Olivier Melnick

August 8, 2019 By Olivier Melnick Leave a Comment

Can We Really Co-Exist Today?

Many people have been exposed to the bumper sticker that says COEXIST using symbols of various world religions and worldviews to spell out the word. The letter “c” is a crescent moon representing Islam. The letter “o” is the peace symbol. The letter “e” is a male/female symbol. The letter “x” is the Star of David representing Judaism. The letter “i” is a pagan/Wiccan symbol. The letter “s” is a Chinese yin-yang symbol, and the letter “t” is a cross representing Christianity. The implied message is that no matter what or who we believe in or even if we don’t believe in anything, we should be able to co-exist. Philosophically, it has merit and as humans, we ought to be able to co-exist on our shared planet. In a sense, we are co-existing by virtue of existing and sharing the real estate that earth provides for us. But maybe our co-existing stops at that level, and maybe, just maybe, this is not such a bad idea!

Co-existence requires tolerance, respect and compassion from all parties. These virtues are very biblical, even when people failed to make that connection. Outside of defending ourselves from our enemies, the Bible teaches us to respect our fellow men. The very fact that over the centuries people have twisted the Scriptures to justify their actions doesn’t make the biblical record into a manifesto justifying a destructive agenda.

Scripture tells us that the greatest commandment is to love God, and the second one is to love one another, “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” Yeshua even took it one step higher, saying that we are even to love our enemies. In Yeshua, we see the example of obeying the authorities, overcoming evil with good and standing for justice and healing for the helpless. These strong ethics have long been a strong foundation for Western civilization, even though the freedoms they have rested on have more recently been eroding.

Now, it seems that the group that is targeted the most is the Jewish people. To a degree, we are targeted by all the letters of the Coexist acronym; radical Islamists, liberals, LGBTQ, atheists and even some Christians. While each of these groups can and have displayed anti-Jewish sentiment, the most lethal is from Islam. People continue to be scared of saying it like it is, but the vast majority of the recent deaths in the Jewish communities of the world are from people who at the very least call themselves Muslims.

How do we co-exist when one party worships death and the other party values and respects life? It is literally impossible unless the meaning of co-existence becomes redefined, which is exactly what radical Islam is trying to do. If tolerance becomes a one-way street, we are then forced into tolerating an ideology that is foreign to western values. In essence, we are tolerating the intolerant, and that leads nowhere but down the spiral of civilizational demise. So, no, I don’t believe we can co-exist unless we share similar values.

When I moved to the United States from France in the mid-1980s, I was looking forward to integrating into the American way of life and American culture and customs. I eventually became an American citizen, even though in the privacy of my own home, I enjoy French food, music, movies, literature, customs and language. I can c0-exist in America as a French expat, even though I am legally American now. My co-existence is based on the respect of others and the price I place on human life and dignity (all of them biblical values by the way.)

When I say that we cannot co-exist, some will quickly succumb to the temptation of labeling me a racist. That’s inevitable, but that is also inaccurate. The only group that I believe we can not co-exist with is radical Islam, and they have proved over and over that they don’t play well with others. But, please don’t call an Islamophobe a racist, because ISLAM IS NOT A RACE! Islam is an ideology that includes a religion among other things. There are Muslims all over the world, and their ethnic origins have nothing to do with their indoctrination or lack of. I also do not want my statement to be seen as an invitation to exclude, expel or exterminate. This was done to my people in the 1930s and 1940s, and we know it didn’t end well. We just need to be more careful about what we allow people to get away with.

I am greatly concerned about the lack of discernment that our world is showing. I am not even speaking of biblical discernment here, but simply of the ability to detect if people mean what they say and say what they mean. If Islam is indeed the religion of peace, where are the millions of “moderate’ Muslims when a voice needs to be heard to fight anti-Semitism? Radical Islam has given other Muslims a bad rep, but that could easily be rectified if the “other Muslims” would speak up against the abusers. I just don’t see it happening except in a very few cases, and I mean a handful!

To quote a Russian proverb that was made famous in English by Ronald Reagan, “Trust, but verify!” I want to play well with others and I want to give them the benefit of the doubt. Forgive me for checking their intentions. I want to co-exist, but I am not sure we really can anymore, at least not in the pure sense of the term.

July 20, 2019 By Olivier Melnick Leave a Comment

Anti-Semitism Clearly Acknowledged at DOJ Summit, Now What?

A Summit on combating anti-Semitism was held at the Justice Department in Washington, DC on July 15, 2019. The one-day summit was filled with presentations and panel discussions on various topics such as anti-Zionism, the Boycott, Divestment and Sanction movement (BDS), anti-Semitism and the First Amendment, Campus anti-Semitism and others. A myriad of experts was present to provide the audience with exposés on the various contemporary iterations of anti-Semitism.

The day started with an opening statement by Attorney General Bill Barr. His opening remarks went straight to the heart of the problem as he said, “I am deeply concerned about the rise in hate crimes and political violence that we have seen over the past decade. And this trend has included a marked increase in reported instances of anti-Semitic hate crimes. We can all agree this trend is intolerable. We must have zero tolerance for violence that is motivated by hatred for our fellow citizens whether based on race, sex, or creed. Anti-Semitic violence is especially pernicious because it targets both Jewish ethnic identity and religious practice.”Mr. Barr eloquently and passionately expressed his and this administration’s frustration over the rise in anti-Semitic acts over the past 10 years. He is right in saying that it is intolerable, and yet, we now have several new members of Congress who tolerate it and are trying hard to make it become the new normal.

The uniqueness of the new anti-Semitism is that it is a poison spewed at people ethnically, spiritually AND geographically. It isn’t just racism, religious bigotry or geo/political discrimination, it is all three. This makes it very hard to fight on all fronts from so many fields like academic, political, religious, entertainment and government.

For the longest time now, anti-Semitism has been either under-reported, inaccurately reported or simply not reported. I first started speaking and writing about it twenty years ago when people couldn’t or refused to see the handwriting on the wall. What took us so long? Bill Barr said that anti-Semitism was akin to cancer, and I agree. I have used that analogy for a long time now. Barr saw the danger when he stated “I think of the various forms of anti-Semitism as very much like different kinds of cancer. A healthy body with a strong immune system can have success in preventing cancers from emerging and spreading. But if the immune system weakens cancer can emerge. Some might be localized. But others can rapidly metastasize and become systematic. Like a physical body, a body politic must have an immune system that resists anti-Semitism and other forms of hatred. “

The Summit was good at identifying the problem, as others have partially done in the recent past. Now we must move into action to rectify, stop and prevent anti-Semitism from growing bigger. Mr. Barr described it as cancer and rightfully so. But nobody would ever think of leaving cancer unchecked. Unfortunately, the cancer of anti-Semitism is no longer localized. It is almost fully metastasized. Is it too late to eradicate? Probably not, but like with all cancer that has become aggressive, treatment must also be aggressive. There are different methods to fight cancer, as well as various levels of intensity with each method. A powerful analogy can be drawn between cancer and anti-Semitism as one looks at the various types of surgical procedures available:

• Preventive Surgery (removing pre-cancerous tissue): This can still work on a younger generation in schools and universities. They need to be educated with the facts about the Middle East in order to counter the lies of BDS and Campus Intifada.
• Diagnostic Surgery (removing tissue for cancer testing): This also can be utilized to test the level of indoctrination of students or members of various organizations. Surveys can work well towards that goal. Although unfortunately, the data is already in!
• Debulking Surgery (removing a portion of a tumor when the whole area cannot be safely cleared): This is not the best option as partial clearing of an issue often allows for it to re-occur, sometimes even in a stronger way. Planing on passing a resolution on anti-Semitism, but changing the verbiage to racism at the last minute was an example of that type of failure.
• Curative Surgery (removes the localized tumor): This might work in some isolated cases of anti-Semitism where a person can be disciplined, re-assigned or fired if necessary. The Florida principal who couldn’s say that the Holocaust was a fact and was re-assigned was a perfect example (although it is uncertain if his re-assignment will still keep away from a position of educational authority.)
• Palliative Surgery (relieves discomfort while not curing advanced stages of cancer): Encouraging people who have been victims of anti-Semitism without really facing the problem head-on.

I have seen a lot of people speak-up against anti-Semitism in the last two decades. For people in the general population, we must speak up, attend rallies and conferences, sign petitions, all to show our support of Israel and our rejection of any and all forms of anti-Semitism. At the government level though, they MUST DO MORE! The recent Summit identified a problem and exposed its dangers to the American People. Now, laws must be passed AND enforced to truly discourage this kind of bigotry and discrimination.

When you identify that you have a problem and start going to AA meetings, as you go through each of the steps, you have to make an effort to refrain from your destructive actions and be true to your accountability partner to be successful.

Step one, America has identified that anti-Semitism is a real problem, now we have to show that we truly want to stop it by making some changes on campuses, within organizations and even possibly within Congress, otherwise, it will keep poisoning the Jewish community to death. Oh, and America… Your accountability partner is that very Jewish community. Let’s get busy!

July 12, 2019 By Olivier Melnick Leave a Comment

History can be offensive, but it shouldn’t be revised!

For as long as man has existed, history has continually been written and has become the ever-growing foundation for our civilization. The ink used to pen the annals of history can be blood, sweat or tears or a combination of any of the three. The important aspect of history is a simple one; it happened at some point in time and it will remain anchored on the timeline of humankind at that very same place until the end of days. So, why is it that people try desperately to re-write, adapt, alter or even completely erase events of the past?

In surveying the last 2,000 years of post-biblical history, it is not difficult to find events that beyond the shadow of a doubt, show the severe depravity of man. The many documented wars within and between countries are some obvious examples. Additionally, many other tragedies have been added to the list. Genocides and ethnic cleansings abound. A very short list would include the Native American Genocide (the 1500s- 20th Century), Armenia (1915), Cambodia (1975), Rwanda (1990), Bosnia-Herzegovina (1992-1995), not to mention the Holocaust (1930s-1940s). Then there is slavery in America and Isalm’s concept of “dhimmitude” when a non-Muslim is tolerated and protected when he/she pays a tax in a Muslim country as a “dhimmi.” Unfortunately, almost every example cited above had something to do with religious beliefs and differences in one way or another.

None of the few tragic events of history that I just listed are denied by either side. Native Americans were massacred by pioneers over a period of time. Obviously, not all pioneers were killers and not all natives were killed, but within reason, the numbers are in, and nobody denies the veracity of these events. Nobody denies the Armenian Genocide. Nobody denies the ethnic cleansing that took place in Bosnia. Are people upset? They have the right to be! Are people ashamed? They should be! But nobody in their right mind will try to change the narrative in order to appease either side. So, why is there another set of rules for the Holocaust?

Germans are ashamed of the Holocaust. They have paid billions in reparation and restitution and continue to pay. Jews have moved on to rebuild but can never forget. Why are people offended by the Holocaust? Even worse, those who are offended are often people that had no connection to the catastrophe. They have no Jewish relatives and many were not even born when the tragedy occurred. So, for instance, when people in the United Kingdom say that the Holocaust isn’t taught in school because it is offensive to some. Who do they mean? Some are afraid that the topic might trigger an anti-Semitic backlash in the classroom from Muslim students. Most European countries have laws against Holocaust denial with various levels of monetary fines and imprisonment. Tragically, the United Kingdom is not of them.

Occasionally, someone will come on the scene and work really hard at trying to make a case debunking the Holocaust, like in the trial between Debra Lipstadt (Holocaust Historian) and David Irving (Holocaust Denier.) For the most part, the Western world has not denied the Holocaust or any other genocide, but things are changing. I guess we could expect anti-Semites in America, being from the left, the right or political Islam, to try to rewrite history or water it down. We cannot stop them, and as long as it is properly taught in our schools, we should be fine. Well, I guess there is no guarantee of that either!

In early July, about one year after he made a statement about the Holocaust, a Florida school principal was let go. He had emailed a student’s mother stating:” I can’t say the Holocaust is a factual, historical event because I am not in a position to do so as a school district employee.” Let’s get something straight here. We are not arguing about Jewish casualties being exactly 6,000,000, a little more or a little less. We are not arguing about the exact number of Death Camps. We are not even arguing about the exact involvement of perpetrators versus by-standers and if they are equally accountable. We are arguing the validity of the entire “Final Solution to the Jewish question” from 1938-45. The principal also said that “not everyone believes that the Holocaust happened.” What a shame that an educator responsible for a whole body of students would be such a coward. Eventually, he was let go, and while some headlines mentioned that he was fired, he simply was “reassigned” to another district position. If I didn’t know better, it would almost sound like a promotion! Someone who doubts that the Holocaust ever happened shouldn’t hold a position in our educational system, period!

Currently, anti-Semitism is lurking at almost every corner across the planet. BDS is working hard to demonize Israel. We now have several members of congress who are openly anti-Semitic. The last thing we need is for the Holocaust to be altered or taught as a possible myth in our school system. When do you stop when you start re-writing history?

June 24, 2019 By Olivier Melnick Leave a Comment

Why Do We Have to Explain Concentration Camps in 2019?

New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) recently made a statement on Twitter that has garnered a lot of attention from both the Right and the Left. She said” The United States is running concentration camps on our southern borders, and that is exactly what they are…If that doesn’t concern you…I want to talk to the people that are concerned enough with humanity to say that we should not…that NEVER AGAIN means something and that the fact that concentration camps are now an institutionalized practice in the home of the free is extraordinarily disturbing.”

She has received a lot of criticism almost immediately after her tweet and continues to experience the “aftershocks” or her seismic faux pas. People have accused her of undermining the horrors of the Holocaust, comparing the incomparable, being ignorant of the facts of history and of course, being anti-semitic. In my eyes, all these accusations have some validity, yet, I cannot help but wonder why in 2019 we have to explain what a Nazi concentration camp was and why nothing, at least in America, even comes close to them?

Only 80 years after the building and filling of Nazi concentration camps, and the horrors that they entailed, we should not have to explain what they were to anyone. That is of course if the Holocaust had continually and properly been taught in schools and universities. We are always going to run into the occasional nutcase denier of major historical events or conspiracy theorist, but with the proper world history education, they should be easy to spot and debunk. Today, sadly…Not so much! So, to defend the memory of Holocaust victims and their surviving families, we have to explain, compare and defend the meaning of “Concentration Camps.” Sad, but necessary!

One possible reason for ignorance is that people simply don’t care. The 21st century has catapulted people into a world of virtual self-gratification with very little needs for factual and historical truth. Between artificial intelligence, social networks and a postmodern approach to everyday life, people don’t see the need to live within reality anymore. To a degree, we all are invited to make our own reality, and it doesn’t have to fit a grand narrative such as the biblical worldview. It simply has to satisfy our desires, not even our needs. We rename things, we ignore the original meaning of things or worse, we ignore that events ever happened. But as much as people try to erase history, history is here to stay. History can be ignored or re-interpreted, but it cannot be erased.

Some will say that AOC didn’t really compare what takes place on our southern borders to the camps of the Holocaust because she never mentioned the words “German” or “Nazi” in her tweet. Unfortunately for her, she chose to politicize two words that put together, represent the timeless somber motto of the surviving global Jewish community; NEVER AGAIN! Once the word was out the connection was made, and since she has not recanted or apologized, it is hard to believe that she didn’t mean to draw some kind of parallel. Of course, comparing our current administration to a Fascist government added insult to injury. Furthermore, after using “Concentration Camps” and “Never Again!” in a political context, she received an invitation to visit Auschwitz with Edward Mossberg who survived the camps and offered to be her private guide. She declined. What a missed opportunity to rectify her faux pas. There are only two reasons for that, she is either too proud to learn and be corrected or too antisemitic to care. Maybe a bit of both. Interestingly enough, her reason for declining was a bizarre statement about the Far-Right trying to politicize the incident. She said’ “The last time you went on this trip it was reported that you also met w/ fringe Austrian neo-Nazi groups to talk shop, So I’m going to have to decline your invite. But thank you for revealing to all how transparently the far-right manipulates these moments for political gain.”

AOC and those who back her up like Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, fail to understand the many differences between Nazi concentration camps and ICE internment facilities. While I do not expect AOC to read my commentary and honestly compare the two, I hope that some people, not so keen on the differences, would take the time to compare. Here are just a few things that you will not find on our southern borders:

• Forced labor
• Starvation
• Electrified fences
• Beatings
• Tattooed identification number
• No bathrooms
• Firing squads
• No doctors

And that is only a few of the elements you would find in Nazi concentration camps. These camps were designed to corral Jews in large numbers and create a war forced labor contingency. The work conditions and lack of food and hygiene were such that they quickly became death camps, and that is even before the full implementation of the “Final Solution to the Jewish Question” with the running of places like Auschwitz-Birkenau. When the death camps were implemented, you could add these to the list:

• Gas chambers
• Crematoria
• Gruesome experiments on inmates including babies
• Long death marches in the snow

Yet, one of the most obvious differences between the Nazi Death Camps and ICE’s detention centers is how people got inside them. During the Holocaust years, the Nazi war machine was systematically rounding-up Jews, outside of Germany, all over Europe through the railway system. They [the Nazis] went out of their way to gather Jews, put them on trains and send them to the camps. Let me repeat myself…the people were hunted down to be put in forced labor camps and later in death camps…THEY WERE HUNTED DOWN!

The migrants of today, coming to America, for whatever reason they might have–and many do have valid reasons to come– are coming to our country knowing that they are going to have to come through the ICE system (as understaffed, overworked and beyond capacity as it is). They are coming through knowing that if they want to have a chance to stay in the USA legally, they have to go through the system. And when I say “They”, I mean anybody who wants to come to the USA, not just an ethnic group or religious group, anybody. They want to come to the USA for asylum and for a better life, and THEY ARE NOT HUNTED DOWN!

Could the “accommodations” be better on our borders? YES! But, please, do not compare ICE detention centers to Nazi concentration camps. By doing so, you are insulting the memory of the victims of the Holocaust, you are diminishing a world event that is already running the risk of sliding into oblivion, and you are politicizing a situation without any foundation to do so.

It is fascinating to me how the same group of people can from one side of their mouth state that maybe the Holocaust never happened or was grossly exaggerated, and from the other side of their mouth, use its terminology and history to validate their own agenda. Well, it’s not really fascinating, it’s more disturbing and despicable!

June 20, 2019 By Olivier Melnick Leave a Comment

The US Senate Antisemitism Resolution: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly!

On June 13, 2019, a joint resolution was introduced by Sens. Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, and Tim Kaine, a Democrat from Virginia, and on June 14, it passed unanimously! The resolution is a short document that unequivocally denounces antisemitism. It comes less than three months after the House brought another resolution of the sort, but changed the wording at the last minute to speak of “bigotry of all kinds” instead of clearly denouncing antisemitism. This is a bold and necessary move in the right direction at a time in our history when global antisemitism is increasing exponentially on a daily basis.

That resolution is definitely a move in the right direction. It uses words that cannot be misconstrued. The opening statement says ” Antisemitism is a unique form of prejudice stretching back millennia that attacks the equal humanity of the Jewish people.” It is indeed very unique and history’s longest lasting hatred against one specific group of people. We need to take a close look at that bi-partisan resolution that was just passed unanimously. Indeed, we need to look at the good, the bad and the ugly! Let’s start with the ugly.

What I think is very ugly, is the fact that we even have to pen such a resolution in 2019. How long will the Jewish people have to suffer unmerited persecution before the world wakes up to the reality of antisemitism? It is so despicable to have to come up with a resolution condemning antisemitism in all its forms, just a few months after a similar attempt was made, but watered down in its verbiage. It is pathetic that Senator Cruz would even have to list some of the myths that have been believed about the Jewish people. To be sure, I do not criticize Senator Cruz’ initiative, but rather the fact that he would even have to delineate what antisemitism has done over the last two millennia.

One of the reasons why such a resolution is needed, as Mr. Cruz so clearly stated is that “Unfortunately, we’re living in an era where the need for a strong and clear condemnation of antisemitism has become acute.” The world has become desensitized to the hatred of Israel and the Jewish people. Antisemitism is undergoing a transformation, a normalization that is making it more acceptable by the masses. How long before those who fight antisemitism become the very victims of the Jew haters? Not too long I am afraid. So now, let ‘s talk about the bad.

My goal is certainly not to denigrate the effort made by senators Cruz and Kaine, they are certainly very commendable. Yet, when I read the resolution, which is almost identical to what we call a “bill”, I see a great list of condemnations that are all on point, and an extremely short closing statement reading ” Resolved, That the United States condemns and commits to combatting all forms of antisemitism.” As commendable as the resolution is, its conclusion is weak and definitely open-ended. It goes without saying that the purpose of such a resolution is to “condemn” antisemitism. As to the commitment to “combatting all forms of antisemitism”, it sounds great, but these statements almost always remain that; statements! Condemning and combatting do go hand-in-hand, but few people end-up combatting.

If and when the bill becomes a law, then it can be to be enforced with all the consequences attached to its breaking. But, we are not there and we might never get there. Before it even has a chance of becoming a law, there should be some guidelines as too how people will be penalized, indicted and even convicted if and when they commit acts of antisemitism.

What the resolution fails to do is:

• Define the difference between antisemitism and freedom of speech.

• Define different levels of antisemitism such as thoughts, words or deeds. While the driving force behind it may be the same, there is a difference between calling someone a “dirty Jew” and throwing a Jew out the window as happened recently in France to Sarah Halimi,

• Define how the opponents of antisemitism will combat it. Real fines and real prison sentences need to be clearly established to deter potential perpetrators. Additionally, the law must be enforced when antisemitism acts are identified.

By now, you are probably asking yourself if there is anything left that would qualify as “good” in this resolution? The good in all of this is that we still have some politicians who care enough to speak up. They are not the majority, but they exist and they need to be recognized. It must be noted that support for Israel and a desire to fight antisemitism is easier to find among conservatives and evangelicals. This doesn’t mean that the fight is one-sided. The bi-partisan aspect of this new resolution would prove the opposite.

That some people would recognize the gravity of the situation is encouraging, but the road to the eradication of antisemitism is long and chaotic. Obstacles such as political correctness, multiculturalism or fear of offending “anything Islam” are constantly in the way. Senator Ted Cruz was heard, and the resolution was passed. Now comes the hard part, combatting the beast in ways that can be measured before that resolution becomes another obscure number in the crowded pantheon of political rhetoric.

Subscribe to our Daily Devotions

Archived Articles

Tags