Friday, July 24, 2009

Anti-Semitic attacks increase in the UK

The United Kingdom has seen an unprecedented number of anti-Semitic ‘hate crimes’, with more incidents recorded in just the first half of 2009 than in any previous entire year.

Up until the end of June, there had been 609 recorded anti-Semitic incidents ranging from verbal abuse to extreme violence, compared with 276 in the same period last year. Alarmingly, 77 have been classified as ‘extreme violence’ – an attack which could cause loss of life or grievous bodily harm. Most incidents took place in London and Manchester, the two biggest Jewish communities in Britain.

The Community Security Trust (CST), which advises Britain's estimated 300,000 Jews on safety issues, said it was the highest number it had recorded since it began collating figures in 1984.

The response of the political parties to this sinister development is that of unqualified condemnation, except in the case of Shahid Malik, the Communities and Local Government minister responsible for cohesion. He said: "This rise in anti-Semitism is not just concerning for the British Jewish communities but for all those who see themselves as decent human beings. The fight against anti-Semitism is a fight that should engage us all. This country will not tolerate those who seek to direct hatred towards any part of our community.”

He then adds: "Of course it may be legitimate for individuals to criticise or be angry at the actions of the Israeli Government but we must never allow this anger to be used to justify anti-Semitism."

It is a nuanced distinction, for how many can be bothered to reason that the Israeli Government does not speak for global Jewry? Or that the Zionists are not all Jews? Or that not all Jews are Zionists?

If it is legitimate for individuals to be angry at Israel's Gaza offensive against Hamas militants, where are the government guidelines on how this anger may be legitimately expressed? Of course it is illegal to assault the nearest convenient Jew, set fire to a synagogue or desecrate a Jewish grave with a swastika. These are universal laws for the protection of person and property. But the violent marches and threatening protests we have witnessed on the streets of London have been permitted and tolerated despite them being manifest expressions of anti-Semitism, against which the police opted to do nothing.

Is it 'legitimate' to burn the Star of David on London's steeets? Is it 'legitimate' to carry placards denigrating Jews or insulting Judaism?

Can you imagine the furore and immediate police response if anyone ever dared to burn a rainbow flag or carry a placard saying 'Down with Gays!' in an expression of 'gay hatred'?

If these marches had been against homosexuality, the authorities would have stamped out the protest and arrested people for ‘homophobia’. No government minister would have said, “It may be legitimate for individuals to criticise or be angry at the actions of the homosexuals.” If these marches had been against Islam, the authorities would have stamped out the protest and arrested people for ‘Islamophobia’. No government minister would have said, “It may be legitimate for individuals to criticise or be angry at the actions of Muslims.”

But Israel and Jews?

There is no recognised ‘phobia’ to incite the police to intervene, especially when the hatred is manifest by a swarm of masked, extremist Muslims baying for Israeli-Jewish blood. Anti-Semitism has such a long heritage across so many continents that its endurability and ubiquity have almost become excuses for acquiescence and toleration. Especially with a Leftist anti-Semitic media which perpetuates the narrative that ‘they brought it on themselves’.

It is time for anti-Semitism to be elevated in the national consciousness to the status of homophobia and Islamophobia: that is, zero tolerance; summary arrest and detention at the merest whiff of it. If police stations are so keen to promote ‘diversity training’ that they fly the rainbow flag to remind them of their equality obligations, let them from time to time also fly the Star of David.

Or are ‘legitimate’ manifestations of anti-Semitism to be ‘understood’ each time Israel tries to defend herself?


Blogger indigomyth said...

//Anti-Semitism has such a long heritage across so many continents that its endurability and ubiquity have almost become excuses for acquiescence and toleration. Especially with a Leftist media which perpetuates the narrative that ‘they brought it on themselves’.//

Curious, I would have thought, since you are such a vocal proponent of traditions and orthodoxy, that you would have supported anti-Semitism, because it has such a long heritage.

What "leftist" media are you referring to? Could you cite some examples?

24 July 2009 at 10:12  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Mr Indigomyth,

There is a hyperlink.

24 July 2009 at 10:19  
Blogger indigomyth said...

Thank you.

However, can there be any criticism of Israel that you would not consider anti-Semitic? This cartoon does not denigrate Jewish people, does not portray them as pig or vermin, as a truly anti-Semitic cartoon would do.

Do you not consider there to be a distinction between Israel, Semitism and anti-Judaism?

//Is it 'legitimate' to carry placards denigrating Jews or insulting Judaism?//

It is perfectly legitimate to be anti-Judaism, just as it is perfectly legitimate to be anti-Christian and anti-Islam.

Is Israel the only nation on the planet to avoid any criticism, because of the religion of its occupants? If so, that seems rather like discrimination on the basis of religion. Why are Jews (not the racial group, but the adherents of the religion) exempt from criticism?

24 July 2009 at 10:32  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Mr Indigomyth,

His Grace has posted on all of the questions you raise. He does not hold the views you suggest, and neither may they be inferred from what he has written today.

The issue here is the 'equality' of 'phobias', and what is a 'legitimate' expression of 'anger' which is not an illegitimate expression of 'hatred'.

24 July 2009 at 10:38  
Blogger indigomyth said...

From your other post,
//It is a manifestly racist slur, insulting to Jews worldwide, and constitutes a blatant denigration of the Jewish faith by abusing their sacred icon, the Star of David.//

Curious, what say you about the Danish cartoon controversy? Muslims thought that was a blatant denigration of the Islamic faith by abusing, in pictorial form, the prophet Mohammed. Surely if you consider the abuse of religious symbols and iconography to be racist, then those Muslims were right to protest; that the cartoons WERE racist.

Again, why do Jews get special treatment about their religious sensibilities and beliefs?

24 July 2009 at 10:39  
Blogger Gnostic said...

How is spraying swastikas on graves any kind of criticism?

How is waving placards saying death to Jews (or anyone else for that matter) any kind of criticism?

Hate isn't criticism.

24 July 2009 at 10:39  
Blogger indigomyth said...

//It is time for anti-Semitism to be elevated in the national consciousness to the status of homophobia and Islamophobia: that is, zero tolerance; summary arrest and detention at the merest whiff of it.//

//Or are ‘legitimate’ manifestations of anti-Semitism to be ‘understood’ each time Israel tries to defend herself?//

As I have said, there is no legitimate anti-Semitism, but there is legitimate anti-Judaism. I am perfectly happy to permit marches against Judaism, and Islam and Christianity, and every religion. anti-Homosexuality is a different issue, and relates more closely to the anti-Semitism that I have utterly condemned.

You understand the difference?

24 July 2009 at 10:43  
Blogger indigomyth said...


Agreed, it is utterly disgusting and not valid criticism to spray swastikas on graves, and the people who perpetrate it should be locked up. However, these are expressions of contempt because of someone's race, not their religion. You understand the difference between race and religion?

//How is waving placards saying death to Jews (or anyone else for that matter) any kind of criticism?//

It is not. However, I am not defending that, what I am defending is strong criticism of religious belief. (I presume you also utterly condemn the protests of God Hates Fags then?)

24 July 2009 at 10:47  
Anonymous Brian E. said...

I've never understood what people have against Jews. Certainly, if I were in the business of hating people there would be many others who would come far higher in my list.
As I see it (not in any particular order),
1. Jews tend to keep themselves to themselves, but don't have any bar on them dealing and socialising with non Jews
2. They don't try to force anyone into their religion, nor do they issue death threats to anyone wanting to leave.
3. They keep a relatively low profile, and don't demand that the country changes to meet their needs.
4. They don't complain about anti-Jewish jokes - a Jewish friend of mine has an enormous collection which no-one he knows finds the least offensive.
5. They seem to tolerate Christianity. Another Jewish friend says that she believes Jesus existed but she cannot accept him as the son of God, perhaps just another prophet. Seems fair enough to me.
6. By and large they are hard workers, which is more than can be said for many of the antis. Perhaps it is really because they are good at making money that they are disliked.

As I said, there are lots of people and races that I could hate far more than Jews.

24 July 2009 at 10:50  
Blogger Jim Bartlet said...

Oh God. did somebody mention poofs again?

24 July 2009 at 11:12  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think this highlights the case in point. One mention of the arse popping brigade and all hell breaks loose.

24 July 2009 at 11:17  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your Grace,

As far as implementing the law is concerned, Britain's police are increasingly tied to the diktat of the 'ruling party'.

In many respects, the 'ruling party' considers itself to be a law unto itself, NOT laws protecting it's citizens. Nulabor blindly follows EU idealogy, in conjunction with which, persecution of Jews is increasing sharply in Britain.

Whilst I'm horrified,

24 July 2009 at 11:23  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


A 'critic' is one who lays judgment on another ... 'criticism' the judgment meted.

To 'persecute' - 'to oppress or harass with ill-treatment, especially because of political or religeous dissent - to annoy, bother'.

24 July 2009 at 11:37  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

From the website Jihad Watch:

The Saudi Sheikh Abd Al-Rahman Al-Sudayyis, imam of the principal mosque in Mecca, the Al-Haraam mosque, expanded on this, saying in a sermon that Jews are “the scum of the human race, the rats of the world, the violators of pacts and agreements, the murderers of the prophets, and the offspring of apes and pigs.” Another Saudi Sheikh, Ba’d bin Abdallah Al-Ajameh Al-Ghamidi, made the connection explicit: “The current behavior of the brothers of apes and pigs, their treachery, violation of agreements, and defiling of holy places… is connected with the deeds of their forefathers during the early period of Islam — which proves the great similarity between all the Jews living today and the Jews who lived at the dawn of Islam.”

With sermons such as these from the Muslim equivalent of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and with a burgeoning Muslim population in Britain, is it any wonder that there is an increase in anti-Semitism?

I would beg anyone with seven minutes and thirty-one seconds to spare to watch this video on Muslim demographics. Please watch it, and then reflect on the implications for your children and grandchildren.

•Johnny Rottenborough•

24 July 2009 at 11:41  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

Brian E. said..."I've never understood what people have against Jews."

It is irrational because it is spiritual at root.

I don't know where you stand theistically, but scripture reveals the origins of the animosity for the Jews.

Since almost the dawn of civilisation God promised that His son, the Messiah, would come from their line and the line of Isaac rather than Ishmael. The latter explains the deeply ingrained hatred the Arabs have towards the Jews (prophesied at the time).

The former explains the various historical attempts (satanic at source) - starting with the Pharaohs - to eliminate the potential birth of the Messiah & Saviour of the world. Each time God miraculously intervened and protected his anointed ones

It is a spiritual legacy in the hearts of most fallen mankind. A love for the Jews and the Jewish nation - like an appreciation of the value of the life of the unborn child - is a pretty good indicator in my mind as to whether someone's heart has truly been transformed by the inner work of the Holy Spirit.

24 July 2009 at 11:59  
Anonymous chris r said...


"It is perfectly legitimate to be anti-Judaism, just as it is perfectly legitimate to be anti-Christian and anti-Islam."

Then, surely, it is legitimate to be anti-homosexual?

But frequently the media cites cases of those whose careers have suffered and even ended simply because, in all good conscience, they could not condone the gay lifestyle.

Has Malik's career ended because he cannot condone Israel's actions against Hamas?

24 July 2009 at 12:07  
Blogger Gnostic said...

Indigo, what gays do in private is their business. And no, I don't hold with people who would see them dead. People have a right to live in peace whatever their sexual persuasion so long as they harm no one else. Yes, I take issue with idiots like Tatchell. His antics do more to turn people against the gay community than anything else. Someone ought to tell him that being gay is NOT a political statement.

That's all I'm going to say on the matter because this post is not about gays.

And in answer to your question - yes I do know the difference between race and religion. Do you?

24 July 2009 at 12:09  
Anonymous Rent-o-Kill said...

Please stop feeding the trolls!

24 July 2009 at 12:18  
Blogger indigomyth said...

chris r,

//Then, surely, it is legitimate to be anti-homosexual? //

No it is not, because religion is more akin to political belief than it is to sexual orientation. Being homosexual is closer to being black or being in a mixed-race relationship. Therefore, it is no more justifiable to be anti-homosexual than it is to be anti-black, or anti-Semitic.

I find it eminently sensible that religious people should loose their jobs because of their beliefs, if their beliefs prevent them from doing their jobs effectively. In the same way I support the banning of British Nationalists from the police, I am equally happy to support banning radical Muslims, fundamental Christians and extremist Jews from positions of power and influence.

//And in answer to your question - yes I do know the difference between race and religion. Do you?//

Yes. Religion is an ideology you choose to adhere to, race is not.

//Someone ought to tell him that being gay is NOT a political statement.//

However, being Christian, Muslim or Jewish is (as evidenced by Cranmer's persistent assertions that Christians should not hide their religious belief, and need to bring their faith to work). It can therefore be legitimately, and harshly, condemned and criticised if it falls foul of secular regulation, in much the same way that British Nationalism can be. Both are ideologies, both can be excised.

24 July 2009 at 12:20  
Blogger indigomyth said...


I am always puzzled by these allegations of "Trollhood" against my person. I come not to troll, but to challenge.

Again, I submit myself to the authority of Mr Cranmer. It is his blog, and therefore, if he believes me to be a troll, he can ask me to leave, and I shall not trouble this site again. So, Rent-o-Kill, if you can get Cranmer, the owner and author of this blog, to ask me to depart, then I will be more than happy to do so.

N.B. I only commented recently to defend my good name against charges of Catholicism. This is my first substantial contribution in several postings.

24 July 2009 at 12:25  
Blogger Si Hollett said...

"It is time for anti-Semitism to be elevated in the national consciousness to the status of homophobia and Islamophobia: that is, zero tolerance; summary arrest and detention at the merest whiff of it."

Surely, your Grace supports free speech, no matter how hateful? Given what gets counted as homophobia/Islamophobia and condemned is often not, I wouldn't support anti-Semitism to be on a cultural par (it's already on a legal par - technically anyway) as stuff like saying that the Palestinians should have a state and the settlers should withdraw would be considered anti-Semitic (oddly, as Palestinians are Semitic) by the standards where people start to cry "homophobia! homophobia!".

Burning a rainbow flag shouldn't get you hounded, just like burning an Israeli flag shouldn't. I'm not saying that either are right, however I feel that there isn't freedom of expression unless that can happen (putting me with the American centre-left on that issue). The problem that I think you are trying to address is that you would be hounded for the former, but not the latter and that disparity has to stop. However you seem to fall into the anti-liberty route of asking for the banning lots of things, denying freedom of expression rather than saying that we cry 'homo/Islamo-phobic' too often and we should be treating all hatred equally.

24 July 2009 at 12:31  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

"Surely, your Grace supports free speech, no matter how hateful?"

Not remotely.

24 July 2009 at 13:02  
Anonymous len said...

Oh no ,the H words been mentioned, put on your P C hats and shhhhhhhh.

24 July 2009 at 13:26  
Anonymous Frank said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

24 July 2009 at 13:42  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

The above comment has been deleted as gratuitously offensive religiophobia.

24 July 2009 at 13:51  
Anonymous the recusant said...

What Brian E. said & What Jim Bartlet said

24 July 2009 at 14:06  
Blogger john in cheshire said...

In my opinion muslims are the cause of the increase in anti-Jewish activities in this country, England. And, the socialists are their co-conspirators, actively or not, because they too hate Israel, but love the muslim world. But then socialists appear to hate just about everything that is normal.

24 July 2009 at 14:17  
Anonymous oiznop said...

John in Cheshire - that's no different to the Nazis saying Jews were the cause of inflation. There a millions of Muslims in Britain - some good, some bad, but you can't lump them all together and blame them all for the increase in antisemitism. Your prejudice is irrational.

24 July 2009 at 14:34  
Blogger English Viking said...

Before I was a Christian I didn't really care one way or the other about the Jews. When I became a Christian and found that my Lord and Saviour, The Lord Jesus Christ is a Jew (bizarrely, I had always thought of him as European, probably all that renaissance art!) my attitude changed to the point where I take every opportunity to bless the Jews. The LORD GOD himself said that He would bless those that bless the Jews, and curse those that curse them. Now I realise that the muslims hate, amongst a very long list of others, the Jews, this makes me favour them all the more. Don't be fooled into thinking that the Arab-Israeli conflicts are over land, food, water or anything else along those lines. It is about the very existence of the Jews. This conflict will never stop until either the Jews are eradicated by the Arabs or visa versa. Seeing as the Lion of Judah is King of the Jews, I know who my money is on. The 'wars' the Jews are fighting are a pre-cursor to the conflicts we in the West will face very soon. Islam is a political ideal which wishes everything non-Islamic dead. No amount of appeasement will satisfy these people. The Lord Jesus Christ said that we should love our enemies. He did not say that we would not have enemies and it appears clear that most Christians have no Idea who and what their enemies are.

24 July 2009 at 15:39  
Anonymous g.o.religiophobic said...

I agree with Brian E that jews are
an asset to any community for all the reasons he has stated.The sermon from the imam in Mecca can only alienate many from his religion,particularly as he is as Johnny Rotten says the equivalent
of the Archbishop of Canterbury.
This offensive religiophobia on the imam's part might be responsible for the attacks on jews.

24 July 2009 at 16:22  
Anonymous non mouse said...

Oh my.

Funny how I grew up not knowing that 'hate' represented anything nastier than dislike of rice pudding! That was in what I consider to be the real Britain - the one we had before the Mozzies and socialists set about it. They are the ones who taught me the vicious dimensions to 'hate.'

As for hating Jews: I thought we were supposed to evolve into better people over the centuries! More civilized; more logical! As someone above pointed out (and I believe Chaucer did by his irony in The Prioress's Tale: circa 1370 and ff [Anno Domini]) - Christ was a Jew. And He does not teach us to 'hate' anyone; let alone his own kin.

At the same time, I can't help praying He would transport the mozzies back to the desert they belong to; or stop them from calling themselves - and their hatred - British.

24 July 2009 at 16:23  
Anonymous g.o.religiophobic said...

At least you remember what is was like before the invasion.There are many who don't so I suppose we should consider ourselves lucky in that respect.
@ non mouse

24 July 2009 at 16:44  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ g.o.religiophobic (16:22)—Worst of all, the Imam’s sermons are based directly on the Holy Qur'an, meaning that Allah himself holds those opinions about the Jews.

24 July 2009 at 18:10  
Anonymous Got the Guts to wear God said...

In today’s Britain it comes as no surprise that nothing is done about anti-Semitism. There is a definite double standard going on fuelled by a pandering for votes. Why is this tolerated in Britain? Do we not call ourselves a civilised society? A democratic society? If these people are anti-Israel why not make their voices heard along the Gaza strip? And I mean voices, for there is no excuse in my mind for violence against one human being from another. Rioting is not the way. War is not the way. The sooner we realise this, the sooner peace will prevail on Earth. Criticism is one thing, violence is another. This post to me isn’t about special treatment for the Jewish religion, it’s about condemning hate and violence. To this end, I agree whole-heartedly with Cranmer. You can’t even remotely begin to consider yourself spiritual when you embark on criminal acts. When you thieve, cheat, murder etc, regardless of how great your need you indeed rob, cheat, and murder your own spirit.

As soon as violence is used for any cause…you’ve lost that cause.

Defend yourself, yes if attacked. The survival instinct will kick in and do the defending for you.

But are you the aggressor? Look inside your heart. Are you fuelled by hatred? Does your cause really warrant your actions? Will God agree with you? Because God is the only thing you need on your side.

24 July 2009 at 19:03  
Blogger English Viking said...

@ GTGTWG (19.03)

Violence is sometimes necessary when confronting evil. The Lord Jesus Christ made himself a flail and drove out the money-changers single-handedly, tipping over their tables and ruining their business. Sodom and Gomorrah were entirely wiped out. The LORD ordered King Saul to utterly destroy every single last Amalekite, man, woman and child. Btw, God is not a 'thing' and He is not on my side, He graciously allows me to be on His side.

24 July 2009 at 19:43  
Anonymous Got the Guts to wear God said...

English Viking, thank you for you're opinion. I appreciate it. However, I can't change mine.

There is no hatred attached to my God you see. To this end my God is non-violent. I wish you luck with yours especially being as "he" graciously allows you to be on his side.

I can’t believe God is such a control freak...

The word thing, was used to describe the indescribable, however, I feel that God is way past our human terminology. You have used, he, and his, to describe God. Simple semantics or do you believe God to be human and male?

I love God and God loves me... do I need anything else?

24 July 2009 at 20:06  
Anonymous len said...

“Of all the extreme fanaticism which plays havoc in man’s nature, there is not one as irrational as anti-Semitism. … If the Jews are rich [these fanatics] are victims of theft. If they are poor, they are victims of ridicule. If they take sides in a war, it is because they wish to take advantage from the spilling of non-Jewish blood. If they espouse peace, it is because they are scared by their natures or traitors. If the Jew dwells in a foreign land he is persecuted and expelled. If he wishes to return to his own land, he is prevented from doing so.”

- Lloyd George stated in 1923

24 July 2009 at 20:11  
Blogger English Viking said...

@ GTGTWG (20.06)

The Lord Jesus Christ is both human and male, so in that sense, yes, God is human and male. The Bible constantly refers to God in the masculine, so I think I am pretty safe ground to do so. That God loves you is indisputable fact, but you also claim to love God and wonder if you need anything more. I am unclear whether the God of whom you speak is the God of the Bible, or one of your imagination, which conforms to every wish and pre-conceived idea you may have concerning deity. I can assure you that God is now, ever has been and always will be 'in control'. I am sure that you are aware of the only method of salvation offered by God to us men, that no man can come to the Father, but by Christ, but if you are unclear I am more than happy to expand.

24 July 2009 at 21:47  
Blogger ZZMike said...

indigomyth: "Is Israel the only nation on the planet to avoid any criticism, because of the religion of its occupants?"

I hardly think desecration of graves and synagogues is "criticism".

Our gracious host asks "Can you imagine the furore and immediate police response if anyone ever dared to burn a rainbow flag or carry a placard saying 'Down with Gays!' in an expression of 'gay hatred'?"

Or burining a Muslim flag or a mullah in effigy.....

indigomyth (again): "However, these are expressions of contempt because of someone's race, not their religion. You understand the difference between race and religion?"

Evidently you do not. Perhaps you'd be good enough to explain your concept of the Jewish race (and how it might contrast with the Muslim race, or even the Anglican race).

Si Hollett: "Surely, your Grace supports free speech, no matter how hateful?"

As our gracious host has already answered, I can only answer for myself (a denizen of that Country Across the Pond).

Free speech is not absolute. Perhaps to the hermit in the desert, or to the lone inhabitant of the Isle of Delos, but to civilized men - members of a civis - it is not. Our test case involves yelling "fire!" in a crowded theatre.

Why on earth do you suppose that is a bad thing? Surely, because people will be trampled and injured, people will be killed.

So the point is, speech that causes harm should be used with great restraint.

Hateful speech may well bring the less civilized among us to do bodily harm to someone. So it should be kept in check.

My ideal is a world where anybody is free so say or do any damn thing he wishes - but that everybody would have the decency and good sense not to.

Back to the subject; I wonder if the upsurge of anti-Jewish (a more accurate term) violence (desecrating a gravesite is a violent act) comes not from skinheads and yobs, but from your Muslim population.

Johnny Rottenborough: I had occasion to cast aspersions on your good name a while back; I now see that one of us (probably me) was having a bad day. I apologize for that; your comments are on the mark.

25 July 2009 at 02:15  
Blogger The Young Oligarch said...

Your Grace is , as usual , correct in this matter .

In recent years the Israelis and our Jewish brethern in general have been elided from the Marxist list of approved victim groups .

Now they have been forced to join the ranks of the oppressor classes along with us and the kulaks .

All Power to the Soviets !

25 July 2009 at 03:06  
Anonymous crass tossers united said...

I find myself agreeing with Johnny
Rotten as well.His posts are interesting and informative.

25 July 2009 at 08:10  
Anonymous Nelson said...

There's not a lot to say here, the attacks on Jews & Jewish property are totally outrageous & the perpetrators should be caught & prosecuted according to the Law, but perhaps the Police force is too busy trying to present itself as modern & PC to uphold the Law. The Police should be unbiased to all, as should ALL the public services, individuals should be free to choose for themselves as to religion or sexual orientation without imposing it on others, the only flags to fly outside police stations, fire stations or ambulance stations should only be the official accredited ones, to fly any other standard implies that all the members of the workforce are in agreement with the statement made by the flag & one cannot see this being the case with ALL the coppers in this station.

25 July 2009 at 10:51  
Anonymous Bethel said...

Your Grace
You certainly managed to stir the riff raff out of their slumbers on this one. What awful friends you have!!

25 July 2009 at 11:09  
Blogger OldSouth said...

Even the discussion of anti-Semitism seems to bring the most passionate and rather unhinged responses.

It should not come as a surprise, as it seems the Jews have served as a sort of lightning rod throughout history. Given the terrible fates that inevitably seem to befall those who preach hate against the Children of Israel, simple prudence would suggest restraint of tongue and pen would be the wisest course to follow.

Anti-Semitism is cultural poison of the worst kind, and must be denounced when encountered.

I am no biblical scholar, nor trained historian, but it seems that, for reasons known only in the mind of the Almighty, the Jews occupy a special role in history.

Given their incredible record of success in all areas of human endeavor, I find myself wanting more and more to learn about them and from them--seems to be a more productive course than vandalizing Jewish cemeteries!

But, then again, what do I know, sitting here in the Colonies?

25 July 2009 at 21:05  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older