Ignoring Taguieff: Al Durah, Judeophobia, and the Success of Islamism in Europe

Pierre-André Taguieff sent me two links to articles that deal with the omerta of the French media about Taguieff’s book, « La nouvelle propagande anti juive ». I have already posted on this issue when Robert Redeker lost his position as book reviewer for a small Luxembourgeois paper for daring to review it favorably. Now two articles, including one in the Nouvel Observateur have taken up the cudgels for Taguieff.

Both point to Taguieff’s work on the Al Durah case as one of the main causes of the silence of the MSNM on his work. I reproduce the two passages on Al Durah below.

Note also an interesting incident in the French Senate during hearings for the new head of France2, in which a Senator put the appointee on the spot about the Al Durah story. This story is covered in still greater detail by the indefatigable Veronique Chemla in which she points out that a) the Senator in question (Plancade) gave the new head of France2 (Pflimlin) Taguieff’s book; and b) that none of the MSNM mentioned Plancade’s intervention. (HT/Eliyahu)

Vladimir Vladimirovitch A Lire

Par ailleurs il décrit et démontre la complicité des médias dans le processus précédent. En s’appuyant noatamment sur l’affaire Al Dourah qui lui permet de décrire par quels processus la classe médiatique, au mépris de toute déontologie, a manifesté sa solidarité avec Charles Enderlin, auteur du reportage contesté dans sa véracité (bien qu’il n’ait pas été présent au moment des faits). Israël ne pouvant être que coupable et les Palestiniens des victimes, il n’était en effet pas possible de revenir sur cette version des faits présentant les soldats israéliens comme des tueurs d’enfants palestiniens sans défense. Pourtant bien des éléments méritent qu’une enquête soit menée sur la validité de ce reportage. Ce qu’ont fait d’ailleurs des journalistes allemands demontant point par point la thèse d’Enderlin.

[Among other things he describes and demonstrates the complicity of the media in the preceding process (i.e., the alliance between the left and the islamists - rl). He emphasizes the al Durah affair to describe the way the "media class" (information professionals - rl), acting in violation of all professional ethics, showed its solidarity with Charles Enderlin, author of the contested report (even though he wasn't present at the time of the events). Since Israel can only be guilty and the Palestinians only victims, it was impossible to revise this version of events in which the Israeli soldiers were killers of defenseless Palestinian children. And yet many aspects of the case indicate that an investigation be carried out on the validity of the report... which German journalists did, dismantling point by point Enderlin's contentions.]

Les médias ne présenteront donc pas ce livre. Parce qu’il les met en cause et parce qu’il navigue à contre courant en démontrant que cette nouvelle propagande antijuive dont ils sont les porteurs constitue une arme de l’islamisme non pas contre Israël simplement, mais contre les démocraties. Ouvrage donc iconoclaste.

[The media will therefore not present this book. Because it questions them, and because it sails against the prevailing winds, dhowing that this new anti-Jewish propaganda of which they are the carriers constitutes an arm of Islamism not only aimed at Israel, but against democracies. Therefore, an iconoclastic work.]

Tarnero’s article is longer, published in a relatively new and iconoclastic publication, Causeur, which has taken on the Al Durah case already. Again, I only cite the segment directly concerned with Al Durah.

Jacques Tarnero, “Embargo sur Taguieff ! La nouvelle propagande antijuive, un fantasme ?

Retour sur l’affaire Al Dourah

C’est bien le crime inexpiable de ce livre : Taguieff met en évidence la part de complicité active ou passive des médias dans ce dispositif de propagande. Un seul exemple, le plus flagrant et le plus grave dans ses effets: ce reportage contesté de France 2 signé Charles Enderlin sur la mort d’un enfant palestinien à Gaza le 30 septembre 2000 à Gaza. À l’évidence ces images font problème et ne donnent pas à voir ce que leur commentaire dit qu’elles montrent. Une polémique, devenue conflit judiciaire, a opposé Philippe Karsenty, l’auteur d’une contre enquête, à Charles Enderlin et à la direction de France 2. Philippe Karsenty, avec un acharnement peu commun, a apporté les éléments mettant en doute la vérité de ce reportage.

[Surely this is the unforgivable crime of this book: Taguieff highlights the complicity, active or passive, of the media in this dissemination of [Islamist] propaganda. One single example, the most flagrant and most serious in its effects: the contested report of France2, signed by Charles Enderlin on the death of a Palestinian boy in Gaza on September 30, 2000. The evidence poses serious problems for, and do not support the commentary that accompanied them. A polemic, become judicial conflict, opposed Philippe Karsenty, author of a counter-investigation, and Charles Enderlin with the direction of France2. Karsenty, with a rare determination, brought the elements of proof that contradicted this report.]

Des personnes aussi peu suspectes de complaisance abusive à l’égard d’Israël, Elie Barnavi et Jean Daniel ont exprimé le souhait de voir une commission d’enquête indépendante statuer sur la qualité de ce reportage. Sans entrer dans le détail judiciaire de cette affaire qui par deux fois a accrédité la bonne foi de Philippe Karsenty et le bien fondé des doutes pesant sur les fameuses images, le monde des médias a manifesté une solidarité empressée avec Charles Enderlin. Sans prendre le soin d’examiner les faits et la contre-enquête, une pétition publiée par le Nouvel Observateur affirmait de manière péremptoire la vérité d’Enderlin face à la cabale conspirationniste menée par Karsenty.

[People as little suspect of excessive complicity with Israel, Elie Barnavi and Jean Daniel, expressed the desire to see an independent commission report on the quality of [Enderlin's] reporting. Without getting into judicial detail of this affair which twice confirmed both Karsenty’s good faith and the firm foundation of his doubts about these famous images, the world of the media showed strong solidarity with Enderlin. Without taking the time to examine the facts and the counter-evidence, a petition published by the Nouvel Observateur affirmed in peremptory terms the “truth” of Enderlin as opposed to the consipracy theorists led by Karsenty.]

L’analyse minutieuse que fait Taguieff de toute cette affaire est-elle la raison du boycott médiatique dont son livre est l’objet ? Taguieff interpelle le refus d’examiner d’autres éléments, d’autres preuves à charge contre ce qui pourrait être une manipulation. Ce refus obéit d’abord à une logique idéologique : Israël ne peut qu’être le coupable et le palestinien ne peut qu’être la victime. Pour tous ces pétitionnaires, la vérité idéologique reste toujours supérieure à la vérité des faits car à Paris il est toujours plus agréable d’avoir tort avec Sartre que d’avoir raison avec Aron.

[Is the careful analysis that Taguieff made of this whole affair the reason for the media boycott of his book? Taguieff notes the refusal to examine other elements, other proofs that argue the affair might be a manipulation. This refusal obeys an ideological logic: Israel can only be guilty and the Palestinian can only be the victim. For all those petitioners, the ideological truth is more important thatn the facts because, in Paris, it's always better to be wrong with Sartre than right with Aron. (A reference to Aron's denunciation of Sartre's useful idiocy. -rl)]

Contre la myopie délibérée, Taguieff passe au crible les enjeux actuels et en ce sens navigue à contre-courant des tendances intellectuelles ou diplomatiques dominantes qui font du « dialogue des civilisations » leur choix stratégique comme Chamberlain et Daladier pensaient pouvoir trouver un modus vivendi avec le nazisme. Taguieff voit dans la nouvelle propagande antijuive le front avancé de l’offensive totalitaire de l’islam radical contre les démocraties et la culture occidentale. L’antisionisme radical repeint aux couleurs du progressisme séduit, par sa propagande, des franges d’opinion de plus en plus vaste qui considèrent, avec bonne conscience, que l’empêcheur de tourner en rond se nomme Israël. Taguieff nous aide à regarder la menace en face même si nombreux sont ceux qui aujourd’hui préfèrent « être verts que morts ».

[Against this deliberate myopia, Taguieff inspects the actual stakes at play, and in this sense, navigates against the current of the dominant intellectual and diplomatic tendencies which take the strategic choice of a "dialogue of civilizations" just as Chamberlain and Daladier (the two leading appeasers of the Nazis in the 30s -rl) thought they had found their modus vivendi with Nazism. Taguieff sees the new anti-Jewish propaganda as the advanced front of the totalitarian offensive of radical Islam against the democratic cultures of the West. The radical anti-Zionism, recast in progressive terms, seduces marginal opinion, ever more vast, which consider in all good conscience, that the one who prevents progress is Israel. Taguieff helps us look the danger straight in the face, even if there are (too) many today who prefer to be "green than dead."]

Hard to get a better sense of the disaster this last decade has been in the cognitive war against the enemies of a decent democratic culture and a civil polities around the world.

124 Responses to Ignoring Taguieff: Al Durah, Judeophobia, and the Success of Islamism in Europe

  1. Eliyahu says:

    Senator Plancade also gave a copy of Taguieff’s book to Remy Pflimlin, the designated new head of France Televisions, a govt post. See post below for an account of Senator Plancade’s remarks directed at Pflimlin in the French. It seems that the al-Durah hoax is recognized as such by at least one French senator, probably more.

    http://veroniquechemla.blogspot.com/2010/07/le-senateur-jean-pierre-plancade.html

  2. Lorenz Gude says:

    I am reminded of a similar case of a book being ignored by the elite US media – Douglas Feith’s War and Decision. Feith worked for Wolfowitz during the lead up to and the early stages of the Iraq war. His book is the best I have read explaining what went on during that time and, like Taguieff’s book, seriously undermines the MSNM narrative of this time. Neither the Times or the WaPo reviewed the book but the WaPo got hold of an early manuscript and did an ‘expose’ making out it was a self serving tell all book. They milked it for the purposes of their narrative and then kicked it the curb. It is actually a carefully circumscribed memoir that sticks very tightly to what Freith actually witnessed and is well backed up by citations. As Enderlin and France 2 have demonstrated prying the cold dead fingers of the MSNM off the narrative is proving difficult indeed. Of course the example of France provides the solution to the problem of our MSNM going broke – state ownership of the means of production is clearly the way ahead. ;-)

  3. Ray in Seattle says:

    As I’ve mentioned before in other contexts, the notion of cognitive war implies some conspiracy to accomplish an agreed-to goal against an enemy. In these actions by members of and apologists for the MSNM in France and elsewhere re: the al Dura affair, I see only identity beliefs being defended. When enough people share the same identity beliefs it can seem to those who don’t share those beliefs as if there is an organized campaign, in this case, of intentional deceit.

    I am sure Enderlin was simply reporting what he believed – at his core level to be true. That Israel (the IDF) murders Arab children and the Palestinians are its innocent victims. It was impossible for him to see the clips any other way.

    What must be changed is the core beliefs of the people who watch Enderlin. What Landes/Karsenty/Taquieff are doing is discrediting Enderlin and the erroneous results that emanated from his core beliefs. This will undoubtedly change the views of some who are watching. Not because LKT are logically correct – but because Enderlin was effectively discredited – humiliated publicly – though not nearly enough yet. There’s still plenty to do and thanks to RL and his work http://www.theaugeanstables.com/al-durah-affair-the-dossier/ for playing such an effective role in all this.

  4. [...] Augean Stables » Ignoring Taguieff: Al Durah, Judeophobia, and the Success of Islamism in Euro… [...]

  5. incognito says:

    The notion of identity belief operating in the French meda is IMO mostly bullocks. There may be the arrogant ideology of “we carry the real truth and morality” involved, but the most salient factor is fear.

    To put that in context, consider the other day’s riots (again) after a “youth” robber was killed by police. The French regime/elite is shitting in its pants, which was explicitly admitted by their FM not long ago.

    What also has not transpired from the senator’s incident is that the candidate for TV channel had did not know (or pretended he did not know) anythng about Al Dura.

  6. E.G. says:

    One’s got to have a “decent democratic culture” to begin with. And the foundations of such a culture in Continental Europe were never very strong. They’ve become very shaky during the 20th century, not recovered after WWII when the “other totalitarian system” kept attacking them.

    One can see the results on the comments part of Tarnero’s article. People confusing Barbarism with “another civilisation”; Defining as Zionists PLO’s envoy to the EU (the Mufti’s niece, an excellent propagandist herself) and other “Alter-Jews”; Denying the quasi-equivalence anti-Zionism – anti-Semitism; Denying the media muzzling…

    The last decade is the apotheosis of the few that preceded it. When people were fed with factoids, pseudo-analyses, and non-anchored narratives on a daily basis.

  7. Ray in Seattle says:

    incog says, “The notion of identity belief operating in the French meda is IMO mostly bullocks. There may be the arrogant ideology of “we carry the real truth and morality” involved, but the most salient factor is fear. To put that in context, consider the other day’s riots (again) after a “youth” robber was killed by police. The French regime/elite is shitting in its pants, which was explicitly admitted by their FM not long ago.”

    Fear is the most common response when someone’s identity beliefs are seriously challenged. Thanks for making my point.

  8. E.G. says:

    Sorry. There’s nothing “identiarian” in the current official expressed beliefs in France. Or in Western Europe in General.
    “Identiterian” beliefs (rather, norms and customs) are expressed by plebos and hardly taken into account by officialdom, except for the vain Burqa ban.

  9. Ray in Seattle says:

    EG, I don’t know how you are using the term. But I am using it in a way that you are not. To clairfy:

    a) Belief is an emotional connection in brains between stimulus and behavior. All complex animals harbor them – showing that awareness is not necessary for beliefs (as I am using the term) to affect behavior.

    b) Humans, who can be aware of abstract things – including the emotional beliefs that guide their behavior – usually are not.

    c) What humans say about their beliefs is almost never an accurate accounting of the emotional forces driving their behavior. Such accounts are more often designed to justify their behavior in others’ eyes and make them seem worthy and deserving of their society’s respect. They are fictions that brains create to make them feel good.

    The Muslim guy who beheaded his wife is now saying that he put up with years of psychological abuse and he just snapped one day. He probably even believes that himself. Do you think he’s going to say that she righteously pissed him off and wanted a divorce and he really wanted to kill her in the worst possible way and he really thought he could get away with it?

    d) Humans who provide these self-serving justifications of their behavior usually have no idea of the actual emotional forces driving them.

    Do you think Enderlin realizes that he non-consciously accepted Talal abu Rahmah’s account of Muhammad’s death because he craved the approval of other anti-semites in his audience who believed as he did in Israel’s general guilt and Arab innocence in the ME conflict and that Israel should never have been created – and therefore there could be no other conclusion but that the IDF shot the kid? Of course not and he’d deny it indignantly if you suggested such a thing. It’s not a conscious position. It is an emotional belief.

    To head off any definition war that may be looming this is the definition of belief that I am using. Whether you agree with it or not is irrelevant. If you wish to disagree with me then you must disagree with this use of the term.

  10. Ray in Seattle says:

    Re Enderlin: He must have known that Muhammad raised his hand after he declared him dead on the newscast. I suspect that his brain convinced him that it was “death throes”. To someone skeptical of the Pal narrative that – plus other incongruities – cast serious doubt on the events as Talal and Enderlin related them. But to someone with a strong emotional belief in Israel’s guilt – those incongruities are easily brushed aside and ignored.

    I know it seems impossible but strong emotional beliefs like these are far more potent than reason and can easily overcome what one’s eyes can see.

    When he was finally confronted with the evidence I believe he then realized he had to tough it out and stick with his story and so he became devious about it at that point. But until then I suspect he truly believed emotionally that the IDF shot and killed Muhammad.

  11. incognito says:

    Fear is the most common response when someone’s identity beliefs are seriously challenged. Thanks for making my point.

    Looks like never in your life you were in physical danger. Had you been, you might have realized that when your ass is inmortal danger, your identity beliefs would be small change.

    When the “youth” riot in France and the police is neither able nor willing to deal with it believe you me identity beliefs is not what the french elite is thinking of.

    I think you are perhaps the single best (if not the single) evidence to your own so-called “theory”. So it looks like you’re projecting your identarian belief on everything you encounter.

    And, as I told you so many times, anything that explains everything explains nothing. Here’s another way to look at it: Is there ANY kind of evidence you would accept that would prove your “theory” wrong? How would one go about disproving it?

    And please, no long lecture. Be succinct. I know it’s hard, but it’s a critical aspect of intellect.

  12. Ray in Seattle says:

    “Looks like never in your life you were in physical danger. Had you been, you might have realized that when your ass is inmortal danger, your identity beliefs would be small change. ”

    Every person’s primary and most immutable identity belief is the belief that “I must live”. It’s the one that every animal is born with. All other beliefs are endowed by genes or adopted by brains in support of that first one. This is why I say that you don’t understand my premise. In #8 above I carefully described the emotional basis for beliefs that guide behavior – as I am using the term. You are discussing intellectual beliefs – the fictions that people create to justify their behavior in others’ eyes.

    Obviously you don’t bother to read my comments – just like Enderlin didn’t bother to critically examine the footage. He knew Israel was guilty – just like you think you know I couldn’t be right – so why read what I say? Why examine the footage? The exact same process is occurring.

    I’ll use however many words I decide I need to explain myself. I do this for my own mental exercise, not to convince you of anything. You can ignore them. But you should read my comments before you disagree with them. The reason you don’t is because you find them emotionally disagreeable. They grate on your own emotional beliefs because they intellectually challenge them – and so it’s emotionally uncomfortable for you to read them.

    Like the Muslim guy who beheaded his wife because she “abused him” you have convinced yourself that my comments “are too wordy” and so you hope to cut them off. This is a fiction your brain has created. Try to get past that and face the challenge honestly. Arguing against an opinion that you refuse to fairly examine is intellectually dishonest.

  13. incognito says:

    Like the Muslim guy who beheaded his wife because she “abused him” you have convinced yourself that my comments “are too wordy” and so you hope to cut them off.

    I cannot respond to this crap without you considering it an insult. It’s only for RL’s sake that I refrain.

    As usual you flatter yourself that somebody “hopes to cut you out”. Please don’t interpret politeness as indicator of the value of the record you keep playing.

  14. Philippe says:

    Happily surprised to read this piece in the Nouvel Obs, especially as they initiated the pro-Enderlin petition after the later lost his suit against Karsenty. Senator Plancade speech also show that there still are a few in France for whom truth matters more than the current political correctness and cowardice. A few, but unfortunately too few.

  15. Eliyahu says:

    As you probably know, there were riots and the usual car burnings in Grenoble in France over the weekend after a group of Jeunes [originaires de la Jeunesse Seoudite] had robbed a casino on the outskirts of town and then were chased by police. According to the prefect, one of the robbers shot at the police car. Then the cops shot and one of the Jeunes was killed. This led to the commandeering of a tram car. Passengers were told to get off [how kind and thoughtful!!]. Rioting and car burning ensued.

  16. E.G. says:

    Philippe,

    The Nouvel Obs hosts many blogs like “Vladimir Vladimirovitch”. This is merely an entry on the blog site, not to be confused with a N. Obs publication.

  17. E.G. says:

    This Guardian piece is worth reading, I think.

    Why this obsession with Israel and the Palestinians?
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/22/obsession-israel-palestinians-conflict

    The trouble is that Israel promotes itself as the state for all Jews, including – despite themselves – my friends. And because some of my friends are Jews and it is therefore their country, it is in some subliminal sense my country too.

    Right. The author’s obsession is due to Israel’s self-definition (I thought this was a state’s right and a pre-condition for independence/legitimacy in Intl. law) rather than to his own motivation.

    So not only is it in effect an English county, but many of my rulers appear to be its devoted citizens, subjectively speaking. All those shrill arguments over water or settlements, all that killing, all that fear and loathing, are not far away from me at all, no further away than Belfast.

    So I judge this by domestic standards, not foreign ones. I do not expect Israelis to behave like Burmese generals; I expect them to behave like Englishmen, like my friends.

    Of course, the Juice and especially his English friends, are not Asians (would that be the PoMo multi-culti version of racism?).
    One still wonders how his English friends would behave if placed in the Israeli situation. Actually, one only has to remember how they did behave when they were there…

    Another reason for my disproportionate interest in this conflict is that I feel I have been lied to, and I feel that people are still trying to lie to me and I don’t like it.
    [...]
    I can remember a time back in the 1960s when I accepted a view of Israel as a plucky little state full of kibutzes busily taming the desert. At that time I had scarcely heard of the Palestinians. Then I discovered the other narrative.

    How accurate!

    My purpose here is not to go into the rights or wrongs, but to point out that if Israel had been described to me from the start as the product of remorseless expropriation of some else’s land (not the full story, I know), I might well have lost interest by now.

    I find this remark both interesting and puzzling. Is it the “lie” that makes this region/conflict obsessive? I’m sure there are many more lies in and around many other countries on the planet. GB included. Ah, but not with a Jewish majority…

    But having been told how heroic and wonderful it was and then to find out that, at the very least, there is a different and more troubling story running in parallel, that affects me emotionally.

    Is the reader to conclude that the unsolved concurrence between the 2 narratives is what triggers the passion?

  18. Eliyahu says:

    In 1948, nobody, least of all the Arabs [inc. the palestinian Arabs] claimed that there was a “palestinian people.” Rather, Arab expert witnesses testifying before the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry on palestine [1946] argued that “there is no palestine in history; it is all Syria.” Etc.

    Further, throughout the years of British control of the Land, they usually sided with the Arabs. This included acquiescence or encouragement of pogroms, as in Hebron in 1929. [see books by Pierre van Paassen & Albert Londres].

    Of course, it was the Arabs who started the Israeli War of Independence with attacks on Jewish civilians throughout the country starting very shortly after the UN general assembly vote recommending partition of the Land into a Jewish state, an Arab state [NOT a "palestinian" state], and an internationally governed corpus separatum [enclave] in and around Jerusalem. The Arab attacks started in the night between 11-29-1947 and 11-30-1947. The first refugees from attacks in the war were Jews in south Tel Aviv and Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem [Shimon haTsadiq, Nahalat Shimon, Siebenbergen Houses]. The Jews of Shimon haTsadiq on the way to Mount Scopus fled toward the end of 12-1947.

  19. Don Cox says:

    “There may be the arrogant ideology of “we carry the real truth and morality” involved, but the most salient factor is fear.”

    And a long French tradition of hostility to Jews.

  20. E.G. says:

    Don Cox,

    So how can one explain the fact that the largest Jewish community in Europe is in France?
    Are French Jews masochists?

  21. Ray in Seattle says:

    Don, Could it be that some (perhaps most) Jewish communities except possibly those in the US or Israel have become accustomed to hostility and generally accept it unless it is lethal.

    “Are French Jews masochists?”

    Communities have a way of insulating themselves over time like the black community in SW Los Angeles near where I went to high school in the fifties. Even then, one traveled through the area with caution. Although I never had any bad experiences you knew you were not in Kansas anymore. The LA police did not spend much time there either. I suspect all that added to the insularity and sense of security of the black residents – at least security from the white man’s predations. The infamous Watts riots were in 1965, five years after I graduated.

  22. incognito says:

    e.g.,

    It turns out that the arab strategy has proven right: keep propagating the hell out of the narrative and ultimately things will turn our way.

    But it is Israel which actually handed them victory: first, by not bothering to counter that narrative at the same level as the arabs (if at all) and by admitting the narrative via concessions and Oslo.

    Of course, the world, particularly EU and more particularly UK were prone to buy into an anti-Israel narrative, but Israel made it easy for them.

    That the west has destroyed the system which would have enabled its people to think independently and critically, and to rely on self-acquired knowledge and reason also contributed to the current outcome.

  23. incognito says:

    eliyahu,

    See my reply to e.g.

  24. incognito says:

    And a long French tradition of hostility to Jews.

    There is that, of course. But I think it’s much facilitated by fear.

    Indeed, scapegoating jews is something that comes up in times like this, when people are afraid about their physical and financial circumstance.

  25. incognito says:

    Could it be that some (perhaps most) Jewish communities except possibly those in the US or Israel have become accustomed to hostility and generally accept it unless it is lethal.

    Read the Luntz interview with jewish and non-jewish students that I linked to somewhere here.

    He claims something of this sort, but with a twist: western jews teach their children “not to judge”. And apparently they apply it even when they are intensively and scurillously attacked.

    Apparently, the jews learned nothing from the Holocaust experience.

  26. E.G. says:

    incognito,

    That’s Arab import of Goebbels’ techniques esp. by Mufti al-Husseini.

    Israel is guilty of letting do, though I’m far from sure she had similar means (oil). And let’s not forget that the attack was planetary, education included.

    I prefer your scapegoating explanation to the traditional hostility one. It seems descriptively more accurate.

  27. E.G. says:

    incognito,

    As much as I’d agree to a description of a raised Jewish threshold (accepting hostility), the non-judgemental teaching is much less common. Especially for those who get aggressed (i.e., non-progressives).

    Most Jews did learn the Holocaust’s lesson.

    My best educated guess is that Jews tell themselves that if things turn really bad, they’d find refuge in Israel. There is a constant trickle, BTW, and those who can afford it have already bought property in Israel.

  28. incognito says:

    MUST READ:

    A Tale of Two Professors
    http://frontpagemag.com/2010/07/19/a-tale-of-two-professors/

    How much of an education do students get in these institutions?

  29. incognito says:

    e.g.

    I prefer your scapegoating explanation to the traditional hostility one. It seems descriptively more accurate.

    Which is why I keep reiterating it. I think the link to the article about the academic dinner validates it quite nicely.

    But one cannot dismiss the hostility entirely. After all, why always scapegoating the jews?

  30. incognito says:

    e.g.

    As much as I’d agree to a description of a raised Jewish threshold (accepting hostility), the non-judgemental teaching is much less common. Especially for those who get aggressed (i.e., non-progressives).

    It’s probably more characteristic of the US jews.

    Most Jews did learn the Holocaust’s lesson.

    I disagree.

    The more time distance from the Holocaust, the more the lesson fades. Up until recently the western jews deemed themselves safe and have not digested yet the rising hatred and the regimes’ unwillingness to defend them (e.g. Germany, France, UK, San Francisco, Tampa).

    The instinctive reaction when facing this is to keep the head down, maybe it’ll go away.

    The Israeli leadership proneness to kiss ass rather than stand tall is a clear example of that too.

    My best educated guess is that Jews tell themselves that if things turn really bad, they’d find refuge in Israel. There is a constant trickle, BTW, and those who can afford it have already bought property in Israel.

    Perhaps, but I am not convinced the % is significant. It may become so if things deteriorate, but then the question is what will the world do when it has no longer jews, when it is already active in destroying Israel while it still has them?

    As Nasrallah says: let them go all to Israel so that we can kill them easier. Do you have any doubt as to what the west will do about that?

  31. incognito says:

    Disengage from Gaza once and for all
    Israel’s left should support the idea of the European Union’s taking effective responsibility for the development of the Gaza Strip, even if Lieberman is the one who proposed it. Anyone who wants to view this idea as European neocolonialism is free to do so.
    By Shlomo Avineri
    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/disengage-from-gaza-once-and-for-all-1.302724?localLinksEnabled=false

    Attractive, but what’s wrong with this picture?

  32. E.G. says:

    incognito,

    The situation is deteriorated enough for the %tage to be high enough.

  33. incognito says:

    e.g.

    We shall see, won’t we?

    I hope the Israeli elite will still have a place for them when they decide to flock in real numbers. Let’s see what it will take for that to happen?

    May well be the old will come first, while the young assimilate. Not a good outcome.

  34. incognito says:

    The Zionist Imam
    http://www.jpost.com/ChristianInIsrael/Blogs/Article.aspx?id=181905

    Let’s see if you see the inconsistency in the response to Palazzi — the selective very interpretation of the Quran which the response purportedly tries to counter.

  35. incognito says:

    Israel’s enemies are conducting a classic PR offensive, designed to keep the focus relentlessly on Israel and away from themselves. Thus they never talk about themselves; they talk only about Israel.

    Israel, however, does the opposite: it talks almost exclusively about itself, constantly trying to defend its own actions rather than focusing on its enemies’ actions.

    http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/evelyn-gordon/330276
    (h/t) Sassywire

    Valid observation, links to what I have been arguing earlier. Not that it’ll make a difference now — it’s too late.

  36. incognito says:

    e.g.

    Incidentally, do you really believe that western jews will get out of the west to escape native hatred in exchange for Hamas, Hezbollah, Fatah and Iranian hatred, armed with missiles?

    Don’t think so.

    They will keep convincing themselves that if only they assimilate better, they’ll be OK.

  37. E.G. says:

    incognito,

    There’s already about a sixth that left. Montreal and Miami seem delighted with these skilled young French Jews, and their children. And they seem to integrate well in Israel.

    I do hope we won’t live to see the exodus of Europe’s Jews.
    For that will be the end of the world we know.

  38. incognito says:

    Marty Peretz:

    So what Abbas demands is that Israel accede in advance to returning to the 1949 armistice lines. This is actually what the formal dispute is all about. The Palestinians are returning to the geographical lines that Ehud Barak offered Yassir Arafat. Arafat rejected these.
    There is no reason–absolutely no reason–for the Israelis to make that failed formula the basis for a different agreement.

    This is crucial. No Israeli state would hand over to some United Nations arm or to some other assemblage of countries the security of its land and people. As we can see from Afghanistan but even less treacherous areas the patrolling of peace is not a chore for foreigners.

    On both counts, wanna bet?

  39. E.G. says:

    incognito,

    They will keep convincing themselves that if only they assimilate better, they’ll be OK.

    That’s one lesson learnt.
    Many understood that this is not the path to Happiness.
    And Youth is highly mobile.

  40. Michelle Schatzman says:

    To all who have theories and principles about France and the french Jews without really knowing the country, and its inhabitants: I just do not want to lose my time trying to correct your prejudices and preconceptions. There are too many of them, and if you looked at serious sources, you might easily correct them yourselves.

    One person in this debate really knows France and the French : that’s E.G.

    I am sorry to report that the other people’s rantings are not even funny.

    But, if you like to feed one another with confirmed gobbledygook, I won’t trouble the party. Enjoy!

  41. Michelle Schatzman says:

    @ E.G.: I have two adult children. One made alya, the other one is till nomadic, but knows quite a few languages, his (stable) girl friend is not french, and he will not make his life in France in all probability.

    Among the Jews I know, and who have some level of identification with jewish life, basically everyone has close family in Israel : a child, a sibling, a father or a mother.

    Lots (and I really mean lots) of french jews bought property in Israel.

    In the twenty four years I’ve spent in my town, I saw the most active jewish families make alya, or leave for Canada. These are not large numbers, but the people who left were often the pillars of the communities.

    My guess is that french alya will take place, it will be massive, and the ones who will be left will be the totally assimilated people and the charedim.

    But it is like earthquakes: geologists know why and how they take place, they just do not know when.

  42. incognito says:

    That’s one lesson learnt.

    You mean NOT learned.

    Many understood that this is not the path to Happiness.

    Jews are not meant to be happy, didn’t you know that?

    And Youth is highly mobile.

    It is, but I doubt Israel is currently more than just a place to visit, just like all youth like to travel.

    I hope you’re right and I am wrong.

  43. incognito says:

    To all who have theories and principles about France and the french Jews without really knowing the country, and its inhabitants

    I certainly did not say anything specific to french jews, although I’ve been to France, I have family there, and I am familiar with North-African jews, whom I lived with in Israel. It’s true that they are closer to Israel and many of them emigrate there.

    I’ve been mostly talking about western jews in general, but more about the french goyim and muslims.

  44. incognito says:

    Lots (and I really mean lots) of french jews bought property in Israel.

    Forgive me, but that is not persuasive enough for me.

  45. E.G. says:

    incognito,

    It should be persuasive (perhaps even enough). Because it demonstrates a shift in thinking about the future. There’s a big difference between donating to Israel (or Israeli institutions) and actually investing there, especially in terms of family real estate. It signals less confidence about one’s prospects in the country. And some state of preparedness to move.
    This is new for a “community” that is hitherto an unequalled model of successful integration.

  46. E.G. says:

    incognito,

    May well be the old will come first, while the young assimilate.

    But the reality is the opposite. While there still are “seniors” who spend their retirement in the “Promised Land” (a common phenomenon in the past), there are more and more of the kind of Michelle: Parents more or less towards their career end whose children emigrate. And the youth’s (in their 20′s) major trend is not towards assimilation. That’s been their parents’ Schtick.

  47. E.G. says:

    Incidentally, do you really believe that western jews will get out of the west to escape native hatred in exchange for Hamas, Hezbollah, Fatah and Iranian hatred, armed with missiles?

    First a correction: hatred is not so native.

    But indeed, I believe that there are calculations of danger vs. danger that keep Jews in the diaspora. I think this is one of the reasons there is emigration towards America.

  48. E.G. says:

    incognito #36

    Very true.
    Todah Haaretz et aliii.

  49. Michelle Schatzman says:

    @ E.G.: seconding you.

    I forgot: french kids going for university or yeshiva study in Israel. Maybe only one year, but it builds links. Daughter of a french mathematical colleague completed here engineering school by spending one year at the Technion, and she will stay on for a master’s degree.

    Soem people from my town making alya a few years ago, because kids were studying at the Technion.

    These are solidly jewish people, with lots of identification to the jewish world. As the situation evolves, the more identified to judaism will make alya, unless they are chareidi, antizionist, and happy to live in their ghetto (some are). Of course, the more assimilated people, who are always on the verge of alterjudaism will stay. They will have lots of melancholy memories for a world they never really knew and they utterly despised. Will serve them well…

  50. Michelle Schatzman says:

    typo : completed her engineering school (not here : there!)

  51. Michelle Schatzman says:

    Another consideration: it is much better to fight people who think like Hezbollah and Hamas, if you can enlist in an army whose job it is to fight them. If your main choice is to hide when you walk around with a soccer cap above the kippa and whatever tricks you can imagine or to be beaten, the choice is pretty obvious, isn’t it?

    By the way, my feelers tell me that jewish intellectuals who identify to judaism are much more solid and trustable for a republican point of view than non jewish intellectuals or jewish intellectuals with no attachment to judaicity.

    I have probably told here the story of this poor CNRS researcher who considered that he was treated by the CNRS administration as a Jew or as a chasid umot haolam during WWII. In fact, he had sent out a questionnaire, which was totally illegal with respect to the french law relative to inquiries that can be treated on a computer. In particular, he had sent out the questionnaire to researchers having an arab sounding name, so as to evaluate the integration of people from the former french north-africa in the research system. CNRS was trying to protect him and to help him change his questionnaire after the fact, so that it could become legal. Some reseachers who received the questionnaire protested violently, because it asked the kind of questions thst you get when you are up for a top secret accreditation.

    Now, guess who protested? You got it : Jews from Algeria who got nice arab sounding names, and knew a bit about the law of the land.

    There is simply much more fighting spirit among the Jews, and a much keener conscience of what is going on. So, they react, and they do not buy the organized lies. Of course, this work only with Jews having a jewish identification, which is why a Jew from Algeria, belonging to my generation, will certainly react if he gets such and such type of questions. He just understand what is going on. It is plain.

    The pattern of migration of french Jews will be probably the following: the young, who are not yet well integrated in society – that is under 30, basically – will move and get jobs or simply complete their studies. The old ones, who are able to retire, will move, because they are fed up, provided they are in good health. The intermediate generation will wait more, because finding a job in a new country is not a trivial matter, especially if you are in a word job.

    So, we shall see…

  52. incognito says:

    It should be persuasive (perhaps even enough). Because it demonstrates a shift in thinking about the future.

    It should, but it isn’t. If they were serious and understood what is happening, they would be already in Israel. But they aren’t. They still think it’ll go away and they’ll be able to get away without aliyah.

    And, as I said, I foresee problems if they all decide to go at the “last moment”.

  53. incognito says:

    there are more and more of the kind of Michelle

    I need accurate and reliable statistics to be persuaded, covering US, Canada and EU (various countries).

    But indeed, I believe that there are calculations of danger vs. danger that keep Jews in the diaspora. I think this is one of the reasons there is emigration towards America.

    That was my point.

    But we know what happened to jews of Europe when they decide to escape the nazis in europe. If I recall correctly, they were not exactly welcome, to put it very politely. We are approaching that phenomenon.

  54. incognito says:

    Michelle,

    We will have to live and see. I do hope you and EG are right, but my gut says otherwise.

  55. Michelle Schatzman says:

    Incog,

    they do not think it will go away, this is the reason why they are buying property in Israel. The ones who buy are middle-aged, they have at least 10 years to go before making alya, if they want their retirement money, and if they want to avoid looking for a job at the age of 52 or 53 – which is about the worst possible age.

    Their kids go to Israel, study and integrate fast, but the parents do not know enough hebrew to do the same.

    This is the simple and clear explanation.

    But we shall see, in any case!

  56. incognito says:

    Stating the obvious:

    Cosi fan tutte
    We cannot afford to continue to have this kind of politics, the kind devoid of a calling or total dedication to the nation’s interest.
    By Moshe Arens
    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/cosi-fan-tutte-1.302929

  57. incognito says:

    Michelle,

    Indeed we shall see. I hope you are right.

    But again, I would need serious statistics to assess whether the phenomenon is not just anecdotal.

    Incidentally, that there is a real estate bubble in Israel may well be evidence supporting your argument. If so, there’s the question of fairness with respect to Israelis who may not be able to afford buying homes.

  58. E.G. says:

    incognito,

    I too wish there were stats. If there are, they’re not available.

    Haven’t you read the articles in the Israeli press in past 2-3 years? There have been complaints about apartment prices soaring because of the French demand, about empty apartments (that only get full several weeks/year)… as well as other opinions about the beneficial aspects of this pre-Aliya.
    There is also the case of commuters: professionals who work all week in France and join their family in Israel for the Week-end.

    At any rate, those aware of the danger are numerous. And the preparedness, including the recollection of what happened in WWII is widespreading. What has less changed is what Michelle described as the spirit of combat. People whose parents or grandparents (if not generations before) made lots of efforts to integrate and become good (country)-men are strongly attached to their country and its culture, values, etc. Seeing it damaged hurts and they won’t give up that easily. They’ve actively participated in building it! It’s only when one feels it’s not his/hers any more that the decision to leave is made. That may be too late.

    Israelis will behave as usual (see: the Aliya sketch with Einstein/Zohar from the 70s: a few more aliyot since then… same-same).

    BTW, I’ve had the curious experience of Goys only half jokingly asking whether they could immigrate to Israel where, they figure, Moslems are held in their place and people are free to practice or not their religion and freedom of speech in full respect…

  59. Philippe says:

    EG.
    Thank you for your precision on the Nouvel Obs.

    regarding your post # 22, there is a yiddish proverb that states: ” Happy like god in France”. You will find that French jews really love their country and its values. (though since 2000 many feel totally betrayed as these same values are being betrayed – again).

    Also to remember. It is Napoleon of France that made the french jews full citizen with full right and duties. The first time (to my knowledge) since the roman destruction of Israel.

  60. incognito says:

    e.g.,

    My family had experienced the consequences of the russian aliyah, so I know all about that.

    I have no doubt that many french jews buy re in Israel and even make aliyah, given the cave in of the French state.

    I am not entirely sure, however, how significant this is and how it should be interpreted in the context of what we have been discussing. I still have concerns.

  61. incognito says:

    On the media:

    Documents show media plotting to kill stories about Rev. Jeremiah Wright
    http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/20/documents-show-media-plotting-to-kill-stories-about-rev-jeremiah-wright/

  62. E.G. says:

    Incognito,

    Which Russian Aliya? The 70s or the more recent one?
    (I confess having had some aggressive reactions to Soviet-style un-service by a few recent Olim. Friends who made Aliya from the USSR in the 70s confessed to even more aggressive reactions… Things have much improved though).

    I wouldn’t count on more than 3-500000 European Jews (UK included) making Aliya in the next 5 years, if things continue the way they do.

  63. Michelle Schatzman says:

    Philippe,

    sorry to contradict you : it is the convention in 1791, which gave full citizen’s rights and duties to the Jews. Napoléon, in fact, diminished the rights of the Jews, through the so-called “décret infâme”, which made easy for the debtors of the Jews not to pay their debs and forced the Jews who had drawn a bad lot for the military service to serve in person (instead of paying a proxy). See for instance

    http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napol%C3%A9on_et_les_Juifs

    which will tell you the essential facts.

    I’d rather say that all the “républicains” aged 50 and above love Napoléon, because elementary and junior high school history made them dream about him. In fact, he did not reinstitute privileges as before 1789, and even if he did rule in a quite authoritarian way, he also instituted the bases of the rule of law in France. So we love the “Corsican Ogger”, that’s a forgivable weakness.

  64. Philippe says:

    Michelle,

    The convention actually canceled all religions. The wikipedia link you give seems to confirm what I said

    (L’accession de Napoléon Bonaparte au pouvoir a été un événement fondamental pour l’émancipation des Juifs dans toute l’Europe. Ils eurent accès à l’égalité des droits civiques et à la liberté de circulation, et furent intégrés à la nation.)

    Above is one of the first sentence on that link.

  65. incognito says:

    Which Russian Aliya? The 70s or the more recent one?

    The latter.

    (I confess having had some aggressive reactions to Soviet-style un-service by a few recent Olim.

    I did notice a serious increase in crime, particularly violent crime after the latest wave of russian aliya. I dk how many of them are non-jewish family members of jewish olim, but I would suspect that even jews have absorbed some of the russian culture in which they had to live.

    I wouldn’t count on more than 3-500000 European Jews (UK included) making Aliya in the next 5 years, if things continue the way they do.

    As what % of total?

  66. E.G. says:

    incognito,

    Less than 50%.
    (The total is less than 1 million)

  67. E.G. says:

    Philippe,

    Bonaparte had balls that only the French appreciate.
    It is said he nourished some dream about restoring the Jewish people as sovereign in Israel.
    At any rate, what he actually did was to convene a Sanhedrin and put it those tough questions. Nobody these days is going to do the same…

    The contract that was established as a consequence has been twice breached (Dreyfus and Vichy), and not by French Jews. Are we witnessing a third breach?

  68. Michelle Schatzman says:

    @ Philippe

    you are committing an anachronism, when you say that the convention cancelled all religions! The emancipation of the Jews came *before* i.e. in 1791, and the cult of Reason and the Supreme Being come later, i.e. from the end of 1792 to 1794.

    Regarding the emancipation of the Jews, look at this:

    http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89mancipation_des_Juifs

    It took place on Sep. 28th, 1791.

    Yes, emancipation of European Jews did take place in the lands conquered by Napoléon. But if you understand carefully the statement, you observe that it is not accurate, since the emancipation had already occurred in France. The statement should have concerned the Jews who were not french – then it is correct.

    @ E.G.,

    Napoléon was ballsy, he was a visionary, he was an excellent general, he was extremely smart, he hired wonderful people to construct the set of civil and penal laws and the administrative structure of France.

    We are still living with many traces of Napoléon’s decisions. One is the separation of the administration of taxes into two separate bodies: one is in charge of calculating how much is due, and the other one is in charge of recovering the money. The idea was to avoid corruption as much as possible. Now, the system is awfully messed up, but initially, it was probably a great factor in buuilding an efficient state.

    Yes, the contract was breached – much more seriously with Vichy than with the Dreyfus Affair, since Vichy wrote and applied antijewish laws. As far as law is concerned, no breach is going on presently. But if we think of a social breach such as the one that took place during the Dreyfus Affair, the answer is yes: the devil is out of the box, antisemitism is no more censored, though it still takes the trouble to cloth itself as radical antizionism.

    But already, in 1980, I remember a conversation with a colleague whom I had met in Vietnam (of all places!) and who did not hide his deep conviction that Israel was wrong, because the jews were not a people, but a religion.

    The discussion ended fast after that… I do not have, and did not have at that time, arguments against such a statement, which seems well beyond rationality for me.

  69. E.G. says:

    Michelle,

    Comte de Clermont-Tonnerre’s « tout pour les Juifs en tant qu’individus, rien pour les Juifs en tant que nation » is still present.

    I guess that this is one factor that contributed to S. Sand’s book’ success.

  70. E.G. says:

    incognito,

    Bingo: numbers (you’ll have to overcome your reluctance to reading French ;-) — knowing it’s from Israel might help…)

    http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1278860675578&pagename=JFrench%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

    http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=1&cid=1278860671859&pagename=JFrench%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

  71. Michelle Schatzman says:

    E.G.,

    Yes, the Comte de Clermont-Tonnerre is still with us, but one of the consequences of the Vichy breach of contract is that there are now quite a few arguments against the idea that the state will always protect the Jews of France.

    Thermidor: hmmmm, the author of the article you linked to is not aware of another shade of that word. “Une ambiance thermidorienne” describes a bloody counter-revolution, not only a cooling down after a leftist dictatorship.

  72. Eliyahu says:

    It is my view that shlomo sand was trying to vindicate Stalin’s claim of circa 1914, that the Jews of his time were not a nation. Stalin recognized that the Jews had been an important nation during the Roman imperial period and before. But in his own time, the Jews were not a nation. Sand may also have written his book on assignment with a generous advance offered by those who do such things. Sand grew up a Communist, which is info usually withheld from readers. But I believe that his personal, emotional motive for writing the book was vindicate Stalin. See link:

    http://cifwatch.com/2010/04/27/shlomo-sands-lies-dont-go-away/#more-7060

  73. E.G. says:

    MaMichelle,

    Emmanuel Navon is an Oleh Yashan (not Vatik!) from France.

  74. E.G. says:

    Eliyahu,

    Why Sand wrote his rubbish is one thing.
    Why it’s been such a success (he was also awarded some prize for it) in France is another.

  75. incognito says:

    As far as law is concerned, no breach is going on presently.

    Well, there was an informal, implicit one. It’s accelerating with the increase of “youth” violence and the anti-Israel policy is a signal that things will further deteriorate.

    who did not hide his deep conviction that Israel was wrong, because the jews were not a people, but a religion.

    Well, you see, that’s a problem even the jews have not entirely resolved yet. It’s been a source of conflict ever since I made aliyah in 1961. The current brouhaha over the conversion law is just the umpteenth in a series.

    If jewishness is determined by mother, how is that not racial, but religius? And if it is religion, is there such a thing as a secular jew? And if so, why does a non-jew convert via religion?

    But I believe that his personal, emotional motive for writing the book was vindicate Stalin.

    You gotta be real dim to try and vindicate Stalin these days. But then his whole book demonstrates that. What is scary is that these people are allowed to “teach” young minds.

    Why it’s been such a success (he was also awarded some prize for it) in France is another.

    Academics in general are very sensitive to fashions when it comes to research funds and publishing. And quite supple to conform.

  76. Philippe says:

    Michelle,
    I was wrong on the convention. Still I think that after gathering the Sanhedrin, Napoleon was the one instrumental to give french jews full citizenship.

    EG. Good point and I believe ( I have read excerpts but just ordered the book itself) that Taguieff shows the mechanism and processes of the new anti-semitism rising in the west.

  77. Michelle Schatzman says:

    Philippe,

    you did not read the wikipedia article which mentioned the “décret infâme”, did you? In fact, the result of this decision diminished the rights of the Jews!

    Also, after the Sanhedrin, rabbis were not paid as civil servants, in opposition to what catholic priests and protestant ministers got. They got paid much later in fact : in 1831 only, under Louis-Philippe, did the rabbis get the same salary as them, establishing formally the equality between the three recongnized religions in France.

    Napoléon imposed the attribution of a name and surname to the Jews.

    So Napoléon must appear as a rather contrasted character to french Jews. There was a celebration in 2007 of the 200 years of the Sanhédrin, and all these problems were tackled interestingly. Have a look at

    http://www.akadem.org/sommaire/themes/histoire/9/1/module_1651.php (video)

    and

    http://www.akadem.org/sommaire/themes/histoire/9/1/module_2918.php (video)

    by respected academics.

  78. Philippe says:

    I had not but just did (speed reading). Of course many steps forward and a few step backward. I was really focusing on the historical trend that was achieved at that time, which overall meant an incredible progress.

  79. incognito says:

    Revealing French indicator:

    http://www.city-journal.org/2010/eon0720td.html

    Also, must read:

    Israel is a Normal Country. But Normal Countries Are Becoming an Endangered Species
    http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/2010/07/israel-is-normal-country-but-normal.html

  80. Eliyahu says:

    yes, EG, why did shlomo sand get such a good reception, especially in France, to the point that he won an award?? His book must have fulfilled an emotional need for many of the middle-brow intellectuals who bought it, who voted for the prize, and who took him to their hearts.

    Did I you tell you of the Belgian phoolosophy prof whom I met here in Jerusalem?? After saying a lot of foolish and false things about events here in the 20th and 21st centuries, showing how little real history he knew, I suggested that he study the subject seriously. He said, I am already doing that. I then asked, What are you reading? Shlomo Sand, he said, as if Sand were a serious expert on anything but his own bank account.

  81. Philippe says:

    Eliyahu.

    I am flabbergasted that no one has yet questioned Sand’s very un-scientific approach.

  82. incognito says:

    Eliyahu,

    With what intellectual tools would academics just like Sand assess the validity of scholarship? Were they ever endowed with such tools?

    I am flabbergasted that no one has yet questioned Sand’s very un-scientific approach.

    I am usually flabbergasted if I come upon valid questioning from current academics. It’s quite rare.

  83. [...] Go here to see the original: Augean Stables » Ignoring Taguieff: Al Durah, Judeophobia, and the … [...]

  84. E.G. says:

    Philippe,

    Sand’s “thesis” was challenged by at least one of his Israeli colleagues — a History professor — in the pages of Haaretz. I’ll try to find the ref. later.

    But the “funniest” and least known fact is that the whole thing was born during an exchange between Sand and a colleague of his (Nir Baram) with Ben-Dror Yemini on the Maariv pages (in Hebrew) in May 2005. Sand then set alone to write his pamphlet, “forgetting” Yemini’s couter-points…
    Hebrew readers can read one of the pieces here:
    http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART/934/400.html

  85. E.G. says:

    Regarding French Judaism, Shmuel Trigano’s analysis is worth considering:
    http://www.covenant.idc.ac.il/fr/vol1/issue2/trigano.html
    (There’s an English version of it too)

    And
    http://www.terredisrael.com/wordpress/?p=98

  86. Michelle Schatzman says:

    I believe that Trigano is right in his analysis of the Mitterrand years, when the french jewry was suddenly pictured as some kind of well-integrated community of immigrants.

    I am less sure about his predictions. Regardless, I believe that France will be eventually left with only two kinds of Jews: the completely assimilated and the ghettoized. People falling in between will feel too uncomfortable to stay here.

    So, we shall see…

  87. andrew says:

    Michelle,

    I know a third kind: commuters. More precisely, people of
    a certain age and strong convictions who have recently
    settled in Israel while keeping some interests or real estate in France. On the other hand, the worst is not always certain, and I have certainly breathed more easily since Chirac’s departure. Do you believe that
    the fact that Sarkozy is not a fanatic anti-Israeli may be part of the genuine hatred he seems to inspire in many segments of France ? Yes, the French media are hopeless, but I have been pleasantly surprised by a small number of recent judiciary decisions related to
    the Karsenty vs France2 affair. To sum it up, I am
    reasonably pessimistic only.

  88. Michelle Schatzman says:

    Andrew,

    it is unclear that Sarkozy is as pro-israeli as he pledged he would be when he campaigned. I am pretty sure, nevertheless that somewhere in the back of some rather dirty unconscious, Sarkozy is hated for having a jewish grandfather and for slowing down (somewhat) the proarab foreign policy of France.

    But one does not need this kind of motivation to consider that Sarkozy is not a serious politician. He is rather incoherent, he lacks sensitivity to what the majority thinks, he does not follow problems.

    Unfortunately, for now, the competition is worse.

  89. incognito says:

    Sand then set alone to write his pamphlet, “forgetting” Yemini’s couter-points…

    The art of the ideologue masquerading as scholar.

    Regardless, I believe that France will be eventually left with only two kinds of Jews: the completely assimilated and the ghettoized.

    And when the tipping point of islamization is reached, will these 2 groups be left alone?

    Do you believe that
    the fact that Sarkozy is not a fanatic anti-Israeli may be part of the genuine hatred he seems to inspire in many segments of France ?

    The main danger is fear of the new overlords, jew hatred only makes it a bit easier.

    How many can afford commuting?

  90. incognito says:

    Andrew,

    Exactly right.

    He seems to be in the same situation Chirac was at the end of his cadence: written off.

  91. E.G. says:

    Andrew and incognito,

    The commuters I already mentioned in #61 ;-) are a growing number (people don’t get younger…). Not many, but then, the proportion of good Jewish boys who’ve become Doctors, Lawers, Bankers, entrepreneurs… has always been disproportionate, n’est-ce pas?

    When I lay my hand on some stats — will do as I did with the Olim.

    The art of the ideologue masquerading as scholar.

    Mamichelle’s indulgence is contagious!
    The guy is a charlatan.

  92. incognito says:

    From Paris:

    Why Does the Decline of Islam Have to Fall on Us?
    by Nidra Poller
    http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/67005/sec_id/67005

  93. incognito says:

    The commuters I already mentioned in #61 ;-) are a growing number (people don’t get younger…).

    These are the rich. How about the less so? And really is commuting evidence of jewish identification, or fear of anti-semitism?

    Not many, but then, the proportion of good Jewish boys who’ve become Doctors, Lawers, Bankers, entrepreneurs… has always been disproportionate, n’est-ce pas?

    These are also the people who tend to think their status will protect them.

    The guy is a charlatan.

    Unfortunately, there’s too many of them and they are not considered as such.

  94. E.G. says:

    No, not the rich. Well off who can’t afford losing their clients (earned through some 30 years’ efforts).

    I think of commuters as risk-avoiders. Ensuring their family’s safety and providing for it. And one doesn’t relocate one’s family to Zion just like that. It’s a protective measure that also has a Zionist feature. IOW, if the commuters could, they’d relocate their offices/cabinets/business to Israel.

  95. incognito says:

    Well off who can’t afford losing their clients (earned through some 30 years’ efforts).

    From where I sit well off is rich.

    IOW, if the commuters could, they’d relocate their offices/cabinets/business to Israel.

    Which means that it’ll take major shocks to get them to move.

  96. E.G. says:

    Well, they are in a sort of a perpetuum mobile…

  97. incognito says:

    Another factor:

    Judaism’s Price
    http://momentmagazine.wordpress.com/2010/07/23/judaisms-price/

    Looks like jewishness may be for the well off.

  98. incognito says:

    Does the US fare any better than EU when it comes to anti-semitism?

    From Stephen Walt’s Mailbag
    http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2010/07/from-stephen-walts-mailbag/60306/

  99. Eliyahu says:

    ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ There were hidden costs of going after Jews in Britain. In France, the media agitation starting over the al-Durah hoax incited much of the Arab population, leading to years of car burnings and then the country-wide riots of November-December 2005 –which is still going on. Apparently, much of the leadership in France doesn’t yet realize how the incitement against Israel boomerangs against daily life in France, or maybe they don’t care. It seems that the Arab violence in France cost the socialists the presidency in 2002 [also boosting LePen], and later helped the socialists to lose again to Sarkozy in 2007. To be sure, Sarkozy has been a disappointment in many ways but his foreign minister, the smug, self-satisfied jackass Kouchner, a certified humanitarian no less, was very quick to condemn Israel over the Turkish Thug Armada incident of 31 May, which could only encourage the jeunes Jeunes [or Racaille, as Sarko called them], telling them that they and their cause were basically in the right and that Jews and Israel were bad, which could only encourage more violence by the Jeunes.

    For example, As you probably know, there were riots and the usual car burnings in Grenoble in France over the weekend after a group of Jeunes [originaires de la Jeunesse Seoudite] had robbed a casino on the outskirts of town and then were chased by police. According to the prefect, one of the robbers shot at the police car. Then the cops shot and one of the Jeunes was killed. This led to the commandeering of a tram car. Passengers were told to get off [how kind and thoughtful!!]. Rioting and car burning ensued. & & & &

  100. Eliyahu says:

    Incog, EG, and others who read Hebrew.

    Caroline Glick is interviewed in the magazine section of Maqor Rishon [Dyuqan] on the state of higher “education” in the USA. It is rather comforting for those of us who could never have gotten into Harvard. As she describes it, a Harvard education today is a PC joke.

  101. Cynic says:

    incognito,

    Heh! I commented, which has not appeared, on that link of yours in #101 with a crit of the following:
    Instead, Jews should consider what Arnold Eisen, chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary who paid $4,000 in synagogue dues this year, proposes: downsizing individual communities by making cross-denominational alliances and sharing Rabbis and other staff.

    by saying something, can’t remember exactly, to the effect that it seems that some think of their Jewish Synagogue ritual like members of the Lincoln Centre accustomed to swapping of conductors and soloists with seasonal changes and with as much contact with the members of the orchestra.

    How can a Rabbi have any relationship with a community on a spiritual and social level if he is constantly on the move?
    But I forget that today the Rabbi is merely a speaker with a teleprompter regurgitating words without any underlying meaning to help those in need of advice to get through the hurly burly of life forcing them to spend thousands on psychiatrists instead.
    Most of them should run for congress or the senate for their partisan ideology.

  102. Cynic says:

    Eliyahu,

    A link to your #104 would be appreciated.

  103. incognito says:

    Apparently, much of the leadership in France doesn’t yet realize how the incitement against Israel boomerangs against daily life in France, or maybe they don’t care.

    I think this has it backwards. French leadership know very well the cost on France, that’s why they are scared shitless of the violence which they lost control over. That’s why their policies are anti-Israel. They try to solve their problem by appeasing the muslim via anti-Israel policies.

    but his foreign minister, the smug, self-satisfied jackass Kouchner, a certified humanitarian no less, was very quick to condemn Israel over the Turkish Thug Armada incident

    Exactly. And he and the italian FM were very explicit that they were doing it to prevent riots.

  104. incognito says:

    It is rather comforting for those of us who could never have gotten into Harvard. As she describes it, a Harvard education today is a PC joke.

    Not only Harvard, but everywhere you look.

    But this fails to understand the purpose of Harvard schooling: it was never to get an education, but rather to schmooze with the beautiful (read: rich) people, develop contacts and have a piece of paper saying Harvard.

    And it is not comforting, because America has collapsed in large part due to the absence of education.

  105. incognito says:

    Cynic,

    You have to understand that jewish life in America is not really about jewishness, but about social identification, not very different than Harvard for the goyim. It’s also very status oriented, with some sort of “symbolic obligation” (for lack of a better term). And the richer the community, the more symbolic.

    I immediately realized this as soon as I got to the US for my graduate studies and tried to connect to the jewish community.

  106. Eliyahu says:

    The link to Maqor Rishon is below. However, it seems to me that the weekend’s edition is not available as yet. The latest weekend edition is not available. I will correct myself. The interview with Caroline Glick is in the Yoman section, not the Dyuqan.

    http://www.jtimes.co.il

  107. Eliyahu says:

    Incog, I think that you’re right that the joint Spanish-French-Italian statement mentioned the fear of riots implicitly or explicitly. That does not make it a just or truthful statement at all, does it?

    But let’s be thankful for little things. The previous Italian FM under Prodi was the Demo-Commie, Massimo D’Alema, who came to Lebanon after the summer of 2006 war and spoke of the Hizbullah as if it were Lebanon. He could not or would not see that most Lebanese did not support Hizbullah or want its domination, not to mention the crimes of the Hizb against Israel and our civilian population.

    http://ziontruth.blogspot.com/2006/08/follies-of-international-diplomacy.html

    I wonder if our friend Barbieri has any insight about d’Alema and his “Democratic Party” to share with us. To be brief, D’Alema was a long time Commie in the Italian CP. Then he saw the light and transformed his faction of the CPI into the “Democratic Party” [partito democratico]. Meanwhile, the other faction of the CPI founded the Rifondazione Communista, or some such [sort of meaning Refounding Communism]. These guys are true blue fanatics, not as slick as D’Alema, they keep just about all the old slogans. They too were in Prodi’s coalition. That crazy female journalist, Sgrena, taken captive in Iraq, as I recall, wrote/writes for Il Manifesto, the paper of the Rifondazione. With all the crazies pulling in several directions, no wonder that Prodi could not maintain his coaltion.

  108. incognito says:

    Re Lee Smith and his article on mainstreaming anti-semitism:

    [MUST READ!!!!!!!!]
    The Case of Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer
    by Pejman Yousefzadeh
    http://newledger.com/2010/07/the-case-of-stephen-walt-and-john-mearsheimer/

  109. incognito says:

    That does not make it a just or truthful statement at all, does it?

    Did I argue that?? In fact, who in his right mind would deem statements by EU politicians, part. of the left, truthful and just?

    I was just arguing that they are afraid of the muslims and they delude themselves that by anti-Israel policies they will save their ass.

    And it says something about the state of the world if we consider the fearful of muslims progress vs. the hateful of Israel and jews.

  110. incognito says:

    Apropos collapse of education:

    [MUST WATCH]
    Uncommon Knowledge with Charles Hill
    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/07/026826.php

    This addresses a very small part of it.

  111. incognito says:

    Fitzgerald: Muslim Triumphalism: “It’s Over. It’s Over. We’re Here. Get Used To It.”
    http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/07/fitzgerald-muslim-triumphalism-its-over-its-over-were-here-get-used-to-it.html

  112. Michelle Schatzman says:

    Eliyahu, I completely disagree with your #103.

    There were hidden costs of going after Jews in Britain. In France, the media agitation starting over the al-Durah hoax incited much of the Arab population, leading to years of car burnings and then the country-wide riots of November-December 2005 –which is still going on.

    Car burnings had started before that. The muslim population in France has satellite dishes: it does not need the french media if it wants to feed its favorite hatreds. The Al Durah hoax is but one small part of the picture – unfortunately. Lots of media portray the IDF as baby killers.

    Apparently, much of the leadership in France doesn’t yet realize how the incitement against Israel boomerangs against daily life in France, or maybe they don’t care.

    They do, they care, and their message to the Jews is “stay quiet, do not react or things will get worse”.
    It seems that the Arab violence in France cost the socialists the presidency in 2002 [also boosting LePen], and later helped the socialists to lose again to Sarkozy in 2007.

    Incorrect on both counts: in 2002, the socialists lost the presidency (1) because they let emerge a large number of candidates from the left, while the first round selects the two best candidates (2) because Jospin made a very bad campaign, where the issues of violence was minimized, but it was only a small portion of the bad decisions he took.
    In 2007, the socialists lost because Ségolène Royal got less votes than Nicolas Sarkozy, and I guess that the issue of violence was not at all central in her loss. Sarkozy was a smarter politician, and in particular, he succeeded in attracting votes from the people who usually vote for the extreme-right. Personnally, I could not stand Royal, and I particularly hated the argument that I should vote for her, because she is a mom. I just don’t need one more mom, and anyone who uses this kind of argument is unfit for government.

    To be sure, Sarkozy has been a disappointment in many ways but his foreign minister, the smug, self-satisfied jackass Kouchner, a certified humanitarian no less, was very quick to condemn Israel over the Turkish Thug Armada incident of 31 May, which could only encourage the jeunes Jeunes [or Racaille, as Sarko called them],

    Not only Sarkozy, but many people call these “jeunes” racaille, and they even call themselves “caillera”, using the popular “verlan” deformation of words, where one puts the end before the beginning.
    telling them that they and their cause were basically in the right and that Jews and Israel were bad, which could only encourage more violence by the Jeunes.

    More like a new instance of s..t in pants. Think of the story of the chinese demonstration in Belleville: the police has instructions not to fight the “racailles”. Quite terrifying.

    For example, As you probably know, there were riots and the usual car burnings in Grenoble in France over the weekend after a group of Jeunes [originaires de la Jeunesse Seoudite] had robbed a casino on the outskirts of town and then were chased by police. According to the prefect, one of the robbers shot at the police car. Then the cops shot and one of the Jeunes was killed. This led to the commandeering of a tram car. Passengers were told to get off [how kind and thoughtful!!]. Rioting and car burning ensued.

    Not only that, but also a group of gypsy thugs devastated the center of a small town called Saint-Aignan in the center-west of France, after one of their friends had been shot down by a gendarme. Thery burnt cars, shops and one or two buildings, they sawed down very old trees, and the gendarmerie let things happen for two or three hours without interference. Now, a few people have been arrested, and maybe some change of policy is in the air. There is a good article here :

    http://www.causeur.fr/ne-dormez-plus-braves-gens,6960

    and in particular, the author remarks that if thugs do not agree to be arrested, it is because they have lost the notion that jail protects them against the law of Lynch.

  113. Cynic says:

    Michelle,

    They do, they care, and their message to the Jews is “stay quiet, do not react or things will get worse”.

    So similar in intent to what the Jews in Britain and its colonies where brought up to believe; Shhhh, keep quiet and it will go away. Don’t make any noise and they will not notice us!
    Running away from a problem does not solve it.
    As a counter one need look at the Jewish communities in Brazil where making a noise has helped and they are certainly not as “humiliated” as European Jews are.

  114. incognito says:

    Michelle,

    You’re most likely right.

    As to policy changes in the air, I very much doubt it for the reason Fitzgerald states in his article I linked to above.

  115. incognito says:

    Martin Kramer: ‎”Quantifying happiness isn’t an easy task. The Gallup World Poll went about it by surveying thousands of respondents in 155 countries, between 2005-2009.” Israel places 8th worldwide in percentage of persons “thriving” (62%). The US is in 14th place (57%), UK in 17th place (54%), Germany in 33d place (43%), France in 44th place (35%), Palestinian territories in 96th place (14%), Turkey in 103d place (13%).

  116. Michelle Schatzman says:

    @Cynic,

    did I say I agree to the french government’s policy re. antisemitism in France?

  117. Michelle Schatzman says:

    @ incog,

    it is particularly difficult to quantify happiness, because a national culture might systematically come up with all sorts of pessimistic assessments. It is the case of France.

    Moreover, in France, their are some areas, in particularly the city where I live, where the custom is to hide your wealth…

    Typical french people are rather going to complain about their real misfortune than about their no less real fortune – it is a cultural trait. Similarly the typical US citizen will boast about his success – it is part of the american dream.

    Moreover, one has to translate words relative to happiness.

    In any case, I’d like to know more about the methodology of the poll…

  118. incognito says:

    As a social scientist believe you me I am well aware of the traps in assessing something like happiness.

    However, there is SOME significance to the differences in self-reported happiness in the study.

  119. Cynic says:

    Michelle,
    Firstly I did not imply that you agree to govt., policy but just showed the similarity in behaviour of the dictated to the inculcated of a different European state and those it occupied, as opposed to South American Jews not inhibited enough to not demand their slice of the “constitution”.

    it is particularly difficult to quantify happiness, ….

    Happiness comes to me when I’m secure and also when I’m buoying in schadenfreude. :-)
    But there is a trait amongst Jews to not invoke the “Evil Eye” by admitting to things positive in case it gets jealous of one’s success in life.
    Just about every day I hear a Ptu, ptu, ptu where it cannot be avoided admitting to a lovely grandchild, a success in the family, whatever, and to the audience happiness exits stage left under a cloud of superstition.

  120. [...] a memento of her contribution, this was her last substantive comments here: Another consideration: it is much better to fight people who think like Hezbollah and Hamas, if [...]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>