“‘Anti-Semitism inherent in Islam can only be eradicated’” By SAM SER

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1213794275309&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

The article is a review of a book by Andrew Bostom:

“The Legacy of Islamic Anti-Semitism”

Bostom himself is quoted as saying:

” WHILE SEARCHING for the roots of jihad, Bostom found the roots of Islam’s Jew-hatred. More often than not, they were intertwined.

“As I was putting the first book together, I came across Ahmad Sirhindi,” he explains. “He was an Indian Sufi who was enraged by the reforms of Moghul Akbar, who abolished the jizya [poll tax]. This enraged the orthodox ulema [scholars], one of the chief representatives of whom was Sirhindi. Amongst his virulent tracts against the moghul he says, ‘Whenever a Jew is killed, it is for the benefit of Islam.’ Now, this is a 16th-17th century anti-Hindu ideologue, and there’s no evidence that he ever had contact with a Jew. So I was like, ‘Where on earth did this come from?’”

Bostom looked first to the Koran for an explanation.

“When I put together the Koranic verses on the Jews,” he continues, “they read like an indictment, prosecution and conviction. It was virulently anti-Semitic. Going into the hadith and the histories of Muhammad - where his assassination is attributed to a Khybar Jewess, for example - only strengthened this conviction.

“So when I juxtaposed that with the notion that there was no theological anti-Semitism in Islam, it was stunning. It’s just so in-your-face that to claim that the foundational sources don’t create anti-Semitism or aren’t inherently anti-Semitic… it’s absurd.”

Forced conversions, rapes, pogroms, the wholesale slaughter of Jews in North Africa during the Almohad invasions of the 12th century and innumerable other incidents catalogued in The Legacy of Islamic Anti-Semitism attest that this Jew hatred was more than a literary holdover of Muhammad’s contempt for the Jews for rejecting his prophecies. Bostom also makes it plain that, with common motifs spanning from North Africa to India, from the eighth century to the 21st century and from Sunnis to Shi’ites and Sufis as well, anti-Semitism cannot be explained by cultural influences but is, in fact, inherently Islamic….”

Read the whole article.

“’And why not? If Jews can today live in Germany, after six millions were butchered by the German Nazis, what is really the problem for them to live in the Arab world, where such horrific crimes were not committed ever?’” Haim Bresheeth

“Because firstly Arab states and societies would have to admit culpability in driving out Arab Jews in the first place, never mind being the world’s current repository of formerly European antisemitic discourse.” Zkharya

I agree with Zkharya’s view that Germany underwent a revolutionary change since the Nazis were in power which is not in evidence in the Arab Muslim world.

Even Haim Bresheeth’s acknowledges it when speaks of “German Nazis” as opposed to the non-Nazi Germans of today. Haim like so many anti-Zionists is making his comment in bad faith.

Still, even if life in the Galut were a paradise the Jews like other nations would still have the right to live in their country and determine their own future.

Life is not a paradise, either in the Galut or in Israel and it doesn’t look like it about to become paradisiacal any time soon.

In any case, Mr. Bresheeth’s comments are almost delusional.

Germany has changed, but what had forced it to change was the utter destruction the allies visited on the country during WW2. After the war the Germans wanted to present themselves to the world as a tolerant nation and one of the ways they did it was by ostentatiously reaching out to the Jewish community.

None of these conditions is present in the Arab world which as Zkharya has said is the home of some of the most antisemitic regimes which disseminate Nazi like anti-Jewish propaganda.

If life for Jews was never ideal in the Arab world (they were never treated as equals) could anyone imagine the Muslims welcoming them back with open arms and offering them equality under the law?

http://cojs.org/VIDEO/zionism/libya.html

However, among these “egalitarian” visions was the belief that the Jews and the Arabs could at some point make peace and co-exist.

Many Mizrahi Jews felt that this view was another one of the pie in the sky dreams of the Mapai bloc.

I remember speaking to a number of educated Mizrahis who thought that I was naive when I suggested that peace with the Arabs could in time become a reality.

From the information we possess we can discover the way in which the rioters were organized. The organizers assembled the mob at a certain place, divided them into groups and gave them specially-defined tasks. These facts were certainly known to the pro-British Iraqi authorities and to the members of the government Committee for Investigating the Events of June 1-2, 1941. Yet these chose to determine that the riots were spontaneous in order not to embarrass the new government, which had been formed under British auspices, in opposition to Islamic national-religious circles of great influence at the grass-roots level. As may be learned from similar sources on incitement and attacks against the Jews, these circles habitually fanned the flames of hatred against the Jews in Iraq and urged that harm be done to the Jews as long as it seemed to them that the Jews were infringing the rules of ‘protection’ (the dhimma) and the inferior status that Islam decreed for them as a condition for their existence in a Muslim state.

Magdi Abdelhadi’s notion of facts under dispute is also laughable. Which historical facts are not “under dispute.”

To some people (antisemites of course) even the Shoah is “under dispute.”

Why is a denial of violation of rights of Jews from the Mizrach any less a sign of antisemitism?

Besides, if Jews in Arab countries had it so good why is that so many of them vote for the most right wing parties in Israel?

Magdi Abdelhadi has got some reading to do on this topiec.