Due to a family bereavement further postings will be suspended for the time being.
In France, any public mention of Muslim anti-Semitism can lead you to court. In February 2017, the scholar Georges Bensoussan was sued for “incitement to racial hatred” because he mentioned in a radio debate how vastly widespread anti-Semitism is among French Muslim families.
Now, however, two types of Muslim anti-Semitism are being highlighted by the media. These two types could be called “hard anti-Semitism” and “soft anti-Semitism”.
Hard Muslim anti-Semitism is the anti-Semitism of murderers. Soft Muslim anti-Semitism is anti-Semitism of “anti-Zionists” and harrassers of various stripes.
The recently concluded trial of terrorist Abdelkader Merah is a clear and pathetic illustration of hard Muslim anti-Semitism. Abdelkader Merah is the brother of Mohamed Merah, a French Muslim extremist who murdered seven people, including three Jewish children and their teacher at a Jewish school, in Toulouse. Mohamed Merah was killed in a shoot-out with police on March 22, 2012. Abdelkader Merah, Mohamed’s brother, was on trial during the past few weeks. He was accused of being a member of a terrorist organization and to have closely monitored his brother during his murder spree. Abdelkader’s trial ended on November 2, 2017; he was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison.
When a minister from the Gulf warns European countries that their mosques or imams should be licensed, you know you have a problem on your hands.
While France and Germany marked memorial days for the 2015 Paris and 2016 Berlin terrorist attacks, many Islamists seem to remain undeterred. The October 31 terror attack in New York and the arrest of three suspected ISIS militants in Germany are merely reminders of how determined many Islamists are to rattle the foundations of modern civilization and move their plans forward inch by inch.
As ISIS retreats in Syria and Iraq, its adherents show up in the West as “inspired” home-grown or would-be terrorists. Anyone believing that these homecoming terrorists were merely hostages of ISIS or were only given air-guns is misinformed.
So many terrorist attacks this year have made people in the West doubt the ability of governments to counter terrorist aggression. Some political leaders, such as London’s Mayor Sadiq Khan, have said that people will just have to get used to terror attacks — a response the public might understandably find less than satisfactory.
Theresa May was so confident of a deal being done yesterday on the Irish border question that she had reserved, we reported this morning, several hours of time in the Commons today to sell it to MPs. But her plans were blown off course, with the Government instead having to answer an urgent question about what has been going on. The DUP made clear they would not tolerate Northern Ireland being obliged to seek “continued alignment” with EU standards while the rest of the United Kingdom goes its own way, and the implications of the plan sparked disquiet among Unionists, like Ruth Davidson. Ministers have sought to defuse tensions by making clear any terms agreed would extend across the UK.
Northern Ireland, David Davis told the Commons today, would not be “left behind” in the EU’s single market and customs union after Brexit. This clarification shows, I suggested this morning, that the Government is starting to be more forthcoming on the detail about their Brexit plan. Mrs May said in her Florence speech that “there will be areas where we want to achieve the same goals in the same ways”. The knowledge that these areas would span across the UK has gone some way to mollifying the DUP, with its Westminster leader Nigel Dodds acknowledging the need for “regulatory alignment”. Unionists are jubilant, with Jacob Rees-Mogg inviting the Government to thank the DUP for helping it “stick to its own policy”. That said, Belfast academic Colin Harvey argues that the proposed solution was not going to put the Union under any real threat. The Brexit Secretary avoided Mr Rees-Mogg’s request to say that his “red line” was to free the UK to diverge from EU standards, insisting that “the red line for me is delivering the best Brexit for Britain”.
The DUP may sound more positive about the Government’s way of answering the Irish border question, but it doesn’t mean they are completely satisfied. Christopher Hope reports that DUP insiders feel they are “far away” from agreeing a deal, with Mr Dodds set to meet the chief whip Julian Smith to talk about potential terms. Their leader, Arlene Foster, is not flying to London today, but will do so “when they are close to agreeing something”. If Mrs May can’t agree a deal with the DUP promptly, she will find it hard to present a better offer to the EU when she flies back to Brussels (currently penciled in tomorrow). If she has enough to help her make progress, the Europeans have indicated that they would have time to prepare new guidelines that could mean talks finally progress to phase 2 – trade – later in the month. Jean-Claude Juncker has said he’ll meet Mrs May “this week”, and declared himself “very confident” that both sides will make sufficient progress. The chances of that happening may now rest with the DUP.
via The Telegraph