Archive for July 2011
An August 13, 2010 report in Haaretz on the anti-Muslim English Defense League’s affinity for extremist Zionism describes its leading spokesman’s spite towards Norwegians over their government’s role in hosting the Oslo Accords:
Along with its activity vis-a-vis the Muslim minority in Britain, the EDL takes a special interest in the Middle East and the Israeli-Arab conflict. [Alan] Lake puts forward several rhetorical questions, such as whether there was any point in the Oslo process, because he says “those Norwegians” can’t be trusted.
When asked about a mainstream Jewish group’s criticism of Jewish involvement with the extremist English group, Roberta Moore, a Brazilian-born IDF veteran and the then head of the EDL’s Jewish division replied:
They think the league is exploiting us, while it is really we who initiated the Jewish division. If anything, we are exploiting them.
By Charles Hawley
July 29, 2011
Islamophobic parties in Europe have established a tight network, stretching from Italy to Finland. But recently, they have extended their feelers to Israeli conservatives, enjoying a warm reception from members of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition. Some in Israel believe that the populists are Europe’s future.
In a recent op-ed in the Financial Times, Council on Foreign Relations president Richard Haass
observes that the CFR-backed Arab Spring seems so far to be producing “a region that is less tolerant, less prosperous, and less stable that [sic] what existed.” Nevertheless, Haass urges continued efforts to reform the Arab world, doubtlessly intended to advance the interests of the CFR’s ardently “pro-democracy” corporate membership:
Wherever possible wise outsiders should promote gradual political change. Constitutions need to be rewritten, checks and balances created. But economics counts as much as politics, if not more. This means providing assistance, so long as reforms are implemented. The scale of the generosity should be matched by the scale of the conditionality.
The kind of “assistance” that the CFR president wants provided is, as indicated by the above link, the increased “support for Arab Spring” advocated by Senator John McCain, the pro-Israeli warmonger and chairman of National Endowment for Democracy-affiliated International Republican Institute, designed to ensure that the interests of bankers, multinational corporations and an expansionist Israel will be given priority in the brave new “democratic” Arab world.
Interestingly, the slightly more “moderate” Zionist Haass is a former director of policy planning at the US State Department (2001-03), the same section in which CFR adjunct fellow Jared Cohen created the Arab Spring-facilitating Alliance of Youth Movements at the end of 2008. Cohen, an Israel apologist whose mentors include Larry Diamond, the pro-Israeli editor of NED’s Journal of Democracy, and former CIA deputy director Frank Carlucci, just happened to be in Cairo during the supposedly spontaneous Tahrir Square protests.
(Ahlul Bayt News Agency) – Former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas wrote in a book he published entitled “Coups et blessures” (Assaults and Injuries), that “the “Israelis” are doing whatever they want in France, and are controlling French Intelligence with what serves them”.
By Gilad Atzmon
July 29, 2011
“It (immigration) was a politically motivated attempt by ministers to transform the fundamental make-up and identity of this country (Britain). It was done to destroy the right of the British people to live in a society defined by a common history, religion, law, language and traditions.”
(Melanie Phillips, as quoted by mass murderer, Anders Breivik, in his manifesto)
Melanie Philips, a rabid Zionist and the author of “Londonistan: How Britain is Creating a Terror State Within” is not happy to be singled out by Andres Breivik in his 1,500 page manuscript. Are they suggesting that “my writing provoked the mass murder of some 93 Norwegians?” she wonders righteously on her blog. I guess that Phillips knows the answer, as much as she knows how to play with words. But I will use this opportunity to reiterate it for her, and for the rest of us — there certainly is a clear and strong resemblance between Breivik’s views and Philips’ writing. The most obvious and immediate comparison is that both oppose Islamic immigration and multiculturalism of course, but it goes much further in that both identify the enemy within the ‘left political circuit.’
Breivik cites Philips’ take on Labour’s immigration policy: “It was done to destroy for ever what it means to be culturally British and to put another ‘multicultural’ identity in its place.”
I should clearly state here that I do not think that Philips provoked Breivik’s murderous inclination. I also believe that Phillips is fully entitled to express her thoughts and ideas. Yet, it is surely reasonable to suspect that Phillips, amongst others, might have contributed to inspiring Breivik, ideologically and spiritually.
No Change in Course Despite Sharing Views of Massacre Suspect
By Nathan Guttman and Josh Nathan-Kazis
Jewish Daily Forward
July 29, 2011
Leading anti-Muslim voices in the United States said that they have no plans to adjust their activities or rhetoric, despite claims that their writing and political outlook provided sustenance for the alleged perpetrator of the terror attacks in and around Oslo.
Anders Breivik, who was detained near the Norwegian capital on an island where at least 68 people were murdered, has admitted to those killings and to the related bombing in downtown Oslo in which another eight people died, though he has pleaded not guilty to any charges. A lengthy manifesto written by Breivik that surfaced soon after the July 22 attacks evinced deep opposition to Muslim immigration to Europe and to European politicians who embrace multiculturalism.
The manifesto echoed talking points of the burgeoning anti-Islamic movement in the United States, which experienced a watershed during the 2010 debate over the Islamic center proposed for near Manhattan’s Ground Zero. Breivik cited a number of prominent American anti-Islamic writers and bloggers.
But despite signs that the alleged terrorist drew inspiration from the writings of key American anti-Muslim figures, prominent leaders in the movement say they see no connection between their work and Breivik’s actions.
By Dr. K R Bolton
Foreign Policy Journal
July 29, 2011
The news media has had a field day in headlining Anders Breivik’s actions as those of someone from the “far Right,” and as actions that are a consequence of Rightist ideology. Yet Breivik is an avid Zionist whose motives were predicated on Islamophobia. His ideological influences are libertarian and “neo-conservative.” He was playing his part, albeit as a loose cannon, in the “clash of civilizations.”
Although the news media has focused on his previous membership in the Progressive Party, his ideological commitment is to Zionism. Why then did not the news media headline Breivik’s atrocity as being that of a “Zionist,” and as a “staunch supporter of Israel”? As is often the case, the fictional “far Right” connection is a red herring. Headlines could have read “Zionist extremist on shooting spree,” “Israel supporter massacres youngsters at Labour camp in Norway,” and the like.
Continue reading here.
Gisèle Littman aka Bat Ye’or (Hebrew for “Daughter of the Nile”) aka Yahudiya Masriya (Arabic for “Egyptian Jewess”), whose “Eurabia” conspiracy theory helped fuel Anders Breivik’s paranoia about the supposedly impending Islamic takeover of Europe, has not surprisingly been lauded by the usual promoters of Islamophobia — Daniel Pipes, Robert Spencer, and Pamela Geller et al. Ye’or has a much more distinguished fan, however. Niall Ferguson, the Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History at Harvard University, William Ziegler Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School, Philippe Roman Chair in History and International Affairs at the London School of Economics, and official historian of Henry Kissinger and the legendary House of Rothschild, has also warmly endorsed the extremist Zionist “historian” (the Palestinians, in her world, not only don’t exist but their “cause was created mainly in Europe”):
No writer has done more than Bat Ye’or to draw attention to the menacing character of Islamic extremism. Future historians will one day regard her coinage of the term ‘Eurabia’ as prophetic. Those who wish to live in a free society must be eternally vigilant. Bat Ye’or’s vigilance is unrivalled.”
Justin Raimondo has been digging deeper into Anders Brevik’s mysterious finances:
Okay, now let’s summarize what we know about Breivik’s money trail, based not on what he says in his diary but on what little investigative reporting has been done on the matter. It boils down to this: His tax records show a small income in 2007 – the year all that money miraculously appeared in his bank account – and a bit more in 2008. He had no reported income in 2006 and 2009. Prior to that, there is no evidence of his “first million” anywhere to be seen.
While his diary emphasizes that he saved every penny to finance his terrorist operation, there had to be some income coming in from somewhere. And then there’s that mysterious $115,000 – did he rob a bank? Or did he have a benefactor? Here is where Breivik’s money trail simply … trails off.
Whatever about the source of Breivik’s finances, there is little doubt about the origins of his anti-Muslim ideology:
However, we can see in the reaction to his murderous assault a kind of support network that has sprung up, if not to defend him personally then to defend his motivations and the ethos from which his hatred welled up. As I have said in my other columns on this subject, the so-called counter-jihadist milieu – whose writings were copiously cited in the online manifesto – provided the theoretical basis for Breivik’s horrific actions. The “anti-jihadist” pro-Israel blogosphere played an important role in reinforcing and elaborating Breivik’s crazed worldview, and there is even some frightening evidence that they played more of an activist role than that.
As Raimondo so aptly puts it, “Never has a “lone wolf” had this much company.”