Arab minorities in Europe and native backlash

[Northlander]

Sorry for interupting the Sari Nuseibeh discussion but I just have to answer newsguy and mediocrates.
They clearly wanted to provoce and they succeded. I get provoced by the fact that they knows absolutely nothing about swedish history and sweden as a county and that they nevertheless keeps critisising it.
I had heard that sweden is still considered to be more or less hostile in Israel but I must admit that Im surprised to see to what extent.
Newsguy.

Yes, of course, a tradition of never taking a firm position against Nazism, Communism, nor Islamic terrorism. Collaborate with whichever brutal, immoral regime threatens world peace, and hopefully you will be saved. Great tradition, Northlander, but not one that I'd be proud of if I were you.
Not true. Apart from the nazi collaboration. Not proud of that. Not my decision though. Also we collaborated to larger extent with the allies so its not entirely true. USA is too big to know anything about having superpowers as neighbours and the need of careful diplomacy. Its just so. Israel would also been forced to use nothing but diplomacy considering its neighbours if it wasnt for USA. Sweden had no military backup ever against the russians and germans. Stronger neighbours than Israel and no backup. Thats the situation. For hundreds and hundreds of years. Have never collaborated with the russians nor islamists.

why is Israel the ONLY country your UN representative ever proposed bringing a resolution against?
Not true. We are into the same sanctions that other european countries. Iraq for example.
And I wont admit I am biased against Israel. Im not. I have nothing against jews or israelis. Its hard NOT to take the israeli side. Its hard NOT to get impressed by the things accomplished.
I support Israel as a country but not everythning they ever did.
And not some of their current politics. As I said before, had I been on a palestinian forum I would have even more things to critise.
You cant compare the democracy israel with PA.
Its no hypocracy. Its you that are blinded by the fact that you want all people to choose side. Why should I? Both sides are wrong and right. But you are 20 pro-israelis here and when I dont agree to israels politics its better to speak up. Do you want me to agree on you on all issues? Wont happen. Im sure we agree on alot, probably more than separates us. Im not a hypocrit by critisising the leadership of both sides. But I havent found any arab on this forum that I could critise.

Mediocrates.

Israel and the US are the worst countries in the world
Israelis and Americans are the worst people in the world
Americans have never built, created, written or done anything of any significance, ever.
Israel and America are the only countries in the world where racism and slavery are official policy
The EU is the light of the world.
God made the Norwegians and Swedes in his own image and everyone else is a ****ty clone.

When have I said any of that?
I have critisised USAs foreign politics but nothing else.
I dont even support EU. I voted against it and Im not religous.

It ridiculous really. A country who's last great naval engagement consisted of the largest warship in the world capsizing 300 yards from its maiden berth in calm seas and no wind with the loss of all hands on board and who's contribution to the 20th century is the commemoration of dynamite and a sudden withdrawal to 'neutrality' which is the same thing as whoredom chattering on what's right and what's not. Stick to making booze out of fish.
This was fun. Lets play that game. You should read up on european military history. After the capsizing you refer to sweden went from being a poor undeveloped country outside europe to become the strongest military and political power. That was BEFORE the 30year war when we was more or less alone on keeping up the fighting on the protestant side. We probably have had 30 larger naval battles after that mainly with the russians and danes after but Im sure they are not famous in USA.
Sweden had less population than any of our neighbours at that time, even denmark, and we were much poorer, still Sweden become more and more successful on the battlefield. It was ONLY because of military tradition and military development. We modernized all aspects of warfare up to the beginning of the 18th century. Naval and land. The offensive and aggresive use of cavalry was the trademark but later on also the techniques for fortifications was modernised. We even did "an israel" in the late 17th century when the king Carl XII was just a teenager. All neighbouring countries attacked surpisingly in the belive that the young king would be an easy target and that this was the chance to finally take back all areas that sweden had taken form them. The military infrastructure of sweden was working perfectly and in a series of attacks into their countries they were one by one forced to accept peace. The main enemy russia was dealt with last and they were then rapidly forced back from all swedish lands. Then one of the biggest military mistakes ever took room which eventually lead to the end of Sweden as a great power in europe.An invasion of russia. After a number of successive attacks on the numerious superior, and technically inferior russians the swedes was finally defeated down in ukraine and 100 years later we had lost most of our lands. It is a period of military strength for 150 years. Fairly long considering our strategicly weak position and the populations of our enemies. 200 years even if you consider our fight for independence from the union with the danes and the defensive wars after against the russians when we lost balticum and finland etc. In total its at least as long as USA has been a great military power. Our military traditions are gone now which is all for the best in my opinion but you are not accurate when seeing sweden as a joke military. Probably only Prussia has had more military traditions historically in northern europe.
We have played it even with the russians in war after war after war. USAs naval history is like a joke compared was it not for the pacific and WWII.
Making booze out of fish? Never heard of. I will pretend I have something against americans personally and fall down to your level. Its not surprising to hear this arrogant views from americans. Everytime we sees them on TV its in funny movies when they ask people on the streets easy questions like "point out england on this map" They never get it right:). The level of education is beyond belife over there. Its a miracle they HAVE accomplished anything. They still belive they are the only democracy in the world even though their own president did not even have the majority of the votes. A laughing matter to the whole world that is. They should stick to eating their hamburgers which they do just fine if you consider the average weight in the states. That they picture themselves over and over again as rich and beautiful in numerous shallow and dumb movies and TV series is once again a laughing matter. They have a white rasist overclass that supress the black/latino population and most of the others and they dont even know it themselves. Once again we saw white fat cops beating up a black child just days ago.
Arrogant and uneducated in general. Americans still belive that france is a city in england and that life in USA is so great compared to europe or asia. Tell that to the bagladies and trailorfolks.
So,do I belive all this or do I get along just fine with my american friends and collegues? Are there americans and americans just as there are swedes and swedes?
I dont think you know anything about sweden at all. You probably havent been here and seen for yourself. We have as high material livingstandard but better distributed than US. Less crime. Less poverty. Better healthcare. Less unemployment.
Better educational system.
We are the size of a large city and are leading in numerous reasearch areas. Medicine together with USA. Alot of technological areas as IT etc. Number 3 after USA and Finland when it comes to implementation of IT sollutions was the latest I heard from american investors. We have not much natural resources and we have received no help from others.
We have given more aid to less developed countries than most and taken in more refugees than many others.
I think its fair to say we have done quite good as a nation. So why should I bother what you say really? Well, just because its irritating. I have learned you language and seen your country, not the opposite. Had I said that Israel or USA is a BS, underdeveloped country you would react too. USA is behind much of the development in the western world, Im aware of that. And I have said that israel is a well developed country not only compared to the region. It has done tremendously well considering the difficulties it have had. But it has also recieved huge amounts of help from US. Thats why I think Israeli politics and the current governments policies are the more tragic. One could expect different sollutions and other approaches to its problems from a country with Israels intelligencia. That goes for many influencial americans too.
That doesnt mean Im a supporter of Syria or Iraq. Those countries are not comparable. Im taking part of sanctions against Iraq right now, even though I think they are not effective and just makes ordinary people suffer. I wont even argue when USA launches its attack later. In your mind it really seems that war is better than peace. A country without war is not honorable. Well, that has to stand for you. I dont agree.

Sorry for going off topic.

[Vic]

OK, children.

The Americans do their homework regarding European history and details of contemporary politics, the Europeans perform serious and honest examination of their attitudes towards Israel and the Jews in general.

Truce?

[Vic]

Sorry, Mediocrates, but correcting some of the American and Israeli posters' ideas on Europe can easily become a full-time job. This is not to deny that European Middle East policy is poisonous. Many of you simply lack sufficient background knowledge, you sound as if you were discussing the latest and greatest on Flying Saucers and on the psychology of the Little Green Men inside them ;)

[Mediocrates]

I wasn't responding to you, but imagine how we yanks feel when we hear this gorp that makes us all out to be stetson wearing barefoot gun nuts.

BTW I have a personal policy of not reading something that doesn't scan. If I see something go over 20 lines w/o a break or an indent I skip it unless I can't avoid it.

[elke]

You have to understand, Northlander, that Hitler did not start out with large mobs either. We become very wary whenever there are synagogue burnings, shootings of Jews, and other expressions of antisemitism. You also have to remember how difficult it is to tell what precisely is the situation in Europe from an ocean away (witness your own and your fellow posters' lack of knowledge as to what is going on here ;) ). We have to go by what's reported, and as always, it's the more sensationalist stuff that makes it into the headlines.

Now I have a question for you: what if anything, are these moderate Arabs you know, doing to combat the perception that the Arab World is extremist? Because you see, while it is certain that they can't all be nuts, until they at least try to do something about it, there is not much to talk about.

[Mediocrates]

Here is a moderate article from the normally abrasive John Derbyshire about the difference between Islam and militancy.

http://www.nationalreview.com/derbyshire/derbyshire071102.asp

Here is the concluding paragraph:

"Instead of mocking or dismissing Islam, we should appeal to believers to look to the nobler and more generous texts in their scriptures, the texts that emphasize a common humanity. We have nothing to gain from alienating honest Muslims, any more than they have anything to gain by being enemies of the West. If we can remember the first, and persuade them of the second, there might be some prospect of cutting off significant support to the legions of glittering-eyed Koran-waving murderers the world is currently infested with, and of averting the destructive clash that we are all, slowly but surely, coming to believe inevitable."

Here is a key sentence and one that I personally believe:

"I don't feel sure, in fact, that the teachings of a religion have any necessary consequence for the destinies of believer communities. "

[Vic]

Originally posted by Mediocrates (thread "Where are the good Arabs?", post http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=16132#post16132 )
One of the problems certainly is that arabs generally are less influential in society, in europe, USA and Israel

That frequently quoth canard is debatable. Arab interests are represented by Arab business interests, at least from a foreign policy perspective. And internally, in Europe where the Arab minorities are a few orders of magnitude larger than the total Jewish constituency it is simply paranoid to claim that a tiny handful of Jews have more import on domestic politics and policy than their Arab and/or muslim counterparts. If that were true then your whole notion of republicanism, democracy and civil discourse is broken. [/B]You should be very careful about this, Mediocrates. Yes, some European countries have still a long way to go reagrding civil discourse. One of the side effects is that this limits the influence of immigrant communities on politcs. Most European countries have much stingier naturalization laws than the US. Among the European Muslims the proportion of those holding the citizenships of their country of residence varies greatly. The mobs that fill the streets screaming about death to Israel, vandalize synagogues etc. are not identical with a certain sector of electorate. And even when do have have voting rights, they can be part of a minority considerably marginalized in social life. It can indeed be argued in some cases that the anti-Isareli/anti-Jewish venom they spew is not just inherent to them, but an attempt to endear themselves to the majority of their countries, a sort of entrance ticket into the larger society. Similar mechanisms have been described for neonazi youth groups: the "respectable" part of the society quietly signaling its acceptance for aggressive extremist speech and acts, thus greatly encouraging them. The practical implication is that the major target for any pro-Israeli/Jewish activity should be not such minority groups directly but rather the so-called "silent majority" (which is not so silent if one cares to listen :(), in order to break this kind of supply-and-demand relationship.

[Mediocrates]

Then you don't have a muslim problem or an arab problem. You have an underclass problem and the arabs happen to fill that niche right now. Tomorrow, who knows it might be the Thais...at any rate an underclass problem has to be addressed in quite a different way than one would were they trying to address a marginalized racial minority problem. It has to be addressed socially not poltically, yes?

That they express their discontent with living in Europe as hatred of Jews is neither that useful nor distinct from the perspective of fixing it. That to me is truest form of bigotry; the kind of diffuse anger directed at some largely invisible/defenseless 'other' - hatred in the absence of a target.

To me that's not that different from any other dissaffected group be they Arab, Irish, Turkish or what have you. Toss in a heady brew of confused radical Marxism, economic stratification and a relentless message that it's someone else's fault and the non Jews of Europe will have a bigger problem than the Jews, because after all there aren't that many European Jews left.

You see what's kept the lid on frictions in the US is that by and large most immigrants, legal or not come here to be 'Americans' and not just living here. But if millions of people came here resentful of what it is to live here and be of us and with a plan to rebuild society as the singular expression of their own ego then you can bet they would try. It would no longer be an under class problem but what Huntington calls the 'Clash of Cultures'.

[Jorge]

quote from Northlander #86:

I had heard that sweden is still considered to be more or less hostile in Israel but I must admit that Im surprised to see to what extent.

Northlander, please do not confuse the opinions of some of our learned fellow Forum members whith those of the israelis at large.
The fact is that israelis have for long looked upon Sweden as a friendly country and also with respect for its achievements in social justice and true democarcy. We appreciate the fact that Sweden and other Scandinavian countries stood by Israel through
most of the State's short history and helped finance a large number of projects in a number of educational and organizational fields.

A sentence often heard in discussions: "Israel is not Sweden" is taken as an admission that we have a long way to
go till we reach the achievements of your social welfare system
and your standards of prosperity and democracy.

It is true that voices have been heard lately against Sweden and european countries in general. A certain number of people here seem to think that for a country to be considered our friend,
it has to agree without reservations to whatever folly we decide
to embark on. If they do not they are not only our foes but also
charged with antisemitic views.

The sad fact is that we, like other countries, have our share of demagogic politicians that find artful ways of playing with public opinion. Instead of enquiring for the reasons why so many
friendly countries suddenly started to criticize their policies in the conflict, they prefer to raise the accusation of antisemitism as the
cause of the criticism. This works usually very well as a rallying
slogan and deviates people from a critical examination of the
said policies. After all that's what demagogy is about: leading people astray by playing with fears, emotions and prejudice.

[Vic]

Originally posted by Mediocrates (post #101 http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=16144#post16144 )
Then you don't have a muslim problem or an arab problem. You have an underclass problem and the arabs happen to fill that niche right now. Tomorrow, who knows it might be the Thais...at any rate an underclass problem has to be addressed in quite a different way than one would were they trying to address a marginalized racial minority problem. It has to be addressed socially not poltically, yes?Both. This can also be valid, say, for a warm relationship between a Ph.D. student of more or less "Arab" background and his lily-white European professor. The latter would easily signalize the former that antisemitic statements are welcome, even if he wouldn't indulge in them ("our guilt complex towards the Jews, you know" etc.) himself. The "political" issue is that of the antisemitism of the establishment. The social issue is that minorities must be offered more honourable ways into full acceptance than torching synagogues and, in case of explicit underclass problems, must be supported in addressing their concerns to the responsible establishments (roughly on the line of: if your children lack educational opportunities, then it's not the fault of Ariel Sharon but of Jacques Chirac). And - that politicans shouldn't use the Middle East for distraction, as it happened in the last electoral campaign in France. The interested parties, in this case the Jewish insitutions among others, should have tried to refocus the debate on internal issues (and, in a place like France, they would have found some support from other quarters), rather than playing the game imposed on them, and playing it badly at that.

It's difficult to generalize. The situation varies from country to country, even between regions, and/or the social/ethnic/religious groups and political parties involved. In fact, a Saudi businessman on a shopping spree in Europe and a third-generation beur have little genuine interests in common.
That they express their discontent with living in Europe as hatred of Jews is neither that useful nor distinct from the perspective of fixing it. That to me is truest form of bigotry; the kind of diffuse anger directed at some largely invisible/defenseless 'other' - hatred in the absence of a target.Whose bigotry do you mean? Of the ones who perpetrate it or of the ones who encourage it?

Basically this fixation on Israel is often self-destructive (no, I haven't forgotten the consequences for the victims of the attacks, should you wonder about it), but I don't need to remind you of the "socialism of fools". Let's call it the "anti-racism of fools" ;) . In some cases they definetely try to emulate the successful Palestinian marketing model: http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=16169#post16169 , apparently not realizing that the slot is already filled (in the late glory days of the PKK the Kurds decided to declare themselves the victims of Zionists too; it didn't bring them much additional support).

As with drugs you have to throttle the "demand", i.e. not just arrest the dealers, but also get a significant proportion of junkies off the stuff. Translated, say, in French terms, you have to start with the (average) readers of "Le Monde", not with the banlieus, because in the current situations Israel-bashing "pure" Frenchmen are much less "Arab" than vandalizing "French Arab" mobs are "French". You have to rob the "Arabs" of the illusion that they can further their interests on any significant scale by lashing out against Jews.

(Maybe that is the reason why some of the more perceptive Muslim (or of remotely Muslim background) public figures in France are speaking out against antisemitism. Maybe they do realize that their constitutiency is much better served with sticking to problems that concern it directly rather than getting in a raving frenzy over something happening thousands of miles away. But maybe I am too optimistic on it...)

There can even be more to it. I'd even venture so far as to say that not only the Palestinian propaganda but also the terrorist acts themselves are calibrated (among other things, of course) towards a certain kind of European reception. This is a quite a revolting subject, but we won't get around addressing it, and I believe better sooner than later.






To me that's not that different from any other dissaffected group be they Arab, Irish, Turkish or what have you. Toss in a heady brew of confused radical Marxism, economic stratification and a relentless message that it's someone else's fault and the non Jews of Europe will have a bigger problem than the Jews, because after all there aren't that many European Jews left.

You see what's kept the lid on frictions in the US is that by and large most immigrants, legal or not come here to be 'Americans' and not just living here. But if millions of people came here resentful of what it is to live here and be of us and with a plan to rebuild society as the singular expression of their own ego then you can bet they would try. It would no longer be an under class problem but what Huntington calls the 'Clash of Cultures'. There is a great difference between such "classical" immigration countries as the US and Europe. The immigrants here are - with few exceptions - never offered a way, an opportunity to become part of a larger "us". In fact, with great variations from country to country, they can be encouraged to stay as "exotic" as possible.

As an immigrant in Europe, you needn't be resentful of your host country in order to be prevented from becoming part of it. It sometimes even functions the other way round: the more you accept its (declared) basic values, the more likely you are to be rejected, yet you are loved as a poor stammering "exote". On the line of what I cited above: if the "natives" can't pronounce your last name, then you'd better not speak their language properly, otherwise their whole world falls apart. (Come to think of it, that the Palestinians are about the only ones "permitted" to break out of this scheme is quite remarkable in this context.)

The exact details may vary, the French, for example, place high demands on linguistic competence as opposed to the Germans, but the underlying scheme is the same: the "Huntington" problem is created and enforced much more by the "native" majority than by the "immigrant" minorities. The immigrant experience in the US seems to be entirely different, from what I've heard.

Whatever happened to the Americans, btw.? Criticism of the way Europeans treat their minorities used to be a never-ending topic in the American media. Some of us certainly admired you for this, but "the times they are a-changing...". Pity.

[Vic]

Originally posted by NewsGuy (post #98 http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=16138#post16138 )
I understand that in Europe, the general population is fed up with Arab immigrants because they have created a big problem of Arab street crime and also because the Arabs are seen not to contribute to society as much as they take from society. I have not personally observed any of this, but these are basically the issues in the European elections that are reported in the press.

But the problem of racism and violence in Europe against Jews is caused to a great extent by Arab Anti-Semitism. It is the Arab community that is directly responsible for a good part of the hatred of Jews, and has perpetrated violence against Jews and Jewish institutions.

I find it hard to be sympathetic to the strong dislike of the Arabs in Europe, when those are the very same people who are violent racists and Anti-Semites themselves.A somewhat naive statement. Don't listen to Lamplighter's fairy tales ;). For a simple fact: in many countries the majority of Muslims are not even Arabs, whether by citizenship or by ethnicity. It's Turks in Germany, afaik, Pakistanis in Britain, Indonesians and Malaysians in The Netherlands etc. The problems you cite are typical underclass problems, the respective groups in Europe may or may not consist of Muslims. One of the most problematic groups in Germany are currently ethnic Germans, who have arrived recently from the fmr. USSR and are a serious factor both in street crime and in the abuse of the welfare system. On the contrary, in many countries the the Arabs belong to the middle to higher income and the appropriate social groups. The French created their "Arab problem" mostly themselves, by being unable to devise a sane policy to deal with their former colonial subjects. I'm sure Takeo will be able to provide some detail, if I give him my word that this is not to boost my German patriotic feelings at the cost of his countrymen ;)


And to all of you: please stop comparing the European situation to Israel. The European states are not Israel for same reasons that the French, the Germans, the Italians etc. are not Jews, and the ethnic and religious minorites living in Europe are not Palestinians under (led by) Arafat. This sort of "piggybacking" on Israeli problems is revolting!


I can only quote an amazingly perceptive post of Northlander ( http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=15586#post15586 ), a dramatic demonstration of how greatly a person's analytic capabilities can vary depending on the subject ;)
On the contrarary to what lompy belives most muslim immigrants that comes to europe flees FROM islamic fundamentalism. Im sure they have no intension on bringing it to us. There are problems, I agree to that, but the fear and suspicion of islam in denmark is totally out of proportions. In france and austria etc the more or less rasict politicians are at least opposed by other politicians but in denmark the lack of a sane debate is stunning. The problems with immigrants are the usual, with segregation and language barriers etc. Not some sort of islamic invasion or plan for world supremacy. Its redicilous. Lets hope that the rest of europe and also US can keep the fear of islam on a realistic level.

They want to preserve their red hotdogs and just drink their beers. Its far to easy to blame people of a different culture or people of a different race for the national problems. It has been done before and Im sure especially jews are aware of that. It COULD as well been the jews AGAIN that were pointed out as the problem in denmark. Same arguements as before, different target.

Preserve the danish way of life. Always the same thinking. I belive that europe as well as USA is in a constant change culturally. We have had even faster changes before like in the 17th century when whole groups of people moved around as a result of an increasing international trade and even warfare. It was probably hard to tell the national identities at that time and they could probably not imagine how the cultural identity would look like these days. We still have one in every country despite the fact that we have had voices against foreign labour or whatever in hundreds of years. Its just fear of what is different.

I am for generous immigration laws. Most muslims that comes here adopt and they in turn makes alot for the change of islam in the long run. They that dont adopt to our culture or find some sort of mix should be allowed to live here according to our laws. Its as simple as that. Do they beat up their daughters because of some family honor? Well, put them in jail. Some people always have to learn the hard way. Its still better for the daughters to grow up here than in some of their originating countries.

We dont help refugees for our own sake, its for theirs. Then its always good to discuss HOW we should help them and to discuss the problems with immigration. Im not for politically correctness which Im sure to be attacked for as a swede, by danes. There are problems, but to hear about an organised islamic plan is laughable. Again, most muslim refugees flees FROM fundamentalism. They will still be muslims here but they will also get many of our values which affects islam as well as our own societies. Nothing strange and definitely nothing new.I can only add to this that most of the security problems are a result of incompetent and ignorant law enforcement. About a week ago a Moroccan-born man was arrested in Hamburg. He was working as a leading computer technician for a central police authority, a kind of German FBI counterpart, and had full access to all databases, among them such containing very sensitive material. He seems to have been a close personal associate of Mohammed Atta, involved in other apparently dubious local organisations from the same quarter. So far there is no credible explanation for the fact that it was never noticed until now. One would expect such institutions to monitor their staff...


Many European Muslims and other members of the immigrant communities have been keenly aware of the rise of islamic fundamentalism and the dangers involved years before anyone else was. No one listened to their warnings. I can only again point to a link ( http://www.afgha.com/article.php?sid=14642 ) I've posted somewhere else ( http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?postid=15687#post15687 ). I leave it to you to decide whether the net result of immigration is an increased security risk or a security asset.

[Mediocrates]

I suggest that quotes are quotes and if anyone feels they are being misquoted, as distinct from misunderstood then they should point that out. We should look at this like US libel law where it is incumbant on the accused to demonstrate that they did not make the statement.

The rules for libel in the US are: a statement was made, it is false, & it caused harm.

Can we live with this?

[elke]

Originally posted by Vic
I am very sorry if you see it this way, but I do not have the least reason to withdraw them. I am capable of seeing the situation with the eyes of an outsider, which is a mixed blessing, and I am too painfully aware of the impression some of the prominent figures of the Israeli Peace Movement make on the European public. To take it even further: What someone like Uri Avnery conveys to the Average Joe, is a sense of sheer limitless, visceral hate for his country, a willingness to uncompromising servitude to external tastes and desires, on the backs of his fellow citizens. I will gladly discuss it in more detail once you have calmed down, since I believe that this is a very importatnt topic.

I understand what you are saying, and I sympathize with how you feel about this. However, this is not within our control! There have got to be Europeans who can see people such as both Avnery and Lieberman for who they are - fringe elements in the open and Democratic Israeli society.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by Vic
A somewhat naive statement. Don't listen to Lamplighter's fairy tales ;). For a simple fact: in many countries the majority of Muslims are not even Arabs... The problems you cite are typical underclass problems, the respective groups in Europe may or may not consist of Muslims.

Maybe so, but when I look at recent Anti-Semitic violent attacks, they are mostly perpetrated by Arabs and other Muslims. True, there is also a growing problem with Russian and German fascist, but it doesn't change the fact that in places like the U.K., France, Belgium, Denmark and Sweden, Anti-Semitism is largely orchestrated by Arabs.

That's why Lamplighter is exactly right about the phenomenon of European Anti-Semitism. Although some Europeans like to deny it, Anti-Semitism has grown to enormous proportions -- this according to the Jewish communities in those countries, not accroding to Lamplighter.

As you know, the anti-immigration sentiment in Europe is a result of an economic and social backlash caused by the natives' reaction to Arab and Muslim immigrants, first and foremost. Sure, there are other immigrant groups as you correctly point out, but in the stories publicized in the general press, the resentment almost always concerns Muslims. There are no parties, so far as I know, that are dedicated to locking out expatriots.

Please don't think that I believe that Muslim immigrants are automatically suspect of crime, nor that all Muslims are in the lower class. These are clearly not accurate assertions. But, from what I read in the European press in English, there is a real problem with Arab and Muslim immigrants throughout Europe.

And, knowing that the Arabs and Muslims have been responsible for Anti-Semitic violence, I find it very difficult to be sympathetic to their negative image in Europe. Maybe a better man than I would be more understanding -- I don't know...



please stop comparing the European situation to Israel. The European states are not Israel for same reasons that the French, the Germans, the Italians etc. are not Jews, and the ethnic and religious minorites living in Europe are not Palestinians under (led by) Arafat. This sort of "piggybacking" on Israeli problems is revolting!

I don't think that anyone is under an illusion that Europe is Israel, but, the point is that Europeans have been critical of Israeli policy and therefore are subject to being judged by those very same standards.

Europe is the origin of some of the most horrific and barbarian crimes against humanity in the past several centuries, and even up to 60 years ago, which is like the blink of an eye in historical terms.

Therefore, it seems to me that, with all due respect, European countries like France, Spain, U.K., Germany, France, Belgium, etc. should simply bow their collective heads in shame and remain silent on the subject of national morality.



... He was working as a leading computer technician for a central police authority, a kind of German FBI counterpart, and had full access to all databases, among them such containing very sensitive material. He seems to have been a close personal associate of Mohammed Atta, involved in other apparently dubious local organisations from the same quarter. So far there is no credible explanation for the fact that it was never noticed until now. One would expect such institutions to monitor their staff...

This is a very narrow case, and possibly does uncover official incompetence for various reasons. But the bigger picture is an ongoing European political and financial support for Arab and Islamic terrorism.

Europeans have avoided investigating the activities of Muslims out of a false sense of liberalism and the desire to avoid an appearance of racism. (This is also the case in the U.S., btw). The reality is that Western society has been ignorant of the depths of Islamic hatred of our civilization and their extensive capabilities for destruction. Therefore, Islamic terror organizations have been taking advantage of the West's weak laws that are totally insufficient to deal with Islamic terrorism.

Terror organizations like al Qaeda and like the Iranian and Palestinian terror groups view Western society's misguided liberal laws as not only a weakness, but as a license to operate freely in places like Europe. This perception is only bolstered by the European's anti-Israel politics and the EU's pro-terrorism stance, like supporting Hizbullah, for example.

[Vic]

NewsGuy, you have a curiously contradictory position on Europe. On one hand you rightly accuse it of antisemitism, causing great damage to Israel etc., on the other you appear to accept unquestioningly its current self-victimisation. No, Muslims don't run Europe and they won't do so in the nearest future, unless there is something we don't know about them - Europe runs its Muslims according to its own lights. When Muslims, immigrants, great-grandchildren of immigrants or whatever attack synagogues, then it's usually because "we" let them do so, if not encourage them, as was obviously the case during the last elections in France. "We", the majority, could crush antisemitic violence in no time, the reasons "we" don't do so are wide and varied.

What we are seeing now in Europe is a textbook case of scapegoating: blaming the mess on "alien elements" and "our" own good-naturedness towards them. We have been there before. The reality is entirely different:
[list=1]
Most, if not all, of the real terror groups could have been suppressed by competent and consequent law enforcement. The laws on their own are AFAIK the least of our problems, they are not being implemented properly. There may be a clinch here and there, but I have to hear of any significant example. Lamenting about the inadequate lawmaking is looking for excuses.

Intelligent minority policies would have greatly reduced the terror groups' recruiting potential on one side and - through better communication - increased the effciency of the security work on the other side. A safe and secure society must be a liberal society, i.e. a society whose members have a modicum (I'm not an idealist on this) of trust in each other and in the authorities, in which information can circulate between various groups, in which the minorities can make themselves heard to a healthy degree. The resulting transparency is a great stability factor. The security failure in Europe is also a failure of communication between social groups. When parts of the population remain "black boxes" to the majority, then we end up with the mess that we are seeing now. How are you going to fight against "Islamic Fundamentalism" without insider knowledge of such, ignoring the information the inhabitants of your country, citizens or not, are capable and willing to provide?

Most European countries have at least partially failed in their post-WWII and/or postcolonial nation-building. I don't think that it's too late, but, frankly, it's the current spread of irrationality that frightens me.

Again, please don't compare the situation of Europe vs. "Muslims" to Israel vs. Palestinians + Arabs of the surrounding countries. The preconditions, the framework and the relation of the forces are entirely different.

And finally, decent policies on Israel and in some cases on the local Jewish communities would have taken the attraction out of antisemitic attacks (at the risk of being declared an islamic fundamentalist terrorism supporter, I submit that European perception also serves as a great incentive for attacks in Israel, especially for suicide bombings - but that is a topic on its own).
[/list=1]
These are the three basic problem sources, and as long as they are not solved, better forget everything you get told both about the European counterterrorism and about the European "Muslim problem". There is none, only a "bad politics" problem.



And now for more detail - -

I'll rearrange your posting a bit for my own convenience, please correct me if you think that I misquote you.

1. You cite the European (English-language) press as a source.
But, from what I read in the European press in English, there is a real problem with Arab and Muslim immigrants throughout Europe.[...]Sure, there are other immigrant groups as you correctly point out, but in the stories publicized in the general press, the resentment almost always concerns Muslims. It is not unbiased, and it publicizes what its readers like to hear. There is much less reason to trust the European's press reporting on minorities, crime, antisemitism etc. that its Israel reporting - take all of it with a good chunk of salt. As for "resentment" - we both know how bad an indicator of reality it can be. I am not so sure about the statistics on the perpetrators either. There are no reliable official overall sources, they normally appear after a year or so.

2. On cause and effect:
That's why Lamplighter is exactly right about the phenomenon of European Anti-Semitism.He is exactly wrong, since he sees it as a Muslim plague descending upon poor defenceless Europe. See above. It's still the dog wagging with the tail, pretending from time to time that it is the one being wagged. Arabs (unless the term includes "Arabs" Chirac ;)) can't really "orchestrate" much here, they don't have the influence. They "perpetrate", but there is a world of difference between the two roles.

3. What is an expatriot as in:
There are no parties, so far as I know, that are dedicated to locking out expatriots.Sorry, I can't find it in my dictionary ;)

4. On the al-Qaeda man arrested in Hamburg:
This is a very narrow case, and possibly does uncover official incompetence for various reasons.How exactly do you know? B/c other cases are not being reported? :D Btw., I've recently read a high-ranking American security official's characterisation of the European counterterrorism as "AWOL" (Not that the Americans are/were blameless either in this respect)

5. "Europeans" again:
Although some Europeans like to deny it, Anti-Semitism has grown to enormous proportions -- this according to the Jewish communities in those countries, not accroding to Lamplighter.I happen to be a member of such a community for well over a decade and I don't need L. to tell me this. Other than both of you, I have to deal with it on daily basis. (No, I'm not afraid to walk through the streets, and if anyone is, s/he needs a psychiatrist, not a slobbering American or Israeli reporter.) My own impression is that there is not "more antisemitism" (what is the exact measurement, one may ask?), but that existing sentiment is being voiced more loudly, finds it way into the media, and, worse still, into the political discourse on highest levels - in open or veiled form. The perpetrators are all the same.

6. ...And their (our) foreign politics:
But the bigger picture is an ongoing European political and financial support for Arab and Islamic terrorism.[...]This perception is only bolstered by the European's anti-Israel politics and the EU's pro-terrorism stance, like supporting Hizbullah, for exampleAbsolutely. Another thing is that Europe is not quite the weakling as it is often seen. It (as represented by its leading politicians, businesspeople etc.) knows a damn lot about power and politics, and my guess is that it could make a flurried little angel out of any oil sheikh (or Hizbullah boss) if it cared to. Why it doesn't is a different story. But I don't buy the myth of Europe being run by "Arabs". It's much more the other way round. I entirely agree in advance with your anticipated statement that such policies are at the very least short-sighted if not criminally negligient. But then politicians rarely think outside of their next election term.

7. I think you have misread my post:
I don't think that anyone is under an illusion that Europe is Israel,[etc.]I was referring to using Israel's fight against terrorism as a justification for an - irrational and counterproductive - clampdown on minorities in Europe, and to comparing the concept of Israel as a Jewish state with European statehood. (Btw., we don't have any "nation states" here, as defined over certain ethnic or religious groups - neither in theory nor by law. Legislative guarantees of "stateship of all citizens" are AFAIK one of the conditions of EU membership. The reality is, as always, a different matter altogether.)

8. Finally,
And, knowing that the Arabs and Muslims have been responsible for Anti-Semitic violence, I find it very difficult to be sympathetic to their negative image in Europe. Maybe a better man than I would be more understanding -- I don't know...I don't think it's a matter of morals, just of facts and interpretations. Again, you contradict yourself: if you don't accept the European judgement on Israel why put so much trust in the same Europe's judgement on its own minorities? This sudden unfriendly and undifferentiated attention the immigrants/Arabs/Muslims etc. are receiving is IMO a convenient smokescreen against discussions that can get less than salutary to the stronger established groups, an attempt to evade scrutiny and criticism. The results can be dangerous to all of us.

[Vic]

Just discovered this article in "Israelinsider". The author recounts a meeting with his French friend in Tel Aviv and provides an excellent psychological snapshot.


[...]

I reminded André that, over the weekend, the IDF stopped five suicide bombers: "Your country is among the loudest who tell us that there is no military solution to terrorism, that only negotiations and concessions will bring an end to suicide bombers. But what happened in Operation Defensive Shield? The army went in. The bombers stay out. The Americans and the Europeans pressured us to let up the pressure. The bombings resumed. Now, again, the army went in, and the terrorists can't pull off a successful attack for weeks, however hard they try."

He didn't have an answer, so I kept up my pressure. "I see the English are learning from the French." He didn't know what I was referring to. "You didn't hear? In Wales, some neo-Nazis tried to burn down a synagogue. They tore up a torah scroll. They daubed swastikas on the walls. They defecated in the building." That got André: "Not while I'm drinking," he protested. "But you can't blame the French people. The anti-Semitism comes from the f---ing Arabs. Illegal immigrants. They should be thrown out."

[...]

André and I parted as friends, although it was hardly the Hollywood moment of Rick and Louis at the start of their beautiful friendship.

[...]

And here I am, well after midnight. French Independence day is over. A day neo-Nazis desecrated and defecated in a Welsh synagogue. A day neo-Nazis stabbed to death a father of six outside a pizzeria in Toronto, because he was a Jew. A day a neo-Nazi tried to assassinate French President Jacques Chirac near the Champs Elysées. A day I had dinner with André on a leafy boulevard in the city of Tel Aviv.

[...]

http://web.israelinsider.com/bin/en.jsp?enPage=ViewsPage&enDisplay=view&enDispWhat=object&enDispWho=Article%5El1240&enZone=Views&enVersion=0&

The sentence about the "illegal immigrants" is simply untrue, btw. From what information is availiable on the perpetrators of antisemitic attacks in France, a majority of them seems to be French citizens. Others must have solid residence permits. An illegal immigrant caught by the police at anything, let alone at committing a violent act (even against a Jewish target), would certainly be thrown out of the country immediately.

Don't let the "true" Frenchmen off the hook so cheaply! Same goes for the good Belgians, "Nordic" Danes etc.

[Philip]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
The rules for libel in the US are: a statement was made, it is false, & it caused harm.

Actually, libel in the US must include either malicious intent or negligence. If a newspaper reports something harmful and untrue, but does so after having reasonably checked out the story, and if the story is indeed newsworthy, then it is not libel. This comes primarily from NYT v. Sullivan, which held "A State cannot under the First and Fourteenth Amendments award damages to a public official for defamatory falsehood relating to his official conduct unless he proves 'actual malice' - that the statement was made with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard of whether it was true or false."

[Mediocrates]

Except in the case of public figures who's public persona is not actually protected under the same strictures. Eg. You can make fun of some public figure intentionally and even if you meant to be malicious that's held under a different standard.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by Philip
Actually, libel in the US must include either malicious intent or negligence.

No, the standard for news organizations is not negligence. It is reckless disregard -- a much tougher case to make out.

[Vic]

...and now someone explain to me why the nice guy on the photo doesn't get arrested, even if some of his fellow Muslims wouldn't be too sad about it:

Muslim militants hold UK meeting
Muslim fundamentalists have held their first public meeting in Britain since the 11 September terrorist attacks.

Speakers at the London conference railed against the United States and said that President Bush should stand trial as a war criminal.

Among those to give speeches were leaders wanted in the US and the Middle East for their alleged support of terrorism.

[...]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_2126000/2126174.stm

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by Vic
NewsGuy, you have a curiously contradictory position on Europe. On one hand you rightly accuse it of antisemitism, causing great damage to Israel etc., on the other you appear to accept unquestioningly its current self-victimisation.

There's a lot to respond to in your message, but for time constraints, I'll start with this first point.

There is no contradiction at all. Europe is influenced by the demands of the Arab and Islamic countries, and Anti-Semitism is common there.

At the same time, Euorpe is apparently being victimized by its support of brutal Arab dictatorships and terrorist groups, as well as by its Arab and Islamic local population from what I read in the European press.

Like in all countries, politicians are focused on their reelection by their local constituencies, and are less concerned with solving the larger societal problems.

I hear you that the press may be offering a skewed view of the facts, but I'll leave that point for next time.

[Foster]

Perhaps I can introduce the Australian way of dealing with illegal immigrants (most of them are of Arab descent): a detention center... Jokes aside, this seems to be at least some controllable situation.
It's amazing how quickly, in front of my very eyes, these people create huge ghettos, squeeze out non-Muslims and then live happily ever after with official unemployment rates hovering above 60% (it's 6.5% Aussie average).
Yet the cab driver in Melbourne (Palestinian) explained to me that:
* He has to work hard as that's the only way to survive in this Jewish lobby run country
* Israel gets what it deserves as it has stolen Arabs' land and Allah will not let it go unpunished
* The Jews have taken all the good spots and poor Aussies and Americans are too dumb to understand this. But the day will come etc etc.
The last bit seemed not so cliche'ed so I asked him some provoking questions about other Christian countries... e.g Europeans. Funny enough, the guy had no hard feeling towards Europeans, particularly the French. In his (obviously very primitive) mind they were on his side, they were the good guys.
Left me wondering, what if he was right?

[Vic]

Originally posted by Foster
The last bit seemed not so cliche'ed so I asked him some provoking questions about other Christian countries... e.g Europeans. Funny enough, the guy had no hard feeling towards Europeans, particularly the French. In his (obviously very primitive) mind they were on his side, they were the good guys.
Left me wondering, what if he was right? He should have tried a French banlieu first :p

Oh, and the ancestors of some of the French Arabs were granted French citizenship in the 19th century. Would they count as "illegal immigrants" by Australian standards?

Make no mistake here: the local, French "Arabs" hardly profit from the anti-Israel stance of the French government (It might seem this way from the safe distance of Australia), no matter how much they would like to. The Palestinians might feel themselves the winners of the situation - on the short run, in case they are interested in continuing the conflict. The French government and the general population have been so far very helpful in this respect.

There is more emotion than rationality in many things over here.

[Foster]

They probably would count as illegal immigrants as they never had a valid visa to travel... that's not the point. Paris is a pretty sorry site though, with Arab arrondisments, subculture and all that...

I actually thought it works all way around: the French government is profiteering from its anti-Israeli stance as many Arab voters are attracted to the ruling party. Le Pen's success is exactly the backlash in progress... That's the hypocrisy of the situation: The French with their stupid pro-Palestinian rhetoric are making things worse for the Palestinians. Surely they will not lift a finger to provide any kind of help beyond worthless preaching at the UN, but the impression they produce on the immature voters is huge. And since the whole European continental politics is dominated by the French to some ridiculous extent this pro-Palestinian BS spreads itself around like plague. It's all quite sad, really.

[Vic]

Originally posted by Foster
They probably would count as illegal immigrants as they never had a valid visa to travel... Excuse me? An australian citizen, whose family has been holding the Australina citizenship for generations, would count as an illegal immigrant in Australia? Because this is the point. The French have been marginalizing a group that has formally quite a serious claim on "Frenchness" for decades and are now trying to deny responsibility for the consequences.
that's not the point. Paris is a pretty sorry site though, with Arab arrondisments, subculture and all that...

I actually thought it works all way around: the French government is profiteering from its anti-Israeli stance as many Arab voters are attracted to the ruling party. Le Pen's success is exactly the backlash in progress... They tried to profit from it, yes. Not the current but the previous government. They started pushing the Israeli issue in the election campaign as a kind of alternative to domestic issue, apparently hoping to placate the Arab/Muslim electorate, parts of which were stupid enough to buy it.
That's the hypocrisy of the situation: The French with their stupid pro-Palestinian rhetoric are making things worse for the Palestinians. Surely they will not lift a finger to provide any kind of help beyond worthless preaching at the UNI'm sure they won't :D
And since the whole European continental politics is dominated by the French to some ridiculous extent this pro-Palestinian BS spreads itself around like plague.The "domination" is questionable, and the coming admission of Eastern Europeans could shift the balance. No, I don't think that the pro-Palestinian "BS" originates from France alone.

But you are right, there is little rationality behind the stuff. It cripples a lot in the public discourse too, many people, of the more intelligent variety, just declare they will never utter a word on the subject, period :)

[Foster]

Excuse me? An australian citizen, whose family has been holding the Australina citizenship for generations, would count as an illegal immigrant in Australia? Because this is the point. The French have been marginalizing a group that has formally quite a serious claim on "Frenchness" for decades and are now trying to deny responsibility for the consequences.
Sorry, couldn' quite make an Australian analogy... probably, because there is none. In your case you're right.


The "domination" is questionable, and the coming admission of Eastern Europeans could shift the balance. No, I don't think that the pro-Palestinian "BS" originates from France alone.
Very interesting point. Eastern Europeans sick and tired of the last 50 years under Big Brother's protection will most likely (and at best) attempt to copy their Western counterparts. I am not saying pro-Palestinian BS originates from France, I am saying France as the only true European continental political power is the force behind it. Will the EEans try to copy French attitude to Israel together with the Western democratical values and market economy?

[Vic]

Originally posted by Foster
Very interesting point. Eastern Europeans sick and tired of the last 50 years under Big Brother's protection will most likely (and at best) attempt to copy their Western counterparts. I am not saying pro-Palestinian BS originates from France, I am saying France as the only true European continental political power is the force behind it. Will the EEans try to copy French attitude to Israel together with the Western democratical values and market economy? I think you overrate France. As for the European "East": the countries they are closest to are Germany and Austria and, in case of the Baltic states, the Scandinavians. Both the influences and the tradition are quite conflicting, yet the current stance seems to be if not explicitly pro-Israeli then at least not pro-Palestinian with the definitely hysteric touch so characteristic for the West Europeans. Maybe it's the latter that makes the difference: after all the recent turmoils the "EEans" tend to more rationality. Maybe it's a late rebellion against the Soviet-imposed collective "anti-Zionism", stuffing the Palestinians down everyone's throats. It's difficult to predict the future developments, of course, there could be a change of mind in the "East" as well.

[Northlander]

At the same time, Euorpe is apparently being victimized by its support of brutal Arab dictatorships and terrorist groups, as well as by its Arab and Islamic local population from what I read in the European press.

Support of which dictatorships and which terrorist groups?
How does it differs from US support for S.Arabia and Pakistan etc?
What is the difference really?


And since the whole European continental politics is dominated by the French to some ridiculous extent this pro-Palestinian BS spreads itself around like plague. It's all quite sad, really.

EUs continental politics is not dominated by France. And there is nothing pro-palestinian with EUs position. Israel forces EU time after time to take a position against Israeli politics, which is not the same as being against Israel itself. Like this latest example of collective punishment by deporting the relatives to terrorists. Its against the geneva convention and every nation that accept the geneva convention has to react. USA reacted as well. Still this will become just another line in your record of EUs pro-palestinian statements. Which is not entirely accurate.

[Vic]

Originally posted by Northlander
EUs continental politics is not dominated by France. And there is nothing pro-palestinian with EUs position. Israel forces EU time after time to take a position against Israeli politics, which is not the same as being against Israel itself. Like this latest example of collective punishment by deporting the relatives to terrorists. Its against the geneva convention and every nation that accept the geneva convention has to react. USA reacted as well. Still this will become just another line in your record of EUs pro-palestinian statements. Which is not entirely accurate. Israel forces the EU? Now that's a strong statement! Poor little EU!

Oh, and the "latest example" is still in the proposal stage, in case you missed it. Why not wait for the Israelis to decide on it before starting to scream? We Europeans have done worse things to our own refugees, without causing an even remotely comparable stir.

[Northlander]

Why not wait for the americans to decide FOR Israel you mean?

Support of which dictatorships and which terrorist groups?
How does it differs from US support for S.Arabia and Pakistan etc?

[Mediocrates]

Well if you think that Israel is a dictatorship a-la SA and Pakistan you're simply not on the same page as rest of the world. It makes charming agitprop when you march on college campuses or attend AMS rallies but that's just rhetoric.

[Vic]

Originally posted by Northlander
Why not wait for the americans to decide FOR Israel you mean?

Support of which dictatorships and which terrorist groups?
How does it differs from US support for S.Arabia and Pakistan etc? I don't think you are a fool, but why are you pretending to be one?

[Northlander]

The questions were the same as from my previous post and they were asked to NewsGuy. It would be interesting to hear you opinion too.

Newsguy wrote:

At the same time, Euorpe is apparently being victimized by its support of brutal Arab dictatorships and terrorist groups, as well as by its Arab and Islamic local population from what I read in the European press.
And I asked:
Support of which dictatorships and which terrorist groups?
How does it differs from US support for S.Arabia and Pakistan etc?

What I meant by USA deciding FOR Israel was that if USA keep on reacting so strongly agianst the deportion of relatives, Israel will back off.

I did not compare S.arabia to Israel.

[Vic]

Originally posted by Northlander
The questions were the same as from my previous post and they were asked to NewsGuy. It would be interesting to hear you opinion too.

Newsguy wrote:

And I asked:
Support of which dictatorships and which terrorist groups?
How does it differs from US support for S.Arabia and Pakistan etc?

What I meant by USA deciding FOR Israel was that if USA keep on reacting so strongly agianst the deportion of relatives, Israel will back off.

I did not compare S.arabia to Israel. OK, here we go.

My comment was on your first question: "Why not wait for the americans to decide FOR Israel you mean?", which is obvious nonsense. I didn't mean it. Israel is a sovereign state and it has its own decision-making process and a well-developed judical system (one of the first Israeli objections did come from this quarter). The rhetoric may be heated, especially in the current situation, but there is always a good chance that the decision at the end of the discussion will bequite measured. In fact, the chances for such a decision are better without outside pressure, whether from the US or somewhere else.

Expelling the families of the suicide murderers to Gaza was a proposal, not a final decision. There was nothing for Israel, to use your charming phrasing, to "back off" from.

As for the support of countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan - it is IMO as bad an idea as the European support for countries like Iran, Lebanon, Syria etc., as well as for the Palestinians. No one is blameless in this respect. (Take a look at the "Promoting true democracy..." thread, btw., some of the discussion is related to the topic, I don't want to repeat myself and others here.)