The New Antisemitism

  • Home
    • Login
  • About the Author
  • Resources
    • Podcasts
    • Videos
  • Speaking Calendar
  • En Français
  • Shop
    • My account
    • Cart
  • Contact
Home » Muslim » Page 2

February 26, 2015 By Olivier Melnick Leave a Comment

Help us protect ourselves from the people who want to kill you!

Ôëàã Ñàóäîâñêîé ÀðàâèèRecently, the Saudis have made two very peculiar moves to protect their country from an ISIS invasion and/or Iran. It is interesting to note that we now have an apparently sharia compliant country trying to defend itself from a sharia enforcing state. Is there more than one way to abide by sharia law?

It is also worth noting that the brand of Islam known as Wahhabism or Salafism, that is the driving force behind the Islamic State was born within the borders of Saudi Arabia. Even though it is clear that Saudi Arabia has progressively distanced itself from the extremist brand of Wahhabism adopted by ISIS, the connection cannot be ignored. It would appear as if the pupil has surpassed the master.

First, it was recently officially announced by the Saudis that they had decided to build a 600 mile wall/fence on their northern border with Iraq to protect themselves from a possible ISIS invasion. Seeing how Iraqi forces have poorly responded to ISIS, the Saudis are getting concerned. But this isn’t a reaction based on the growing threat from the Islamic State since apparently the idea first came up almost a decade ago.

Then there is the most recent offer they made to Israel in regards to opening their air space for the IDF to use if they choose to strike Iran. Of course it wasn’t announced in those words and was only discussed behind closed doors with some European leaders. According to The Wall Street Journal : US and Arab diplomats say that, although Arab nations have avoided matching statements made by Israel, they share many of the same fears regarding a nuclear deal with Iran. While I can appreciate Saudi Arabia’s desire to protect their borders, I find both those moves to be quite hypocritical.

The 600 miles wall/fence isn’t necessarily a bad idea. I believe that any sovereign state is absolutely entitled to its own safety. This is a sad reflection on the times we live in, when countries have to isolate themselves for their own safety, but like someone once said: “It is what it is!” As Saudi Arabia is building their fence, why isn’t there any outrage about their isolationist attitude? Should we accuse them of Islamophobia, or better yet “ISISophobia”? Are they becoming an apartheid state? Of course, you see where I am going with this as nobody is finding the Saudi fence to be out of line, yet the Israeli fence is Islamophobic and driven by colonialism and an apartheid mentality. Give me a break, the Saudi fence AND the Israeli fence have the exact same purpose and that is sovereign protection of their citizens. Why the double standard?

Now let us consider the opening of the airspace over Saudi Arabia for the IDF to fly over he they decide to strike Iran. As the United States continue to flex under the Iranian arrogance, the whole world is wondering how soon Iran will be ready to go nuclear. It certainly appears to be a matter of when and not if. Iran just performed a military exercise days ago and destroyed a life-size replica of a US ship to show the world how capable and certainly willing they are to destroy the West. They now have missiles capable of reaching Europe and the United States. What are we waiting for?

Saudi Arabia doesn’t share a border with Iran but finds itself on the other side of the Persian Gulf and definitely vulnerable. They understand that the one country that can and might do something is Israel, so they are willing to open up their air space in case of a strike. They obviously have much to gain with that move. But wait, there is a catch! The Saudis expect Israel to promise progress in the Israeli/Palestinian “Peace talks” if they want air space access. Nothing has been specified regarding what kind of progress, but good will towards reconciliation must be shown.

Excuse me! Saudi Arabia wants Israel to get along with Hamas who pretty much lines up with much of ISIS’ ideology and wants nothing but the death of all Jews (first) and the West (next). Last September, at the United Nations, Netanyahu rightfully said: “ISIS and Hamas are branches from the same poisonous tree.” Reconciliation requires both sides to be willing to reconcile. One-sided reconciliation is abdication, and in Israel’s case, abdication to Hamas would mean instant suicide.

How hypocritical is it from the Saudis to ask Israel to negotiate with some of the same bloody murderers that they [the Saudis] are trying to protect themselves from? How can they keep a straight face and ask Israel to “Help us protect ourselves from the people who want to kill you!”

It might still come to the time when Israel flies over Saudi skies to strike Iran, and it could be a positive move for the whole region. This being said, it is time for the world to recognize that Israel isn’t the enemy but the only hope in the Middle East. Deep down, Saudi Arabia probably knows it, otherwise they wouldn’t open their air space to them, but they are not willing to make such a statement in the open.

I look at the Saudis and It reminds me of Doc Holliday in the movie Tombstone, when he said:“My hypocrisy only goes so far!”

Filed Under: Antisemitism, Featured-Post-1, ISIS, Israel, Middle East, Muslims Tagged With: Anti-Semitism, Fence, Iran, ISIS, Islam, Israel, Middle East, Muslim, Nuclear, Saudi Arabia, Sharia, United States

February 13, 2015 By Olivier Melnick 1 Comment

Equal Opportunity Vagueness Is a Real Danger!

 

hyper-cacherFrance is still trying to recover from the terrorist attacks of early January 2015. But it wasn’t just France that was affected, as many around the world are starting to realize that the danger of radical Islam isn’t specific to the Middle East and/or exclusive to the Islamic State. Our global community was hit. There is still a very long road ahead of us if we really care to defeat people with an ideology in line with that of ISIS. But at the very least, it is now impossible to ignore the danger.

Yet it is one thing to acknowledge a real danger and it is another to strategize and move forward to fight it. For the most part, the world is being forced to recognize the brutality and barbarism of the Islamic State, but few if any have made any progress in the war against that enemy. Its is quite mind boggling that some governments have yet to clearly label the Islamic State as a radical Islamic group. Leading the pack is the Obama administration whose vagueness regarding the Islamic State is a real danger.

We can all agree that the beheadings, crucifixions and burnings have placed the Islamic State to the forefront of our contemporary enemies, yet for any government to even hesitate in calling the group a radical Islamic terrorist group, is a grave mistake. Last September, in one of his addresses, President Obama declared that the Islamic State was neither Islamic nor a State. In regards to being a state, I would agree with Mr. Obama; the Islamic State might have declared a caliphate a few months back, but it doesn’t qualify them as being a bona fide state. They are more of an illicit economy as the Wall Street Journal labeled them.

On the other hand, they are every bit “Islamic” if we understand the meaning of the word Islamic. It is a misconception to believe that Islam is simply a religion of peace, because it is much more complex than that. Yes it is true and extremely important to understand that many Muslims want nothing to do with the Islamic State barbaric methods, yet any serious student of the Qur’an cannot ignore that it contains plenty of verses about violence, deception and killings of the infidels.

What we could call “orthodox Islam” is a lot closer to radical Islam that one might think. There simply are many Muslims who do not adhere to that kind of literal approach to the Qur’an. They have distanced themselves from the extremism taught in those verses. These people are what we call “moderate Muslims”, yet they are not even recognized by radical Muslims as true Muslims. I think that a better description would be to call them “cultural Muslims.”

To avoid calling the Islamic State “Islamic” is a vagueness that is far from accidental. It is deliberate! It remains uncertain if the choice is made out of fear of reprisals or simply because of political and/or ideological alignment. Nevertheless, the Islamic State IS Islamic from a Qur’anic standpoint.

Continuing with the vagueness that has stricken our President in the past few months, we also need to question his motives when he claims that the Paris Kosher Market attacks were random attacks. In an interview with VOX in the last few days, Mr. Obama didn’t identify the victims as Jews but simply as”a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris.” Of course, the fact that Amédy Coulibaly (the killer) entered a “kosher” store, said that he was linked to Islamic State and killed the people inside because they were Jewish was purely anecdotal and I guess irrelevant! What an insult to the Jewish community!

Mr. Obama was further defended by the White House press secretary Josh Earnest who very awkwardly backed him up. This didn’t satisfy the press and drew the ire of the social networks. Then, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki added a couple of days later that we should let the French government decide if the events were of an antisemitic nature. Give me a break; if a radical Muslims barges into a kosher store and kills Jewish people, there is NOTHING RANDOM there. The French government has authority since this took place on French soil, but that doesn’t invalidate the original intent of the act itself.

Finally, the White House decided to back pedal and do damage control on Thursday when they made a statement declaring the events of the Paris kosher store as anti-Semitic. Again, the vagueness applied to the description of the terror attack at the supermarket is very dangerous because it reduces the tragedy to a random act of violence, removing it from the hate crime that it was.

Is this part of the conditioning of the masses to lead them to ignore both a real danger and a real victim? This vagueness is terrifying to me because it was only 70 years ago that some of my family members went from being human beings to being prisoners to just being a simple number. Eventually, the whole process led to a need to exterminate my people who had been reduced to the status of animal.

Calling the Paris terrorist attack “random” is in and of itself “targeted” because often we say a lot more by saying less, and once again Mr. President your vagueness doesn’t appear to be accidental!

Filed Under: Antisemitism, Featured Post 3, ISIS, Terrorism Tagged With: Anti-Semitism, Islam, Jewish, Muslim

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2

On Sale Now


The Time is Now!

by Olivier Melnick

EMAIL NEWSLETTER

Recent Podcasts

Fight Antisemitism Podcast

Search

Recent Posts

  • This is the Mark of the Beast, Are You at Risk?
  • What does it mean to be Jewish?
  • Is the Antisemitic “Goyim Defense League” the New Normal?

Newsworthy Reading

  • No Matter How Deep Antisemitism Runs, It Must be Uprooted!
  • carolinglick | The New Middle East
  • U.S. Southern Command warns Sunni extremists infiltrating via Mexico – Joel Rosenberg

Archives

Subscribe to our Daily Devotions

* indicates required

Archived Articles

Tags

Abbas Anti-Semitism antisemitism Auschwitz BDS Boycott CaTC Christ at the Checkpoint Christian Palestinianism Covid-19 EU Europe France Hatred Hitler Holocaust Holocaust Denial Iran ISIS Islam Israel Jewish Jews Kristallnacht Middle East Migrants Muslim Netanyahu Nuclear Obama Olivier Melnick Palestine Palestinian Palestinians Radical Islam Rapture Reconciliation Refugees Shoah Temple Mount Terrorism Trump UN UNESCO Zionism
  • Home
  • About the Author
  • Speaking Calendar
  • Resources
  • Contact

Copyright © 2023 · Website Services by Image Market Inc.