I have stated before. You want to clean up this Anti Semitism you can not handle this with kid gloves, Take these student and expel them from the schools. Take the teachers, professors and remove them from the schools. This is blatant terrorist threats by Muslims , By J-street who are Obama's Jews, BDS who are financed by Soros ( A converted Muslim from Christianity) Black Lives Matter and the Black Panther who are Obama's army and part of the Nation of Islam has declared war against the Jews who support their home land Israel.
No Country in the world is ever forced to give up land ( including the USA) to a country they have won a war with. The idea the mere idea that a weak infidel like Israel won against the mighty forces of Islam and made Mohammad's people look weak and Stopped Mohammad's mad ideas that they declared Holy War against all Jews, If Israel should give up land to the Muslims then the North should give up the South and Texas give back land that belonged to Mexico. Or the 13 settlements give back the land to the Natives Americans.
 |
| Shaikh Ahmed Yassin |
The Occupiers are the Muslims not the Jews. We are taking back our land not taking away land from the Muslims who took out land from us through the slaughter by Mohammad's followers.
The so called Jews in J Street and BDS don't realize that statement From the River to the Sea means they will wipe out Jews. It will be worse then the Holocaust. Jewish blood will flow from the River to the Sea, Not that Jews will be allowed to live in Israel. Hamas, a Palestinian Islamist organization, was founded in Gaza in 1987 by Shaikh Ahmed Yassin. The organization is best known for its suicide bombings and other attacks mainly directed at Israeli civilians.
Hamas' charter calls for the destruction of the State of Israel and its replacement with a Palestinian Islamic state from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean See.
Yassin became involved with a Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. In 1984 he and others were jailed for secretly stockpiling weapons, but in 1985 he was released as part of the Jibril Agreement. In 1987, during the First Intifada, Yassin co-founded Hamas with Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi, originally calling it the "paramilitary wing" of the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood, and becoming its spiritual leader.
Yassin opposed the peace process between the Palestinians and the Israelis. He supported armed resistance against Israel, and was very outspoken in his views. He asserted that Palestine is an Islamic land "consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgment Day" and that no Arab leader had the right to give up any part of this territory.[Yassin's rhetoric did not distinguish between Israelis and Jews, at one point stating that "Reconciliation with the Jews is a crime." But however a video of him was captured stating that he had no problem with the Jews as people, and his conflict with them is political, and not religious. Yassin's inflammatory rhetoric was often scrutinized in the news media. On one occasion, he opined that Israel "must disappear from the map". Yassin's declaration that "We chose this road, and will end with martyrdom or victory" later became an oft repeated mantra among Palestinians.
In 1989, Yassin was arrested by the Israelis and sentenced to life imprisonment. In 1997 Yassin was released from Israeli prison as part of an arrangement with Jordan following the failed assassination attempt of Khaled Mashal, which had been conducted by the Israeli Mossad in Jordan. Yassin was released by Israel in exchange for two Mossad agents who had been arrested by Jordanian authorities, on the condition that he refrain from continuing to call for suicide bombings against Israel.
Following his release, Yassin resumed his leadership of Hamas. He immediately resumed his calls for attacks on Israel, using tactics including suicide bombings, thus violating the condition of his release. He also sought to maintain relations with the Palestinian Authority, believing that a clash between the two groups would be harmful to the interests of the Palestinian people. Yassin was repeatedly placed under house arrest by the Authority. Each time he was eventually released, often after extended demonstrations by his supporters. Yassin criticized the outcome of the 2003 Aqaba summit. His group initially declared a temporary truce with Israel. However, in July 2003, the truce unravelled after a Palestinian suicide bombing of a Jerusalem bus left 21 people dead. Israeli forces killed two Hamas members in retaliation.
On 6 September 2003, an Israeli Air Force (IAF) F-16 fired several missiles on a building in Gaza City, the Gaza Strip. Yassin was in the building at the time but survived. Israeli officials later confirmed that Yassin was the target of the attack. His injuries were treated at Shifa Hospital in Gaza City. Yassin responded to the media that "Days will prove that the assassination policy will not finish the Hamas. Hamas leaders wish to be martyrs and are not scared of death. Jihad will continue and the resistance will continue until we have victory, or we will be martyrs."
Yassin further promised that Hamas would teach Israel an "unforgettable lesson" as a result of the assassination attempt. Yassin made no attempt to guard himself from further attempts on his life or hide his location. Journalists sometimes visited his Gaza address and Yassin maintained a routine daily pattern of activity, including being wheeled every morning to a nearby mosque.
Reem Raiyshi's suicide bombing at the Erez crossing on 14 January 2004, which killed four civilians, was believed by the Israeli military to have been directly ordered by Yassin.Yassin suggested that the suicide bomber was fulfilling her "obligation" to make jihad, and Israel's Deputy Defence Minister responded by publicly declaring that Yassin was "marked for death". Yassin denied any involvement in the attack.
Before these Tree Hugging Jewish Liberal Hippies decided to belame Israel ....Learn your Jewish Modern History.
Mob mentality at Vassar BDS vote typical of school’s Israel climate
MARCH 16, 2016, 3:58 PM
POUGHKEEPSIE, N.Y. (JTA) — At many colleges and universities today, Jewish students are often pitted against students of color when it comes to Israel.
In my three years at Vassar College, I have been told – by a Jewish student leader, no less – that supporting Israel is tantamount to supporting oppression. I have watched Jewish friends bullied into silence by aggressive anti-Israel activists who call the Jews racists. I have seen many anti-Semitic comments from fellow students on social media. Although I have had many good experiences at Vassar and have made many friends, it can be uncomfortable to be Jewish here, especially if one supports Israel.
But nothing prepared me for the mob mentality that prevailed here on March 6, when Vassar’s student government, the Vassar Student Association, voted 15-7 to endorse the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, or BDS, against Israel.
Other than members of Vassar’s J Street U chapter, which offered an alternative resolution endorsing a two-state solution and calling for the creation of a student committee to educate the campus about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – a resolution overwhelmingly rejected by the student association — few showed up to oppose BDS.
They did not stay away because they were busy or because Vassar lacks anti-BDS students. They stayed away because they were afraid of pro-BDS students who have, over the past two years, pursued an aggressive campaign of intimidation at Vassar.
BDS supporters have picketed a class that was to travel to Israel and the West Bank, tweeted a Nazi cartoon, sold T-shirts celebrating a gun-toting Palestinian hijacker and sought to deny funding to J Street U to attend a conference sponsored by Haaretz.
Perhaps most damaging of all, they have divided the campus by portraying the territorial conflict between Israel and the Palestinians as a case of white colonialists oppressing people of color. Few charges on college campuses today are as incendiary as calling someone a racist, and BDS supporters routinely direct it at their opponents, regardless of their political inclinations.
The behavior of BDS supporters at the March 6 vote was typical. One after another, members of groups representing students of color stood up to denounce Israel for oppressing people of color. One student from Vassar’s Multiracial/Biracial Student Alliance claimed supporting BDS was necessary to support the “black and Arab population of Gaza.”
Those who attempted to challenge the resolution’s intellectual basis were mocked.
“Jesus Christ,” exclaimed a pro-BDS student in response to a question about the resolution’s claim that BDS is based in intersectional feminism.
“Does that question even have to be answered?” sneered another.
Most disturbingly, students who raised concerns about the effects of the unending BDS campaign on Vassar’s Jewish community were heckled and laughed at. One Jewish student talked about how the BDS campaign had invoked every anxiety nightmare she had ever had. She was crying as she spoke. Pro-BDS students laughed at her.
Religious minority groups were pitted against one another as well. When a Jewish member of the student association’s council reminded the gallery that Jewish students at Vassar had suffered the most during the BDS campaign, a pro-BDS student responded that Jews on campus had a Jewish studies program and a rabbi, as if her concerns hardly mattered. Muslim students, this BDS supporter argued, lacked an imam and similar classes.
Another Jewish student talked about Israel’s founding in the wake of the Holocaust. He was immediately accused of using the Holocaust as a political tool to justify the “genocide” of another people. The diminishment of the Holocaust has become routine at Vassar. Many students here think of the Holocaust as an event that affected white victims rather than people of color, and they argue that it therefore receives too much attention compared to other atrocities.
At the meeting’s conclusion, one non-Jewish council member said she felt “very complicit in the anti-Semitism that was occurring tonight.” Some, at least, feel shame about what happened on March 6.
Pro-BDS students do not constitute a majority at Vassar. They accomplish things by being highly aggressive, highly vocal and highly organized. And they bully opponents into silence by accusing them of racism, as they did on March 6.
It is time that Vassar students and professors who, one hopes, reject tactics like these, stand up and reject the divisiveness that BDS has brought to Vassar and so many other campuses. Vassar students, particularly its Jewish students who have suffered the most during this debate, deserve to feel safe, and they deserve not to have their identities and their fears dismissed by those with an extreme political agenda.
—
Jason Storch is a junior at Vassar College who serves as co-president of the local Chabad center and treasurer of the Vassar Jewish Union.
Defining Anti-Semitism
Fact Sheet
SPECIAL ENVOY TO MONITOR AND COMBAT ANTI-SEMITISM
Washington, DC
June 8, 2010
Anti-Semitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities." --Working Definition of Anti-Semitism by the European Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia
Contemporary Examples of Anti-Semitism
- Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews (often in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion).
- Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as a collective—especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
- Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, the state of Israel, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
- Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
- Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interest of their own nations.
What is Anti-Semitism Relative to Israel?
EXAMPLES of the ways in which anti-Semitism manifests itself with regard to the state of Israel, taking into account the overall context could include:DEMONIZE ISRAEL:
- Using the symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism to characterize Israel or Israelis
- Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis
- Blaming Israel for all inter-religious or political tensions
- Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation
- Multilateral organizations focusing on Israel only for peace or human rights investigations
- Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, and denying Israel the right to exist
me>
History of the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”
The "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," the most notorious and most successful work of modern anti-Semitism, draws on popular anti-Semitic notions which have their roots in medieval Europe from the time of theCrusades. The libels that the Jews used blood of Christian children for the Feast of Passover, poisoned the wells and spread the plague were pretexts for the wholesale destruction of Jewish communities throughoutEurope. Tales were circulated among the masses of secret rabbinical conferences whose aim was to subjugate and exterminate the Christians, and motifs like these are found in early antisemitic literature.
The conceptual inspiration for the Protocols can be traced back to the time of the French Revolution at the end of the 18th century. At that time, a French Jesuit named Abbe Barruel, representing reactionary elements opposed to the revolution, published in 1797 a treatise blaming the Revolution on a secret conspiracy operating through the Order of Freemasons. Barruel's idea was nonsense, since the French nobility at the time was heavily Masonic, but he was influenced by a Scottish mathematician named Robison who was opposed to the Masons. In his treatise, Barruel did not himself blame the Jews, who were emancipated as a result of the Revolution. However, in 1806, Barruel circulated a forged letter, probably sent to him by members of the state police opposed to Napoleon Bonaparte's liberal policy toward the Jews, calling attention to the alleged part of the Jews in the conspiracy he had earlier attributed to the Masons. This myth of an international Jewish conspiracy reappeared later on in 19th century Europe in places such as Germany and Poland.
The direct predecessor of the Protocols can be found in the pamphlet "Dialogues in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu," published by the nonJewish French satirist Maurice Joly in 1864. In his "Dialogues," which make no mention of the Jews, Joly attacked the political ambitions of the emperor Napoleon III using the imagery of a diabolical plot in Hell. The "Dialogues" were caught by the French authorities soon after their publication and Joly was tried and sentenced to prison for his pamphlet.
Joly's "Dialogues," while intended as a political satire, soon fell into the hands of a German anti-Semite named Hermann Goedsche writing under the name os Sir John Retcliffe. Goedsche was a postal clerk and a spy for the Prussian secret police. He had been forced to leave the postal work due to his part in forging evidence in the prosecution against the Democratic leader Benedict Waldeck in 1849. Goedsche adapted Joly's "Dialogues" into a mythical tale of a Jewish conspiracy as part of a series of novels entitled "Biarritz," which appeared in 1868. In a chapter called "The Jewish Cemetery in Prague and the Council of Representatives of the Twelve Tribes of Israel," he spins the fantasy of a secret centennial rabbinical conference which meets at midnight and whose purpose is to review the past hundred years and to make plans for the next century.
Goedsche's plagiary of Joly's "Dialogues" soon found its way to Russia. It was translated into Russian in 1872, and a consolidation of the "council of representatives" under the name "Rabbi's Speech" appeared in Russian in 1891. These works no doubt furnished the Russian secret police (Okhrana) with a means with which to strengthen the position of the weak Czar Nicholas II and discredit the reforms of the liberals who sympathized with the Jews. During the Dreyfus case of 18931895, agents of the Okhrana in Paris redacted the earlier works of Joly and Goedsche into a new edition which they called the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion." The manuscript of the Protocols was brought to Russia in 1895 and was printed privately in 1897.
The Protocols did not become public until 1905, when Russia's defeat in the Russo-Japanese War was followed by the Revolution in the same year, leading to the promulgation of a constitution and institution of the Duma. In the wake of these events, the reactionary "Union of the Russian Nation" or Black Hundreds organization sought to incite popular feeling against the Jews, who they blamed for the Revolution and the Constitution. To this end they used the Protocols, which was first published in a public edition by the mystic priest Sergius Nilus in 1905. The Protocols were part of a propaganda campaign that accompanied the pogroms of 1905 inspired by the Okhrana. A variant text of the Protocols was published by George Butmi in 1906 and again in 1907. The edition of 1906 was found among the Czar's collection, even though he had already recognized the work as a forgery. In his later editions, Nilus claimed that the Protocols had been read secretly at the First Zionist Congress at Basle in 1897, while Butmi, in his edition, wrote that they had no connection with the new Zionist movement, but, rather, were part of the Masonic conspiracy.
In the civil war following the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, the reactionary White Armies made extensive use of the Protocols to incite widespread slaughters of Jews. At the same time, Russian emigrants brought the Protocols to western Europe, where the Nilus edition served as the basis for many translations, starting in 1920. Just after its appearance in London in 1920, Lucien Wolf exposed the Protocols as a plagiary of the earlier work of Joly and Goedsche, in a pamphlet of the Jewish Board of Deputies. The following year, in 1921, the story of the forgery was published in a series of articles in the London Times by Philip Grave, the paper's correspondent in Constantinople.
A whole book documenting the forgery was also published in the same year in the United States by Herman Bernstein (The Truth About "The Protocols of Zion." Reprinted with an introduction by Norman Cohn. NY: Ktav Publishing House, 1971). Nevertheless, the Protocols continued to circulate widely. They were even sponsored by Henry Ford in the United States until 1927, and formed an important part of the Nazis' justification of genocide of the Jews in the Holocaust.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/protocols.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.