Jerusalem post is not a moderate Israeli paper.
It’s managing director supports Pam Geller and other extremists of the tea party.
To judge the Israeli media and it’s people by reading the Post , is like stating all UK citizens can be judged by the utterances of the Mail

When I first read the Jerusalem Post editorial I was immediately reminded of the New Statesman’s editorial after 9/11 (which was dubious in the extreme & seemed to suggest that US citizens deserved their fate, as they voted for bad governments time after time)… Credit where it’s due, the JP has apologised (as the NS did) and as Sunny points out UK commentators would do well to take on board its concluding remarks. I think editorialising immediately after an atrocity can blind people to reason & sense.

Sunny,

The JP were very wrong to try and make political capital out of the murder of others.

But by the same token, so are you.

Your periodical swipes at Israelis, when the chance arises, does you no credit.

“Jews, Muslims and Christians in Israel and around the world should be standing together against such hate crimes.”

Indeed, they should. Equally, rational discussion of the disadvantages and advantages of Islamic immigration should not be branded ‘Islamophobic’. There are genuine problems in integrating Muslims into a liberal society – problems that Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jews etc do not have or have to a much lesser extent. Multiculturalism is not the answer as ‘multicultural society’ is a contradiction in terms. Every successful multiracial society has a primary culture which allows sub-cultures to flourish as part of an integrated whole.

@4

“Equally, rational discussion of the disadvantages and advantages of Jewish immigration should not be branded ‘Anti-Semitic’. There are genuine problems in integrating Jews into a liberal society”

See what I did there? And see why you’re missing the point somewhat?

It’s also much better than the reaction of many conservative commentators in the UK, who screeched at how the terrorist attacks would ‘help the left’…

It did.

If that was your first reaction to the tragedy your an inhumane bastard but, still, as they’re liable to think that shifts in public opinion will be consequential – and, in this case, for the worse – it makes sense for them to lament the fact.

@ 5:

“See what I did there? And see why you’re missing the point somewhat?”

No, because there are genuine problems in integrating Muslims into a liberal society. And there are no corresponding problems with Jews or virtually any other group. So there is no symmetry here, which is what you are suggesting. Your ‘Jewish’ substitution results in a false proposition; the ‘Islamic’ version is a true proposition.

Islam is an illiberal medieval religio-political ideology. Throughout the world, it is in conflict with its neighbours – whether Christian, Buddhist or Hindu – and it’s teachings on the role of women and on homosexuality are at variance with the moral principles of liberal societies. Ignoring these problems by making glib substitutions will only make the problem worse. Extra efforts need to be made to help ad encourage Muslims to integrate into Western societies. Failure to do so will result in more homegrown Islamist terrorism, and quite possibly more Breiviks, too.

Your periodical swipes at Israelis, when the chance arises, does you no credit.

Oh grow up modernity. You might want to tell your mates first, who seem to be obsessed by Muslims daily. We run the odd article on Middle Eastern politics, if you don’t like it – don’t read it. Pathetic attempts at trying to say its anti-semitic to run the odd article critical of Israel won’t work.

theophrastus is an EDL clone.

Islam is NO more reactionary than most other religions.

“It’s teachings on the role of women and on homosexuality are at variance with the moral principles of liberal societies.”

The same could be said of many implementations of Christianity, until 40 years ago a fair few denominations in the South of the US were against basic civil rights.

In a similar fashion, the Dutch Reformed Church supported apartheid. In fact one of it main instigators, D.F. Malan was a priest in that Church.

Closer to today, Westboro Baptist Church when not stirring up hatred toward gays, is picketing funerals.

As for the role of women in society you need look no further than the reactionary Catholic Church and its teachings on women’s position.

And so on.

Now let’s forget the ignorant and sweeping generalisations.

“Pathetic attempts at trying to say its anti-semitic to run the odd article critical of Israel won’t work.”

Sunny,

We have been through this before and you deliberately misrepresent my argument.

I’ve never said you were antisemitic, just a bit touched, a bit unhealthy in your attitude to Israelis.

And yes, there are many people who have an unhealthy attitude to Muslims, but you don’t make it any better by showing an unhealthy attitude towards Israelis.

Again, just so you understand my point, I’m not saying you are antisemitic but your attitude is unhealthy.

Once more, so you don’t misrepresent what I’ve written, you are not antisemitic in your views, but they don’t help things.

“theophrastus is an EDL clone.”

No, I’m not: I think the EDL is a racist rabble. I’m not arguing for demonstrations or confrontations. I’m suggesting efforts to help Muslims integrate into Western societies.

“Islam is NO more reactionary than most other religions.”

False. No other major religion requires death for apostacy, for example.

Yes, all the major religions contain reactionary and illiberal elements. The problem with Islam is that it contains more such reactionary and illiberal elements than any other major religion. And it has never undergone any kind of reformation.

“Now let’s forget the ignorant and sweeping generalisations.”

Please, take your own advice!

theophrastus,

No answer about the Dutch Reformed Church?

Westboro Baptist Church?

The Catholic Church ?

And not forgetting the CoE who can’t work out if they want to split over the role of women?

Even the “reformed” CoE still has problems with Gays?

Well?

@theophrastus

Only in the topsy-turvy world does a white, far-right extremist & self-professed Christian go on the rampage and murder young people, and Muslims get the blame. Sorry but it won’t wash. Racist and hateful spite leads to the sewer of thought that led to the murders in Norway (just as racist and hateful spite leads to Islamists blowing themselves up on buses in Israel, or leads to Israel having a segregationist policy against Arabs, or whatever). The common thread is fear & not understanding, or not wanting to understand.
Your hatred of Islam is very similar to the hatred that was thrown at Jews before the war, I’m afraid. Look at any caricature of Jewish people from those times. It’s disturbing that you don’t recognise this.

@13,

And so what leads young people from Leeds to blow themselves up on buses in London?

@14

“racist and hateful spite leads to Islamists blowing themselves up ”

I mentioned “..in Israel” because of the topic at hand. But it applies anywhere. Hate begets hate. Always has, always will.

And where did this racist and hateful spite come from? How would you characterise it?

@16

I’m not sure if you’re after a history of Wahhabism or a psychoanalysis of suicide bombers or what here… why is anyone hateful? But it’s beside the point: the most recent terrorist atrocity in Europe was not carried out by Islamists. That point – that hate can infect anyone, from any creed or colour or religion – cannot be hammered home enough. As the JP put it: “Jews, Muslims and Christians […] around the world should be standing together against such hate crimes.”. I concur, and would add to that list “atheist liberals and conservatives”.

Islam is NO more reactionary than most other religions.

I’d have probably said the same at one time or another, but let’s think about how weird it’d be if “most religions” were about as reactionary as eachother. These are faiths of remarkably differing content, that have been evolving in remarkably different contexts, yet we’re supposed to believe they’re pretty much equivalent? It’s a faith claim, not a fact claim.

Siddique Khan was from Beeston, Yorkshire, not Saudi Arabia. I think we can safely say that his influences were a bit more familiar that Mohammad ibn Abd-al-Wahhab.

@19

Er, yeah, and most English Christians aren’t from Bethlehem… it’s kinda well known that Islamist violence is influenced by Wahhabism.

What are you trying to say, exactly? Seems like you have a specific answer in mind but you’re hesitant of saying it?

Nothing about David Copeland, the pub bomber?

What short memories people have?

He was from Hampshire.

@21

Copeland, the neo-Nazi? Thanks for proving my point. ..

Had no idea that the JP had a sense of shame, but it’s nice to be proven wrong about that kind of thing.

@4 – Religious Orthodox Jews don’t integrate (which…isn’t me. I’m not overly religious). Sorry to break that to you, they’re just harder to spot than the Muslims, because they very rarely engage in public displays of law breaking, and the women wear wigs rather than veils.

Regardless, I am highly uncomfortable with attacks on multiculturalism, since I’m British (not, note, English), but /not/ part of the small-c christian majority.

@21 @12 what a load of whataboutery …

You might as well ask what about the Red Army Faction, what about Irgun, what about all the other ideological nutters of every shade on the religious and political spectrum.

As for the contemporary Church of Rome or the CofE, you’re really off into the realm of moral relativism there trying to compare what’s happening there with thinking and practice across great swathes of the Ummah.

Maybe you need to go and live in an Islamic country for a while and see what it’s really like to live under. Inter-communal bombing is not a once in a generation shocker like in Norway, but an everyday event for Pakistanis to give one example that immediately springs to mind. Or how about Saudi Arabia where women aren’t allowed even leave the house without permission of a male relative, and you can get flogged senseless for the crime of having been raped. Oh yes and homsexuals are stoned to death, which sounds just a little bit worse than being told you can’t be a priest.

@25 – Yea, so about those “Troubles”…

It is fascinating to read this thread I notice how those so quick to criticise Muslims and make fun of Islam, don’t actually engage with any counterarguments.

In much the same way that those who are quick to criticise Israelis and make sweeping generalisations about them, those anti-Muslim bigots in this thread, constantly return to the same themes, like obsessives.

And it is that obsessive like behaviour, that gives them away.

Older readers will remember how a small but persistent minority of the British would always go on about “immigration”, “the Blacks” or later on in the 1970s “Pakistanis”.

Times have moved on, but that xenophobia and scapegoating hasn’t.

So instead of ethnic minorities being directly attacked in Britain a surreptitious approach is taken by bigots, thickos and cranks, they go on and on, and on about “Islam” and “Muslims”.

Same old crap, different boxes.

Again, you can invariably spot bigots by their persistent obsession, how they return to a subject time after time without a moment’s thought given to counter arguments, or a single reflection why they are so obsessed by their own particular fixation, it can be Muslims, Islam or Israelis, the basic modus operandi is similar.

It looks like it is modernity who is failing to engage with counter arguments.

And also, note, modernity who constantly jumps to ad hominem attacks to intimidate anyone who has the nerve to disagree with him.

No, I don’t engage in arguments with bigots, cranks or racists, I am an antifascist and that’s why.

I consider these views to be utterly reprehensible, moronic and the ramblings of bitter and twisted people.

However, I am commenting on the methodology and similarity taken by those with the most obsessive and aggressive attitudes towards: Israelis, Muslims, etc

It is how you spot them, their persistence, their obsessions, etc

Most competent anti-racists would be able to explain these similarities, obviously people with prejudice won’t.

I don’t expect people that share these peculiar views to understand that.

People with particular hangups are often desensitised to their own prejudices, so won’t get the above points. Again another way of spotting them is their lack of self-awareness on these issues.

“The JP were very wrong to try and make political capital out of the murder of others.

But by the same token, so are you.”

He isn’t if you read the article he praises the JP
Why should the JP not be mentioned modernity. It’s MD is a
massive supporter, , of tea party and anti muslim ideas.
the poist was more aimed at the JP.
Or should there be no comment, isn’t that as rascist as well as dangerous.

“And so what leads young people from Leeds to blow themselves up on buses in London?”
Same madness that drives a right winger to shoot 80 kids

I see. So do you see yourself as some sort of Witchfinder General then?

A sort of Modernity Hopkins?

No, I don’t engage in arguments with witches, heathens or ungodly folk, I am a witchfinder and that’s why.

I consider these views to be utterly reprehensible, moronic and the ramblings of bitter and twisted people.

However, I am commenting on the methodology and similarity taken by those with the most obsessive and aggressive attitudes towards God’s people.

It is how you spot them, their persistence, their obsessions, etc

Most competent witchfinders would be able to explain these similarities, obviously people possessed by demons won’t.

I don’t expect people that share these peculiar views to understand that.

People with particular hangups are often desensitised to their own prejudices, so won’t get the above points. Again another way of spotting them is their lack of self-awareness on these issues.

They should pray more, or even prey more.

Be pure, be vigilant, behave!

Mr S Pill @ 21: I can assure you I hate no-one. And I am disturbed that you can characterise me as such for having some concerns about Islamic immigration and advocating attempts to integrate muslims more fully into British society – in other words to make them feel more welcome here and encourage them to modify their religious beliefsto suit aliberal democracy. Is a reformed, tolerant British form of Islam too much to hope for in the decades ahead?

LW @ 24: Yes, I’m quite aware of the tiny, harmless minority that is Orthodox Jewry in the UK, and that they tend to keep themselves separate from gentiles. But they seem to integrate rather better than Muslims, they don’t contain a terrorist minority, and they don’t have such a developed sense of victimhood as the much larger Muslim community. I wrote @ 4: “There are genuine problems in integrating Muslims into a liberal society – problems that Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jews etc do not have or have to a much lesser extent.” Note the last seven words.

@birdie @disciple

Yeah, you’re so fucking persecuted. *Sobs*

Modernity

did you read what Ben Six said:

> but let’s think about how weird it’d be if “most religions” were about as reactionary as each other.

Did you read Theophrastus :

> No other major religion requires death for apostacy, for example.

So – on what evidence can you support your claim, which looks in tatters now, that

“Islam is NO more reactionary than most other religions.”