Anti-Semitism in 20th and 21th century

Anti-Israeli in European Parliament

2006-08-18T23:31:00.000-07:00

Anti-Israeli Bias in the European Parliament
and Other European Union Institutions

An Interview with Rijk van Dam

About 20 percent of the Members of the European Parliament are friends of Israel. Another 20 percent are clear friends of the Palestinian people, while the remaining 60 percent like to sit on the fence. Some of Israel's friends are outspoken; many prefer to keep a low profile.

Since 1993, the EU and its member states have given over four billion euros of financial assistance to the Palestinian Authority and a variety of Palestinian NGOs. This was meant to develop democratic institutions as well as promote education and prosperity among Palestinians. A substantial portion of the European funding, however, has served purposes such as corruption and terrorism.

One significant achievement of the friends of Israel in the European Parliament was a 2003 resolution that no EU money given to the Palestinians should be used, directly or indirectly, to strengthen hatred of Jews, to promote various types of racism, or to distort history.

Another achievement was the 2005 resolution of the European Parliament stating there is abundant evidence that Hizbollah is a terrorist organization, and the European ministers should put it on the list of such organizations. This has not happened because of the opposition of three EU member states: France, Spain, and Ireland.

"About 20 percent of the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) are friends of Israel. Another 20 percent are clear friends of the Palestinian people, while the remaining 60 percent like to sit on the fence. Some of Israel's friends are outspoken; many prefer to keep a low profile."

Rijk van Dam was an MEP from 1997 to 2004. He represented the Christian Union, an association of Dutch Protestant parties. After he left the Parliament, he became on 1 October 2004 director of the European Coalition for Israel. The members of this pro-Israeli lobby are four Christian organizations: Bridges for Peace, Christians for Israel-International, Christian Friends of Israel, and the International Christian Embassy in Jerusalem. In 2005, Ebenezer joined as the fifth full member.

Van Dam remarks: "The low profile of Israel's friends became very clear when several years ago we took the initiative to have the Parliament investigate the funding of the Palestinian Authority. Some twenty to twenty-five German Christian Democrats were willing to sign only if we promised not to publish their names. We were still glad to have them.

"When I told this to Wolfgang Schäuble, then leader of the Christian Democrats in the German parliament, he could hardly believe it. He said he would take up the matter with the head of his faction in the European Parliament. The Christian Democrat MEPs were members of the largest faction in the Parliament, namely, the European People's Party/European Democrats (EPP-ED), which is to the Center-Right. This is a broad, pluralistic grouping. One finds there enemies of Israel next to good friends. The MEPs who did not want their names disclosed may have had a difficult position there."

Four Billion Euro to the Palestinians

Van Dam points out that the development of this investigation process sheds much light on the European attitude toward the Middle East. He says: "Since 1993, the EU and its member states have given over four billion euros of financial assistance to the PA and various Palestinian NGOs. This was meant to develop democratic institutions as well as promote education and prosperity among Palestinians. There is no doubt that a substantial portion of the European funding has served purposes such as corruption and terrorism.

"In March 2004 in Brussels, at a meeting of the European Parliament's temporary committee on abuses in PA funding (see below), the then Palestinian finance minister Salam Fayyad was asked how this European money was spent. He replied that he did not know, not a penny was left, and much of it had gone to the pockets of fat cats. We know that longtime Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat was misappropriating large parts of the PA's resources, and led his people to economic ruin.

"In a brochure we clarified that already well before the Oslo agreements in 1993, Western leaders knew that the PLO's income was largely derived from dubious sources. It says: 'In 1990 the British National Criminal Intelligence Service determined that the PLO's acquired wealth ranged somewhere in the order of US $8 to $14 billion, while its annual income stream stood at approximately $2 billion. British intelligence noted that the PLO generated a considerable portion of its budget from extortion, pay-offs, illegal arms dealing, drug trafficking, money laundering, fraud, and other illicit means.

"'In the last year of Israeli rule [1993], GDP per capita in the West Bank was $3,500, and in Gaza, $2,800, and it had been growing. Had that growth continued, it would have been by now approximately $7,000, which is not that remote from what Saudi Arabia had before the meteoric increase in oil prices. It certainly would have dwarfed that of Egypt, Syria and Jordan. Before the second Palestinian uprising in September 2000, under Palestinian Authority rule, the GDP per capita had fallen to about $1,300. Since then it has only declined further.'"¹

A Temporary Inquiry Committee

"It wasn't easy to get an inquiry started. In 2002 a few MEPS - Ilka Schroeder from Germany, Willy de Clerq from Belgium, Charles Tannock from Great Britain, and I - started the effort. The procedure is a difficult one. For a parliamentary inquiry, one needs the signatures of one-quarter of the MEPs, which at that time meant 154. Despite great resistance, we finally managed to get close to 180. EU external relations commissioner Chris Patten used his personal staff to try to convince MEPs to withdraw their signatures. Nine who had already signed gave in to the pressure.

"We then presented the signatures to the presidency of the European Parliament. This is composed of the presidents of the various factions and so includes a communist, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, the copresident of the Greens, a socialist, and so on. Our opponents managed to prevent a parliamentary inquiry; instead a temporary inquiry committee was established that had much less competence. It was composed of twenty-five MEPs drawn from the foreign affairs, budget, and control commissions.

"Among the committee's members were some outspoken enemies of Israel as well as friends. Most of the inquiry took place in 2003, and a little of it in 2004. The report had to be finished before the end of the parliamentary period. Israel provided much evidence including proof of fraud found in the offices of Arafat. Thirteen committee members said: 'We haven't found sufficient proof, let's close the matter.' The other twelve concluded that much evidence of abuse had been found and stated that the matter should be investigated in more detail by the new Parliament.

"That action thus ended in failure, but the European Commission has by now become much more critical. An account has been created at the World Bank to which all monies of donors are transferred. It is claimed that nothing more is paid to the Palestinians in cash. Whether that is true or not, I cannot judge."

Hate in Palestinian Schoolbooks

"In earlier years we had already addressed another important problem: the hate promotion in Palestinian schoolbooks. Until 2000, the Palestinians claimed that they bought these from Jordan and Egypt. Yet their own new schoolbooks are not much better.

"In 2000, with a few MEPs, we started to ask the European Commission questions such as: 'What is your relationship with the Palestinian textbooks where Israel's existence is denied and horrible things are said about Jews?' Their official answer was that there was no European subsidy for Palestinian schoolbooks.

"We came back saying: 'But the EU pays for buildings and for teachers who use these books. It cannot be that you don't inspect what kind of teaching materials are used.' We demanded that the EU representative to the PA should check these books. We knew that he already had done so but had gotten a signal from Brussels to let the matter rest."

Resolution: No EU Money for Hatred

Van Dam continues: "Then we approached Commissioner Patten with questions such as: 'It cannot be that you send large amounts of money to the Palestinians who use school materials containing texts that are criminal under European laws.' Patten responded more or less: 'We have better things to do than monitoring books and such matters.'

"He also said: 'The EU does not pay for these books, you have to go to the member states who subsidize these.' Patten was right insofar as some member states indeed pay directly for the textbooks. Finland, for instance, contributes about seven million euros per year.

"We then decided on a different strategy. The European Parliament should declare that no money given to the Palestinians may be used, directly or indirectly, to strengthen hatred of Jews, to encourage various types of racism, or to distort history. Such money could only be used to promote a peaceful solution of the conflict.

"We proposed such a resolution in 2002 when the 2001 annual accounts came up for approval. We mentioned the schoolbooks in it, and some MEPs opposed this. They did not want to express an opinion on the content of schoolbooks, and the resolution was defeated. We raised it again in 2003, this time without mentioning the schoolbooks, when the accounts for 2002 came up for approval. Now the motion was adopted.

"The existing trade agreements between the EU and Israel allow for Israeli exports to enter the EU without duties. This includes products made in Israeli factories in the disputed territories. In 2002, the European Parliament discussed an initiative to suspend that treaty and boycott imports from the 'occupied' territories. Although the resolution obtained a majority, it was not within the competence of the European Parliament to decide the matter but, rather, of the European Commission.

"Subsequently, the Israeli Permanent Representation in Brussels reached an agreement with the European Commission about how this issue should be treated. As so many Palestinian workers are employed in the factories in the disputed territories, they would have been the main victims of such a boycott."

Hamas and Hizbollah

"Nowadays much of the EU financial help to the Palestinians is suspended but not stopped. Hamas, which controls the Palestinian government, is on the EU's list of terrorist groups. The EU cannot, however, reach an agreement to put Hizbollah on that list. It can still raise money in the EU.

"Although twenty-two member states have agreed to put Hizbollah on the terrorist list, the remaining three block this. Diplomats from all twenty-five member states meet in a secret clearing house to discuss the list. Yet is has leaked that the three states that oppose putting Hizbollah on it are France, Spain, and Ireland.

"We had, however, some success on this matter. The European Treaty mainly covers such issues as agriculture, transportation, and the environment. Foreign affairs are not part of the Treaty, yet the European Parliament discusses them. They remain, however, a national responsibility and also are dealt with by NATO."

Van Dam relates: "In March 2005, at a plenary meeting in Strasbourg, the issue came up. A debate in the Parliament starts with a draft resolution presented on Wednesday the week before. Usually these are very cautious. This one stated that if it should be proved that Hizbollah is a terrorist organization, then the European ministers were called upon to put them on the list.

"Afterward, every resolution is usually further diluted so as to obtain majority support. One could rightfully expect that the final text would have been even weaker. Several organizations and individuals started to lobby, the European Coalition among them. I visited all the speakers in that debate. If they were not in the office, I spoke with their assistants. I told them how incredible it is that such a double standard prevails in the EU. Democracy seems important in Europe, yet is irrelevant in the Middle East. Terror in Madrid and London is horrible, but seems of no relevance in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv."

Double Standards

"We gave the MEPs our Coalition's brochure titled "The European Union and Palestinian Terrorism: A Double Standard that Needs Revisiting." It records how EU leaders have routinely reacted to terrorist atrocities committed by Palestinians and to Israel's measured military responses in self-defense. The latter are habitually condemned as 'an excessive use of force.'

"The brochure also mentions how in April 2002, after a Palestinian suicide bomber killed twenty-nine civilians at a Passover seder meal in Netanya, Chris Patten angrily declared about Israel's reaction: 'The Israeli Defense Forces are trampling over the Geneva Convention and any notion of international law is being torn up.'²

"The unexpected happened. When on the Wednesday the following week the draft resolution was discussed, the inclination was to make it stronger. When it was brought for a vote on Thursday, the final text said there was abundant evidence that Hizbollah is a terrorist organization, and the European ministers should put it on the list. About five hundred MEPs voted in favor and fewer than ten against, all or almost all communists.

"The European Parliament was thus ahead of the countries' ministers and diplomats. Nothing has happened because the Parliament has no authority regarding who is put on the list. Yet it expressed itself very clearly on this matter."

Israel's Major Enemies

Van Dam explains that among Israel's major enemies in the European Parliament are the communist and other leftist factions, now called the European United Left-Nordic Green Left (GUE-NGL). They have 42 of the 732 MEPs.

"The Italian Louisa Morgantini was in the previous parliamentary period the chair of the parliamentary delegation to the Palestinian Authority. One can describe her as an enemy to Israel. In the previous parliament, there was one exception. Ilka Schroeder, who was elected on the Green ticket in eastern Germany, left her party and joined the GUE/NGL, was a strong supporter of Israel.

The Greens-EFA, who have forty-one MEPs as a faction, always vote against Israel, including Cohn-Bendit, who is a strong opponent. Some members such as Johannes Voggenhuber from Austria, however, are very reasonable.

"The Socialists (PES) are the second largest group with two hundred MEPs. Most support the Palestinians because they see them as a pitiable, poverty-stricken group. There are, however, other voices among them. The previous chairman of the Israel delegation, a German Social Democrat, did not share the anti-Israeli positions.

"In the previous Parliament, the French Jewish Socialist François Zimeray was very active on behalf of Israel. Perhaps because of this, his party did not include him as a candidate again in the 2004 elections. On the other hand, my colleagues and I once heard Austrian Social Democrat MEP Hannes Svoboda say in the temporary committee for funding the PA that Israel has no right to exist."

The More Supportive

"The EPP-ED with 264 MEPs is a mix of factions including conservatives as well as Christian Democrats. In this heterogeneous group, the attitude toward Israel varies from very positive to highly critical.

"The Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) are the third largest grouping with ninety seats. Some of its factions give little support to Israel, particularly the British Liberal Democrats. In the previous Parliament, a representative of the Dutch D66 party, Louisewies van der Laan, was especially anti-Israeli. I considered her hardly better than Morgantini.

"Once she came back from the PA and showed a picture of quadruplets born in one of the hospitals there. I said I hoped that when they were adults, they would only pick up stones to build houses and not to throw at others. Now van der Laan is head of the D66 faction in the Second Chamber of the Dutch parliament, and may even become the party leader.

"There are also some smaller groups. One is Independence and Democracy (IND/DEM) with thirty-three MEPs. This includes the British members of the UKIP party who are only interested in having Great Britain withdraw from the EU. My colleagues and I were members of that group and many of its MEPs were supportive of Israel.

"The last group is Union for Europe of the Nations with thirty MEPs. It, too, is very heterogeneous. It includes the Irish Fianna Gael, hostile to Israel, and others such as the Portuguese delegates of the Partido Popular, who are very supportive. It also includes the extreme right-wing Populist Party from Denmark, which is generally dangerous including for Israel.

"There are also about thirty-two independent MEPs among whom is Jean-Marie Le Pen, the French right-wing extremist. He is now a member of the Parliament's Israel delegation."

Progress in the Commission

"The European Union and the Commission seem to think that evenhandedness in the Middle East is the best principle. They make statements about what Israel and the Palestinians should do and give the impression that the two are comparable entities. On the one side is Israel, a democratic state with an advanced legal system; on the other is an artificial nation of Palestine, with hardly any structure. IDF retaliations are regularly condemned in Brussels and Strasbourg without mentioning the Palestinian terror that leads to them.

"As far as the present Commission is concerned, there is progress from Israel's point of view. Patten has been replaced as commissioner for international relations by Benita Ferrero-Waldner, the conservative former Austrian foreign minister. She tries hard to ensure that no EU money goes directly to Hamas. The Commission's vice-president Franco Frattini of Forza Italia, Berlusconi's party, who is responsible for human rights among other matters, is a very positive figure as well.

"Yet it would be mistaken for Israel to assess only the Parliament and the Commission. Another very important figure in the EU is Javier Solana, its representative for foreign affairs. He tries to play the role of the EU's foreign minister even though, since there is no unified European foreign policy, there cannot be such an official. Solana is a good friend of the Palestinians and constantly tries to find new openings for Hamas."

Visiting the National Parliaments

"One way to influence positions is to visit the national parliaments. The parliamentarians often do not know that they can invite their ministers to explain the positions they are going to espouse in Brussels. They can also call their national MEPs for a discussion.

"When I go to a European capital, I always do so with representatives of our member organizations. I also discuss matters with the Israeli ambassador and with the Jewish community.

"Ireland is the one country we visited where the attitude toward Israel is particularly hostile. I once went to see some members of the foreign affairs committee, including the vice-chairman. He said something like, 'Christians supporting Israel. Yes, I remember Godfried of Bouillon and his Crusaders, who were already mass murderers in Palestine.' He meant that as Christians, we had no right to speak. In the eyes of many in Ireland, the Palestinians are waging the same battle against Israel as the Catholics in Northern Ireland against the Protestants.

"One of the claims frequently made by hostile counterparts is that they are anti-Zionists and not anti-Semites. They usually use arguments, however, identical to those of anti-Semites."

The World Council of Churches

"Although the EU and its institutions are our main lobbying objectives, we sometimes go beyond them. In mid-2005, we visited the World Council of Churches in Geneva after this organization had called for divestment from Israel. This got much attention at the time, though later the opposition increased. At the WCC's headquarters, we were received by a Swedish and a Pakistani pastor.

"In the first part of the meeting, they simply denied that this call was the official view of the WCC. They claimed that, instead, it was a motion by the temporary committee for the annual conference, which had only been adopted in that committee.

"We said: 'So there is no call. Have you placed on your website a correction that it has been canceled?' They answered: 'No. The motion is still there, but it is not an official document.' So we said we understood that there was still a call for divestment.

"Then we asked them: 'Why doesn't the WCC condemn what goes on in Darfur, or in North Korea?' They replied: 'In Africa and Asia we have member churches. They will object if we take a stand on their countries. In Israel we do not have influential churches.' We told them our conclusion: 'What you in fact say is that you take a one-sided, biased action against Israel because you get no protest.' They had no choice but to admit that. In May 2006, the WCC Executive condemned Israel in a very one-sided way and with this confirmed its anti-Israeli posture."

Why Do Christians Stand Up for Israel?

"The member organizations of the European Coalition have been supporting Israel and the Jewish people for over twenty years. Not long ago we realized that we lacked a voice in politics, and this led to the Coalition's establishment.

"The representatives came to see me in 2003 and asked me to explain why the EU has such a negative attitude toward Israel. In my view this is directly related to secularization. There was a so-called 'ethical revolution' in Europe, mainly from the 1970s onward. People left churches and their ethical values. This brought with it a lack of a coherent civilization, in which anti-Semitism could rear its head again.

"Many churches took a horizontal approach, claiming that only interhuman relations were important while neglecting the relationship between man and God. They thus followed the general fashion of lack of values and respect. This also explains why among the leaders of so-called 'progressive' churches in the United States there are many proponents of anti-Israeli measures. These people claim that the weakest party is the one that is always right. They do not want to see that there can be extreme criminality among the weak. The many Palestinians whose national aim is to destroy others are a typical example.

"When I left the European Parliament, I was asked to represent the European Coalition for Israel within the EU and its institutions. From a technical standpoint, I have the advantage that as a former MEP I have free entrance to the European Parliament. There is also an office available especially for former MEPs, which I can use."

Standing Up for Israel

"My colleagues and I are often asked why we stand up for Israel. As Bible-believing Christians, we think the Scriptures are very clear about the covenant the Lord made with the People of Israel. Through Israel we are crafted into that covenant.

"Thus we fight against the lie of replacement theology that says the Christians of the world have replaced the Jews in that covenant. For us, standing with Israel and the Jewish people is standing with one's eldest brother. One can sometimes have disagreements with one's brothers and sisters, but when they are threatened, you always support them. I am grateful to say that in recent years there is more and more response from the Israeli side.

"I am often asked whether I do this because in some way I have a remote Jewish family background. I explain that I have none. So people ask me: 'What is in it for you and your colleagues?' I answer that the only thing in it for us is the Lord's blessing, which says in the Scriptures: 'Who blesses you [Israel] will be blessed.' That is the sole reason why we struggle side by side against the evil forces that threaten the Jewish people."

Interviewed by Manfred Gerstenfeld

This text is part of a major project of interviews with prominent Dutch people on Dutch attitudes toward Jews and Israel. This project was funded by The Israel Maror Foundation.

Notes

1. "European Funding of Palestinian Institutions," Issue Brief, European Coalition for Israel, www.europeancoalitionforisrael.org

2. "The European Union and Palestinian Terrorism: A Double Standard that Needs Revisiting," Issue Brief, European Coalition for Israel, www.europeancoalitionforisrael.org.

Rijk van Dam is executive director of the European Coalition for Israel. He is a former Member of the European Parliament, representing several Christian parties from the Netherlands.

The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the Board of Fellows of the
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.

Jean-Marie Le Pen (born June 20, 1928) is a French politician, president of the far-right^[1] ^[2] National Front party and perennial candidate for the presidential elections. He is known for advocating contentious viewpoints and policies: including the reinstatement of the death penalty (prohibited by European Union law), a revisionist approach to history (including Holocaust denial) [1], incentives to encourage women to stay at home and have children rather than work[2], strong restrictions on immigration to France from countries outside Europe, compulsory military service, strict censorship of the cinema and the arts as well as withdrawal or at least far greater independence from the European Union. ^{[citation needed]}

Jean-Marie Le Pen has run in several French presidential elections, qualifying for the second-round of the 2002 election, where he challenged current president Jacques Chirac. His victory in the first round of the 2002 presidential elections, where he arrived before left-wing candidate Lionel Jospin, was unexpected.

In 1997, the European Parliament, of which Le Pen himself was a member, removed his parliamentary immunity so that Le Pen could be tried by a German court for comments he made at a December 1996 press conference before the German Republikaner party. Le Pen stated there that: "If you take a 1,000-page book on World War II, the concentration camps take up only two pages and the gas chambers 10 to 15 lines. This is what one calls a detail." ; Le Pen had made a similar statement in France in 1987, which also caused him to be condemned in virtue of the Gayssot Act on negationism. In June 1999, a Munich court found this statement to be "minimizing the Holocaust, which caused the deaths of six million Jews," and convicted and fined Le Pen for his remarks.^[3][4]

Biography

Le Pen was born at La Trinité-sur-Mer, a small Breton harbour, as the son of a fisherman. Le Pen was orphaned as an adolescent; his father's boat was blown up by a mine. Today he is a wealthy businessman, mostly because of a large inheritance received in 1977 from a political supporter.

Le Pen studied political science and law, and was at one time the president of an association of law students in Paris. His graduate studies thesis, presented in 1971 by Jean-Marie Le Pen and Jean-Loup Vincent, is entitled Le courant anarchiste en France depuis 1945 or "The anarchist movement in France since 1945".

From his first marriage (June 29, 1960 - 1985 or 1986) to Pierrette Lalanne, he has three daughters and nine granddaughters. The youngest of his daughters, Marine Le Pen, is a ranking officer of the Front National.

On May 31, 1991, Jean-Marie Le Pen married Jeanne-Marie Paschos ("Jany"). Born in 1933, Paschos was previously married to Belgian businessman Jean Garnier. Pascho's father was a Greek merchant, and her mother is partly of Dutch descent.

Allegations of anti-Semitism and xenophobia

Le Pen has been criticized both at home and abroad for his xenophobia and perceived anti-Semitism. These criticisms are considered to be unfounded by his supporters, but at several times Le Pen has been convicted for such remarks.

Le Pen has made remarks which are widely considered to be anti-Semitic; for example, on 13 September 1987 he said: "I ask myself several questions. I'm not saying the gas chambers didn't exist. I haven't seen them myself. I haven't particularly studied the question. But I believe it's just a detail in the history of World War II."^[5] He was condemned to pay 1,2 millions Francs (183,200 Euros).^[6]
Le Pen once made the infamous pun "Durafour-crématoire" ("crematory oven") about then minister Michel Durafour, a Jew. The corpses of the victims of the Nazi gas chambers were incinerated in such ovens. [4]
In February 1997, Le Pen accused President Chirac of being "on the pay roll of Jewish organizations, and particularly of the notorious B'nai B'rith".
In May 1987 he advocated isolating those infected with AIDS (whom he calls "sidaïques^[7]") from society by placing them in a special "sidatorium".
On June 21, 1995, he attacked singer Patrick Bruel on his policy of no longer singing in the city of Toulon because the city had just elected a mayor from the National Front. Le Pen said "the city of Toulon will then have to get along without the vocalisations of singer Benguigui". Benguigui, a Jewish name, was Patrick Bruel's real name.
In 2005, he claimed that the occupation of France by Nazi Germany "was not particularly inhumane".[5].
In June 2006, he claimed that the French World Cup squad contained too many coloured players, and was not an accurate reflection of French society. He went on to scold players for not singing La Marseillaise, saying they were not 'French'.

Jean-Marie Le Pen

Anti-Semitism and Anti-Zionism

2006-08-18T21:06:00.001-07:00

Anti-Semitism (alternatively spelled antisemitism) is hostility toward or prejudice against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group, which can range in expression from individual hatred to institutionalized, violent persecution. The highly explicit ideology of Adolf Hitler's Nazism was the most extreme example of this phenomenon, leading to a genocide of the European Jewry.
Anti-Semitism can be broadly defined into three different forms:

Religious based anti-Semitism, or anti-Judaism. As the name implies, it was the practice of Judaism itself which was the defining characteristic of the anti-Semitic attacks. Under this version of anti-Semitism, attacks would often stop if Jews stopped practicing, or changed their public faith.
Racial anti-Semitism. Either a pre-cursor, or a by-product of the Eugenics movement, racial anti-Semitism replaced the hatred of the Jews religion/culture, with the concept that the Jews themselves were a distinct (and lesser) race of the human species. Unlike the religious version, the problem was not the Jews social beliefs, but rather genetic.
New anti-Semitism. Starting in the latter part of the 20th century, a new style of anti-semitism began to appear. The basis of this anti-Semitism appears to be more political in nature, often overlapping, and being (intentionally) confused with anti-Zionism. This form of anti-Semitism pervades Left wing politics in both Europe & North America, and is characterized by borrowing language and concepts from anti-Zionism.^[1] ^[2] ^[3] ^[4].

The word antisemitic (antisemitisch in German) was probably first used in 1860 by the Austrian Jewish scholar Moritz Steinschneider in the phrase "antisemitic prejudices" (German: "antisemitische Vorurteile"). Steinschneider used this phrase to characterize Ernest Renan's ideas about how "Semitic races" were inferior to "Aryan races." These pseudo-scientific theories concerning race, civilization, and "progress" had become quite widespread in Europe in the second half of the 19th century, especially as Prussian nationalistic historian Heinrich von Treitschke did much to promote this form of racism. In Treitschke's writings Semitic was practically synonymous with Jewish, in contrast to its usage by Renan and others.

German political agitator Wilhelm Marr coined the related German word Antisemitismus in his book "The Way to Victory of Germanicism over Judaism" in 1879. Marr used the phrase to mean Jew-hatred or Judenhass, and he used the new word antisemitism to make hatred of the Jews seem rational and sanctioned by scientific knowledge. Marr's book became very popular, and in the same year he founded the "League of Anti-Semites" ("Antisemiten-Liga"), the first German organization committed specifically to combatting the alleged threat to Germany posed by the Jews, and advocating their forced removal from the country.

So far as can be ascertained, the word was first widely printed in 1881, when Marr published "Zwanglose Antisemitische Hefte," and Wilhelm Scherer used the term "Antisemiten" in the "Neue Freie Presse" of January. The related word semitism was coined around 1885. See also the coinage of the term "Palestinian" by Germans to refer to the nation or people known as Jews, as distinct from the religion of Judaism.

Despite the use of the prefix "anti," the terms Semitic and Anti-Semitic are not antonyms. To avoid the confusion of the misnomer, many scholars on the subject (such as Emil Fackenheim of the Hebrew University) now favor the unhyphenated term antisemitism. Yehuda Bauer articulated this view in his writings and lectures: (the term) "Antisemitism, especially in its hyphenated spelling, is inane nonsense, because there is no Semitism that you can be anti to."^[5][6]

The term anti-Semitism has historically referred to prejudice towards Jews alone. It does not traditionally refer to prejudice toward other people who speak Semitic languages (e.g. Arabs or Assyrians).

In recent decades some groups have argued that the term should be extended to include prejudice against Arabs, Anti-Arabism, in the context of accusations of Arab anti-Semitism; further, some, including the Islamic Association of Palestine, have argued that this implies that Arabs cannot, by definition, be anti-Semitic. The argument for such extension comes out of the claim that since the Semitic language family includes Arabic, Hebrew and Aramaic languages, and the historical term "Semite" refers to all those who consider themselves descendants of the Biblical Shem, anti-Semitism should be likewise inclusive. This usage is not generally accepted.

Anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism

Anti-Zionism is a term that has been used to describe several very different political and religious points of view (both historically and in current debates) all expressing some form of opposition to Zionism. A large variety of commentators—politicians, journalists, academics and others—believe that criticisms of Israel and Zionism are often disproportionate in degree and unique in kind, and attribute this to anti-Semitism. In turn, critics of this view believe that associating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism is intended to stifle debate, deflect attention from valid criticism, and taint anyone opposed to Israeli actions and policies.

Civil Rights Leader Dr. Martin Luther King Jr strongly condemned anti Zionism stating

". . . You declare, my friend, that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely 'anti-Zionist.' And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops, let it echo through the valleys of God's green earth: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews--this is God's own truth.

"Antisemitism, the hatred of the Jewish people, has been and remains a blot on the soul of mankind. In this we are in full agreement. So know also this: anti-Zionist is inherently antisemitic, and ever will be so.

"Why is this? You know that Zionism is nothing less than the dream and ideal of the Jewish people returning to live in their own land. The Jewish people, the Scriptures tell us, once enjoyed a flourishing Commonwealth in the Holy Land. From this they were expelled by the Roman tyrant, the same Romans who cruelly murdered Our Lord. Driven from their homeland, their nation in ashes, forced to wander the globe, the Jewish people time and again suffered the lash of whichever tyrant happened to rule over them.

"The Negro people, my friend, know what it is to suffer the torment of tyranny under rulers not of our choosing. Our brothers in Africa have begged, pleaded, requested--DEMANDED the recognition and realization of our inborn right to live in peace under our own sovereignty in our own country.

"How easy it should be, for anyone who holds dear this inalienable right of all mankind, to understand and support the right of the Jewish People to live in their ancient Land of Israel. All men of good will exult in the fulfilment of God's promise, that his People should return in joy to rebuild their plundered land.

This is Zionism, nothing more, nothing less. [1]

Anti-Semitism and the Muslim world

Anti-Semitism within Islam is discussed in the article on Islam and anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism in the Arab World is discussed in the article on Arabs and anti-Semitism

The Qur'an, Islam's holy book, accuses the Jews of corrupting the Hebrew Bible. Muslims refer to Jews and Christians as a "People of the book"; Islamic law demands that when under Muslim rule they should be treated as dhimmis - from the Arab term ahl adh-dhimma. The writer Bat Ye'or introduced the modern word Dhimmitude as a generic indication of this Islamic attitude. Dhimmis were granted protection of life (including against other Muslim states), the right to residence in designated areas, worship, and work or trade, and were exempted from military service, and Muslim religious duties, personal law and tax on certain conditions such as paying the poll (jizyah) and land taxes as set by Muslim authorities. They were also subject to various other restrictions in relation to Muslims and Islam (for example, Muslim men could marry Jewish women and own Jewish slaves, but the opposite was not true), the Qur'an or Muhammad (such as desecrating scriptures or defaming the Prophet), and proselytizing. At times Jews were subjected to a number of other restrictions on dress, riding horses or camels, carrying arms, holding public office, building or repairing places of worship, mourning loudly, wearing shoes outside a Jewish ghetto, etc.

In the Muslim world traditional Islamic judeophobia eventually merged with modern European anti-Semitism. Antagonism and violence increased in the twentieth century, as anti-Semitic motives and blood libels were imported from Europe and as resentment against Zionist efforts in British Mandate of Palestine spread. While anti-Semitism has certainly been heightened by the Arab-Israeli conflict, there were an increasing number of pogroms against Jews prior to the foundation of Israel, including Nazi-inspired pogroms in Algeria in the 1930s, and massive attacks on the Jews in Iraq and Libya in the 1940s (see Farhud). George Gruen attributes the increased animosity towards Jews in the Arab world to several factors including: The breakdown of the Ottoman Empire and traditional Islamic society; domination by Western colonial powers under which Jews gained a disproportionatly larger role in the commercial, professional, and administrative life of the region; the rise of Arab nationalism, whose proponents sought the wealth and positions of local Jews through government channels; resentment over Jewish nationalism and the Zionist movement; and the readiness of unpopular regimes to scapegoat local Jews for political purposes.^[29]

Anti-Zionist propaganda in the Middle East frequently adopts the terminology and symbols of the Holocaust to demonize Israel and its leaders. At the same time, Holocaust denial and Holocaust minimization efforts have found increasingly overt acceptance as sanctioned historical discourse in a number of Middle Eastern countries. Arabic- and Turkish-edition of Hitler's Mein Kampf and the Protocols of Zion have found an audience in the region with limited critical response by local intellectuals and media. The Protocols have even inspired TV series (in Lebanon and Iran) showing rabbis ritually slaughtering (throat cutting) Christian children.

Germany

From the early Middle Ages to the 18th century, the Jews in Germany were subject to many persecutions as well as brief times of tolerance. Though the 19th century began with a series of riots and pogroms against the Jews, emancipation followed in 1848, so that, by the early 20th century, the Jews of Germany were the most integrated in Europe. The situation changed in the early 1930's with the rise of the Nazis and their explicitly anti-Semitic program. Hate speech which referred to Jewish citizens as "dirty Jews" became common in anti-Semitic pamphlets and newspapers such as the Völkischer Beobachter and Der Stürmer. Additionally, blame was laid on German Jews for having caused Germany's defeat in World War I (see Dolchstosslegende).

Anti-Jewish propaganda expanded rapidly. Nazi cartoons depicting "dirty Jews" frequently portrayed a dirty, physically unattractive and badly dressed "talmudic" Jew in traditional religious garments similar to those worn by Hasidic Jews. Articles attacking Jewish Germans, while concentrating on commercial and political activities of prominent Jewish individuals, also frequently attacked them based on religious dogmas, such as blood libel.

The Nazi anti-Semitic program quickly expanded beyond mere speech. Starting in 1933, repressive laws were passed against Jews, culminating in the Nuremberg Laws which removed most of the rights of citizenship from Jews, using a racial definition based on descent, rather than any religious definition of who was a Jew. Sporadic violence against the Jews became widespread with the Kristallnacht riots, which targeted Jewish homes, businesses and places of worship, killing hundreds across Germany and Austria.

The anti-Semitic agenda culminated in the genocide of the Jews of Europe, known as the Holocaust.

United States

Jews were often condemned by populist politicians alternately for their left-wing politics, or their perceived wealth, at the turn of the century. ^{[citation needed]} Anti-semitism grew in the years leading up to America's entry into World War II, Father Charles Coughlin, a radio preacher, as well as many other prominent public figures, condemned "the Jews," and Henry Ford reprinted The Protocols of the Elders of Zion in his newspaper.

In 1939 a Roper poll found that only thirty-nine percent of Americans felt that Jews should be treated like other people. Fifty-three percent believed that "Jews are different and should be restricted" and ten percent believed that Jews should be deported.^[30] Several surveys taken from 1940 to 1946 found that Jews were seen as a greater threat to the welfare of the United States than any other national, religious, or racial group. [2] It has been estimated that 190,000 - 200,000 Jews could have been saved during the Second World War had it not been for bureaucratic obstacles to immigration deliberately created by Breckinridge Long and others.^[31]

In a speech at an America First rally on September 11, 1941 in Des Moines, Iowa entitled "Who Are the War Agitators?", Charles Lindbergh claimed that three groups had been "pressing this country toward war": the Roosevelt Administration, the British, and the Jews - and complained about what he insisted was the Jews' "large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio and our government." ^{[citation needed]}

Unofficial anti-Semitism was also widespread in the first half of the century. For example, to limit the growing number of Jewish students between 1919-1950s a number of private liberal arts universities and medical and dental schools employed Numerus clausus. These included Harvard University, Columbia University, Cornell University, and Boston University. In 1925 Yale University, which already had such admissions preferences as "character", "solidity", and "physical characteristics" added a program of legacy preference admission spots for children of Yale alumni, in an explicit attempt to put the brakes on the rising percentage of Jews in the student body. This was soon copied by other Ivy League and other schools, and admissions of Jews were kept down to 10% through the 1950s. Such policies were for the most part discarded during the early 1960s.

Some extreme cults also support conspiracy theories regarding Jews as dominating and taking over the world. These cults are often vitriolic and severely anti-semititic. For instance, the Necedah Shrine Cult from the 1950s on to the mid 1980's, has Mary Ann Van Hoof receiving anti-semitic "visions" from the Virgin Mary telling her that the Rothschilds, a prominent Jewish banking family, are "mongrel yids(Jews)" bent on dominating the entire world economy through international banking. Most of the worlds problems, from poverty to world wars, are the cause of International Banking jews and their "satanic secret society," according to Van Hoof.[3]

American anti-Semitism underwent a modest revival in the late twentieth century. The Nation of Islam under Louis Farrakhan claimed that Jews were responsible for slavery, economic exploitation of black labor, selling alcohol and drugs in their communities, and unfair domination of the economy. Jesse Jackson issued his infamous "Hymietown" remarks during the 1984 Presidential primary campaign.

According to ADL surveys begun in 1964, African-Americans are "significantly more likely" than white Americans to hold anti-Semitic beliefs, although there is a strong correlation between education level and the rejection of anti-Semitic stereotypes.^[32]

http://en.wikipedia.org/

PARIS - Since the beginning of 2006 in Sarcelles, a city formerly synonymous with harmonious cohabitation, there is a real malaise. Several anti-Semitic acts have marred the last few months.

Sunday morning and the market in Sarcelles is buzzing. But the times when Jewish and Muslim stands stood side by side are far off. The Jewish stall holders and shoppers moved away several years ago, to districts frequented by their community.

“The market was a convivial place. Today it’s a not very safe. There are nasty looks and racist remarks are hurled around from time to time,” explains Patricia B. who has been selling clothes at the market for 20 years.

“Sarcelles has become a divided town. We live in captivity, we don’t go out after 7 pm. I don’t even let my daughters go to baker anymore. I bring them to school every morning and fetch them in the afternoon,” she adds.

Since the murder of Ilan Halimi, Patricia avoids showing her religion, but also doesn’t show any sign of wealth to avoid provoking jealousy. Jean-Luc, her husband who had never thought of leaving France, today says he wants to go to Israel: “I feel less and less at home.”

Communal concern

At a nearby stand, Nawell, a young Muslim woman and a friend of Patricia’s agrees. “Seventy percent of my customers were Jews but they don’t come any more. It shows there is an unease.”

As a mother of two, Nawell has always lived in Sarcelles: “I saw Patricia being insulted. I also feel threatened because I am her friend. The feeling of insecurity has worsened in the last three years, and more for the Jews. I’m ashamed of these young Muslims.”

Many Jews have moved to the district known as “Little Jerusalem” where 20 percent of the Jews of Sarcelles now live. “They gather to be in peace,” summarises Sammy Ghozlan, chairman of national Office of vigilance against the anti-semitism, created into 2000.

Mordehaï Aziel is owner of a kosher butcher. He came to Sarcelles 10 years ago and has seen the situation deteriorate little by little. Batcheva, his wife, says their son was attacked recently. Since then, the teenager doesn’t want to go out anymore.

“Since the beginning of 2006, there have been a dozen attacks on Jews in the Val d’Oise department, particularly in Sarcelles where a synagogue was vandalised,” Sammy Ghozlan specifies.

“Little Jerusalem” crystallises the tensions. “Sarcelles is a volcano which sometimes erupts, especially since 2002, when the mayor authorised pro-Palestinian demonstrations.”

Fear on Shabbat

The Office of Vigilance listed 13 ant-Semitic acts in 2002 and 27 in 2003. Half were comitted in Sarcelles and Garges-les-Gonesses.

The Jews living close to the synagogue endure daily insults and egg throwing. “It’s stressful,” says Moshé Cohen-Sabban, president of the Jewish communities of Val d’Oise departement. “On Shabbat, we’re more vigilant. Some faithful pass through ‘hot’ districts to attend the office and they’re regularly attacked and insulted.”

However, for François Puponni, mayor of Sarcelles “this climate is in a general tendency of insecurity. The riots in November 2005 broke taboos, there is an explosion of violence. For a few weeks there is also a new phenomenon, senseless racist attacks: a person is beaten up in the street only for being Jewish, black, white, Arab... but it’s especially the Jews.”

So is it delinquency or anti-Semitism? Sammy Ghozlan says there is no doubt. “They really are anti-Semitic acts. The attackers are not just hooligans. They target the places frequented by Jews.”

By Rebecca Assoun (EJP)