmcghee]

16. You said,

"Do you think it's the far left that's trying to paint the Democratic party as anti-semitic? Strange, I would have said it was the right, eg Republicans, trying to do that, to attract voters for whom anit-semitism is anathema."

I am not good at politics - but, it seems to me that the far left is creating that impression - I'm not so sure they are trying.

I think that as long as opinions toward Israel like those commonly expressed here come from large sites that have "Democratic" in its name - that Republicans only have to moderately and reasonably express their discomfort with anti-semitism - and people will generally figure it out.

I'm not sure they are trying to do that either. It just seems that Republicans, being conservative, are more psychologically sensitive to threats from foreign religions - and dark skinned people as well. So articles discussing anti-semitism will attract readers.

Psychologically, liberals want to believe that we are all the same and if we just recognize our common humanity we can all get along. So, articles that discuss anti-semitism grate a bit uncomfortably on our sub-conscious. We'd rather find the "noble savage" somewhere in Islamic / Israel relations - we're trying to fit it all into something like a "Dancing With Wolves" narrative.

The best thing we can do is try to discuss these things unemotionally. It's process - not outcome - that interests me.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dipsydoodle]

2. This has been raised before

and I can only re-state that if there are issues here it's between the Muslims and the Jews - not the rest of us and the Jews. In a way it's similar to the tension which has always existed here between the Hindus and the Sikhs - not that I ever known Muslim v. Jews two hundred strong street fights using bats and pickaxe handles as occasionally happened with the Asians some years ago.

[geek tragedy]

26. The report indicates that it's extremism--right, left, and Islamist--that

drives the new wave of anti-semitism.

Most of the blatant stuff comes from the fascist right, but there's an alarmingly increasing amount of common ground between radical right, radical left, and radical Islam when it comes to Jews.

[msmcghee]

8. Here's Haaretz' take on all this.

- just to provide a more objective source for the topic.

************************************************

The fate of a supportive leader
Fri., September 08, 2006
By Haaretz Editorial

The person most damaged so far by George Bush's policy of waging war on the axis of evil is Tony Blair, his unwavering partner. Now, the British leader is about to pay with his job for the war in Iraq and support of Israel.

The suicide bombings on London's Underground failed to sway British public opinion to support the war on terror, but rather reinforced the opinion, especially in Labor and the Liberal-Democratic party, that England is risking its citizens' lives by participating in this war.

Only last month, 27 British soldiers were killed in Afghanistan, and British Muslim members of a terror group are under arrest for planning to blow up airplanes en route to the United States. Even capturing the terrorists did not score points for Blair, but increased the criticism from the left for his joining Bush.

(snip)

Europe is home to 20 million Muslims, a most coveted electoral power. Britain's 300,000 Jews have become no more than a punch bag for the anti-American and anti-Israeli sentiment, and the report on growing anti-Semitism that was presented to Britain's prime minister yesterday shows how much worse the situation has become. At the Labor Party conference in Manchester, Blair's colleagues will castigate him more for his support for Israel in the Lebanon war than for his domestic policies. Israel will have to take note of the anti-Semitic undercurrents in this.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/760286.html

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[msmcghee]

18. Deleted, my mistake. n/t

[cracksquirrel]

19. Thanks for the article

I'm always so glad to see some revealing light shed on the subject of the new anti-semitism in Europe or anywhere else, especially in a well written, un-hyperbolic and fully cited manner. However, my good humor is often immediately tainted by the realization that the ONLY places that I can find such things these days are on right-wing, neo-conservative and sometimes wacky-right religious sites. Has it really come to this? Are the activists, the writers, the intellectual forces behind what "progressive" politics are left in this fading republic of ours so disinterested in such a sickening and growing phenomenon that is anti-semitism, which was once a battlestandard of the forces of justice and progressive change?

Or are the Jews just not oppressed enough anymore, not deserving or needing any help from the progressive community. Demographics have changed, and it would appear that those who should be the greatest opponents of bigotry and racism towards ANYONE, especially Jews who have been integral to forward-thinking political movements for centuries; would not hesitate to pick up the pen and mount the podium to document and condemn such abominations. Yet I do not see it...

In a class on Marxist theory and world politics that I took a few years ago, I was told that the intellectual elite is not something that can ordinarily survive on its own, as its value and self-worth is derived by larger constituencies that it claims to represent. In days past it was the proletariat, the liberated peoples of Eastern Europe following the cold war, the indigenous movements seeking to roll back the forces of imperialism and colonial exploitation...
It would seem that there is only so much room on the slate of represented causes and people, and the cause of anti-semitism seems to have been dropped off the bottom of the list in exchange for a newer, larger, more vocal clientele. One would think that the causes of the oppressed Muslim peoples could be advocated for WHILE acknowledging that certain regressive ideas within those movements needed to be corrected and brought to a more progressive and tolerant approach... but that has not happened. Instead of the nuanced and grey-shaded worldview that defined the progressive left as a voice of sanity in a sea of patrio-fascist jingoism and fear-mongering anti-communism, I see more and more black-and-white "fer us or again' us" thinking that is so horribly reminiscent of ideologues on the other side of the political divide.

I'm still waiting, hoping to see this rectified. But I won't hold my breath. And neither will a lot of others who share some of my concerns yet still consider themselves to be progressives through-and through.

[pelsar]

32. speaking of marxism...

this is my favorite article...a bit old but i love the writing, he explains how todays "left" is more of an "anti west' movement than a movement concerned with people..as they align themselves with the any dictator, anti west militia etc....and how it rings sooo true.

http://marxist.org.uk/htm_docs/comm12.htm

But how is it possible for us to call ourselves Marxists and support a war waged by a coalition of rich western liberal democracies against the government of a poor “Third World” country? We would turn the question round: how it is possible that Marxism has been so corrupted and distorted that “Marxists” prefer to see thousands more Iraqis die in the torture chambers of the Ba’ath, and millions more suffer under the iniquities excused (not caused) by the UN sanctions, rather than admit that socialists not only can but must support even the worst bourgeois democracy against even the least bad tyranny? For the beginnings of an answer, let us consider just some of the transparent and disgusting lies generated and spread by the western “left” before and during the war.

.... the western powers did more than any Muslim government did to help the largely Muslim peoples of Bosnia and Kosova; that Saddam’s regime killed more Muslims than any other regime in history; and that Muslim minorities in western countries are treated at least as well as, and often much better than, non-Muslim minorities in Muslim countries are. But so what

As for the “Arab world”, only a fanatic (such as Robert Fisk of The Independent) could believe in such a mirage, not only in the face of the obvious political, economic and social differences between (say) Iraq and Kuwait, Egypt and Bahrain, Algeria and Jordan, but also in the face of the presence in almost all these countries of non-Arab peoples (Kurds, Berbers, Turcomen and others, not to mention the slaves of Mauritania), whose mistreatment the western “left” has been silent about for too long.

[msmcghee]

33. Wow. Thanks for posting this.

This is going to keep me busy for a while.

[pelsar]

35. be-careful...

it will probably be considered a RW document here....even if it was written by a Marxist

[Tom Joad]

36. No, someone, somewhere, who calls themselves marxist, said

he supported Bush's war against the people of Iraq.

[pelsar]

37. and he also said...

that most of todays "leftists" "elites, support oppressive dictatorships, fanatical militias, etc at the expense of the people simply because they prefer to be "anti bush or anti western"....ignoring the real needs of the oppressed.

he is more concerned with the actual people involved as opposed to some fanatical stand that is more cultist than anything else.

[Tom Joad]

38. Bush is the cultist. He invaded Iraq for no good reason.

And why not call Daniel Pipes a cultist. He supported arming Saddam with weapons, which no antiwar protester i know ever did. See It's Time for a U.S. Tilt by Daniel Pipes and Laurie Mylroie from The New Republic on April 27, 1987

Yet Dan Pipes is a hero to the publisher of the American Stinker...er..Thinker. Where this piece of trash was plucked from (the original post, not your "marxist" dude).

Is Dan Pipes a cultist?

[pelsar]

41. Is Dan Pipes a cultist?

actually i dont know, as i rarely read his stuff......my defintion of a cultist is rather simple:

someone who cant "entertain" other ideas, whatever they are and discuss them... discuss them and look at them from different angles. Its not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing, as that is a matter of belief, values etc. (bush doesnt fit the profile as the US govt has used different policies for different regions)

A cultist, like a fanatic, has a base that simply cannot even be questioned, he/she wont even go there as that would raise questions that arent acceptable.

an example? (my favorite) is the 67border religion. That states if israel withdraws to the 67 borders peace wil prevail. A cultist/fanatic is one that cant even discuss the possibility that it might not work, even though there are dozens of reasons that such a move would not only fail but make a far worse outcome.

Whether Dan Pipes can discuss any and all questions thrown at him i dont know, but if he can, than i wouldnt call him a cultist.


btw....i can only find links to marxist.org with the article (where i found it years ago). I was looking for the marxist view of the war....whats the link to Pipes site?

[Tom Joad]

39. So invading Iraq has helped the oppressed of Iraq?

I think there are a few dozen people on earth that think that, outside the white house.

[pelsar]

40. invading iraq..helping the people....

from my point of view the "jury is still out".....its not over yet, nor are the repucussions over with, how it effects the region.

the idea that geopolitics can solve problems in a few years is the view of the "impatient child" who has little or no knowledge of history. WWII lasted from 1939 to 1945....hit and run germans killing american troops continued after the war ended continued.

the cold war lasted another 40+ years before poland, east germany, etc were finally freed from the yoke of "communism"

the Koran war is yet to be over with, N. korea a horrendous dictatorship, by the standards of a liberal society, has yet to be removed and thats from over 50 years ago....

so has the invasion helped the iraq people?.....trying to decide that in the middle of a war doesnt make any sense.

the article (if it came from a different site).....still stands on its merits (as do all articles in my mind: striking an article down because its "origns" dont fit a certain "profile"....is just plain "literary racial profiling"...

many on the left prefer that "people suffer" rather than have the "wrong people do something about it

[cracksquirrel]

34. Wow...

That was unexpected... a good read indeed.

[Stockholm]

22. American thinker?

seriously msmcghee :thumbsdown:

[Tom Joad]

28. Not much of a thinker.

[Englander]

42. Aye, this weeks FrontPageMag friendly author -

'Andrew G. Bostom
Andrew G. Bostom, MD, MS is an Associate Professor of Medicine at Brown University Medical School, and regular contributor to Frontpage Magazine. He is the author of "The Legacy of Jihad."

Recent Articles

* Reciting the Shehada in Gaza
Published: Tuesday, August 29, 2006

* Badging Infidels in Iran
Published: Wednesday, May 24, 2006

* The West's Muslim Allies
Published: Tuesday, May 31, 2005

* Black Slaves, Arab Masters
Published: Monday, April 18, 2005

* The Islamization of Europe
Published: Friday, December 31, 2004

* The Legacy of Jihad in Palestine
Published: Tuesday, December 07, 2004

* John Quincy Adams Knew Jihad
Published: Wednesday, September 29, 2004

* Jihad Killings of POWs and Non-Combatants
Published: Thursday, September 09, 2004

* Confused Islamic Apologetics
Published: Tuesday, August 10, 2004

* The 9/11 Commission and Jihad
Published: Friday, July 30, 2004

* The Ayatollahs’ Final Solution?
Published: Monday, July 05, 2004

* Textbook Jihad in Egypt
Published: Wednesday, June 30, 2004

* The Real Roots of Muslim Hatred
Published: Thursday, June 03, 2004

* The Sacred Muslim Practice of Beheading
Published: Thursday, May 13, 2004

* Jews as “Christ-Killers” in Islam
Published: Wednesday, March 03, 2004

* Is Paul Bremer "Unclean"?
Published: Friday, February 20, 2004

* Caliphate Dreams
Published: Friday, December 12, 2003

* Shattering Taboos of Radical Islam
Published: Tuesday, September 09, 2003

* Islamic Apostates' Tales
Published: Monday, July 21, 2003

* Delusions of Islamic Democracy
Published: Monday, June 02, 2003

* Endowing Denial
Published: Tuesday, May 13, 2003

* A Modern Jihad Genocide
Published: Monday, April 28, 2003

* A Modern Passover Blood Libel
Published: Thursday, April 17, 2003

* Treatment of POWs
Published: Friday, March 28, 2003

* An Apostate Cassandra
Published: Monday, February 10, 2003

* Dr. King: Anti-Zionism Is Anti-Semitism
Published: Monday, January 20, 2003

* Muhammad, the Qurayza Massacre, and PBS
Published: Friday, December 20, 2002

* Palestine during the "Golden Age of Islam"
Published: Thursday, December 05, 2002

* Arab Muslim Anti-Semitism
Published: Monday, November 25, 2002