Anti-semites abound!

CNN posted an article today about a Jewish man who was attacked in London because he was Jewish. His attackers told him it was payback for what Israel was doing in Gaza! Really! A British citizen, a Londoner, who has probably never been to Israel is somehow responsible enough for what is happening in Gaza to be attacked? I don't think so and neither should any rational person. In fact, Denis MacShane, a British lawmaker said this: "[police] report that since December, there have been four times as many anti-Semitic attacks as attacks on Muslims, even though there are seven or eight times the number of British Muslims as there are Jews." Okay, I'm not one of those people who thinks it is okay to attack Muslims either, so I'll start off by saying that none of these attacks should be taking place. However, this is an interesting quote for several reasons. First, 4 times more attacks on Jews than Muslims but there are 8 times more Muslims? Wow, that is a huge difference. I wonder why this is? Hmm... today, anti-semitism is really a word that is used to describe attacks on Jews, even though the Jews are not the only semitic people. Doesn't really matter, this is a clear indication of anti-semitism on the rise in Europe/Britain. This is NOT a good thing, although some things I've read lately would try to paint this in a positive light, oddly enough. The other thing I notice about this quote is that, for someone who supposedly led Britain's first Parliamentary inquiry into anti-semitism, MacShane seems to have missed the point. Assuming the quote is accurate, he says British Muslims, but gives no such accolades to the Jews, simply saying Jews. Could this mean nothing? Absolutely it could mean nothing, but in a country struggling with anti-semitism on a grand scale (see numbers above), is it nothing? Hmm... Maybe it is nothing, after all, MacShane says the right things: "Parliaments now have to acknowledge that anti-Semitism is back. It's a potent ideological force, causing fears to Jews in many different countries, and it has to be combated by all people that care about democracy." He's right, anti-semitism does need to be combated. So, is anti-semitism because of Gaza? No, it has always been around. MacShane says it is back, but I submit it never really left, it just took a hiatus for awhile when it was unpopular to hate Jews. Don't believe me? Ask Michael Bookatz, the victim in the case being reported here. He says, "Anti-Semitism is around," he said. "It has always been around. Throughout my life, I have experienced anti-Semitic attacks... Gaza was probably a focal point, something that triggered it: 'OK, now that Gaza is happening, we can use it as an excuse to attack people,'" so yeah, it has always been around, it just hasn't always been a strong force, like it is now becoming. Mr. Bookatz has a warning about that as well: "Whenever anti-Semitism sinks roots, the world is heading in a disastrously wrong direction," he said. "That is a lesson from history. If we don't tackle anti-Semitism in the early stage, then it devours democracy." It devours Democracy! Well, Europe has been destroying democracy pretty well all on its own as they've moved toward socialism and towards the European Union which turns out to not be a very democratic organization, so I have to wonder if freedom and democracy are killed by anti-semitism or if anti-semitism becomes rooted in worlds that do not have freedom and democracy? It doesn't really matter which is the cause and which is the effect, the fact is that anti-semitism abounds, especially in Europe and the Middle East. Do you really think that Israel giving up half of its land to Palestine would stop the violence in the Middle East? Really? Nice of you to be so naive. No, there are several people, Ahmadinejad in Iran, or the Ayatollah Khomeini before him, Osama bin Laden, Yasser Arafat before his death and many others who have basically said that only the destruction of Israel is an acceptable outcome. So, half their land won't do it. Only the abolition of the Israeli state will do it. Is that acceptable to people? It shouldn't be, but I'd bet it is. You say, oh the Israeli are awful with their bombing and invading Gaza, etc. Okay, maybe they are, but they seemed to have learned something the rest of us haven't. You can't negotiate with fanatics and terrorists. Oh wait, someone else did know that and his name was Ronald Reagan. Anyway, I digress, why is it that only Gaza was invaded while the West Bank remained peaceful? Could it be that Hamas was attacking Israel from Gaza but the people in the West Bank weren't? No? Well, actually yes, that is why. In fact, it wasn't even a week after Israel pulled out of Gaza that Hamas began mortar attacks all over again. So, who broke the cease fire? Israel has shown remarkable restraint in not just going in again, mostly because Europe and the U.S. have begged them not to. At any rate, don't be blind. Israel is a legitimately recognized nation under international law and therefore has a right to defend itself. I might not agree with all her methods because I happen to think you create terrorists by killing terrorists. However, the fact that they seem to be the only people in the world who learned the real lesson of WWII (that you win a war by using force, but that the force you use is only useful if it is disproportionate and demoralizing) means they know how to defend themselves. I have to wonder why so many people want the only stable democracy in the Middle East to fail. Hmm... could it be, anti-semitism?