Over the past couple of weeks, a number of stories, each exceeding the other in the ridiculousness, have surfaced. Imagine the following scenario:
News reports hit media outlets that the government has drafted a policy which was primarily being implemented in the Jewish areas of Manchester and Stamford Hill. The policy threatens to close down Synagogues and ban Jewish speakers for promoting “extremism” – a term which is often conflated with religious conservatism and unpopular/dissenting political viewpoints. Primary school Jewish children are targeted and asked “radicalisation” questions such as, whether they believe their religion to be the correct one. Jewish children as young as eleven are subject to “external agencies” which “educate” about “extremism”, radicalisation and “terrorism”. The parents of four year-olds are invited by Primary schools to workshops on how to “detect” radicalisation. Jewish students who oppose the draconian policy are banned from their college for protesting a decision to cancel an event discussing the policy. Software companies capitalise on the insanity by selling software to schools which filtered for words like “goy”, “Shoa”, “Moshe Ya’alon”, “Benjamin Netanyahu”, “Operation Protective Edge”, and “IDF”. Tens of Jewish-only teachers have been purged from the education sphere. The government funds and utilises unrepresentative and widely rejected members from the community to assist in the attack on schools in Jewish areas and also trots them out to give credence to their policy.
What would the response be to the above? Would not comparisons be drawn to the Third Reich? Would not cries of anti-Semitism and calls for the government to be castigated made? Would we accept the destruction of democratic principles and hypocritical postulations of rule of law and “equal treatment”?
If the answer is no, then why is there is such indifference to such measures when they are applied predominantly to the Muslim minority? Why is there no relentless media coverage of this police-state-for-Muslims which has been constructed by fascist neocons, with the terrible complicity of faux “liberals”?
If we absurdly accept such measures, then my response would be, why are we not seeing this policy being applied to the Jewish community as it has been applied to the Muslim community? To not do so would constitute Muslim minority discrimination and a demonstration of the perceived flaccidity of “liberal values”.
The government churns out “illiberal” measures by hiding behind the barbarity of ISIS and the “jihadi threat”.
The reality is, however, that the same argument can be made to apply to Jews: young Jewish individuals were joining brutalising militants who perpetrated human rights atrocities and war crimes. As such they are prone to radicalisation too. Indeed, last year “dozens” of “international fighters” travelled to join this army – which brutalised a 25 mile strip of land with some of the most advanced weaponry – and underwent a process of radicalisation. Young graduates from Britain have joined an army whose deputy defence minister regards the Palestinians as subhuman. There are agencies and support groups dedicated to these violent extremists.
One Briton, a law graduate from the University of Birmingham, joined militants to “receive comprehensive training”. He claimed he was raised in a “traditional family”, which had “strong connections” to the land in which this occupying military fighting force has been committing war crimes.
What type of military is this and how does it interact with the arms trade? Yotam Feldman, an Israeli journalist classed the Occupied Palestinian Territories as “labs” where the military tests its weaponry. Zionist weapons companies profit from this killing because they can sell their products as “tested” on Gazans. This is a military which had in the last Gaza massacre, rules of engagement which advised that “whoever you see there, you kill”. Civilians in an IDF-controlled area were not regarded as civilians. The megalomania of this terrorist military spares no children; children playing on beaches have been blown to pieces by this military’s shelling, and then, with complete impunity, shrugged off with pitiful excuses and lies.
What emerges from the above are “battle-hardened” individuals, thoroughly radicalised by Zionist officials who regard a people as subhuman and whose clergymen justify killing innocent civilians. And for those who declare that Zionists are not a threat to Britain, the King David Bombing should be an indication of what can happen if Zionist interests are opposed. Indeed, in 2006 Netanyahu commemorated the terrorist attack in which 28 British citizens were killed.
Yet one community seems to be immune from counter-terrorism policies, with the establishment and its cohort media failing to apply the “extremism” label to Jewish practices at odds with “British values”, whilst another is have their children profiled and brainwashed.
The PREVENT Strategy, and Counter-Extremism Bill are the embodiment of state’s structural discrimination against the Muslim minority. Whilst hatred of the Jews was undeniably a catalyst which led their massacre by Nazis, it was societal indifference which formed the foundations of the terrible atrocity that followed. Indeed, in some cases such indifference materialises an acquiescence of such a discriminatory state reinforcing the notion that the structural discrimination affecting the British state, has successfully managed to permeate wider society. This indifference needs to be turned into animation which calls for the removal of this falsely-premised, neocon policy of persecution.