We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Samizdata quote of the day – Progressing back to the Middle Ages I was baffled by my first exposure to antisemitism in Eastern Europe in 1992. I explained my confusion by saying it was ancient history in Britain. Our last pogrom was in the Middle Ages.
Since returning to England in 2011, I’ve had a nagging fear that this was not likely to remain true. The growth of Islam, antisemitic by its very nature, has been supported politically by the British Left. Socialists and Muslims have together revived an ancient evil.
Perhaps the Yom Kippur attack in Manchester is not a pogrom as it’s just one killer and not a mob? Either way, it’s a fall from grace. I am ashamed for my nation and furious that our “leaders” are still wittering on about “Islamophobia.” A phobia is an irrational fear. There is nothing more rational than fearing Islam — a religion conceived as if to justify the sins of its founder – one of the worst men who ever lived.
– Tom Paine
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Doesn’t seem to be well remembered and I haven’t seen it mentioned in any news or articles since the current Gaza war started, but there was large anti-Jewish riots in Britain in 1947. After the terrorist Irgun group lynched two British sergeants in Mandatory Palestine (‘Sergeants Affair‘, the British press published photographs of the lynched corpses and there was anti-Jewish riots in several British cities in response.
I studied the immediate postwar era of Britain at A-level and university, as well as doing the founding of Israel as part of my history degree, as well as done plenty of other private reading but only became aware of these riots after getting more interested in the specific topic about the British Mandate in Palestine when we found some photos of my Grandad after he died that were from when he was stationed in the dying days of British Palestine after WW2. We knew he’d served in the Middle East back then but he never spoke much of it and other relatives said he didn’t talk about it as he’d seen some very ugly stuff with comrades killed in guerrilla ambushes etc. Finding the photos sparked me to look into the conflict in Mandatory Palestine and what people in Britain thought about it more.
Antisemitism is not confined to Islam – for example I was shocked by the sudden turning on Jews, blaming Jews for just about everything, of both Candice Owens and Tucker Carlson (two people that, some years ago, I thought of as fellow conservatives and well meaning people) – although with Mr Carlson the antisemitism may well be cynical opportunism, and with Candice Owens it may be part of a mental illness (perhaps caused by the strain of years of attacks upon her) – for example the lady now also says the Moon Landings did-not-happen.
However, Islam does indeed have a problem in relation to Jews – Christians have killed Jews, but Jesus never killed any Jews, and he was Jewish himself (although the German National Socialists denied that) – as was his mother (the Virgin Mary) and all 12 of his disciples and the other early Christians – and the Jewish scriptures make up the Old Testament.
Islam is rather different – the Koran (first verbal presentations by Mohammed, who it-is-said could not write, and then written down after his death) presents a false view of the Jewish scriptures, it misquotes them (and so on) – and when Jews pointed out that Mohammed was getting the Jewish scriptures wrong, he became angry.
Mohammed led surprise attacks on Jews in Arabia (who had lived there for centuries) killing the men and taking the women as slaves – and by the end of his life (and it is claimed that his final years were wracked by ill health caused by a Jewish women poisoning him in revenge for him killing her family) there were no free Jews left in Arabia – it was ethnic cleansing – and Mohammed made it clear, as did his successors, that the power of Allah (their God) and his followers was not confined to Arabia – that they, supposedly, must spread this authority over the whole world.
So followers of Islam face a choice – was Mohammed morally right or morally wrong in his actions?
If they decide that Mohammed was morally wrong they are no longer followers of Islam, they are no longer Muslims – for, please remember, Mohammed is considered a perfect model of conduct – and to have been acting under the direct orders of God Himself – so if Mohammed is morally wrong, then Allah is morally wrong – because Mohammed was, supposedly, acting under the orders of Allah.
But if followers of Islam decide that what Mohammed did and taught was morally right – then they must carry on doing it, as Mohammed made clear that someone who claimed to be a Muslim must carry on his work – the spreading of the authority of Islam by all means necessary, including (if need be) force, so that non Muslims paid the infidel tax and did so in humiliation – so that they felt themselves subdued. If a Muslim, or rather someone claiming to be a Muslim, did not do this – they they were, according to Mohammed, a “hypocrite” and it was correct, according to him, to execute such “hypocrites”.
So when, for example, Islamic members of the British Parliament call upon Jews to be humiliated in such-and-such a way, say forbidden to go and see Association Football matches in areas (such as Birmingham) that the followers of Islam now claim, they are acting as Mohammed would have wished – it is NOT a matter of personal sadism, it is a matter of religious duty.
Finally – remember the old saying “first they came for the Saturday people – but then they came for the Sunday people”.
The Byzantines (the East Romans) did not like Jews – but that did not save the Byzantines from the wrath of Islam – for Islam claimed the world for the authority of Allah, as He, supposedly, created the world.
No Christian nation, in 14 centuries, has been saved from the wrath of Islam by saying “but we also do not like Jews” – and neither will Tucker Carlson or Candace Owens.
And yet you call them “the terrorist Irgun group”?
We learned a very different emphasis in the US.
I would call the perpetrators of this and this terrorists, yes.
Martin – and this shows that the propaganda line that Israel was created by Britain and America is FALSE.
Neither Roosevelt or the Truman Administrations really wanted modern Israel restored – indeed, in private, they did not like Jews (especially Franklin Roosevelt – who was incredibly two faced, being polite to any Jew who could be of use to him, and then showing contempt as soon as their back was turned – see Paul Johnson “A History of the Jews” which also shows Franklin Roosevelt had, in reality, no real concern about the Holocaust – and even quoted, as truth, FAKE National Socialist statistics about Jewish domination of the professions in Germany).
As for Britain – in the 1920s and 1930s “the British”, or rather a FACTION of “the British” – there were always pro and anti Jewish factions in the British government, tried to, by force, keep Jews out of the Holy Land – whilst doing nothing to prevent a Islamic immigration from Egypt and other lands (a totally one sided immigration policy).
Even when it was known that the National Socialist government in Germany, and supporters elsewhere, intended to wipe out the Jews – British policy, at least of the anti Jewish faction (again we are talking about factions – there was NOT a united British view), did-not-change, one sided immigration controls remained – Muslims allowed to freely go to the land, Jews restricted.
When the forces of Islam, under the command of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem (friend and ally of Mr Hitler and Mr Himmler) tried to wipe out Jews in the 1920s and 1930s – Jews found they had to organize their own defense.
And the British authorities even killed Jews – and YES British soldiers were also killed – sometime by Jews who had served in the British army themselves. Perhaps the worst incident that a Jewish group was responsible for was the bombing of the King David hotel in Jerusalem – where people of all religions, including (ironically enough) Jews, were killed. “The Stern Gang” were not nice people (to put the matter mildly) – they were filled with anger and bitterness, perhaps understandably so, but the anger and bitterness ate away at them, leading them to do terrible things. They should have resisted that anger and bitterness – but they did not, thinking that embracing it would give them the strength they needed to save their people from their enemies – who they came to see as basically everyone (that is a dark path to take).
Although it should be pointed out that Jewish groups also sometimes killed each other – such as the infamous incident when the Labour Party militia sank a ship containing “right wing” Jews and opened fire on the survivors in the water – the British army never did this.
The British Labour government of 1948 was not pro Jewish – if anything it was anti Jewish, it did not create Israel – it did not really want Israel to exist.
But the myth continues – “the Jews came from the West” – most Jews in modern Israel are descended from Jews expelled from Islamic countries, “Britain and America created Israel”, FALSE (see above), but there we go.
It seems that both Martin and myself thought of the King David Hotel bombing independently – and our comments crossed. But this is natural enough – it is the logical example to go to. A relative of my mother (I was told – I am not sure) was killed in that bombing.
Like the killing of two British soldiers after the killing of two Jews – the killing of the two British soldiers was condemned by most Jewish groups. I do not think it would have happened before World War II – the war, and the holocaust, had increased the level of anger and bitterness, in some people, almost to the point of madness.
There was even a plan, by some Jews, to poison German civilians via the water supply – this would have made the lies of the Middle Ages “the Jews are poisoning the wells” truth – action had to be taken (by other Jews) against the Jews who, in anger and a desire for revenge, came up with this plan.
Yes, I am especially puzzled by the ‘Britain created Israel’ line, especially given the anti-British terrorism in Mandatory Palestine, and the fact that British-Israeli relations were never especially close up until at least the 1990s (even during Suez confict the French had better ties to Israel than Britain did). Margaret Thatcher had warm ties with British Jews but had poor relations with Israel while in office as she was incensed by Israeli activity in Lebanon and Israeli arms sales to Argentina during the Falklands War.
Truman was indeed privately anti-semitic. It is ironic that the United States and USSR were the first states to recognise Israel yet had anti-semitic leaders at the time (my understanding was Stalin at the time saw Israel as useful in undermining the British position in the Middle East at the time, but then became hostile as it became clear Israeli and Soviet interests diverged and as he became increasingly paranoid against Soviet Jews towards the end of his life).