Coming Home to Israel – NOW is the Time to challenge misdirected Jewish genius


“We know that Jews have won a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes: over twenty per cent of them from a group that represents 0.2 per cent of the world population, an over-representation of 100 to one. But the most striking disproportion is in the field of economics. The first Nobel Prize in economics was awarded in 1969. The most recent winner, in 2017, was Richard Thaler. In total there have been 79 laureates, of whom 29 were Jews; that is, over 36 per cent.”

Jews and Economics, Rabbi Lord Sacks,, 2017

Only 1 in 500 of the world population is a Jew, and yet in the century or so since we have introduced measurements and awards of genius, Jews have earned perhaps more international intellectual awards than all the world’s Christians (about a third of the world population).  And this is despite the enormous suffering of Jewry in Europe, the Middle East and North Africa, and indeed in Israel (which is surrounded by ultra-violent and brain-dead Jihadists whose only goal, as a result of brainwashing since childhood, is the obliteration of Israel).

By contrast, in the past century, Islam – which traditionally revered the Intellect – seems to have eschewed the pursuit of knowledge and wisdom altogether.  Muslims who have tried, or are trying, to reform Islam and bring it into modernity and good education and knowledge, quickly find themselves subject to lethal fatwas, even if they live in the West.  The problem, for the Muslims, and therefore for all of us, is top-down:  as I wrote in my piece last week, all the leading scholars and de facto ‘popes’ of Islam, Sunni and Shia, now encourage Muslims to find their meaning in the destruction of Israel, which, contemporary Islam teaches, is the very metaphysical enemy on Earth.  Antisemitism is now stupefying the Muslim world in much the same way that it stupefied Christian Europe until Great Britain, the USA and Allies defeated the philosophical-theological source 75 years ago, at least in Western Europe, which escaped the brainwashing into Stalinism and other forms of Socialism (much of which, it has to be said, was the product of misdirected Jewish intellect, from Marx to the Bundists to Trotsky).

Islamic scholars seem to have convinced themselves that the way forward for Islam is ‘purity’ through ever-stricter jurisprudence and through the ethnic cleansing of the Arab nations not only of Jews but of Christians, Sufis (i.e. thinking Muslims) and other infidels and heretics.  Everwhere in the world the mullahs want to ‘purify’ the world through an increase in disgustingly cruel corporal punishments, including death, amputation, public flogging and even crucifixion (particularly in Saudi Arabia, where cruxifixion is used as punishment for anti-government protesters).  In all the Muslim nations today, the absence of human rights for females is appalling by comparison to any age, let alone our times.

The British Government last year was forced to acknowledge that the persecution of Christians in the Middle East – who have dropped from 20% to 4% of the population, largely since the turn of the millennium – is now “near genocide”.  Christians, some of whom are of the oldest continuous Christian communities in the world, are suffering murder, expulsion, kidnapping and imprisonment.  Former Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, who commissioned the report on Christian persecution, admitted that it is “political correctness” that prevents knowledge of the situation being transmitted in the West. He is right of course, but it is not only political correctness, it is – to repeat what I have written in other pieces – the West’s addiction to Arab oil money.

Not surprisingly, then, whereas Arab Muslims were once, for several centuries, the great enlighteners of mankind, today Muslim Nobel Laureates are so scarce that you can count them on one amputated hand.  Whereas today the Madrassas are where Muslims go to get brainwashed into the Seventh Circle of Hell, they were once the model for the first of Europe’s universities, not least the University of Paris, the intellectual home of the Italian Doctor of the Church, Thomas Aquinas (or Tommaso d’Aquino).  Even the great 12th-century Jewish philosopher Maimonides – whose work has near-canonical status for Jews to this day – drew heavily from the genius of the Arab Muslim thinkers and Arab monotheistic interpretations of ancient Greek philosophy. And Thomas Aquinas, whose work has near-canonical status for the Roman Catholic Church, is equally indebted to the Muslim Arabs, and he also overtly drew from Maimonides.

Perhaps, who knows, Islam will bring forth once again great thinkers to bring Islam back to civilisation.  Christian Europe, after all, is quickly recovering from the mudererous Fascism, Anarchism, Nazism, Communism and Socialism that overwhelmed it until the 1990s and the collapse of the Socialist Bloc (which included the re-education and rehabilitation of the East Germans, not least Angela Merkel who started her political career under the murderous Stasi, if not, as Boris Johnson has questioned, within it).

The best of times and the worst of times

Perhaps the 12th and 13th-century period of philosophical renaissance (scholasticism) – as Thomas d’Aquin at the University of Paris attempted to synthesise and abstract the best of the world’s intellect – was a cosmopolitan hint at what I envision as the ultimate turn of the kaleidoscope as God Almighty, God of Israel, brings History into its glorious fulfilment through Israel, in what Maimonides called the “messianic era”.

We must not romanticise this period at the birth of Parisian scholasticism however.  Yes it brought forth Europe’s first universities, and the great French cathedral-building era, and science, but all was not at peace between the religions.  Western Christianity was particularly cruel and barbarous:  Western monks on Crusade, including from England, would say their Hail Marys in the morning and then, literally, murder and disembowel Jews, Muslims, Pagans and the wrong kind of Christians (east of the “Great Schism”) in the afternoon.  In fact Thomas Aquinas’ own siblings joined the Crusade, and his brother Dominicans invented the dogma of torture and Inquisition.

The 12th/13th century, like the 21st century, was one of the periods of history in which the world was obsessed with Israel and Jerusalem.  For most of the history of the past 2000 years, Jerusalem has been the derelict outpost of this or that Christian or Islamic empire.  When the British took Jerusalem from the Ottoman Empire in 1917, it was one of the most derelict and diseased and forgotten cities in the world.  But today the world is once again obsessed with Israel and Jerusalem.  This obsession is generally negative not despite Israel’s being a thriving nation, but because Israel is a thriving nation.  Christian obsession and secular obsession (such as in Sweden, the most secular nation of all) with Israel is generally negative and antisemitic, and Islamic obsession with Israel, in all 57 formally Muslim nations, is pathololgical, and the reason that Islam has dropped out of civilisation altogether (indeed, the Arab nations have regressed to the child sacrifice – or ‘martyrdom’ as the Muslim scholars now call it – that dominated the region before the advent of Islam).

There are some Christians and secularists who support Israel, and there are even some Muslims who support Israel, but those of us in the world who have a positive dedication to Israel – and her Jewish restitution – are very much in the minority.  Even many Jews hate us.  But we will win. “Keep Attacking”, insists Colonel Richard Kemp CBE, who recently described himself (in an interview with the Jewish Chronicle) as a “Christian and a Zionist but not a Christian Zionist”.

I am optimistic, or “Hope-full” as we Christians prefer to say.  There is a reason for the world’s obsession with Israel.

In a recent essay on this blog, titled, The Jews Must Lead us to the End of Time, I wrote:

Somehow, the world’s negative obsession with Israel needs to be turned upside down, into positive obsession and encouragement. The ship of fools we call mankind must accept its navigator: the Jews. And, frankly, contemporary Jews, especially of the diaspora, must not forget Jerusalem and must make a better fist of navigating us towards the goal.

In that essay, I wrote about the political self-identifying Jews (generally atheists) who in the UK not only formed the “Momentum” cult to put the antisemitic/anti-Israelist Jeremy Corbyn into power but tried to protect Corbyn and the Labour Party from charges of antisemitism.  And as I wrote in my essay last week, the same thing is now happening in the USA, as anti-Israelist and “proud Jew” Bernie Sanders makes his bid to become the “leader of the free world”, God forbid.

God gifts all peoples, but God gifts the Jews disproportionately.  All gifts – by definition – are from God.  Despite antisemitism, and despite Jews being so few in number, and despite the many ultra-religious Jews who have shut themselves out of society altogether (much like the Amish Christians), we find Jews at or near the top of every intellectual endeavour: politics, economics, philosophy, the sciences, the humanities, the arts, chess, mathematics, business, technology, medicine, warfare… and, of course, music.  What makes this all the more remarkable is that for almost the whole of the history of Christianity and Islam, Jews have been reduced, at best, to second-class citizens, denied land, denied arms, denied access to the universities, denied access to the professions, denied access to politics, and even denied access to golf clubs.  Denied freedom of movement and invariably ghettoised, Jews had few opportunities to thrive or reveal their talents. Even when Einstein reached the USA having fled Berlin in 1933, Academia was reluctant to let him in. The American universities had a “Jewish Quota”, which the great physicist Richard Feynman later fell foul of, being turned down by Columbia University in New York City. (Feynman did get into the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and went on to play a key part in the Manhattan Project, helping to ensure the USA invented the atomic bomb before the Axis powers, and, like a remarkable number of other well-known Jewish physicsts of the period, went on to win the Nobel Prize for physics.)

Just as “Einstein” comes to mind when we think of scientific genius, the word “Jew” or “Yehudi” is almost synonymous with musical excellence, in composition and performance, from classical to the American Songbook to the world’s favourite pop music.  (Yehudi Menuhin, by the way, is one of several leading Jewish musicians who were or are ardent anti-Israelists to the point of being antisemitic; Daniel Barenboim is another, blaming Israel for Palestinian Jihadism, which is in fact no different to the Arab Jihadism that now extends right across the Middle East and North Africa, and the Jihadism now spreading throughout the world.)

Not only are Jews vital to classical and contemporary music, but music has always been vital to Judaism. The Jerusalem Temple was a temple of music.  King David, King of the Jews, was the musician king, and songwriter par excellence.  Surely, no songs ever composed have been performed as often, and is an many languages, as the Psalms.  And according to the Gospels, there is no part of Jewish scripture that Jesus quoted more than the Psalms, the songs.

In Psalm 137 we read that the Jews in captivity in Babylon lamented so deeply for the Jerusalem Temple and its music,  that when mocked by their captors to sing “a song of Zion” they hung their lyres on the trees, and sung instead to God that if they failed to set Jerusalem above their highest joy, they should lose their gift to play instruments and to sing at all.

Alas, Israel – despite being surrounded by godforsaken Arab lands locked in internecine conflict and entrenched Jihadist ideology – is now enjoying its restitution, and is now home to half the world’s Jews, largely because many Jews did not forget Jerusalem.  And this number is likely to increase as we see a resurgence of antisemitism in Europe and even the USA.  As noted, I am optimistic that God is working out His plans for the destiny of the nations through the nation of Israel. And as I have written in other pieces, we should not be surprised by the death throes of antisemitism and rebelliousness against God of Israel, be it from atheists, secularists, politicians, nations (and blocs of nations such as the UN, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, the Communists, and the EU).  And we should not be surprised that we now see so much anti-Israelism from Christians, Muslims and Jews.

Those of us who support Israel must fight like never before, because global anti-Israelism is more intense than ever before. It has even now invaded the USA – once Israel’s staunchest ally – aided by Bernie Sanders and “the Squad”:  the Red-Green alliance (see the essay I wrote last week).  American universities have been taken over by novel philosophies of “progressivism” that are quite insidious, and inevitably gravitate to anti-Israelism and campaigns to unleash the “Palestinians”, who are today amongst the most deranged Jihadist-supporting Arabs in the whole Arab world, so deranged that even Egypt locks them out.

Jewish Anti-Israelists

In previous pieces my main targets have been Christian, Islamic and Socialist antisemitism/anti-Israelism.  I now want to focus on intellectual anti-Israelism, a more insidious form of anti-Israelism, much of which happens to come from Jews who, we have established, are amongst the most gifted intellectuals and entrepreneurs in the world.

What I call anti-Israelism is not only overt attacks on Israel, but the attempts to point mankind to a goal or destiny other than the goal of all nations arrayed on Israel by God of Israel.

It is even time to challenge what I call the Einsteinian paradigm, an atheistic paradigm  that has been with us for about a century (see my essay, 1919 Vision: Albert Einstein’s Gravitational Lens).  I do think the Einsteinian paradigm had to unfold as it did, to get us where we are, which, most of us would agree, is a better place than where we were a century ago.  I think our Einsteinian paradigm was inevitable.  In any case, had God willed that Albert Einstein believe in God, Einstein would have believed in God.  (Einstein was an atheist, or, at best, a Deist.)

[ I do, by the way, believe there is a reason for the dialectic of monotheists and atheists.  I was talking about this very recently with a Roman Catholic priest, who pointed me to the work of the Czech priest and philosopher Tomáš Halík (whom I have not yet read, but intend to do so).  Apparently, Halík believes that theists and atheists are in “partnership”. This makes sense to me, especially because I was myself a deep thinking atheist until my early 30s (I’m now in my late 50s), and feel that I have grown through this internal struggle.  I thank God that He allowed me the space to be a thinking atheist, even though, looking back, they were far from easy years. ]

Einstein himself was anti-Israelist. He wasn’t overtly anti-Israelist, he was after all a personal friend of the de facto leader of world Zionism, the scientist Chaim Weizmann, who went on to become the first president of Israel. Rather, Einstein was anti-Israelist in the sense that he was pointing the world away from God Almighty, God of Israel, to a novel and pagan way of understanding the Creation that cosmologists and mathematicians now call “Mathematical Platonism”.

“The word God is for me nothing but the expression and product of human weaknesses […] the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstition. […] I cannot see anything ‘chosen’ about [the Jews]”.

Einstein’s letter to Erik Gutkind, 1954

Einstein famously said that, “God does not play dice”.  By this, Einstein was protesting that there is no God who has power over the laws of nature, which are themselves the product of mathematics (i.e. Mathematical Platonism).  Einstein could not tolerate ideas from fellow scientists who were beginning to suggest that there are irregularties in Nature which might better be explained by mathematical probabilties than mathematical rules and certainties.  These new scientists, the quantum physicists, were not necessarily interested in God of Israel, in fact many turned to the pagan and pantheistic religions and philosophies of the East.  Perhaps this too was inevitable. Western science was never easily going to step back to the Judeo-Christian monotheism that it had claimed to have outgrown with the mechanistic science that had dominated it since the 18th century, until Einstein and quantum physics.

We monotheists will win the battle with the atheists at the time of God’s deciding.  God of Israel is Almighty.  In the end, atheism will become incredible and irrelevant, until then we must each play our part, as hero or villain. All the world’s a stage.

As for God’s playing dice. Yes, He can play dice, and load them too. There’s a divinity that shapes our ends, rough-hew them how we will.

The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the LORD.
Proverbs 16:33

If I forget thee, O Jerusalem…

Rabbi Sacks has written and spoken often about the exceptionality of the Jews, but he seems to me to be very reluctant to criticise Jewish geniuses who have forgotten Jerusalem, and are pointing the world to “other gods”.  Indeed, in Sacks’ list of Nobel economists are the atheists Alan Greenspan and Milton Friedman, who laid the foundations for a whole new belief system called “Monetarism”, which fooled much of the West until 2008, and is of course yet another of mankind’s experimental workarounds that avoid centring things on God.

I do by the way see an inevitably to all the great trials and errors resulting from human ideas that have buffeted mankind through history.  We are God’s children, and like our own children, if you tell them not to touch something because it is hot, the command is meaningless until the child does actually touch a painfully hot object for first time.

I wonder if, perhaps, Rabbi Sacks is so attracted to and awed by genius, particularly the celebrity genius with which he hobnobs, that he cannot bring himself to properly discern it.  For instance, on the death of Stephen Hawking a year ago, Sacks tweeted:

“Stephen Hawking, who died this morning at the age of 76, was a man who changed our understanding of the universe, demonstrating that the greatest human power of all is the power of ideas.”  Rabbi Lord Sacks, Tweet, 14 March 2019

But Rabbi Sacks knew full well what Hawking’s militantly atheistic ideas were.  And surely Sacks should acknowledge the human power of bad ideas. Hawking famously said:

“the human race is just a chemical scum on a moderate-sized planet, orbiting around a very average star in the outer suburb of one among a hundred billion galaxies”.

And Hawking made many philosophically-absurb claims such as that “the laws [sic] of science” reveal that “God is not necessary”.

Rabbi Sacks – whose job it is, surely, to teach about the sanctity of human being – knows that Hawking often spouted such philosophical non seqs.  Furthermore, the former Chief Rabbi surely knows that Hawking joined the academic boycott of Israel, despite the fact that Israeli and Jewish gravitational physicists contemporaneous with Hawking achieved far more in the field than Hawking.  Hawking didn’t actually change our big ideas on anything, apart from encouraging his readership to atheism.  His fame was due to the fact that he lived in a wheelchair and spoke through a microprocessor, which happened to have been designed in Israel, and without which Hawking would have been “locked in”.  Hawking is a famous scientist not despite his terrible illness but because of it.

Amongst Hawking’s other bad ideas is that we can upload our ‘brain’ (with which Hawking fully identified his person) to have a form of eternal life.  Theoretically, said Hawking  (several times), this form of ‘eternal’ life is possible.  (Naturally, in believing that human being is “chemical scum”, Hawking had no concept of the human soul.)  This idea is now being advanced by the computer scientists  and entrepreneurs in California’s Silicon Valley, the leading proponents of which are Halachically Jews, who have turned their back on Jerusalem.

Google Life and the Frank Einsteins

The Internet and social media are good things and inevitable things. They have always been potentially there in God’s Earth. It was as inevitable that we would find a World Wide Web as it was inevitable that man would learn how to make fire, and invent the wheel.  But like fire, and like the wheel, we must keep it safe, and use brakes.

There are some in the computer sciences, including the founders of Google, Larry Page and Sergey Brin (both Jews), who claim they will create a world run by the next generation of artificial intelligence, or “Superintelligence”, into which you can upload your “brain” into a virtual world of eternal fun.  (Google has set up a new company called “Calico”, whose mission is to “Solve Death”.)  These people call themselves “Transhumanists”.  You will find them at the head other IT giants too, including Facebook.  Most of them are Americans, but they are well supported by Oxford University in the UK (led by a philosopher called Professor Nick Bostrom) and by a computer sciences company called “Deep Mind” in London.

And so you can see that, yet again, man has dreamed up an alternative goal or destiny of things, but this time arguably even worse than the goals of Socialism/Communism, which at least only caused godless and godforsaken misery in the human lifespan, rather than in an ‘eternal’ transhuman lifespan!

Throughout history, many theologians have doubted that God would create an eternal Hell.  It appears that God doesn’t need to:  misdirected genius at Silicon Valley, and “Deep Mind” Cambridge, UK, is aiming to create a Hell in which you will find the soulless manifestations of Nick Bostrom (and a few other philosophers at Oxford University), Larry Page, Simon Cowell, and Paris Hilton (and, apparently, her pet dogs), who have paid the deposit and booked their place to be mummified in a cryonics waiting room in California, to be released and resurrected at Earth’s “technological maturity” (Bostrom’s words) into the new world: the “Hell Hilton”: you can check out anytime you like but you can never leave.

The “Superintelligence” of this man-made eternal world is, of course, a kind of god.

The idea is that Artificial Intelligence, now evolving exponentially, can itself create the Superintelligence, which in turn works out how to run and sustain the new and virtual-reality world.  The human brain is then to be mapped, or 3D-printed, into this virtual reality, potentially for eternity, when Larry Page and Google have “solved death”.

This Superintelligence would decide what is best for man, including what the world would look like. What birds and animals and plants would you see, hear, touch, feel and smell?  What would be the length of day and night?  Which days would have high winds and waves for the windsurfers, and which days would be calm for people who don’t like the wind?  Would you need sleep, and food?  Sex? Would there be any dangers?  Would man get bored?  Could there be such a thing as exhilaration without any danger?  Could sadness be allowed?  Could transhuman being exist in a permanent state of happiness, and if so, how would he know he is happy?  What moral code would the transhuman beings follow?  How would the Superintelligence punish the trangressors?  How would the transhumans remain intelligent?  What problems, if any, would the transhuman need to solve?

Who is going to agree what the virtual paradise is like? After all, no two humans could agree such a thing, let alone a whole population. Or perhaps you can choose your eternal ‘life’, from a commercial market of Frankenstein entrepreneurs, such as “Google World”, “Zuckerbergarama”, “Golem Heights, or “Eternal Disneyland”, whose Superintelligence works along the lines of the entrepreneur’s vision.  But as Professor Nick Bostrom admits, it would be impossible for the transhuman being to know if this Superintelligence, or this god, were not dissembling, whilst assuring the transhumans it is always acting for the common good.  It would be impossible to know if the Superintelligence had decided to sell you an eternal heaven which turns out to be an eternal hell.  Even if Google does “solve death”, it will not solve Love.

With all these ideas and other fast-moving “progressive” ideas abroad it should not surprise us that “the Internet” seems to be stacked against Israel, because those who most influence the World Wide Web’s content and data and Artificial Intelligence (that determines what and whom we see, even within our socials networks) are attracted to, attached to, and pointing to goals for the World that are not Israel, and not God of Israel.

Page and Zuckerberg are Jews, but I don’t trust them because they do not trust God of Israel, and have forgotten Jerusalem. They think they are “Progressives”, but they are facing the wrong way, to something infinitely less than the Almighty.  Rather than yearning to “solve death”, the Frankensteins in California should be asking, “what is life?”

Life Sciences and Theology

“For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause.”


In my piece on Einstein 1919, I suggest that we are on the cusp of overthrowing the atheistic Einsteinian paradigm, which threw out God and led to the relativity and subjectivism of almost everything.  It led to Stephen Hawking teaching that human being is nothing more than “chemical scum”, and it has led to people grasping at all kinds of queer philosophies in the hope of living an “authentic” life of subjective choices, because there is no way to be objectively human, based on God’s choices and binary divisions of everything in Nature, from day and night, life and death, man and woman…

We will see an overthrowing of the atheistic Neo-Darwinist paradigm too.  Just as the first book of Genesis gives us an understanding of the Cosmos and of life in Earth in the same breath, we will come into a paradigm in which we too understand all things, and how they relate to God, in the same breath.

Indeed, we will come to see our life  – and our soul that Larry Page, Nick Bostrom, Richard Dawkins, and Stephen Hawking insist we do not possess – is the breath of God.

We are not merely our material brain (which is in fact merely acids, mucus membrane and earwax), no more than we can say that our material TV set is images of the world that it is demodulating from this or that signal in the ‘ether’.

We might call our new way of seeing and knowing “holistic”, or better, “Holy”, complete: a wholeness of knowledge that comes out of our great long history of inevitably fumbling in the dark, and trial and error, with partial knowledge. This is why I like the kaleidoscope analogy.  Nothing is properly seen until everything is properly seen. Everything illuminates everything else.  But perhaps music is an even better analogy, and it is Biblical: the world comes into music, just as the Sabbath of History – the messianic age – is represented by the 10-stringed lyre of King David.  It is as though we are a great orchestra in the warm-up period before the conductor walks on. We are all expert musicians, with a long history of developing skills and knowledge, but all is jumbled up, and we are hearing only snatches and hints of what is to come when all people of good will are playing as one.

At an appearance at a Cambridge Film Festival in 2013, Stephen Hawking said: “I think the brain is like a program in the mind, which is like a computer … so it’s theoretically possible to copy the brain on to a computer and so provide a form of life after death”.  And in an interview with a science correspondent for the Guardian in May 2015, Hawking again affirmed his philosophical materialism, in effect saying, “I am my brain”, saying, “there is no heaven or afterlife for broken-down computers”.

Hawking’s computer analogy is a poor one indeed to teach death after life. Why?  Because computers are essentially disposable vessels. Our digital ‘life’, our digital memory, is held in a “cloud”.  (And consider all the religious connotations of the word “cloud”.)  Therefore if our computer breaks down, we simply need to obtain a new computer, which can be “re-imaged” to make it exactly like the old one, and able to access the same memory (cloud) on recognition of our name and password (or biometrics). Of course, if we have been foolish virgins rather than wise virgins, and have not backed-up to the eternal cloud – keeping the spiritual light burning by maintaining the eternal I-Thou – then of course we are indeed effectively lost souls when our computer breaks down.

To reinforce my point, we might look at the theory of the brain (or “quantum mind” and “wave function”) of Hawking’s main partner in physics, Sir Roger Penrose, with whom Hawking came up with the Penrose–Hawking singularity theorems.

Professor Penrose, who unusually for a gravitational physicist takes an interest in human consciousness, says (my highlighting):

“My claim is that there has to be something in physics that we don’t yet understand, which is very important, and which is of a non-computational character. It’s not specific to our brains; it’s out there, in the physical world.” (Roger Penrose, *Edge Conversation, Chapter 14)

In other words, Penrose’s view seems to be closer to philosophical idealism than Hawking’s philosophical materialism, i.e. that human memory is not in the computer, but in the non-local and omnipresent “cloud”.  Science has never found any memory in the human brain, or in the brain of any mammal. In other words, human memory is not stored in the brain (or at least, if it does exist in the brain, it has not been found despite many decades of searching).  And when we talk about human memory and human consciousness, we are perhaps talking about the same thing (an idea that there is not space to explore here).

By a stroke of luck – considering my interest in philosophy – I do have some recent exposure to the life sciences in my professional life:

I am a Technical Writer – with a 30-year background in electronics, avionics (aircraft electronics) and the computer sciences (IBM-certified developer) before I started writing for a living.  I was surprised, when, in 2012, my agent phoned me, wanting to put me forward for a contract as “Scientific Technical Writer” for an Anglo-American life sciences company (called “Waters”).  I pointed out that I have no experience or formal education in the life sciences.  I got through the interviews and was offered the contract, and soon came to see why my background in the computer sciences is relevant: biology (or at least “systems biology”) has in our times become a computer science in its own right, called “bioinformatics”.

The data problems in the life sciences are now phenomenally huge. Biology, including in medical research (both Western medicine and Traditional Chinese Medicine), now works with “Big Data”, and the life sciences are now very inter-interdisciplinary, hence the increasing need for technical communicators. Just as the Human Genome project coincided with the advent of an “internet” (without which the project would have been impossible), the new sciences – the new branches of “omics” spawned from genomics – would be impossible without today’s more-powerful Internet, or “World Wide Web”.

This internationally-collaborated Big Data (curated in huge Internet ‘libraries’) is interrogated through the World Wide Web (often through Artificial Intelligence) and is being used for many things, such as drug-testing in sport, water security, food security (such as detecting harmful pesticides and other residues), detecting fake pharmaceutical drugs, understanding Traditional Chinese Medicine (sorting the good, which has worked for thousands of years, from the fake or harmful, including harmful to endangered species). And the dream, for medical researchers, West and East, in systems biology, is to better understand cancer, and serious degenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Motor Neurone.

It would be good if we could tackle more serious diseases than we already do, especially those that afflict children. Of course, we all need to die back into our Creator of something. We must praise God for life forms such as killer bacteria, viruses, fungi, diseases, and for the general degenerative process of ageing that we share with all mammals.

Like Judaism, Christianity, as we hear in the very first line of the Lord’s Prayer taught to us by Jesus (and based on his own Jewish faith), works out from the parent-child paradigm. We learn about God largely through the parent-child paradigm, which of course would not be possible without birth, childhood innocence, and death. It is through these things that we come to know what parents are: through our own parents, and more so if we become parents ourselves.

But, pray, as life-expectancy has increased in recent decades, God will allow us to treat Alzheimer’s and Motor Neurone Disease and other such horrors.  And, pray, God will allow us to better tackle serious diseases that can afflict children. Having said that, most severe childhood illness – such as diarrhoea, the biggest killer, with malaria, of children under 5, due to lack of access to potable water – is most often caused by mankind’s lack of will to effect universal care. We already have the technology to tackle this scandal.

“Darwinian evolution” can hardly be avoided in modern theology.  And yet shortly after my introduction to the life sciences, I soon came to realise that contemporary biologists are not interested in “Darwinian” evolution or even Neo-Darwinian evolution (which synthesises Darwin, molecular biology, and genetics), which is far too abstract, out-dated, metaphorical, and absurdly reductionist.

Darwin’s metaphors, and Richard Dawkins’ metaphors, can offer you a world view, if you really do want to see everything as Nature “selecting” what Nature thinks is good from bad, or if you want to explain everything as the will of the “selfish gene”.

Let us look at what Charles Darwin said:

“In the literal sense of the word, no doubt, natural selection is a false term; but who ever objected to chemists speaking of the effective affinities of the various elements? – and yet an acid cannot strictly be said to elect the base with which it in preference combines. It has been said that I speak of natural selection as an active power or Deity; but who objects to the author speaking of the attraction of gravity as ruling the movements of the planets? Everyone knows what is meant and is implied by such metaphorical expressions […] With a little familiarity such superficial objections will be forgotten […]”

“It may metaphorically be said that natural selection is the daily and hourly scrutinising, throughout the world, the slightest variations, rejecting those that are bad, preserving and adding up all that are good […] “

Charles Darwin, “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life” (1859)

In my three years working with PhD life scientists, I did not meet one who had read “On the Origin of Species …”, and “The Descent of Man”.

Think seriously about what Darwin suggested: Nature is “hourly scrutinising”. This is what Darwin means by “Natural Selection”. Nature selects, perhaps not every minute, but every hour.  He says “Natural Selection” is a metaphor, but then elevates the metaphor to an explanation, which is not science at all.

Darwin was a pigeon fancier, and therefore he selected the best of his pigeons to breed in his loft at his home in Kent, England. And this is where he found the “selection” metaphor.  Just as Darwin selected his best pigeons to breed, surely, he thought, this is what Nature is doing (as though Nature is a person).  But, of course, Darwin could not have selected his best pigeon to breed with his best dog, or he could not have selected his dog to breed with his cat, just as we cannot breed a cat with a dog today, at least not without doing some very unnatural and dangerous things with our knowledge, and barking up the wrong tree.

Richard Dawkins has obviously realised that we cannot be satisfied with Darwin’s idea that “Nature” is, at the end of every hour, “scrutinising” how things should evolve into the next hour.  And so Dawkins transferred some of Darwin’s personification of Nature to the personification of the gene: the “Selfish Gene”, and wrote a popular book of that title.

Dawkins work is based on the neo-Darwinist dogma proposed by Francis Crick: the so-called “Central Dogma of Molecular Biology”.  This dogma claims that at the centre of every cell (including the first fertilised cell of our being), DNA provides instructions to tell every cell how to fold our proteins into the 3D form they need to be (be it a cell in an eye or a toe nail: it all comes, according to the Central Dogma, from instructions from the DNA at the centre of the cell).

Discounting water, most of our body mass is protein, much of which needs to be constantly re-nourished (which is why we die if we don’t eat protein from other life forms, animal or vegetable). The Central Dogma claims that information from the DNA nucleus of our every cell (we have about 100 trillion) to the proteins (tens of thousands) in each cell is linear and uni-directional.

But the money (literally) in the life sciences is now going on a more holistic and “non-linear” understanding of organisms, including the human body. We have realised that the Central Dogma can’t explain the statistics, and that there is a protein-to-protein networking going on that we call “Proteomics”. (Proteomics is the field in which I was employed as a writer.)

Contrary to the Central Dogma, which claims that the DNA at the centre of every life cell instructs the proteins in every cell on how to “fold” into, say, an eye or a finger or brain, it is now evident that proteins in any part of the body can communicate with any other part, bypassing the molecular centre/DNA of the living cell. Indeed, our bodies grow and regrow with no apparent central control. How our proteins fold themselves into the correct and upright 3D structures – rather than an amoebic slime of “chemical scum” – is still a complete mystery to science!

As noted, the data problems in life sciences are now huge. Biology has entered the world of “Big Data”, or “Bioinformatics”.  What fascinated me, after my introduction to the field, is that the algorithms used for interrogating this Life data are what we call “attractor algorithms”, and that we also often use a statistical technique known as “top-down hierarchical clustering analysis”.  Great metaphors indeed!

Yes, the evolution of life involves (“Darwinist”) random mutations, and constant adaption to the environment (that we might call “bottom up”) but, it seems to me, Life is always being “attracted”, as if evolution is goal-oriented.

Coming Home

I think we will return to, in some form, the “Vitalism” of pre-20th-century biology.  I think it will become obvious that we cannot observe the behaviour of chemicals (or “bio-chemicals”) to explain life, but rather we will need to simply accept “Life” to ‘explain’ the biochemistry.

What I find interminably boring, when I’m appreciating the beauty in Nature (and thereby the Beauty of God in created things), whether observing a seahorse in an aquarium or a kingfisher in the British countryside, is the guy who thinks he’s got a “Darwinian explanation” why a seahorse is like a seahorse or a kingfisher is like a kingfisher, or the song of the skylark is like the song of the skylark.  As Mark Twain is often quoted as saying: if your only tool is a hammer then every problem looks like a nail.

I encourage people to see things in a different way. Yes, there is an apparent randomness in species, which seems to be responsible for great diversity and variety, and, often, beauty (that can hardly be a product of randomness alone).  And yes, species adapt to the environment (and the environment itself, on Earth, has great randomness and diversity and beauty), and yet we have no good reason for believing that, say, the skylark or the homing pigeon, are not goals of evolution, willed by the Creator, bringing His Earth “home” (and, who knows, perhaps billions of “Earths” home).

As noted, Darwin was a pigeon fancier. What attracts people to pigeons? It is, of course, the homing instinct, the attraction to home of the pigeon that can navigate, totally mysteriously, from hundreds of miles away, and, suddenly, after several days, drop out of the sky on to the roof of the pigeon loft, like Noah’s dove on the Ark. And what is attraction if it is not Love? And what is a dove if it is not a divine metaphor for Love, and Peace, and Shalom, and the Eternal Spirit of God.

In the French language, the categories/kinds of animals are different than they are in the English language. For instance, what we call “terrapins”, “tortoises” and “turtles” are all, to a Frenchman, “la tortue”.

In French, “heaven” and “sky” are the same word: “ciel” (plural “cieux”). Notre Père, qui es aux cieux, que ton nom soit sanctifié…  And in the French language, a pigeon fancier is a “colombophile”. And a “colombe” is both a pigeon and a dove.

Come down O Love divine […]
till Love create a place
wherein the Holy Spirit
makes a dwelling.

English hymn


Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: they shall prosper that love thee.


Related Blog Pieces:

1919 Vision: Albert Einstein’s Gravitational Lens (10th December 2019):

Bernie Sanders spouts the anti-Israel and antisemitic libels that the UN inherited from President Idi Amin and Archbishop Desmond Tutu (2nd March 2020):


* Sir Roger Penrose on human consciousness:





Posted in Antisemitism, Christianity, France, Gravity, Israel, Judaism, Musicology, Political philosophy, Science, Theology, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Bernie Sanders spouts the anti-Israel and antisemitic libels that the UN inherited from President Idi Amin and Archbishop Desmond Tutu



Upon an instrument of ten strings, and upon the psaltery; upon the harp with a solemn sound.  Psalm 92


I have consumed a lot of writing on antisemitism/anti-Israelism in recent years, in book form, journals, academic papers, journalism and blogs.  The most useful writing for me is a book published in 2015 by Dr David Patterson, a scholar of humanities and philosophical theology at the University of Texas (Dallas).  I share with David a need to dig into the philosophical roots of things.  We will come to David’s book soon. I will draw from some of his ideas to challenge the philosophical virus we call Socialism, and to prove that Socialism is not the inevitable ‘progress’ of history to its fulfilment as its adherents claim.

The goal of history is not Socialism. The true goal of history – the true destiny of the nations – is something far greater, and too great and glorious to be held in the mind, or in the devices and desires, of any man or woman.  The true goal follows mankind’s trusting, not mankind’s internationalist planning, be it the planning of Socialism, or Islamism (which, as we will see, is violent revolutionary Socialism in an Islamic garb).

Socialism – like Islamism – is in fact a moral inversion of civilisation and true progess.  Socialism, and its antisemitic philosophy of history and of man, is the world’s big collective “NO” to God. And Bernie Sanders, potential “leader of the free world”, is now its most dangerous prophet, and “the Squad” its most dangerous Socialist/Islamist cheerleaders.  (This marriage of convenience between Western Socialist ideology and active Islamism is sometimes called the “Red-Green alliance”, and it is ideologically anti-Israel, to the point of obsession.) 

My friend David Patterson is a Jew, and I am a Christian, and so there are obviously areas of philosophical theology in which we differ.  And as a caveat before I promote his philosophy, I should say that whilst I like David’s analysis of Christian antisemitism, I think that he is too negative about Christianity per se.  Whilst David has good reasons for describing Christianity as a heterodox version of Judaism, Christianity, for all its historical horrors, is the widest-reaching civilising force in history.  There have always been, and there still are, atheistic and religious philosophies that are a lot worse than Christianity.  And Western culture is overwhelmingly indebted to the Church.  Although the Church has doubtless made many errors in its many conflicting ways and teachings of evangelising God of Israel and the Christ, it has brought all parts of the world into the knowledge of the One True God to whom we all owe our existence, and to whom everything owes its existence (including what we moderns call “the laws of physics”).

Much of what today we take for granted, and is indispensable, came out of the Church, not least modern science, and not least the shape of the miniscule letters I am now typing.  Even the so-called Humanism of the Italian Rennaisance was driven by, and largely supported by, the Church.  No Church means no Monteverdi or Mozart, and no Mendelssohn or Mahler.  The melodies, rhythms, and harmonies that now run through all Western music, from the Great American Songbook to all contemporary ‘Western’ music worth listening to, are more indebted to the sacred music and musical knowledge of the Church than most people realise.  And according to the Jewish teachers, not least King David, music is the harmony of the world as we come fully into God. Consider for instance the eschatological very last lines of the very last Psalm (150), where every creature on Earth comes into the new song centred on the orchestra and choir of the Jerusalem Temple.

For a good appreciation of what the Church contributed to Western culture and learning, one need look no further than everything the Socialist Bloc removed from Russian and Eastern European culture and learning and attempted to put in its place, punishing and banishing all composers, writers, playwrights and painters who alluded to the nation’s Christian past.  Although Socialism/Communism consumed half the world (including much of the Islamic world) since it was unleashed a century ago, it has produced nothing of cultural value.  Nothing.  Bernie Sanders seems to think otherwise. He visited the Soviet Union (Yaroslavl) on honeymoon at the height of the Cold War in 1988, courtesy of the KGB. On being interviewed on his return to the USA, he said of the “beautiful” Soviet Union:

“The [metro] stations themselves were very beautiful, including many works of art, chandeliers that were beautiful… Their palaces of culture for the young people, a whole variety of programs for the young people, and cultural programs which go far beyond what we do in this country. We went to a theater in Yaroslavl which was absolutely beautiful, had three separate stages. Their cultural [sic] programs were put together by professional actors and actresses, including a puppeteer area. And the cost, the highest price of the ticket you can get was equivalent of $1.50.” 

Bernie Sanders, interview in 1988, speaking about his honeymoon in paradise. The interview is easy to find on the Internet, and has been widely shared on social media.

Bernie Sanders’ main political message – apart from his anti-Israelism (the Socialist reasons for which we will explore) – is that the Western economy creates huge inequalities.  And it does, of course, and the inequality seems to be getting more extreme, as does the tax evasion and the tax avoidance.  Inequality is a good and necessary thing in any nation, but I agree that the extreme inequality today needs to be addressed. I think that most of us would agree that mankind can, and must, do better.  But man’s propensity for greed and unfairness does not magically disappear by changing the political system to Socialism or any other system.  In any case both Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn are multi-millionaires, and so their desire for equality is not so compelling to mind them to share their wealth with the poor.  There are successful examples of voluntary socialism, most notably the Israeli kibbutzim (on which there are no millionaires, and all are equal), with which Sanders says he is familiar.  But State-imposed Socialism is a false religion. And in the case of the kibbutzniks, they depend as much as everyone else on the nation’s effective capitalist economy that is able to deliver the services, and the defence, that all require for safe and secure modern living and a good life expectancy.

In all the world’s experiments of State Socialism, including the extant ones from the United Socialist Party of Venezuela to Syria’s Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party, the nature of man seems to deterioriate; the greed and unfairness become even worse, and the Socialist palaces seem to get even bigger than the caplitalist ones.  The Socialist elite (and post-Socialist elite, such as in Russia) easily find workarounds to the equalising political ideology they espouse. And because their means of income cannot be revealed, the rich in Socialist societies are successful racketeers in place of successful entrepreneurs (who in the West, because they do not have to hide their money, at least have the opportunity of becoming philanthropists if they become super-rich, where racketeers do not). Furthermore, because Socialism is an atheistic philosophy (even though its innate call to violent revolution has been adopted by the Islamists), no-one in the political elite has moral authority or moral direction other than the system/ideology of the regime itself.

Socialist systems write off the possibility of the sanctity of human being (imago dei), and of God’s plan to bring the world into harmony through Israel:  i.e. the very idea of historical progress on which Christian civilisation is built.


David Patterson’s book is titled, “Anti-Semitism and Its Metaphysical Origins” (Cambridge University Press).  I met David at a conference on antisemitism at Oxford University in 2019, and have kept in touch.  I hope to meet him again when he visits the UK later this year.  It is impossible to précis his book; it is philosophical and deep, but some of the key points for me are as follows, numbered 1 to 4.  I have added my own interpretations and developments to each point.  Philosophy is the engine of all politics.  And I think these four points provide a good philosophical tool kit for anyone who wants to truly undermine Bernie Sanders’ bid to lead the free world into the pseudo-religion of Socialism that I for one played a dutiful if very small part in helping the world to defeat. (In the 1980s I served as an avionics engineer in the RAF, at the height of the Cold War, posted to a “Strike” base helping to maintain the UK’s nuclear deterrence.)


Antisemitism lurks in the soul of every human being.  And because antisemitism lurks in every one of us, to sound the depths of antisemitism is to sound the depths of our soul.

The Hebrew for human being is ben Adam (son of Adam).  We are all sons and daughters of God, but with the free will, and the knowledge, to do good and to do evil.  The parent-child paradigm is good, because children know they are to do good in the eyes of good and loving parents.  And of course, even those of us who were raised by good and loving parents often rebelled against their telling us what is for our ultimate good. If a young child is placed on the dentist’s or orthodontist’s chair by its parents for a painful operation, or series of painful operations, this is evidence enough in the child’s mind of the parents’ inability to reason as well as the child thinks it can.  The young child’s overriding if unarticulated philosophy is inevitably short-term, and is largely about seeking pleasure and avoiding pain.


Antisemitism, whether is it religious or atheistic, is man’s rejecting or appropriating God – including God’s choices. Or antisemitism can be man’s hiding from God.

The scientifically-minded might hide within this or that theory that ‘proves’ that God the Creator, God of Israel, is a “delusion”.  The hubris of such scientists can lead to their thinking: “I am as god”.  Both Richard Dawkins and Stephen Hawking, for example, have taught that it might soon be possible for science to create a kind of virtual-reality eternal life ruled by Artificial Intelligence (a god created in man’s own image, in other words).  Dawkins suggests that this means it is possible we are already living in a computer simulation created by ancestor scientists – a theory proposed by the “transhumanist” philosopher Professor Nick Bostrom.  (Prof Bostrom, at Oxford University, has signed up to cryogenics, in the belief that when humanity reaches what he calls “technological maturity”, he can be thawed out into eternal life.)  Dawkins and Bostrom are free to try to keep their brains eternally ‘alive’ in the ‘paradise’ created by Google. (Google’s founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin are Transhumanists, as are Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk. And Larry Page has created a research centre to, his words, “solve death”.)  But I won’t be trusting my eternal life and soul to any ‘paradise’ created by Silicon Valley and its misguided secular-Jewish genius.  To dust I shall return.  And to God I shall trust my life and soul.

Whereas the atheist hides from God by telling Him that He doesn’t exist, religious types can often use their religion not to seek God who seeks us, but rather to hide within religious adherence, the more sectarian, unthinking, and rule-based (‘pure’) the better.


All human being is chosen by God – we are all potentially imago dei.  This is why the Jews, who were chosen by God to teach the world that we are each chosen (and we are all obliged to live as such) are generally hated, and have been since at least the time of the new-atheist scientist Democritus (d. 370 BC), who, David Patterson tells us, came up with not only the paradigm of physics-as-an-explanation-for-everything, but the first antisemitic blood libel.  Democritus could tolerate people who had nature gods (within the physics), but not the people who were pointing to the metaphysical and omnipotent Being behind all being, and omnipresent in all being.


Jews can be as passionately antisemitic as Christians, Muslims, Atheists and others.  In fact a Jew who is antisemitic can be the most passionate antisemite of all, blaming himself and/or his own people for introducing Israel-centred, and God-of-Israel-centred, monotheistic faith into the world.

Indeed, the (halachically-Jewish) father of Socialism, Karl Marx, was also the father of Socialist antisemitism, teaching that the salvation of the Jews will come when the whole of mankind is “saved from Judaism”.  Bernie Sanders, even though he tells us he is “proud to be a Jew” is a bird of the feather (Marxist, Bundist, Bolshevist, Trotskyist…).

For Marx, the fulfilment of historical progress is the internationalist commonwealth in which man has grown out of faith in God, and man puts all faith in man’s own ability.  The Soviet Union came to call this “Marxist–Leninist scientific atheism”, or more latterly in the Socialist Bloc, “Scientific Atheism”.  As Karl Marx famously said: “The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it [to its inevitable fulfilment in Socialism/Communism]”.  And although this terrible social experiment has failed everywhere in the world it has been tried and is still being tried, Socialism seems to be the only humanist political philosophy that refuses to die, perhaps because its big claims and promises such as peace on Earth and social justice for all inspire a kind of quasi-religious faith that appeals to the propensity for faith that God has given us, and through which He calls us.

Socialism is a lesser god that denies the existence of the One True God who commands us to have no other gods.

Furthermore, because there is no context of Eternity in Socialism, every committed Socialist – not least ageing Socialists such as Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders – seems to exist in a kind of state of panic in which he must help bring about “social justice” in his lifetime.  And for almost all contemporary Socialists, that “social justice” begins with the unleashing of the “Palestinians”, i.e. the Revolutionary Islamic Jihadist Muslim Brotherhood, on the State of Israel.


The Arab “Palestinians” are arguably the most deranged and violent Islamists, Socialists and Nazis in the Arab world, and that is saying something, considering the genocide that the whole Arab world has been unleashing on Christians, Yazidis, Druze and Sufis of the Middle East and North Africa since the turn of the millennium.

The very fact that there is a nation with the name “Israel” – which variously means God rules”, and “the Son of God”, and “Patriarch of the Israelites” from whom God chose the Tribe of Judah to bring the world into God through Israel – is a humiliation of Socialism.  After all, Israel, in the short time since her post-War restitution, has produced all kinds of wonders – not least medicine, and sustainable agriculture in the harshest of environments, and the ecological eradication of malaria – that are indispensable in the modern world.  Socialism on the other hand, despite its billions of followers, has produced nothing of enduring value.

David Patterson, in his book, does not mention Bernie Sanders in person, but if you want to understand Bernie Sanders’ antisemitism/anti-Israelism, and if you are puzzled by Sanders’ courting of Islamist antisemites, Sanders ticks many boxes in David’s book. Sanders is the perfect antisemite.

Whereas Israel is, per capita, the most gifted and giving nation in the world, by contrast, everywhere that Socialism, Islamism, and Arabisation have taken hold in the world, we see tyranny, chaos, oppression and cruelty, despite the enormous wealth of the Gulf States sitting, as they are, on the black gold.  The West turns a blind eye precisely because of the wealth of the Arabs, whose money supports, in Britain alone for instance, academia, elite football clubs, defence sector, civil aviation sector, luxury-car sector, etc.  In general, the West does not really care what the Arabs do, even if they murder, imprison and kidnap all their Christians, so long as they keep buying from the West, and keep sponsoring the elite football clubs and stadia.

Alas, Europe has now started to understand the consequences of its addiction to Arab money, because whilst the Arab nations indulge in internecine warfare, the Arab nations do not absorb Arab refugees from their wars, meaning that Europe has been importing not only Arabs, but the Arab Islamism into which the people have been brainwashed.  The journalist Douglas Murray has called this, “The Strange Death of Europe”, in a book of that title, published in 2017.

Let’s be honest. Do a thought experiment.  Imagine you are a highly intelligent and God-loving human being, with a young family, and your family is thrust into this world from another world, and you can choose your neighbours.  The last people you would choose, in the 21st century, are the Communists and the Arabs. And the last Arabs you would choose are Palestinians, for whom even Egypt has closed its borders. Like Israel, Egypt has realised the need to wall out Palestinians since Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad took power in the Gaza Strip.  Even Egypt, the very cradle of Islamism, and a nation with an appalling lack of human rights (which has the largest number of girls of any nation subject to the extreme cruel practice of female genital mutilation) has today decided it has had enough of the Muslim Brotherhood and the people of the Gaza Strip who voted them into power.


Bernie Sanders’ frequent claims that Israel is “Racist” and “Apartheid”

As I wrote in my last piece, the United Nations is obsessively anti-Israel to the extent that since the UN Human Rights Council was set up in 2006 it has condemned Israel more times than every other nation in the world combined.  And I wrote that the United Nations’ overt legitimisation of antisemitism/anti-Israelism can be precisely dated to 1975. To recap:

It was in this year that the UNGA received President Idi Amin, in his capacity as Chairman of the Organization of African Unity. By this time, Amin had already perpetrated extensive massacres of his own people. And he had proven and peerless antisemitic credentials. Amin approved of the Holocaust, and, in a telegram to the Secretary General of the UN in 1972, advocated the genocide of all Jews. He named a park in Kampala after Hitler, and proposed that a statue of Hitler be erected for want of one in Germany.

The nations of the 1975 UNGA session were not to be disappointed. Amin gave a speech on “the Zionist-American conspiracy” now threatening the world, and which called for the “extinction” of Israel. Tellingly, he received a standing ovation both before and after his speech. The following day, the UN Secretary General and the UNGA President received Amin at a public dinner in his honour. Two weeks later… the UNGA voted to pass a motion condemning the very establishment of the State of Israel as “racism”, and has continued to do so ever since.

The trope “Israel is a racist endeavour” is a product of the United Nations, that came directly from Idi Amin’s Uganda and the rest of the Islamic bloc in the UN (now 56/57 nations).  Considering the near-2000-year tradition of brutal Christian antisemitism, it is not surprising that the Christian nations (well over a hundred nations are formally Christian) have given their nodding approval, and supporting vote, to the Islamic bloc.

And as I said at the beginning of this piece, quoting David Patterson: “Antisemitism lurks in the soul of every human being”.  There was a time when the Church was antisemitic hard-cop and Islam the antisemitic soft-cop, but today it is the other way around. Today it is Islam that preaches genocidal antisemitism,  from Arabic, Turkish and Farsi translations of Mein Kampf and Protocols of the Elders of Zion, wrapped in Islamic theological garb.

The World Council of Churches, which is deeply anti-Israelist, plays antisemitic soft cop. The WCC is not explicitly antisemitic, rather it gives its support to the antisemitic Jihadists set on destroying Israel and pushing all Jews into the sea.

In 2008, the World Council of Churches’ contribution to the World Conference Against Racism in 2001, in Durban, ensured that Israel was demonised as the most racist nation on the planet.  The South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu did, and does, insist that Israel is an apartheid state because she will not allow in the many millions of Arabs from surrounding nations who self-identify as “Palestinian” and naturally want to loot the wonderful nation that the Jews have created amongst godforsaken nations (such as over the borders in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan).  Everywhere in the Arab world, the Arab’s have expelled Jews and looted Jewish property.  It is what contemporary Arabs do.

In fact, Israel is the only nation in the Middle East and North Africa that is not apartheid. To remind you of what I wrote earlier, we are now witnessing what the British Government has acknowledged as genocide levels of persecution of Christians in the Middle East, and that Yazidis, Druze and Sufis have suffered the same fate.  The reason Israel keeps Palestinians out of Israel, and has checkpoints that inconvenience Christian pilgrims such as Desmond Tutu, is not apartheid; it is for the protection Jews from the Palestinian Arabs, whose intent was made clear when they democratically elected Hamas and Fatah, whose covenants, television broadcasts, newspapers, and flags, make no secret of their political aim, which is to liberate all land from the Jews through unrelenting violent Jihad:


The Fatah flag makes no secret of the intentions
of its chairman, President Mamhoud Abbas. Israel
is to be conquered in the name of Jihad, from
“the river to the sea”.  Israel takes these intentions
seriously. The United Nations deny them,
if not legitimise them.

Whenever I come across an Israel-focussed organisation with the title “Middle East Peace”, or “Human Rights”, I am wary, in the knowledge that the organisation is almost certain to be the very opposite of what it claims to be, especially if the organisation claiming to want “peace” and “justice” in the Holy Land is Socialist, Christian, or Islamic. And there are Jewish organisations too that support Arab Jihadist irredentism in the Holy Land.

The Recycling of Bad Education

Antisemitism/anti-Israelism is still a legitimised and popular form of prejudice or hatred in British society, and increasingly in American society, including in our educational establishments.  This is partly due to the monetary element: Western univerisities – and therefore often the education of our teachers – are now highly funded by antisemitic/anti-Israelist Gulf States.  (Do an Internet search, for instance, of Saudi funding of British and American universities.)

If the Arabs were really interested in peace and the welfare of Arabs such as Palestinians, they would be giving their own children a proper education, rather than pumping money into the education of Western undergraduates and post-graduates.

Whilst the Arabs pump money into Western education (to push the Islamist and anti-Israelist agenda), the West, including the UK, pumps money into the education of the Arabs surrounding Israel, much of which educates children to become child martyrs who are to die in the process of killing Jews to assure direct access to paradise as blessed martyrs.

Just last week I came across two articles on the subject, one in The Algemeiner[i]on 21 February, titled: “Who Will Protect the Children of the Holy Land From Palestinian Adults Who Serially Brainwash Them to Hate?”  The article, an op-ed, tells us about the general brainwashing of the region’s Muslim children, and that “an estimated 10,000 children are trained in Hamas’ terrorist camps each year, and at least 160 have died digging terror tunnels into Israel”. This is old news but, sadly, news we seem to need to keep re-telling.

Coinciding with the The Algemeiner article on 21 Feb was an article in the British journal Daily Mail. [ii] The Daily Mail article is titled: “Jihadi textbooks in schools funded by £100 million of OUR cash as foreign aid goes on science material that teaches physics in Palestine by showing a slingshot being fired at ‘Zionists’ ”

The Daily Mail article tells us that British money reaches the Palestinian Jihadists via a UN agency, and tells us that the textbooks include:

“a reading exercise for six-year-olds with the words ‘martyr’ and ‘attack’, plus poems for eight-year-olds which include phrases such as ‘sacrifice my blood’ to ‘eliminate the usurper from my country’ and ‘annihilate the remnants of the ‘foreigner’.

“Nine-year-olds learn maths by adding the number of martyrs in Palestinian uprisings in textbooks illustrated with pictures of their funerals. And ten-year-olds learn the most important thing is giving their life for ‘sacrifice, fight, jihad, and struggle'”

Daily Mail article on Jihadi textbooks, 21 February 2020

The Daily Mail article is hardly an exposé. Jewish and Israeli journalists and journals have been reporting the content of Arab schoolbooks for years, but it is perhaps encouraging that the British mainstream media is now taking an interest, if only to inform British readers that taxpayers’ money is going to Jihadists.

As I wrote in a piece last week (published 19 Feb): “No Israeli parents (as far as I know) are so paranoid and sick in mind and soul that they encourage their children to train to be martyrs, as many thousands of Muslim parents do in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and elsewhere… Child martyrdom, against the Jews of Israel, is encouraged at the highest levels of so-called Islamic scholarship”.

By “highest levels of Islamic scholarship”, I mean the Muslim ‘popes’, or the rather closest figures that contemporary Islam has to the Roman Catholic and East Orthodox popes, such as the Grand Imam Ahmad al-Tayyeb in Egypt, and such as Sheikh Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi in Qatar (the Muslim Brotherhood’s political power base) who heads the International Union of Muslim Scholars.  Al-Qaradawi legitimises and encourages, on behalf of Islam, Muslims turning themselves into human bombs, but only if the target is the Jews of Israel. Other influential Muslim educators and clerics – everywhere from Luton to Libya – go further, legitimising, on behalf of Islam, martyrdom whilst attacking any non-Muslim society.

Much of this bad education started at about the time of 9/11 – the most devastating suicide attack of all time.

Muslim Human Bombs

What chance do the moderate Muslims have when the globally-influential men at the top, such as Al-Qaradawi, the Ayatollah, and Mahmoud Abbas preach that contemporary Islam is fundamentally about martyrdom, even for children, and that the best Muslims are the ones who put on a suicide vest?

Suicide martyrdom is not even the original idea that contemporary Islamic scholars seem to think it is. Japanese suicide pilots flew into American targets long before Muslim leaders came up with the idea of attacking the Twin Towers. Japs also rode on suicide torpedoes into American ships. And they put their pilots on manned missiles when they realised that this was a cheap and crude alternative to using sophisticated fighter planes.

The Japanese seem to have got the idea of suicide bombs from the Chinese. Japan suffered a humiliating defeat by the Republic of China in the Battle of Tai’erzhuang, 1938, partly as a result of Chinaman bombs.


Skin Colour

In my writings on antisemitism/anti-Israelism I have been highly critical not just of contemporary Islam, but of the World Council of Churches and the Anglican Church (ostensibly my own faith community) for their absolute failure to care for the Christians of the Middle East. Western Christians and Arab Christians in the Holy Land allow their own antisemitism to support the genocidal antisemitism of the Muslim irredentists in the Holy Land, whilst turning a blind eye to the genocide of their fellow Christians throughout the Middle East.

The World Council of Churches, in accusing Israel of being a racist nation, often speak of skin colour.  (It is perhaps worth pointing out that personally I do not make pre-judgements according to skin colour. In any case, my wonderful mother is dark brown, being from South-East Asia, where my father met her during his National Service with the RAF. Under previous systems of British administration, I would have been classified “half-caste”.)

There is a dangerous myth popular in the West that Israeli Jews are white imperialist imposters occupying the lands rightfully claimed by brown Arabs since the British took it off the Turks.  Bernie Sanders and Desmond Tutu often use the skin-colour argument, augmenting what Sanders calls “racist government”, “occupation” and “colonialism”.

A year after the Durban Conference in 2001, Desmond Tutu gave a disgustingly antisemitic speech in the USA, based on his impressions following a visit to Israel, where he was no doubt hosted by his fellow Anglican clergy. And as I have written elsewhere on this blog, the Anglican Arab clergy, not least Rev Dr Naim Ateek, are antisemitic in the extreme:

“[I saw] the humiliation of the Palestinians at checkpoints and roadblocks, suffering [sic] like us when young white police officers prevented us from moving about…

 “I am not even anti-white, despite the madness of that group”…

People are scared in this country, to say wrong is wrong because the Jewish lobby is powerful – very powerful. Well, so what?  The apartheid government was very powerful, but today it no longer exists. Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Pinochet, Milosevic, and Idi Amin were all powerful, but in the end they bit the dust…”

Desmond Tutu, from his speech in the USA in 2002

Archbishop Tutu not only incorrectly asserts that Israel is “apartheid” and “white”, but condemns it in the same breath as he does the regimes of Hitler, Stalin, Idi Amin… This is antisemitic in the extreme, and it is what Holocaust historian Deborah Lipstadt calls “soft-core denial”.

In fact, around 50% of Israeli Jews are refugees, or descendants of refugees, from the Arab nations (Mizrahi Jews), who are brown-skinned.  And there are well over a 100,000 Ethiopian Jews of Israel who are black-skinned. Yes, there is some racism in Israel, but it is nowhere near as serious as antisemitism.  There is racism in all nations. To single Israel out on the grounds of racism is absurd, and the only reason for singling out Israel is antisemitism.  Surely, Archbishop Tutu would be better employed trying to sort out the chaotic, ultra-corrupt, and ultra-violent mess that his personal friends have created since they were elected to govern South Africa, and whom Tutu helped empower.

Since the early Arab-Israeli wars, there has been a movement of 700,000 Arabs (who, since the 1960s and the formation of the PLO started to self-identify as ‘Palestinians’) out of parts of Israel, and 850,000 Jews out of the Arab nations.  The Jews fled or were expelled, and the majority fled to Israel.  The Jews, such as the Yemeni Jews for instance, have more “right to return” than the Arabs, but of course they cannot return, because the Arab nations are now actually apartheid, and exclude Jews (and increasingly exclude Christians).  In Yemen, for instance,  the Houthis’ slogan is “God is great, death to the US, death to Israel, curse the Jews, and victory for Islam”, but things became impossible for the Jews long before the rise of the Houthis. Following mass murders of Jews and looting of property, 49,000 Yemeni Jews were airlifted to Israel by the British and American air forces in 1949-1950.

Israel is in no sense apartheid. Yes, there are different obligations for Jews and Arab-Israelis.  For instance, young Jewish adults are conscripted into National Service for the defence of Israel, whereas Arab Israelis, Muslims, Christians and Druze, are not (although they can volunteer, and many do).  Arab-Israelis, including Muslims, serve at the highest levels of administration and law, and they play in the Israeli national football team.

Yes, there are Jewish children with pale skin, but there are also Palestinian children with pale skin. And Muslim child martyrs come in all colours.

Israeli Jews have all skin colours. It is not possible to discern Jews and Arabs by skin colour. A group of brown children playing on the beach at, say, Jaffa, are just as likely to be Jews as Arabs. And so why does this matter? It matters because almost every anti-Israelist organisation I can think of, including the United Nations, appeals to the myth that Jews are white racist imposters on the land of brown people, and responsible for the lack of peace in the Middle East (despite the fact that no nation of brown people in the Middle East is at peace with its brown neighbours).

The UN first legitimised slogans such as “Zionism is racism”, and “Israel is a racist endeavour”, and “Israel is apartheid”.  As I wrote in my piece last week, this largely started with the audacity of President Idi Amin, the “Butcher of Uganda”, despite his being one of the most racially-motivated perpetrators of genocide in modern history.

And at the follow-up “Durban II” conference in 2009 President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from Iran – one of a handful of the most morally disgusting nations on Earth, since the Islamic Revolution – turned up to tell all nations that Israel is “totally racist”.

But it’s not just the Muslims and Christians who attack Israel on the perceived whiteness of its Jews. There are many Israel-hating Jews like Bernie Sanders within the American and British diaspora who want to convince others that Jews do not belong in Israel, on the grounds of race.

And in the World Council of Churches, Desmond Tutu is far from the exception who plays the race card.  The group NGO Monitor, in a report[iii] on the World Council of Churches (WCC), writes:

At an August 2015 “Israel: Palestinian Christian Perspective” conference, promoted by the BDS [Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions] Movement, WCC’s co-moderator of PIEF [Palestine Israel Ecumenical Forum] Robert Smith* stated, “Christian theology that support Zionism is heresy [sic]… Such Christian theology that support Zionism is a false teaching that must be confronted…it is essential for all of us to understand that the Israel of the bible the ancient Israelites are not link in any substantive or material way to the contemporary modern state of Israel [in other words to the Jews]…the Israeli society is full with racism and light skin privilege…”

This unctuous man, Rev Robert Smith*, of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, is depicted as a Jerusalemite exercising his light-skin privilege to lord it over the Jews.  Even Germany, which has an appalling record of undermining Israel, has ruled that “Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions” is antisemitic.


And below is a picture of light-skinned German Lutheran in Israel, also representing the WCC (on its “Ecumenical” program EAPPI). He is stalking and filming what to me look like brown Israeli soldiers. The WCC/EAPPI recruits Christian volunteers, young and old, from all over the world. Part of the EAPPI tour of duty involves “monitoring” the IDF in Jew-baiting programs given names such as, “Christ at the Checkpoint”. If this German Christian were to stalk soldiers like this in any other nation in the Middle East, it is very likely that he would be subject to torture and then beheading or, in Saudi Arabia, crucifixion.


One might have expected contemporary Lutherans, especially German Lutherans, to distance themselves from antisemitism/anti-Israelism as a result of their total complicity in the Holocaust.  Israel, after all, is home to half the world’s Jews, and is under permanent siege from Arab and Iranian genocidal antisemites whose regimes make no secret of their ambition to finish what the Nazis started.

The very first German ‘Lutheran’ after all (the Augustinian monk Martin Luther), wrote On the Jews and Their Lies calling for the extermination of Jewry. Adolph Hitler, persuaded by similar ideas, had an open copy of Luther’s antisemitic tract on display in a glass case at the Nuremberg Rallies.

Vote Trump!

I don’t like Donald Trump, and I don’t like Boris Johnson.  But I voted Conservative to keep an antisemite out of 10 Downing Street.  Similarly, I hope the Americans vote Trump to keep an antisemite Socialist and his antisemitic “Squad”, and the deeply-infected Democratic Party, out of the White House.

Antisemitism is, and has been for millennia, the greatest threat to civilisation, and to your soul.





Screenshots of typical Palestinian education and culture in 2020:

The was published on the MEMRI Twitter feed on 25 February:




Posted in Antisemitism, Christianity, Israel, Judaism, Musicology, Political philosophy, Science, Theology, Uncategorized | 2 Comments

It is Time to Destroy the United Nations General Assembly

« Ma vraie gloire, ce n’est pas d’avoir gagné quarante batailles ; Waterloo effacera le souvenir de tant de victoires. Ce que rien n’effacera, ce qui vivra éternellement, c’est mon Code civil. »

Napoléon Bonaparte,

In 1948 in Paris, leaders and influencers in culture, law and politics from 58 nations gathered at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) to proclaim “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights”.

The structure of the document – and to some extent the content of the document – was based on the Napoleonic Code: the first modern pan-national system of legal coding, adopted throughout Europe, Latin America, and much of the French Empire (or if not fully adopted, the Napoleonic Code nevertheless deeply influenced the systems put in place by nations aiming to modernise).

Through the Napoleonic Code of the First French Empire, Europe’s patchy feudal systems, and the arbitrary, antisemitic, and ‘infallible’ rulings of the Pope and the Church, were brought into something that, alongside the British system, were overwhelmingly influential in bringing the world into modernisation: i.e. our world of international airports, the World Wide Web, modern economics (Napoleon founded the Banque de France, and inflation control measures), science, engineering and computing (all now done to internationally-agreed standards), decimalisation, international medical research, vaccination, international diplomacy through a common language (which used to be French, but is now more usually English), weights and measures (until very recently, all nations calibrated “1 metre” and “1 kilogram” against the prototype metal objects in Paris) etc, etc.  France was the mètre, or mesure, of things in the modernising world where the Church had created the international standards in ages past (such as communication through Latin, musical harmony and composition, and the shape of the characters I am now typing: the Carolingian miniscule).

And modern living following the industrialisation is generally good, certainly here in England.  Yes, there are great problems to solve, but what kind of beings would we become if we had no problems to work through, individually and collectively?  Our human rights are generally good, as human rights generally are in all modernised nations that are not Islamic, Communist, post-Communist, or Japan. (I classify India, now modernising rapidly, as post-Communist.)

Modernisation is good. In previous ages, many children died in infancy, and many mothers died giving birth. Most of us now live long enough in the world to enjoy family life, with far fewer risks to it than ever in the past.  Most of us have the opportunity to comprehend the beauty of Creation, and reflect on its meaning, and on what our Creator, the Being of all being, asks of our human being on Earth.

Two of my great heroes are Mozart and Emily Brontë – Emily for her poetry, her indomitable soul, and her worldview (she was born and bred, as I was, in and around the city of Bradford, Yorkshire). They died in their early 30s, which was not unusual in the 18th and 19th centuries. The Mozarts, Wolfgang and Constanze, had 6 children, only two of whom survived infancy, which again was not unusual. In my native Bradford (“Wool City”) in the late 19th century, at the peak of a highly-polluting Industrial Revolution, life expectancy was 17. As a working-class Bradfordian myself, had I been born a century before I was in 1961, the odds would have been stacked against my ever becoming an adult, or of my wanting to become an adult amongst those dark satanic mills.

The Ancient and Modern Code of Israel

Modern living is good, largely, I maintain, thanks to Israel, on whom all civilisation worth its salt is built.

The first hugely influential pan-national code is not the humanist UNGA Declaration, but the code of the people Israel, the Mosaic law, in particular the Ten Commandments, half of which, crucially, deal with the human relationship to God, not just to other humans.

As I have written in other pieces, there has never been a successful society anywhere at any time based on atheism/humanism, and there never will be. Post-War Germany is a striking illustration of the difference between monotheistic philosophy (West Germany) and atheistic philosophy (East Germany) at the nation’s foundation. The two German states illustrate what can happen to people of the same race, culture, tradition, level of intelligence and nationality, depending on their leaders’ founding philosophy. The British not only re-built the Ruhr Valley but re-Christianised West Germany as part of the Denazification process. “Thou shalt not kill” was writ large. East Germany (until 1989) on the other hand killed or imprisoned civilians on the grounds of political dissent or thought crime (established through secret police, mass surveillance, and hundreds of thousands of willing civilian informants). Judicial independence answerable to God-given human conscience and moral wisdom, rather than loyalty to Stalin’s cause, meant nothing to East German judges.  And “Thou shalt not kill” meant nothing to German Border guards, who were granted shoot-to-kill orders of fellow Germans trying to cross to the West.

Israel is at once the most ancient and the most modern nation in the world. I say Israel is the most ancient, because she is the only nation that, whilst displaying a remarkable ability to adapt very quickly, has conserved her ancient national identity, faith, scripture, culture, social structure and language. Unlike the Levantine nations that surround her, Israel does not want or need, in order to keep her tradition alive, to lash, imprison and behead people who come to doubt or challenge the faith into which they were born.

And although today there are over a hundred times more Muslims in the world than there are Jews, the Muslim nations think the world has too many Jews, and having killed them, or expelled them to Israel, now want to destroy Israel (home to half the world’s Jews, and about 50% of whom are refugees, or descendants of refugees, from the Arab nations).  And the German regime, including Angela Merkel – formerly a supporter of the Stasi (how else could she have advanced politically in East Germany?) – is diplomatically sugar-coating its antisemitism whilst doing everything it can to help the genocidally-antisemitic Arabs to complete the Final Solution. Consider for instance Merkel’s friendship and support for President Abbas, who himself openly supports terrorist child-martyrdom and pay-for-slay, and makes no secret of his belief in the Final Solution, which is also written into the covenants of the Jihadist organisations he heads: PLO and Fatah.  When he speaks in Arabic to his own people, Abbas is as open about genocide of the Jews as was Hitler (look up the speeches with English subtitles on media-watch websites such as MEMRI, CAMERA and PMW).

No Israeli parents (as far as I know) are so paranoid and sick in mind and soul that they encourage their children to train to be martyrs, as many thousands of Muslim parents do in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and elsewhere. As I wrote in my piece last week, child martyrdom, against the Jews of Israel, is encouraged at the highest levels of so-called Islamic scholarship.

Israel lives, whilst every great empire or caliphate that has ever surrounded it or subsumed it is now confined to museums. “Egypt”, the very last word of English translations of Genesis, is very anciently-civilised land of course, but its ancient culture, language, knowledge and wisdom (that were known to Moses) are long gone. The Arabs of the land know less about ancient Egypt than the Eyptologists of Europe (especially since Napoleon Bonaparte discovered a large fragment of a multilingual stele in the town of Rashid: the “Rosetta Stone”).

And Israel is the most modern nation in the world in the sense that she is the most innovative of all nations per capita, gifting the rest of the world with her genius. The Prince of Wales, on his recent and first formal visit to Israel spoke of “Israeli geniuses maintaining the entire structure of the NHS [the British National Health Service]”. But frankly, I do not wish to encourage the reader to trust the Prince of Wales on matters Israel. His equerry and long-term political friend Sir Nicholas Soames is a notorious Israel basher (see my piece, There is no Two-State Solution [i]) whose sentiments the Prince has echoed.

Almost everything about civilisation today is fundamentally Jewish, not least through the overwhelming historical influence on the world of the non-Jewish and universalising versions of the Jewish faith: i.e. Christianity (in all its forms) and Islam (in all its forms).

Even our 7-day week is Jewish, dating back, according to empirical history, to the 6th century BCE. The Romans for instance had the nundinal, or 8-day week, and 10 months in a year (whilst not calling out the months in the depths the winter). And although the mètre of the First French Empire obsoleted the cubit, the Republican 10-day week did not catch on.

And in the scripture that we Christians inherited from our parent faith, God Almighty is referred to as “God of Israel”. And “Israel” is referred to as God’s “firstborn” and the “Son of God” (cf. Exodus 4:22 for example).

Bref. It’s impossible for any thinking person interested in world affairs and our human being to not have an opinion on Jews and on Israel. And haters of Jews and Israel – and admirers of Jews and Israel (a much rarer breed) – are as likely to be religious as irreligious. Here in England and the Church of England for instance, I know Christians who are deeply anti-Semitic – and therefore inevitably deeply and obsessively antagonistic to the Jewish state and Jewish rule of the Holy Land – and I know atheists who are philo-Semitic and supportive of Israel, showing gratitude for all that she gives to the world, and our modern and healthy living.  (Although Jews comprise a mere 0.2% of the world population, they have won 30% of Nobel Prizes in Medicine.)

Where did the Universal Declaration of Human Rights go wrong?

I think that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, derived from the Napoleonic Code, is about as good a document as we can have in our times.  But the Declaration has one huge omission, an omission that, in hindsight, has resulted in the absolute and extant failure of the whole UN project, and especially the Human Rights project.

Unlike Napoleon himself, whose vision and Code emancipated the Jews of Europe from the Church-enforced ghettos, the main drafter of the UN Declaration – René Cassin – failed to write into the Declaration that special measures are necessary to counter antisemitism, “the longest hatred”.


Perhaps future generations will see as inexcusable the nascent UN’s failure to recognise antisemitism as a unique form of abuse and a unique form of radical failure of the human intellect and politic. After all, the UN was seeking a path to peace immediately after a world war whose main philosophical impetus was genocidal antisemitism.

A tragic irony is that the Leftist thinker René Cassin, the Declaration’s author, was himself a French Jew (and old enough to remember the Dreyfus Affair, as Cassin himself told the world in his acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1968).

In my studies, I have come to realise that every international organisation, be it religious, secular, charitable, or political will inevitably be consumed by antisemitism. The World Council of Churches is no exception. The European Union is no exception. The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (the bloc of Muslim nations) is no exception. The International Criminal Court is no exception.  And the United Nations is no exception.

Far from protecting human rights, the UN enables and mandates the most extreme and cruel human-rights abuses. How? As nations gather in the UNGA, each nation is given the opportunity to avoid scrutiny by projecting all ills onto the world’s scapegoat: the Jew.

The Frenchman René Cassin witnessed the Dreyfus Affair – the greatest historical conspiracy implicating the French nation (Government, Church, Army, and mainstream media) – but paradoxically he drafted the charter that enabled the United Nations General Assembly, which – as the world will surely see as it comes to its senses  – is the greatest and most lethal of all historical conspiracies, implicating all nations apart from the USA and Israel.

The UNGA, we might say, is the international macrocosm of the French microcosm, but with an important difference. Whereas the antisemitic Dreyfus conspiracy was clever and systematic and difficult to deconstruct, the antisemitic UNGA conspiracy is stupid and blatant and easy to deconstruct. And deconstruct it we must.


The UN was formed at a time when the world – Christian, Islamic, Communist and Fascist (Spain was still Fascist when it joined the UN in 1955) – was more deeply antisemitic than the world has ever been. Inevitably then, when all the antisemitic nations – religious and atheistic – came together to “unite”, they united on antisemitism/anti-Israelism. Indeed, the only ideology that is shared by Socialist/Communist, Fascist, Christian and Muslim nations is antisemitism. I cannot think of another ideology common to them all; can you?

And so the UN quickly arrived at the ludicrous position in which the only nation scrutinised for human rights abuses, against the UN’s new Declaration, is the sole Jewish nation. And yet Israel is the only nation in the Middle East and North Africa that has human rights.

Israel should be seen as a template of human rights for all 22 Muslim Arab entities, none of which has human rights.

Israeli-Arabs (especially girls) are the only Arabs in the Middle East and North Africa who have human rights. Pick any Arab nation, and then tick off which of the thirty articles of the Declaration that nation’s regime endeavours to meet. Or better, don’t waste your time, because the answer is “none”.

If you want to see human rights, stay far away from Mecca. (You won’t be allowed anywhere near apartheid Mecca in any case, unless you are a Muslim, of a theological genus acceptable to the Saudi Administration.) And if you want to travel beyond the Arab world to see the opposite of human rights, visit Iran, where adult human beings are imprisoned for decades for shedding the hijab, or receive the death sentence for shedding Islam. And go further east to Pakistan, where human rights violations are generalised. (And human rights under the Hindu regime of India, it has to be said, are not much better.) There is no Muslim nation in the world that has human rights or whose regimes want human rights. As the Sultan of Brunei made clear in 2019, he wants to move his super-rich nation further away from human rights, in order to stone homosexuals to death and to amputate thieves, and to imprison lesbians for 10 years.  The Sultan of Brunei wants more Islam, and less human rights.

Contemporary Islam is paranoid. Its mainstream has become extreme, regressing to medieval ‘purity’, perhaps precisely because Islam – as contemporary Muslim governments and their clerical advisers and the Muslim Brotherhood see it – is threatened by human rights. And yet the international community, including the Muslim nations, have agreed to unite on human rights.

In order to pull off this human-rights scam, the Muslim nations must scapegoat Israel as the sole human-rights-violating pariah state, and they must get the Christian, post-Christian, Communist and post-Communist nations to agree, which, of course, they do:  “The longest hate” is also the most universal hate.  All nations can unite on it, to their leaders’ eternal shame.

As more and more nations joined the UN (there are now almost 200), the antisemitism/anti-Israelism simply got worse, and it is getting worse to this day. This is extremely serious of course. The resurgence of antisemitism in every age is the barometer for a generalised moral collapse and the onset of tyranny. And so to see the nations united in antisemitism, means that we are all in trouble, and we really must react effectively to this global crisis.

Judenboykott. Kauft nicht bei Juden!

Only last week, the United Nations agreed to blacklist many Israeli companies. No other nation’s companies are blacklisted by the UN. The nations (led by the Islamic bloc) have voted to regress to 1930s Germany, where the people were told: “Don’t buy from the Jews”.

As I wrote in my piece two weeks ago – “It’s Time to Rethink Human Rights” – all the international forums that were formed after World War II – such as the World Council of Churches, Oxfam, Christian Aid, Amnesty International, the European Union, and every organisation prefixed with the word “Islamic” or “Muslim” – is deeply institutionally antisemitic.  And so is the International Criminal Court, founded in 1998 – inevitably so, because for much of the world the Jew is, by definition, the international criminal par excellence, and therefore the Jewish state inevitably the most criminal state in the world.

Leaders and regimes in almost all the nations and religious bodies (including my own nation, the UK, and my own church, the Church of England) have, since World War II, used international bodies to legitimise antisemitism. In the West this generally takes the form of anti-Israelism. The Muslim nations also subscribe to anti-Israelism of course, but are not shy about preaching the genocidal antisemitism that they learned from pre-War Christendom.

In the UN, the early warning signs were there from the off, but were usually implicit until the Muslim nations started to join the UN.

In order for the UN’s implicit antisemitism to become explicit (and thereby more effective), it required someone to come on to the world stage with a big mouth, who was media-savvy, who had charisma, and for whom antisemitism is a matter of overt Islamic pride rather than a post-War Christian dirty secret.

Cometh the Hour, Cometh the Man

The UN’s antisemitic coming out can be precisely dated to 1975. It was in this year that the UNGA received President Idi Amin, in his capacity as Chairman of the Organization of African Unity. By this time, Amin had already perpetrated extensive massacres of his own people. And he had proven and peerless antisemitic credentials. Amin approved of the Holocaust, and, in a telegram to the Secretary General of the UN in 1972, advocated the genocide of all Jews. He named a park in Kampala after Hitler, and proposed that a statue of Hitler be erected for want of one in Germany.

The nations of the 1975 UNGA session were not to be disappointed. Amin gave a speech on “the Zionist-American conspiracy” now threatening the world, and which called for the “extinction” of Israel. Tellingly, he received a standing ovation both before and after his speech. The following day, the UN Secretary General and the UNGA President received Amin at a public dinner in his honour. Two weeks later, with renewed confidence following its coming out party, the UNGA voted to pass a motion condemning the very establishment of the State of Israel as “racism”, and has continued to do so ever since.

Idi Amin the “Butcher of Uganda”, racist-evil personified who murdered up to half-a-million people of Uganda, largely on ethnic grounds, and who expulsed the tens of thousands of Ugandan Asians, will no doubt have been pleased to see the antisemitic and Israel-focussed progress of the UNGA from his luxurious home in Saudi Arabia – Amin was hosted by the Saudi royal family from the time of his exile from Uganda in 1979 until his death in 2003. Indeed, in 2006, the UNGA spawned the equally disgusting United Nations Human Rights Council UNHRC.

This graphic, from the organisation UN Watch, shows that since the formation of the UNHRC in 2006, Israel has been condemned more times than all the other nations of the world put together. And most of the most cruel, morally-depraved and disgusting regimes on the planet, including Uganda, have not received a single condemnation!


The effects of World War II on the mutating virus of Antisemitism

In the Christian nations of the West, guilt about the Holocaust caused antisemitism to mutate, but not to diminish. And why would it? To expect this would be as absurd as expecting German and French Jews who had survived the death camps to return to Germany and France and politely ask for their homes and property back. (I believe that the only Nazi-occupied European nation whose people generally and hopefully welcomed surviving Jews back, and had cared for, rather than steal, their property is Denmark.)

Since the turn of the Millennium, the antisemitism in international organisations has got much worse and more obsessive. And the regimes and the clerics in every Muslim-majority nation – not least Uganda as mentioned – either deny the Holocaust or complain that Hitler did not go far enough. Today the Muslims use precisely the same kind of genocidally-antisemitic language as the Nazis, and often the same texts, notably the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, taught as factually true in the world’s Islamic universities (which are now failing as badly as the academies in Nazi Germany).

The teaching about Jews by Mahathir bin Mohamad – the Prime Minister of Malaysia and the elder statesman of the nations of Organisation of Islamic Cooperation – and Sheikh Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi – head of the Qatari-based International Union of Muslim Scholars – is almost exactly the same as that of Henry Ford and Adolf Hitler in the 1920s and 1930s. The only difference is the Islamic theological garb where Ford and Hitler used Christian theological garb (and both Ford and Hitler encouraged the revival of the Oberammergau Passion Play as a means to re-engage Christians with their obligation to hate and persecute Jews in every generation).

Although in the East Asian theatre of World War II, Japan’s imperialist belligerence began in 1937 independent of Nazism/genocidal antisemitism, the War in the West was the result of the ideology of genocidal antisemitism. And this was not just the ideology of Hitler. Antisemitism and genocidal antisemitism were fairly generalised in the Christian nations, and in the Arab nations (largely working out from the Muslim Brotherhood, formed in Cairo in in 1928[ii], but also via the anti-Dreyfusard French colonialists). Hitler attributed his political ideology to his good friend Henry Ford, who had bought his own publishing company and newspaper in 1920, and spent the best part of the decade publishing articles chronicled in volumes such as: The International Jew: The World’s Foremost Problem. Ford’s work was translated into German and helped inspire the Nazi ideology, and the Nazi leadership, including, by his own admission, Hitler himself. Henry Ford was awarded, and accepted, the Nazi’s Grand Cross in 1938. Whilst all Nazi officers and administrators had a picture of Hitler in their office, Hitler himself hung a picture of Henry Ford in his office. Ford was the only American to be lauded in Mein Kampf, but was dropped from subsequent versions of the tract, for obvious reasons.

Surely, it was generally thought, if the Jews really are, as Ford and Hitler were claiming, the world’s foremost problem, yet being so relatively few in number (a small fraction of 1% of the world population), they could be dispensed with, and quickly forgotten. As Hitler famously said regarding the Ottoman Turks’ large-scale 1915 genocide of Armenians, Assyrians and Pontic Greeks: “Who, after all, speaks to-day of the annihilation of the Armenians?”

It is impossible to know what was going in Hitler’s mind, but the historian Paul Johnson, in A History of the Jews, makes the convincing case that the reason Hitler himself wanted war was not for more land for Germany – the Nazis had already walked into Austria and Czechoslovakia – but because he knew the German people could not be persuaded to systematically murder in peacetime. Murder is not natural behaviour, particularly for highly civilised and educated people, over 90% of whom in Germany, Austria and Czechoslovakia where Christian, a fact that Hitler – a Roman Catholic who admired Martin Luther – approved of, not least as an antidote to the Communists’ state atheism. And Hitler, promising the Third Holy Empire, was a messiah figure to the bulk of German and Austrian Christians. Many were deceived.

Thou shalt not kill. Only total war could engender the correct national mind-set in this Christian nation. Germans, and especially Berliners, who before the rise of Nazis were arguably the most advanced and sophisticated people on Earth, were obviously not amenable to genocide in peacetime. Paul Johnson tell us that it was doubly important for Hitler to take Poland, because Poland had the highest number of Jews in Europe, right on Germany’s doorstep. But walking into Poland to annex it would have not inspired highly-civilised Germans to genocide. Hitler needed total war. He needed to make his nation into a nation of killers. And so Operation Himmler was launched: a false flag operation comprising staged attacks on Germany by German soldiers dressed in Polish uniforms. Germany then could, and did, declare war on Poland, as a matter of self-defence. And even the reluctant Berliners, hitherto suspicious of Hitler and enjoying the city life and the Weimar culture, now embraced the Nazi cause and the killing spree.  Europe was overrun by a plague of evil German sub-humans who mutated into their new form as quickly as grasshoppers into locusts.

At the same time, in the Middle East, Muslim propaganda calling for the genocide of Jews was just as strong as in Christian Europe. And is it no less prevalent today. Scholars of contemporary Muslim antisemitism have attributed the worsening conditions in all Muslim nations to several causes that there is not space to explore here. But an important reason is the eschatological (or ‘Apocalyptic’) timetable according to mainstream Islamic Jihadism. As I wrote in my last piece, “Islamism” (the term the movement gave itself) is now the mainstream of Islam, including here in England. Whether or not its advocates promote violence (Dar al-Harb) or evangelical persuasion (Dar al-Islam), they all believe that the Time of the End (the “Day of Resurrection”) is fast approaching when Islam is to rule the whole world following the destruction of Israel with Jerusalem (or “Al-Quds”) as the centre of the global caliphate. And Islamism – which is the antithesis of human rights – is using the antisemitic Useful Infidels of the Human Rights Council to legitimise both Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb.

Time to Destroy the United Nations Human Rights Council

The UNHRC does the very opposite of what is it supposed to do. It is the greatest false prophet or false messiah of our times. It enables all the nations to gather to protect every nation that wants to perpetuate its human rights violations, and to justify the lack of peace on Earth. It does this by allowing each nation to scapegoat the Jews according to the philosophy of Henry Ford: Jews are The World’s Foremost Problem.

According to the United Nations, the Jewish state of Israel is the world’s foremost problem.

Hence we see, at the UN, spokesman from disgustingly cruel and failing nations such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and worse, gathering to do nothing more than to tell us what they think of Israel, one of the few nations in the world whose government does implement laws and measures that meet that articles of Universal Declaration of Human Rights (not that the Jewish state would ever need such a document, working as it does, to the highest code of all, despite the crises caused by being at perpetual war with brain-dead Nazified Arabs).

If you look down the list of the 30 articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Pakistan does not meet a single one of them, and the Pakistani government shows no intention of meeting of them. Imran Khan will not, and cannot, take on the clerics and the madrasas. To do that would be to relinquish his position as Prime Minister. In Pakistan, as in all Muslim nations, Islam trumps human rights. According to the UN’s own figures (UNICEF) Pakistan has allowed 1.9 million paedophile “marriages” (sanctioned by Islam and unchallenged by the Islamic government of Pakistan) to girls who are likely to die trying to give birth before full puberty. Female genital mutilation is widespread in Pakistan. Pakistan kidnaps, kills, and imprisons Christians. Pakistan executes homosexuals. Pakistan is one of the world’s great Islamic holes of corruption and human rights abuses, which if not all sanctioned by the government are tolerated by the government. And yet if you look back up at the graphic of the history UNHRC condemnations, Pakistan has not received a single one. Pakistan doesn’t receive human rights condemnations, it only hands them out: to Israel.

Saudi Arabia, which has even chaired the UNHRC, is just as institutionally cruel as the Uganda of its friend Idi Amin. Saudi clerics preach genocidal antisemitism with impunity, and anti-Christian libel (which is leading to mass murder of the region’s Christians). There are no Jews left in Saudi Arabia today, despite large Jewish communities having lived their continuously, until recently, since many centuries before Islam was even dreamed up. There are no churches allowed in Saudi, and no public evidence of Christian worship. Conversion from Islam to Christianity is punishable by death. The general treatment of women in Saudi is degrading even by Islamic standards. In other words, there are no human rights in Saudi Arabia. Look down the list of the 30 articles of Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and it is obvious that the Saudi regime does not meet a single one of them, and has no intention of doing so. Beheadings and amputations are popular entertainment in Riyadh. Often the decapitated body is hung in public for a few days, next to its head, just to remind the public what can happen if they ask for human rights. The young Saudi writer and blogger Raif Badawi was awarded a punishment of 1000 lashes, in public, in instalments of 50, and 10 years in prison (if he survives the lashes), and a huge fine, precisely because he expressed his views that he wants to see at least some human rights in Saudi Arabia.

How, despite the world having an international human rights forum, does Saudi Arabia get away with zero condemnations? The answer, as I hope the reader has realised by now, is because all human rights condemnations are reserved for the scapegoat: the Jew.

We have an effective UN Watch organisation, but I think that we need a movement to engender the idea that the UNGA/UNHRC must be destroyed, not just observed and complained about. We must encourage the world to see that the UN enables and even legitimises human rights violations, and therefore it must be destroyed in the interests of universal human rights.

The Isaiah Wall

The nascent UN set up its headquarters in New York City. Gardens were developed and, over the years, various sculptures, artefacts and installations added. One of these is the “Isaiah Wall”. It has the inscription in English, translated from the Jewish Bible:

“They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more”.

The text is Isaiah 2:4. But the text is out of context. It implies that the United Nations – i.e. that man – will judge the nations, from New York, or Geneva, or Durban… But in fact the text is really about God’s judging of the nations, from Jerusalem.

It is perverse indeed that the United Nations General Assembly, which has managed to unite on nothing more than anti-semitism and anti-Israelism, has appropriated from God of Israel and the Jews the most Zionist text in the Book.

Man cannot achieve God’s Peace, Shalom, Jeru-Salem without God and without Jerusalem, the City of David: King of the Jews, of the Tribe of Judah.

Isaiah tells us that the peace will come not when the world has destroyed Israel/Zion and Jerusalem and the Jews, but when God our Creator, God of Israel, draws all nations to Him through the Jewish people, and the Jewish nation, through which God pilots all nations to their destiny.

What the UN’s Isaiah Wall – together with the UN’s antisemitic behaviour – is really telling us is that the UN, not God of Israel, will decide how the nations are judged.

Let us read the “swords into plowshares” with the original Jewish words that precede it (English translation: JPS Tanakh):

The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.
And it shall come to pass in the end of days,
That the mountain of the LORD’S house
Shall be established as the top of the mountains,
And shall be exalted above the hills;
And all nations shall flow unto it.
And many peoples shall go and say:
Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
To the house of the God of Jacob;
And He will teach us of His ways,
And we will walk in His paths.’
For out of Zion shall go forth the law,
And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
And He shall judge between the nations,
And shall decide for many peoples;
And they shall beat their swords into plowshares,
And their spears into pruninghooks;
Nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
Neither shall they learn war any more.

It is time to turn things upside-down. Whereas the nations have come to think that they will come into their rightful destiny if they all gang up against Israel, in fact we must help Israel and the Jews (or at least the Jews who are not anti-Israel) to build up Israel.

Of course many Christians and Muslims, through pride, want to own Jacob’s Ladder, the axis mundi, the “gate of Heaven”, the “House of God”, Israel, Jerusalem. But God’s covenants with the Jews are eternal.  It is not through the United Nations, but through the seed of Abraham, that all nations will be blessed.

The anonymous author of the Gospel of John, who wrote at about the beginning of the 2nd century CE, and was by far the most anti-Jew and sectarian writer in the New Testament, nevertheless put into the mouth of Jesus the words, “Salvation is of the Jews”.



[i] There is no Two-State Solution:

[ii] The Arab-Israeli Conflict Made Simple – The Nazi Elephant in the Room:
(A recent Polish visitor to my blog kindly translated this piece into Polish: )

Posted in Antisemitism, Christianity, France, Israel, Judaism, Political philosophy, Science, Theology, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Israel is the Meaning of Life

Israël : C’est le sens de la vie

עם ישראל חי

There was a terrorist attack last week in the London suburb of Streatham by a young Muslim Englishman who set out to murder English infidels and become a religious martyr. The attack was described – universally throughout Britain, by the Church, the media and the Government – as a “senseless attack”.

In fact the suicide attack was not senseless at all. The protagonist surely used, as Muslim martyrs are called to do, the full human sensibilities, awareness and logic in aligning himself to the cause – the Holy Struggle or Jihad – in order to qualify as a blessed and eternally-rewarded martyr or shuhada. 

The attack was inspired by Islamist philosophical theology. It had clear purpose and direction, as we know from what the young man had expressed on social media, spouting the standard Al-Qaeda propaganda. (We can properly deduce that the attack was a martyrdom attack, because the attacker had strapped a dummy bomb to himself, therefore inviting the police to shoot-to-kill without warning as he set about killing the Infidel.)

We will return to the word senseless, and how the attack was reported by British authorities and media, later in this piece.

The attacker – according to what he told the world before the police shot him – has gone straight to paradise. Age shall not weary him in waiting for the ‘Palestine’/’Al-Quds’-centred paradise that comes on Earth with the Islamic apocalypse, according to the mainstream contemporary Islamic theology (Islamism) that had poisoned this man’s mind.

Although the headline-grabbing Streatham attack (mercifully not fatal) was doubtless horrific for the victims and their close ones, in the larger scheme of things it is but one of many tragic knife attacks in London (most of which do not carry the classification of “terrorism”).  Islamist philosophy leads to attacks in the UK such as 7/7, Lee Rigby, Manchester Arena, London Bridge and Streatham but these amount to about a mere thousandth of such attacks on the people of the tiny nation Israel, if we compare the annual tally of Islamist attacks on the UK with Islamist attacks on Israel. Israel is the primary target for Al-Qaeda and the other Islamist movements.  Of course, British Intelligence has, thankfully, reduced the attacks by many multiples, but so has, thankfully, Israeli Intelligence in Israel.

Islamist attacks in England, despite the media sensation they arouse, are statistically insignificant, although the threat does seem to be worsening. They are a worry of course, and financially costly (not least through keeping in prison the Muslims who have made terror threats, and then attempting to de-radicalise them, and then monitoring them after release). But there are more severe problems of violence in the UK, such as drug-crime violence, and domestic violence (which according to the Office of National Statistics affected over a 1.3 million women in 2018, and averaged 2 murders of women per week).

Islamist attacks in Israel, on the other hand, are a daily occurrence that, in the worst-affected areas, are causing, apart from death and injury, deep psychological trauma, and post-traumatic stress disorder, to Israelis and their children. And Islamist attacks, including martyrdom attacks, are also a constant menace throughout the whole of the Middle East, for Christians, Sufis, Yazidis and other minority groups.


In this piece, as in most of my pieces dealing with antisemitism and the world’s obsessive anti-Israelism, I dig into the philosophy of the problem. It is a problem that my own (or, practically now, former) faith community – the Church of England – refuses to deal with. As I’ve written elsewhere on this blog, there are many complex reasons for the Church of England’s own antisemitism/anti-Israelism, which variously cause it to ignore, or approve of, Islamic antisemitism/anti-Israelism, and to ignore Islamist persecution of Christians (murder, kidnapping, rape and imprisonment) throughout the Middle East and the continent of Africa, and Pakistan and elsewhere. One of the reasons is, frankly, that the Church of England clergy has become lethally stupid from the top down. I’ve been involved with the Church of England for nearly 30 years, and I was for a time one of a handful of moderators for a global online forum for the Anglican Communion. I have come to realise that, like many failing institutions, the CofE rewards loyalty to the leadership rather than meritocracy. Hence the senior clergy has no thinkers left that are able or willing to challenge the conventional wisdom, or are able to think differently from the weak leadership. Show me today, for instance, a bishop who can write philosophical theology like Bishop William Temple (d. 1944), both his great abstractions of the whole and his vision for Christian society relevant to his times (but not relevant to our times, which has wholly different problems to those that Temple helped to solve).

Much of the Church of England’s antisemitism is fed by Arab Anglican senior and junior clergy in the Holy Land through a movement called “Palestinian liberation theology” led by Rev Dr Naim Ateek, who is a popular guest to Protestant churches (not just Anglican) throughout the UK and Europe.  Ateek was the main Christian voice supporting the Jihadist Second Intifada.  Ateek’s philosophy is the traditional Christian one: “blame the Jews”.  And back home, the English senior Anglican clergy are duped, unable to even accept there is such a thing as contemporary Jihadism and Islamic martyrdom, as we can see in this extract from the Church’s official teaching on the Arab-Israeli conflict, titled Israel/Palestine, An Unholy War.  The document, written in 2002, is still on the Church of England’s website (although now out-of-date, because in the ensuing years, all Jews have moved from, or have been removed from, Gaza):

“It is difficult in such a report to convey the deep despair that leads young Palestinians to seek ‘martyrdom’, or the anguish felt by Israeli families mourning the loss of loved ones that legitimates military retaliation. What motives three 14-year old Palestinian classmates to mount a suicide attack on a Jewish settlement in Gaza, or a 20-year old Palestinian woman to blow herself up by a bus stop in central Jerusalem? Without an understanding of this despair, merely condemning suicide bomb attacks as immoral glosses over the deep-rooted social, economic and political disenfranchisement experienced by Palestinians. Such attacks are evil and must be condemned unequivocally. However, if peace is to be achieved the cycle of suicide bombings has to be broken. This requires the circumstances that give rise to them to be understood and resolved. Similarly, it is difficult to imagine the grief felt by Israeli families when a Jewish girl’s bar [sic] mitzvah party in Hadera turns into a bloody massacre leaving six dead and thirty wounded or when a night out in Tel Aviv at a discotheque or snooker club ends in horrendous circumstances…”

Israel/Palestine, An Unholy War, the Church of England’s official ‘understanding’

Note that the Church of England has written martyrdom in inverted commas, implying that the contemporary Islamic theology of martyrdom, and genocidal antisemitism, do not exist, and that human bombs are rather natural human reactions to frustrating situations. And yet in the regions administered by Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Palestinian Authority (i.e. PLO/Fatah) religious martyrdom against Jews is taught to children, including by their parents[i]. And beyond the boundaries of Israel, children in Lebanon (where Hezbollah now controls the government) and Jordan are also encouraged to become martyrs to anti-Israelist Jihad. There are even popular summer training camps in Lebanon and Gaza where children are given pretend machine guns and suicide vests with bombs, and are taught the Islamist philosophies which demand the taking of Jerusalem (Al-Quds) by Islam.

Suicide bombing, we are told by the Church of England, is a result of the “despair” and “economic and political disenfranchisement”. No it isn’t. It’s martyrdom. And it is no different, and no less excusable, in Israel than the Islamist martydom attack in Streatham, London, last week.  It is sourced in the same Jihadist political theology.  The Church of England is guilty, we might say, of the bigotry of low expectations. If Irish, Scottish or Welsh irredentists were to make themselves into human bombs and come into English towns, or English churches, the Church of England really would condemn it unequivocally as evil, but the Church of England has lower expectations of Arabs, and much lower concern for Jews.

Consider one of the most atrocious Arab-Islamist suicide bombings in Israel: the attack on Machane Yehuda Market in Jerusalem in 1997, perpetrated by two science students from Birzeit University in Ramallah, which injured 178 people (including teenage tourists) and killed 16. In 1997, Ramallah, a Palestinian Authority region, had a far higher standard of living for Arabs than the average for the Arab world (Middle East and North Africa). Yes, the people have been “politically disenfranchised” but this is because Palestinian Authority/Fatah has not allowed an election since it was elected in the 1990s.

Last year (2019), one of the worst – or at least most widely reported – Islamist suicide bombings was on Easter Sunday in Sri Lanka. It had been planned by a group of young, intelligent and affluent Muslim men who, on the most holy day of the Christian calendar, walked into crowded churches and hotels, blowing themselves up, killing over 250 people, and injuring hundreds more. The martyrs were highly educated (including, it seems, at Kingston University in the UK); two of them were brothers who were sons of one of the richest businessmen in Sri Lanka. And yet the Church of England senior clergy thinks that condemning such attacks as “immoral” is to “merely gloss over” the causes.

The Church of England’s anti-Israelism and uncritical support of Arab Jihadist irredentism of the Holy Land has caused the Church to ignore the real problems in the region: the “near genocide” of Christians throughout the Middle East since the turn of the millennium. As the Bishop of Truro admitted in his report demanded by the British Government last year on the “vast scale” of Christian persecution, “many churchmen in the West turn a blind eye” to this genocide of Christians. The Bishop of Truro has himself turned a blind eye to the Anglican antisemitism that I have reported to him.

And so here we have a CofE bishop telling us that many churchmen in the West turn a blind eye to the plight of Christians in the Middle East, at the hands of Muslim Arabs. It is neglect. But these clergymen do not neglect to support the same Muslim Arabs (or at least Muslim Arabs of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad motivated by the same Islamist/Muslim Brotherhood philosophy) who want to eradicate the Jewish State of Israel and murder all her Jews.

The Church of England is, today, the Church of Stupid. And stupidity is not the Christian Way.  Anglican bishops – who should be protecting Christians, not Islamist terrorists – have become the #UsefulInfidel overseeing the genocide of Christians.

Contemporary Islam is the Problem, and Christianity must take much responsibility for where Islam has ended up

The British newspapers tell us that the Streatham attacker was radicalised whilst in jail. Perhaps he was, but his ideas – that he published on the Internet – are standard contemporary Islamic philosophy that has come from the world’s most revered Muslim thinkers (revered by the world’s Muslims, that is).

Islam, unlike the Church, does not have a Pope and a Magisterium, or its spin offs, such as the Anglican Church. (The Church of England is essentially inertia: a sidecar, attached by its “episcopalian” bolts, to the Roman Catholic motorbike.)  The closest figure to a Muslim pope today is Sheikh Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi, in Qatar, who heads the International Union of Muslim Scholars. At age 93, he seems to be the most revered and decorated thinker of contemporary Islam. Like a medieval Pope, he  makes infallible proclamations on everything, from sex to dancing to death sentences.  And the Muslim faithful, including scholars, lap it up as canonical. The fact that much of what he says violates any sensible standard of human rights seems to afford him more authority: Islam sets itself above human rights: there is not a single Muslim-majority nation that has universal human rights, or shows any intention of introducing them, precisely because of thinkers such as Qaradawi. Qaradawi says he is not antisemitic, but encourages Muslims, including Muslim children, to martyr themselves in order to help wipe the Jewish state of Israel off the map.

In January 2009, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who has issued fatwas on Jews (and Europeans, according to some sources that I would like to investigate further) issued one of his infallible sermons (translated by MEMRI from Al-Jazeera TV):

“O Allah, take your enemies, the enemies of Islam. O Allah, take the Jews, the treacherous aggressors. O Allah, take this profligate, cunning, arrogant band of people. O Allah, they have spread much tyranny and corruption in the land. Pour Your wrath upon them, O our God. Lie in wait for them. O Allah, You annihilated the people of Thamoud (An early pagan Arab tribe) with an overpowering blast, and You annihilated the people of ‘Aad with a fierce, icy gale, and You destroyed the pharaoh [of Exodus] and his soldiers – O Allah, take this oppressive, tyrannical band of people. O Allah, take this oppressive, Jewish Zionist band of people. O Allah, do not spare a single one of them. O Allah, count their numbers, and kill them, down to the very last one.”

Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Al-Jazeera TV, 2009

Two weeks later, also translated by MEMRI, Qaradawi offered the Arab world his theory of the Holocaust:

“Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the Jews people who would punish them for their corruption … The last punishment was carried out by Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them – even though they exaggerated this issue – he managed to put them in their place. This was divine punishment for them … Allah Willing, the next time will be at the hand of the believers.”

Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Al-Jazeera TV, 2009

And so I think it is fair to say that the incumbent ‘pope’ of Islam is an antisemitic anti-Israelist. And his ideas are not considered extreme in contemporary Islam. In recent decades, mainstream Islam has inexorably been taken over by Islamism. As I have noted in other pieces, the incumbent Prime Minister of Malaysia, the elder statesman of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) of the Muslim-majority nations, preaches exactly the same evil as Sheikh Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi.

Of course, none of these Islamist ideas from contemporary Islamic ‘scholarship’ are original. They came from Christendom. And, if you add a little sugar-coating, Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s teaching on Israel is more or less the same as that of the Church of England and of senior Israel-bashing British politicians in all parties, such as Jeremy Corbyn (Labour), Baroness Jenny Tonge (ex-Liberal Democrat) and Sir Nicholas Soames (Conservative).

British and Christian Israel bashers do not wear suicide belts or carry machetes or launch rockets, but they give their nodding approval – or at least partly justify terrorism – to the Islamists surrounding Israel who do the killing for them.  They relay the propaganda for the Islamists (much of which is received into the Church of England via the World Council of Churches), and the propagation of absurd ‘News’ and narratives and spurious histories provided by Arab, Turkish and Iranian media agences.  I think, in England, most Christian Israel bashers do not even realise they are antisemites. Look at this screenshot for instance, published on LinkedIn in July 2019 and which, the last time I looked recently, is still there.  Fr. Bernard Joy (a Franciscan Anglican) was responding to an essay I wrote accusing the Church of England of institutional antisemitism. In other words, this is his defence that the Church is not antisemitic!

I’ve reported this kind of thing (there are many other examples) to Church of England bishops (including the Bishop of Truro), who have acknowledge receipt.  The bishops are not interested, and close ranks, despite the College of Bishops’ having ostensibly accepted compliance to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, a year before Fr Bernard Joy wrote this in a public domain.

[ If the reader has any ideas of how I can make the Church of England live up to its compliance to IHRA – which is apparently not legally binding – please do let me know. Message me as a response on this blog; I will keep the message private unless you want to see it published as a response. ]

The World Council of Churches’ antisemitism and anti-Israelism – and implicit support for Jihadism in Israel – is obsessive. This should not surprise us. The high-profile Protestants who opposed Hitler, such as Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Karl Barth, and Martin Niemöller – whose “Confessing Church” gave birth to the World Council of Churches – were nevertheless old-school German antisemites. As Bonhoeffer wrote:

“The Church of Christ has never lost sight of the thought that the “chosen people,” who nailed the Redeemer of the world to the cross, must bear the curse for its action through a long history of suffering… . But the history of the suffering of this people, loved and punished by God, stands under the sign of the final homecoming of the people of Israel to its God. And this home-coming happens in the conversion of Israel to Christ….This conversion, that is to be the end of the people’s period of suffering. The gospel lesson for the day throws light upon the dark and sinister history of this people that can neither live nor die because it is under a curse which forbids it to do either. Until the end of its days, the Jewish people must go its way under the burden which Jesus’ decree has laid upon it.”

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Church and the Jewish Question, 1933

As for historical punishment by God, if there is such a thing, no nation was punished more than Bonhoeffer’s Germany. Even though Germany has now recovered economically, every German today either has to deny the Holocaust or live with the shame that, within living memory, his nation became one of the most systematically evil nations on Earth, in which almost every citizen was complicit. Germany is condemned to eternal shame, which is why perhaps why there will always be a threat of German neo-Nazism from younger generations who want to recover the nation’s loss of honour by justifying what the Nazis did, or by denying what they did.

“What is the reason for obvious punishment, which has lasted for thousands of years? Dear brethren, the reason is easily given: the Jews brought the Christ of God to the cross!”
From a sermon by Martin Niemöller in 1935

Surely future historians of the 20th century will arrive at the conclusion that it was overwhelming Germany and Italy (the cradles of Fascism) and Russia (the cradle of Communism) who were the curse of civilisation. Or perhaps Japan, and its emperor worship, will take the ultimate dishonour; it was Japan after all that introduced to the world the philosophy of “divine” human bombs. The State of Israel, on the other hand, will be seen as the great blessing to mankind that she is, despite almost all nations united in their attempts to undermine her.

Apocalypse Now

As noted, the terrorist in Streatham opted to go straight to Paradise before the Islamists win the world for Allah and bring Sharia ‘Paradise’ to Earth on Judgement Day, spanning out from Jerusalem.

The Church’s mainstream teaching on the goal of history (be it Catholic, Protestant or Orthodox) is no better than mainstream Islamic teaching. According to the Christian vision of history – which has been modified in parts of Western Europe since the Holocaust – the Jew is condemned (or at best surplus to requirements) as God Almighty rules the world through the Church. The Church is to “sit” on everything, as implied in the churchy words supersession and cathedra.

The Christians and churches of Germany and Austria have of course been made to realise that they are not in fact to become the ruling centre of the Judenrein thousand-year Third Holy Roman Empire (or Reich), but contemporary Islam has not given up on the belief that it is to become a Jerusalem-centred Judenrein global caliphate.

To use a (Christian) Biblical metaphor, we handed over the leaven in the lump, which although it has been added to a quite a difference recipe, results in bread that is a recursion of the exact same inexorable rot.  In other pieces on this blog (such as the Arab-Israel Conflict Made Simple, that I wrote in August 2019), I have explained the transfer of Nazism from European Christians to Muslim Arabs, not least via the philosophy of Muslim Brotherhood leader Sayid Qutb (d.1966) who Islamised Nazism, and on whose philosophy al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood is based.

To fear contemporary Islam is not “Islamophobia”, it is common sense, just as to fear the direction of Christianity a century ago in nations such as Russia, Germany, Austria, France, Italy… would have been the correct view.  Jews were the first victims of course, but the nations themselves quickly imploded to a state of pre-Christian barbarism following the resurgence of antisemitism.  Mussolini even modelled himself on Caesar, and Hitler modelled himself on Mussolini.

You would think the World Council of Churches has enough to do in the world – not least addressing the genocide of Christians in the Middle East, who have rapidly dropped from 20% to 5% of the population – but no, the WCC is obsessed with providing support for Arab irredentism to overthrow the Jewish “Israeli occupation” of the Holy Land. Church of England vicars don’t wield machetes, and don’t launch rockets, and don’t wear suicide vests, but they are nevertheless the mincing and mawkish cheerleaders for anti-Israelist Islamism.

Sense is Meaning


As noted, last week’s attack in London was described – universally through Britain – as a “senseless attack”. To understand why the attack should not be seen as senseless requires us to look through the lens of philosophical theology, and that which gives life its deepest meaning to many of us (perhaps more than half the population of the world) who have faith in God of Israel.

It is worth looking at the very word “sense” at its French roots.  Sens, in French, primarily means direction of travel. Hence the French road signs saying sens interdit mean that you are not permitted to travel in this direction (“no entry” we say in the UK).  And deux sens de circulation means that the traffic travels in both directions.

In the Anglophone world, when we are talking about the meaning of life, we are talking about life’s significance. In the Francophone world, when we are talking about the meaning of life, we are explicitly talking about life’s direction.

Hence the French phrase for “meaning of life” is rarely la signifiance de la vie, and almost always le sens de la vie. And this is why I have echoed my title for this piece in the French:  Israël : C’est le sens de la vie.

I think that the French expression to describe the meaning of life is more useful than the English expression. Almost everyone in the West (and “Westernised” parts of the world), and in the Muslim-majority nations, have in their mind a linear direction (sens). If we have no personal goal, and no corporate goal that we feel we are part of, life is senseless, directionless, meaningless.

Of course, we all embark on many meaningful journeys (literally and metaphorical) in life, and some have more meaning than others. Starting a family for instance does, for most people, have supreme meaning, despite knowing all the effort, difficulties and challenges that will accompany the achievements and joy and familial love.  This is at least the case in civilised nations: there are parts of the world where, as we have noted, children are bred to create child martyrs, and there are, tragically, still many parts of the world where children are bred to be slaves, in the many nations where debt bondage remains prevalent and is passed down the generations. (Many children are born into slavery, and debt bondage is another terrible global problem that our churches have, scandalously, neglected in pursuit of irredentism of the Holy Land.)

Our life finds its meaning in our direction, our journey

For “Abrahamic” monotheists amongst us – that is Jews, Christians and Muslims who accept that the Creator is God of Israel who definitively revealed Himself into the history of mankind through the People Israel – life’s most meaningful journeys can literally be journeys.

For Muslims for instance, a once-in-a-lifetime pilgrimage, or Hajj, to Mecca has inestimable value to the believer.

Metaphorically, the Church is all about journey. The fact that the naves of our great cathedrals resemble upside-down ships is no accident of design. As the very word “nave” (related to navy) implies, these are the spiritual ships of heaven, carrying our souls safely through the storms of History to the end of Time. The New-Testament word parousia is usually mistranslated as “second coming”, but more literally means to arrive, a word itself (as in the French arriver) that comes from Old French, meaning to arrive at land, “to come to shore”.  It is a metaphor for man’s arriving to a state of holy knowledge, at which time, according to Christian Apocalypse, we see things differently, andthere was no more sea” (the ancients, of course, generally feared the sea, the great and endless unknown that could not be encompassed).  The word Apocalypse means unveiling.  It relates back to the Jerusalem High Priest unveiling the whole, when he entered the veiled Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement and became fully at one with the Name of God.

And the three great monotheistic faiths have direction – sens – not only towards a corporate end goal, but in day-to-day worship.

  • The world’s Jews face Jerusalem in prayer.
  • The world’s Muslims face Mecca in prayer.
  • We Christians face East to the Sun: almost all church naves point east to the Sun because Emperor Constantine’s favourite god was Sol Invictus – to be worshipped not on the Sabbath (i.e. Saturday or sabbato in Latin) but on dies Solis: Sun-day.

And so in every way, literally and metaphorically, the Abrahamic faiths have sens, or direction of travel.  They can be good sens or bad sens, of course. And perhaps in most religion, the majority of followers always follow each other down a bad route, not the good route. Consider Germany and Austria in the 1930s for instance, at the very heart of Christendom and the very peak of civilisation. According to the Nazis’ own census in 1939, 94% of the people were Christian. (Hitler himself opposed secularism, seeing it as a Communism project.)

Alas, this would not, I imagine, have surprised Jesus the Christ, who warned that people would follow each other through the wide gate, rather than take the narrow and demanding path that we are each, as individuals, called to ascend in order to become as fully human as we can (as Jesus was fully human), and grow “in wisdom and stature” in the eyes of God and man.

The Abrahamic religions have Geo-graphy, and have Time: they are all “apocalyptic” (much as this word has come to have overwhelmingly negative connotations where it should be overwhelmingly positive).

The Abrahamic faiths are progressive: The world is always progressing towards the unknowable ultimate good on Earth, despite appearances, and despite the obvious fact that God Almighty, God Omnipotent and Lord of History, allows evil to unfurl under His Providence. God uses all things, good and evil, to bring about the ultimate Good.  As for the obvious lack of justice we see in the world, many of us have faith that, in the context of Eternity, there is justice (and mercy), which is why we forgive rather than seek revenge.  There is only one authentic Judge of what is ultimately justice.

“Thy Kingdom Come” [Time] Jesus said in his prayer following the Sermon on the Mount, and in almost the same breath as he said, preaching from his Jewish scripture, “Swear not by Jerusalem [Geo-Graphy], for it is the City of the Great King”.

And so, all adherents of all three Abrahamic religions have sense/sens.

Muslim Terrorists are NOT senseless

Justice Secretary Robert Buckland MP, who informed the House of Commons of the Streatham attack last week, described it as “senseless and horrific”.

The terrorist was, until he went to prison, a college student of science and maths. His mother told the media: “I spoke to him on the phone on Sunday. He said: ‘Mum, I want some biryani… your mutton biryani…’ He was fine when I went to see him. He became more religious inside prison… Before he went to prison he was not that religious. After he came out he was really religious… He was a polite, kind, lovely boy. He was always smiling. I’m so upset, he was only 20 years old.”

One of the victims of the knife attack, a Roman Catholic lady, is now, thankfully, safely recovering, at least from the physical wounds. The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Southwark John Wilson is reported in the Catholic journal The Tablet as saying:

“Our thoughts and prayers are with those who have been injured and with their families, and with all affected by this senseless assault. We thank our emergency services for their support and response.”

All the media outlets I have seen used the word “senseless”.  But reading the media reports we find that this young man’s life was not senseless at all. The Mail Online and the BBC website reported that the attacker had a “Goals In Life” on the inside cover of his notebook. He had his eyes fixed on goal and direction of travel. Indeed, the judge who imprisoned him in 2018 spoke of “life goal”, which was “to die a shuhada (martyr) and be admitted to jannah (paradise)”. As noted, he strapped a false bomb to himself because he wanted the police to kill him whilst he was doing his divinely-assigned task of killing the Infidel.

As Muslims who are trying to encourage reform of contemporary Islam point out, Islamism – such as the Islamism of the Muslim Council of Britain – is not necessarily violent, and in fact isn’t usually violent, but its very philosophy – the belief in the Islamisation of the world – is nevertheless extreme. And the potential for violence as the means for achieving the goals of Islamism is ever present.  As the historian Dr Richard Landes, an expert on the history of apocalyptic movements through the past thousand years points out, apocalyptic expectations quickly lead to frustration, impatience and then extreme irrationality, evil, killing, and suicide (Heaven on Earth: The Varieties of the Millennial Experience, Richard Landes, OUP).

Islamism is an apocalyptic movement.  Its three goals are –  according to the “Prevent” counter-terrorism expert and practicing Sufi Muslim Haris Rafiq at a speech he gave at Oxford University in July 2019:

  1. “Enforce Islamism’s verion of Fiqh [jurisprudence] which comes from Sharia”.
  2. “Impose Islam, and Fiqh, in every part of Earth”.
  3. “Wipe Israel off the map”.

The greatest obstacles to these goals are seen as the USA and, obviously, Israel.

Israel is the Goal

The world’s obsession with Israel should surprise no-one. More than half of the population the world has some attachment to one of the Abrahamic religions. It was through the People Israel, on whose ideas our civilisation is built, that the One Creator, “God of Israel” (in Scripture) revealed His Israel-centred plan.  Our ideas of geography and time – such as 7 days in a week – come from Jewish scripture (which has even survived the atheism of the French Revolution, and the 10-day week of the Republican Calendar).

God even “housed” His Name in Jerusalem. And all those of us who are baptised Christian are “named... in the Name of God”. Christian Scripture points, always to “Israel”, “Zion”, “Jerusalem”, “Mount Zion”… in both ‘Old’ Testament and ‘New’ (not least Apocalypse).

I am a science writer by profession. I write inter-disciplinary science to help scientists communicate (such as explaining the physics of mass spectrometry to life scientists who need to use such instruments for medical research and analysis). In my spare time I choose to write about Israel, and antisemitism. I have many Jewish friends, some of whom appreciate my efforts and ideas. One Jewish friend recently asked me if writing about Israel is a “hobby”. No, it’s something far more meaningful. Ever since Jeremy Corbyn MP became leader of the Labour Party and introduced antisemitism/anti-Israelism into mainstream British politics, I’ve become so aware and concerned about bad philosophy in the world, and how it is increasingly gravitating to antisemitism and anti-Israelism, that I have had to drop my hobbies, feeling that I must make whatever small contribution I can to challenge the anti-Israel philosophies (religious and secular) that seem to be overwhelming the world.  I’m ashamed that I have not engaged before 2016, or wasn’t properly aware of the problem before 2016, especially as an adherent in the institutionally-antisemitic Church of England.  But I have realised that what filters through the British media, including the BBC, does not help our understanding of the truth. I was ignorant, but not wilfully ignorant.

The lawmaker said that Israel is to be “the head nation, not a tail nation”.  I think in many ways she already is the head nation, always excelling and doing the best she can, despite so little encouragement from the world and despite being surrounded by the Levantine Leviathan, whose regimes’ philosophy is the same as that which inspired the Muslim martyr’s knife attack in Streatham last week.

Israel, the ensign for God of Israel, is already the best nation in the world, despite the fact that the United Nations has condemned Israel, the sole Jewish nation, more times than every other nation in the world put together!

According to the United Nations, Israel is by far the worst nation in the world.
Very strange. Very bad sense.


[i] A few days ago I came across this on Twitter (click on the February 6 link below): A 6-year-old girl articulates the need to kill Jews, before her proud and beaming mentor (mother? or teacher?). This is common Arab entertainment today.  There is a big demand for it.  It is translated from the Arabic by media-watching groups such as MEMRI and CAMERA.  Look them up.


And here is a campaign published on Twitter today that hopes to dissuade antisemitic Muslim parents from condemning their children to a life of evil and misery:


And over the border in Jordan, things are no better:



And here is good and short animated talk by the Middle East analyst and writer Raymond Ibrahim on the persecution of Christians by Islam:



Posted in Antisemitism, Christianity, Israel, Judaism, Political philosophy, Theology, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

It is Time to Rethink “Human Rights”

Every international forum on human rights, and every international monitoring of human rights, gravitates to both antisemitism and anti-Israelism.

This has been the case since the world came to agree that there should be a universal standard of human rights, applicable to all nations.  And since the turn of the millennium, the appeal to “human rights” to justify international antisemitism and anti-Israelism has intensified.

The World Conference Against Racism in 2001, in Durban, inevitably followed the natural course of things, and became the world united against Israel.

In 2009, the UN’s Islamic bloc (the 57 nations of the Organisation of Islamic Conference) mandated the Goldstone Report to go after Israel, which inevitably produced what the UN wanted to see, although in 2011, Richard Goldstone seemed to have regretted having been a “useful infidel” and retracted his claim that the State of Israel’s policy is “to deliberately target civilians”.

The “Durban II” conference in 2009 was even more farcical: the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s contribution was a speech condemning Israel as “totally racist”.

In 2014, another UN “fact-finding” mission went to Gaza. Its conclusions are rightly described by Colonel Richard Kemp CBE (retired and very conflict-experienced British soldier) as “flawed and dangerous” in that it justifies and perpetuates the indiscriminate rocket attacks – in the tens of thousands – from the Gaza Strip. It justifies the terror tunnels whose purpose is to launch a Jihadist ground attack, and it justifies the incendiary attacks that occur on a near-daily basis.  Every other nation, and certainly the UK, would see these things as acts of war, and justifiably declare war to crush the regime that makes these attacks, and whose very political covenants explicitly state the intention to obliterate Israel in the name of Islam.

Recently Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch, tweeted a list of the UN Human Rights Council condemnations of human rights between 2006 and 2016:

Israel – 68 UN human rights condemnations
Iraq – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Cuba – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Qatar – 0 UN human rights condemnations
China – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Russia – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Turkey – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Somalia – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Pakistan – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Venezuela – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Zimbabwe – 0 UN human rights condemnations … etc, etc

Since its formation, the UN has issued far more human rights condemnations against Israel than all the rest of the world put together.

Other global human rights organisations, and human-rights charities such as Amnesty International* and Christian Aid are equally as antisemitic/anti-Israelist.

And, I’m afraid to say, the churches – including my own faith community, the Church of England – are just as bad.  Only last November (2019) the Church of England issued its first ever “teaching document”** on relations with Jews which, despite all the mawkish sugar-coating typical of the CofE, is in fact deeply antisemitic and anti-Israelist if one reads the document properly, and the resources and references to which it refers.

Because in the 21st century, “human rights” is the highest authority, it is inevitable that antisemites/anti-Israelists, including religious people, appeal to “human rights”.

In ages past, when the Church carried the most clout, Christian antisemites appealed to Christian theology, dogma, and Tradition with a majuscule “T”, by which the Church means the unbroken “Episcopalian” continuity to the Twelve Apostles, and “the Jews”, who according to Tradition (until the 1960s) were collectively responsible, in every generation, for killing the Christ.

Every international forum on human rights (be it Islamic, Christian or secular) gravitates to both antisemitism and anti-Israelism.  I can’t think of a forum (including the EU) that doesn’t follow this antisemitic Pattern.

There is an obvious reason for this: most nations, Christian, Islamic, Socialist and secularised (such as ultra-secularised France and Sweden) are as institutionally and culturally antisemitic as they always have been.  The “longest hate” has not disappeared from the world, it has merely found new ways of justifying itself through the highest authority of our times: “human rights”.

There is nothing new about scapegoating the Jew of course. Every nation used to scapegoat the Jews in its midst.  And since the restitution of Israel, every nation has come to scapegoat the one tiny Jewish nation in the midst of all nations.  The existence of no other nation – such as the many nations that were created after WWII – is ever seriously called into question. Only the legitimacy of the Jewish nation is called into question.

Israel is the best, not the worst, nation on Earth,
including on the grounds of human rights

What makes all this even more perverse is that Israel, per capita, gives far more of what is innovative, good and useful to the world than any other nation in the world.  Israel is indispensable.  Also, frankly, the Jews are the best teachers of philosophical theology in the world, and the only teachers who can truly reveal to us the depth of the Torah as received in the Holy Language, and how it relates to highly-evolved knowledge of the world.  (Unlike Christian “dogma”, commentaries on the Torah are not fixed and inevitably always in conflict with science, but continue to evolve, with a continuum of commentaries on the commentaries on the commentaries…)

Jews, who account for a mere 1-in-500 of the world population, have brought forth genius that has won almost 1-in-3 of all Nobel prizes, including in medicine. Israel is the only nation in the world that has managed to push back desertification, and the only nation to see in the millennium with a net increase in trees. Israel has taught the world how to defeat endemic malaria and other endemic disease, and how to farm sustainably in areas with little water.

And what makes the invocation of “human rights” against Israel yet more perverse is the fact that Israel is one of the minority of nations in the world that does govern itself according to any sensible definitions of human rights.

As I wrote in my piece last week:

Israeli Arabs, unlike the Arabs of, say, Islamist nations such as Saudi Arabia, are not conditioned to enjoy watching people being publicly lashed or caned into a pool of blood, and they are not expected to enjoy amputations and the public decapitation of anyone who dares to challenge the Saudi regime, often followed by a public three-day crucifixion of the decapitated body… Israeli Arabs – especially women and girls – enjoy far more rights and protection than in any contemporary Arab nation, and generally enjoy a higher standard of living. Most Israeli Arabs do not attempt to undermine the Jewish state and its democratic and tolerant setup, which, unlike contemporary Arab nations, accepts the dignity of difference.

None of the 57 Muslim nations of the OIC has human rights.  And one struggles to find a nation with human rights in the Roman Catholic or Communist nations of Latin America.

Italy does not have human rights, by virtue of the fact the second most powerful institution in Italy after the RC Church is the Mafia (and which the Church has always generally supported, including through the Vatican Bank).  Political corruption in Italy is notorious, as it is in France (not least through Archbishop Justin Welby’s former employer: Elf Aquitaine).

Sweden’s ultra-liberalism and political correctness are ostensibly “human rights”, but Sweden has the highest rates of rape, domestic abuse and child abuse in the EU (according to the EU’s own data).

The world needs to work with, not against, Israel – just as much as, I would argue, we need to with, not against, God our Creator, God of Israel. I am optimistic that the world’s obsessive fixation of Israel, and the Jews, will become love of Israel, and the Jews, and of God who chose to pilot the destiny of the nations through, first, the People Israel, and then specifically the Jews, of the tribe of Jacob’s son Judah (the very tribe, Christians and Muslims accept, that produced their messiah).

The world will wake up, I’m sure. This seems to me to be the great divine plan in fact: we will wake up and face the right direction after having tried out (perhaps inevitably) all conceivable political and philosophical experiments, from Communism, Anarchism, Social Darwinism, Fascism, and Islamism to where we are now, with British universities and British liberal churches and liberal synagogues turning themselves over to neo-Marxism, trans-genderism and “Free Palestine” antisemitism.

“Human rights” have been high-jacked by ideologues, hence they have come to mean that a big, hairy-arsed fella can call himself Sheila and invoke his “human rights” in order to be selected for the Australia Women’s Handball Team.

Liberalism and human rights have become almost synonymous, but Liberalism gets all the priorities wrong, and as an ideology, is, we are now beginning to see, as much a failed experiment as all the other political “isms”, which like all the other failed experiments inevitably bottoms out at antisemitism and anti-Israelism (no more so than ultra-liberal Sweden, whose city of Malmo has earned the title, “antisemitic capital of Europe”).

It is time for the world to overcome its need for antisemitism

The philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre famously said that, “if the Jew did not exist, the antisemite would invent him”. Today, Dr David Deutsch – a quantum physicist and science writer involved in the study of antisemitism – similarly speaks of a “Pattern”: a psychological need for societies to be antisemitic, and to justify the need for harming the Jew.

I agree with Sartre, an atheist, and Deutsch, an atheist, up to a point. But, as a theist, I go further:

Just as the very word “anti-sem-itism” has within it “Sem”, or “Shem” – meaning God, or “the Name” – antisemitism is either man’s hiding from God or appropriating God, to make the antisemite feel that he, not the Jew, is special (i.e. as god in a world without God), or “chosen” by God.

Note also that the very word “Pattern” alludes to “Pater”, of whom, almost by definition, there is no greater ontological category of phenomena, i.e. this is the Pattern behind “Big Bang” itself.  In other words, perhaps what David Deutsch identifies as “the Pattern” is in fact the anti-Pattern, the anti-Pater, anti-HaShem:

Pater noster qui es in caelis
sanctificetur nomen tuum

In other words, I think that anti-Semitism is in half of cases man’s justifying to himself that God does not exist, making man free, or making himself ‘god’: “you can be as God”. In such cases, man proudly comes to think that he is the most conscious being in the cosmos, without asking himself where his own consciousness came from. Or if he does ask himself where his consciousness comes from, comes to deny that he is conscious at all, as does the atheist philosopher Daniel Dennett, who tells us he thinks that his consciousness is an illusion created by the electrical activity in his brain reacting deterministically to the world.

And in the other half of cases (generally Christian and Islamic), antisemitism is man’s appropriating God, as in “replacement theology” and “supersessionism”.

In sum, I suggest that when the nations, be they Christian, Islamic, Communist, Socialist, or Secular-Liberalist come to “furiously rage together” against the Jews and Israel on the grounds of “human rights”, they are doing one or both of two things:

  1. Nations such as Italy, France, Chile, Pakistan, Somalia, Iran, China, Sweden, … are using the Scapegoat (the Jew) to deflect the international forum from the appalling abuses of human rights in Italy, France, Chile, Pakistan, Somalia, Iran, China, Sweden…
  2. Nations such as the above, and organisations such as Amnesty, Christian Aid, World Council of Churches (and its EAPPI), the Muslim Brotherhood, etc are rebelling against God of Israel, either by hiding from Him (and in this I include “liberal theology”), or attempting to appropriate Him, whereby the Jew becomes “Unchosen” and the Antisemite (be he Christian or Muslim) becomes the new “Chosen”.

Our world desperately needs more human rights, especially for the world’s young girls. But it seems that all the international human-rights forums that should be protecting human being have gravitated to antisemitism, thereby denying the very thing that makes us truly human, our innate sanctity in God, our imago dei, our great potential, that God first definitively revealed, and continues to reveal, through the Jews, guardians of the Holy Language and of the Holiest of Holy Names.

Without the Name, HaShem, nothing is holy, the very word ‘holy’ is relativised, and in every language each word becomes merely contingent on other words. Undermine language is this way, and the very basis of Christian civilisation is undone:  “Hallowed be thy Name”, Jesus opened his universal prayer, but I know of no Christian who does hallow the Name, or even understands what this means.

Our world desperately needs an international human-rights forum that looks through the correct end of the telescope: towards, not away from, “the apple of His eye”.


*See the recent report on the antisemitism of Amnesty International by David Collier:

Amnesty International- from bias to obsession – the report

** See my article in The Algemeiner, 27th November 2019 on the seriousness of the antisemitism/anti-Israelism in the Church of England today:

While Acknowledging Past Antisemitism, Church of England Fails to Right Historical Wrongs


Posted in Antisemitism, Christianity, Israel, Judaism, Science, Theology, Uncategorized | 2 Comments

The Two-STAGE Solution to the Arab-Israel Conflict

I wrote a piece last week titled, “There is no Two-State Solution” to the Arab-Israeli conflict. In this follow-up piece I suggest that if there is a solution – and I sincerely believe there is – it should be seen as a two-stage solution.

My piece last week was short and sweet, about 1000 words. This follow-up is somewhat longer.  Thinking properly about new solutions is harder than debunking old ‘solutions’.

The first stage of the two-stage solution is to cure the Arab nations, and the wider Islamic Ummah, of genocidal antisemitism. This is obvious to any intelligent human being of good will, including Muslims who acknowledge that contemporary Islam needs to reform. Such reform would draw on traditions of personal intellectual and spiritual growth.  It would move away from the philosophies of political Islamism, which seek to win the world for Islam by first destroying the Jews of the Jewish state and then taking Jerusalem as the axis mundi.

Setting the Scene

Islam has brought forth great philosophers in the past, and it will – I hope – bring forth again great philosophers, or at least a great and good philosopher.  Invariably in the history of civilisations, a new paradigm, or reformation, or movement  – whether it is for better or for worse, whether it is a blessing or a curse – comes through just one thinker.  By good philosophy I mean philosophy that encourages love of wisdom, as implied in the very word philo-sophia.

The Muslim Arabs were once the world leaders in all the philosophies and sciences, and, as guardians of the Silk Road, were responsible for some of the greatest ever achievements of assimilation and abstraction of knowledge and wisdom. Where would the Occident be, for instance, without “zero” (or ṣifr in the Arabic):  the ancient Hindu-Arabic imaginary number introduced to Europe by Fibonacci of Pisa in the 13th century CE?  Where would the Roman Catholic Church be without Thomas Aquinas’ exploration of Arab scholarship, and of the Jewish-Arabic scholar Moses Maimonides (himself a student of the Arabs’ philosophy and cosmology)?

Seeking the cure for genocidal antisemitism is not only necessary to protect the Jewish state, but to heal the mind and soul – and stem the corruption of the youth – of all the genocidally-antisemitic Arabs of the Gaza Strip, Fatah, Lebanon/Hezbollah, Syria, Jordan, Somalia… in fact the contemporary Islamic mainstream in the whole of the Middle East and North Africa, and beyond to Bangladesh, Malaysia, Pakistan… all the Muslim-majority nations in other words.

Near the end of my last piece I wrote:

“Antisemitism is a chronic illness that, when it flares up, eats away at the mind of those it infects, and destroys the hater more thoroughly than the hated. It can be cured, or at least controlled. The [Christian] Germans, Austrians, Italians, French, Romanians… today are largely cured of genocidal antisemitism [the underlying philosophical ideology of World War II], but the Arab nations are not, and, alarmingly, we see much evidence now of cross-infection back to Europe.”

And so the first stage of the two-stage solution is “Philosophical Reformation”.

I am going to call the second stage “Eretz Israel”. Failure to achieve the first stage precludes any attempt at the second stage. Unless you cure contemporary Arabs of genocidal antisemitism, there is no solution for anything. No solution or ‘deal’ should be attempted with people whose mind and soul are diseased with genocidal antisemitism.

By Eretz Israel I mean a contiguous Jewish state in which measures are taken to ensure Israel remains a Jewish state (rather than a “one-nation democracy”, which would lead to Arabisation/Islamisation), in which non-Jews enjoy the protection of the Jewish state. In fact the millions of Arabs who now live inside the Green Line already do enjoy the protection, and the opportunities, of the Jewish state. And outside the Green Line, Arabs and Bedouhins of the region now enjoy – for the first time in many centuries – freedom from malaria and other endemic diseases, thanks to the Zionist pioneers (as we will see).

Israeli Arabs – especially women and girls – enjoy far more rights and protection than in any contemporary Arab nation, and generally enjoy a higher standard of living. Most Israeli Arabs do not attempt to undermine the Jewish state and its democratic and tolerant setup, which, unlike contemporary Arab nations, accepts the dignity of difference.  As I wrote in my last piece, in a report commissed by the UK Government last year, we learned that Christians of the Arab nations throughout the Middle East and North Africa are now suffering “near genocide” levels of persecution, including murder, imprisonment and kidnapping.  Some have called this “the greatest story never told of the 21st century”.  It amounts to lethal journalistic neglect by the mainstream media not least, in the UK, the Israel-bashing BBC.

Israeli Arabs, unlike the Arabs of, say, Islamist nations such as Saudi Arabia, are not conditioned to enjoy watching people being publicly lashed or caned into a pool of blood, and they are not expected to enjoy amputations and the public decapitation of anyone who dares to challenge the Saudi regime, often followed a public three-day crucifixion of the decapitated body, presumably because the Saudi clerics today are as anti-Christian as they are antisemitic. (One assumes that the Saudi clerics associate crucifixion with Christianity even though the Romans probably crucified more Jews than Christians, including since the time Christian worship of God of Israel started to become a faith distinct from that of the Jews.)

The Arab children of Israel are far less likely than other Arabs to be indoctrinated into what is today the Arab-nation equivalent to the Nazi youth being imposed by all the regimes that surround Israel. In fact the education of Arab children in the Gaza Strip and parts of the Palestinian Authority, though using some of the same texts as Nazi Germany, is even worse than it was in Nazi Germany, being in some ways more like the education in Axis Japan. Although the Japanese did not share Hitler’s obsession with Jews – but rather in murdering and raping over 10 million non-Japanese Asians (since 1937) – the education of Arab and Iranian youth today is some ways more like that of Japanese emperor worship, which convinced the Japanese youth of the need for loyality and honour until death (never surrender) and that the ultimate accolade comes through finding the selfless courage to make yourself into a human bomb.

If the Arabs need yet another new state – and frankly I see no justification why they do – it must be nowhere Israel, the Jewish state. Eretz Israel must extend at least from the Mediterranean Sea to the River Jordan, and must be liberated from all attempts at Arabisation/Islamisation. There has been a Jewish attachment to Israel since Biblical times, i.e. since the time according to Biblical accounts of Abraham’s land purchase and of Jacob’s purchase of land from the sons of Hamor.  There has been, according to empirical history, a continuous Jewish presence in the Land for over 2500 years, despite the Seige of Jerusalem in 70 CE.  Yes, Arabs have ruled the Land, but not meaningfully since 1516, when the Turks took it, and ruled it almost continuously until 1917.  There has never been an autonomous Arab state called “Palestine”.  In fact there has never been any autonomous state or unified region/jurisdiction in the Levant called “Palestine”, not even within an empire. The land has historically been seen by Arabs as Arab land, or desired as Arab land, such as part of “Southern Syria” or “Greater Syria”, or the Levant.

There is no such thing as “Palestinian people”.  There are Arabs, Jews, Druze, Bedhouins… but predominantly Arabs.  If “Palestinian” means you were born in British Palestine, it means Jews who were born there before 1948 are no less “Palestinian” than the Arabs, such as Mahmoud Abbas, who were born there before 1948.

There is nothing Palestinian about the “Palestinian” flag.  It is clearly nothing more or less than the ubiquitous pan-Arab flag of red-green-black-white, representing four historical Arab empires.  It represents Arab culture and history and language, not “Palestinian” culture, history or langauge, because there is no such thing!  During the years of the British Mandate, the British would generally refer to the Jews of the region as “Palestinians” and the Arabs as “Arabs”.  Hence in 1936 when professional Jewish musicians in Mandatory Palestine came together, they chose the name Palestine Symphony Orchestra (now the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra).  Even from 1948 to 1967, Judea and Samaria were not Palestine but Jordan, and the Gaza Strip was not Palestine but Egypt.  Indeed, it was the Egyptian Yasser Arafat, of the Muslim Brotherhood, who came up with the “Palestine Liberation” narrative in the 1960s, and the idea that there is such a thing as a distinct Palestinian culture and history.

Today, the Arab Mamhoud Abbas – the PLO/Fatah’s incumbent head – obviously needs to keep up the “I’m a Palestinian” irredentist narrative as the pretext for Arabisation/Islamisation of the Holy Land (which is why all the Arab nations and wider organisation of Islamic nations support “Palestinian Liberation”).

“Syria Palaestina” was the name give to the region by Emperor Hadrian, following the crushing of the Jewish revolt of 135 CE (the Bar Kokhba revolt).  Hadrian wanted to wipe from the map evidence of the land’s connection to the Jews.  Who knows, perhaps he even thought that Jews would forget their connection to the Land.  The idea was that “Palestine” alludes to pre-Jewish history, i.e. of the Philistines.  But all we know about the Philistines, apart from the derogatory accounts in the Bible, is they were most probably “Sea Peoples” from Greece and Turkey.  History and archaeology tells us nothing more than that their main source of protein was pig (the DNA of whose bones has been traced back to Greece and Turkey), and they ate dogs too.  The Philistine language and social structure is lost to history.  All we have is some broken pottery and a lot of pig bones.  Jews, on the other hand, have – despite frequent persecution – lived, and worshipped, continuously on the land since Biblical times.  Scratching the surface anywhere in Israel today (including Judea, Samaria and the Golan Heights) reveals history that cannot be eradicated with the names “Palestine”/”Philistine”.  There is empirical history for King David, for instance, who united the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, and which came to light with the archaeological discovery of the Tel Dan Stele in 1993.

At times over the millennia, Christians and Muslims have been peculiarly interested in Jerusalem – the City of David – but in most epochs of the Common Era, neither Christianity nor Islam has taken much interest in “the Land” or in Jerusalem, which, as a far-flung outpost of this or that Christian or Muslim empire, was allowed to become derelict and diseased. Only a century ago, Jerusalem was one of the most dangerous cities on earth, according to British reports of their new mandate. Typhus, smallpox, cholera, dysentery and yellow fever were endemic, and malaria extremely so.  Life expectancy was low.  The British expeditionary force led by General Allenby, that took Jerusalem, reported 28,000 cases of malaria among British soldiers, with Allenby’s chief medical officer reporting that Palestine “is one of the most malaria-afflicted countries in the world”.

[ The areas of Judea and Samaria, west of the River Jordan, were never called “West Bank” – a term I refuse to use – until the Arabs of Jordan suddenly occupied and “annexed” it during the 1948 war, proceeding to Jerusalem, which the Jordanians de-Judaized by killing or expelling the Jews, destroying all the synagogues and using ancient Jewish gravestones as latrines. Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria were liberated during 1967 defensive war, when the forces of Jordan, Syria, Egypt and Iraq, expecting to overwhelm Israel with vast numerical superiority, were repelled back through the Sinai in the west and back across the River Jordan in the east. ]

Eretz Israel is I think how Winston Churchill, who visited the region in 1921 just four years after the Balfour Declaration, saw the future of Mandatory Palestine, as it was inherited in its derelict and sparsely populated state from the Ottoman Empire. But this is merely the tittle-tattle of modern history.  I think that we should be more philosophically committed to God of Israel, concerning the destiny of the nations, rather than seeking authority in the writings of Winston Churchill, the Balfour Declaration, and the Sykes-Picot Agreement.  A century later, the situation on the ground is very different. A century ago, Islamism and apocalyptic Jihad did not exist.

Eretz Israel amounts to less than half of 1% of the Levant, and in relation to the whole Arab-nations landmass of the Middle East and North Africa, it is so tiny that it is nearly invisible on the map. Israel has none of the easily accessible oil/gas resources of much of the rest of the region (although, very recently, Israel has managed to start exploiting gas resources off the Israeli coast). Mandatory Palestine was, as noted, desolate, derelict and diseased, until the Zionist pioneers drained the malarial swamps, and, thanks to the genius of the scientist Israel Jacob Kligler (1888-1944), effected the total eradication of malaria in Israel by the 1960s. (Kliger’s ideas on ecological management, including the planting of thirsty Eucalyptus trees around stagnant water, have been used successfully in the fight against endemic malaria in other parts of the world.)

The established Arab states surrounding Israel are, today, more than horrendous enough to make us realise that they don’t deserve a new start-up “Palestinian Liberation” or Arab-liberation nation that pincers the State of Israel and has an Islamist/PLO Trojan Horse within it. To think that a combination of Hamas, Fatah and Palestinian Islamic Jihad could create a start-up nation that is any better than, say, neighbouring Syria, and the unhinged men who rule it, and the unhinged men of the opposing factions who want to rule it, is delusional in the extreme. Mahmoud Abbas is just as philosophically committed to evil as is Bashar al-Assad and all the other Arab actors whose philosophical ideologies are fuelling Syria’s calamitous civil wars.

Israel, behind the Green Line, although densely populated, is one of the best places in the world to live for Jews, Muslims, Christians, Baha’is, Druze and atheists. The town of Jaffa is perhaps the most religiously plural place on earth, with a cacophony of church bells from Western and Eastern denominations, the Muezzins’ frequent call to prayer, and men with flowing tzitzit muttering Hebrew psalms. In fact, Israel is the only place in the Middle East and North Africa where all these groups live in harmony, able to display signs of their worship and religion, or, indeed, able to publicly challenge the existence of God and challenge all religion per se. (Although I am very much a monotheist, whose faith is deep, life-dominating, and life fulfilling, I believe that intellectual atheists are essential to every healthy society, to challenge lazy notions of God, including of my co-religionists, and make sociological challenges to the obvious faults and contradictions in all the world’s religions today.) Israel, unlike any other nation in the region, is a meritocracy. To take just one example, Israeli-Arab footballers are as likely as Israeli-Jewish footballers to earn their place in the Israel national team.

My piece last week gave some overwhelmingly obvious reasons why the region’s Arabs cannot be given a state called “Palestine” that is situated anywhere near the world’s only Jewish State of Israel.

One only has to look at the godforsaken lands bordering Israel today:

  • The government of Lebanon is now controlled by Hezbollah, which is a genocidally-anti-Israelist terrorist organisation backed by the genocidally-anti-Israelist Islamic Republic of Iran. It has about 150,000 rockets cynically distributed behind “human shields” within the towns of south Lebanon.  Lebanon can no longer be considered the region’s uniquely stable Arab nation. It is on the verge of revolution.  And Lebanon/Hezbollah is corrupting its youth with genocidal antisemitism.
  • Syria is still deeply involved in internecine inter-Arab conflicts that have already caused about half-a-million deaths, and 13 million refugees/displaced persons. And Syria is corrupting its youth with genocidal antisemitism.
  • The Gaza Strip is controlled by the Islamic Resistance Movement (or “Hamas”, a tributary of the Muslim Brotherhood) and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, both explicitly genocidally-anti-Israelist. And Hamas and PIJ are corrupting the youth with genocidal antisemitism.
  • The other Jew-free areas of Israel, in Judea and Samaria, are controlled by Fatah (aka Palestinian Authority/PLO), which is also explicitly committed, in its covenants, to the genocidal obliteration of Israel. And Palestinian Authority is corrupting its youth with genocidal antisemitism.
  • Jordan is one of the most deeply and ideologically antisemitic nations on earth, and is becoming increasingly influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood, which is hooking up with its unhinged brothers in the Gaza Strip. We should remember that when the Jordanians administered Jerusalem – between 1948 and 1967 – they imposed an apartheid system which included the destruction of all 35 of the Old City’s synagogues. And Jordan is corrupting its youth with genocidal antisemitism.jordanshitole

And the Levantine Leviathan is not just manifesting itself in failing nations and the corruption of children and youth. There are pan-national caliphater movements operating throughout the Levant, such as the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

And so it is obvious that the last thing Israel can possibly allow is an autonomous new neighbouring state that opens its borders to the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists. That would be suicide. When Gazans, Lebanese, Syrians, Jordanians, Iranians and others say they want to murder all Jews, Israel takes them seriously. These are not idle threats. From the Gaza Strip, since the turn of the millennium, tens of thousands of rockets have been fired, indiscriminately, at Israel.  People of the traumatised town of Sderot, close to the Gaza Strip, spend many of their days running for the bomb shelters.  Furthermore, incendiary devices, often attached to kites that make use of the prevailing westerly breeze are continuously launched from the Gaza strip, destroying huge areas of forest, agriculture, nature reserves, and property. Contemporary antisemitic Arabs not only do not care about people (including Israeli Arabs), but are addicted to destroying, in the name of Islam and the Prophet Muhammad, everything of God’s good creation on Earth. Were the Islamic Republic Iran and the other Islamic dystopias able to smuggle bigger rockets into the Gaza Strip to annihilate the whole of Israel and murder all Jews, they would.

Moving out from the Levant, we see other reasons why the region’s Muslims must not be granted a new state bordering Israel:

All 57 Muslim nations are operating as an antisemitic bloc in support of ‘Palestine’s’ constitutional commitment to “obliterate” Israel (cf. the Hamas Covenant), the world’s sole Jewish state, home to half the world’s Jews.  The elder statesman of Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is the Prime Minister of Malaysia, Mahathir bin Mohamad, who said, on his visit to Cambridge University last year, he is happy to be called an “antisemite”. Bin Mohamad said in his address to the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation in Kuala Lumpur in 2003:

“Jews still rule the world by proxy… but 1.3 billion Muslims cannot be defeated by a few million Jews. There must be a way. And we can only find a way if we stop to think, to assess our weaknesses and our strength, to plan, to strategise and then to counterattack…The Europeans killed six million Jews out of 12 million”. The Prime Minister of Malaysia, Mahathir bin Mohamad, addressing the OIC in 2003

As far as I know, no regime of any Muslim nation has distanced itself from the Malaysian Prime Minister. The Muslim nations are regressing, not progressing. Where nations do try to progress, the pan-national Muslim Brotherhood exerts its influence. Even the Sultan of Brunei, last year, proudly announced that he wants to to make his nation more “Islamic” by introducing death-by-stoning for male homosexuals and adulterers (and 10 years imprisonment of lesbians), and he wants to reintroduce amputation for theft.

Female genital mutilation is still rife in the Muslim countries (sometimes at rates as high as 98% of girls, such as in Somalia, with Egypt not far behind according to a UNICEF report on the subject in 2013), and so are honour killings, including of daughters by their fathers. Child ‘brides’ are common in the Muslim nations, with UNICEF reporting about 1.9 million in Pakistan, many of whom become pregnant before their bodies are able to safely give birth.

In other words, there is no Muslim nation that has human rights. Unreformed Islam continues to trump human rights in all Muslim nations. And as I said in my piece last week, the Arab world is still strongly influenced by medieval shame-honour codes, not least the honour lost by the fact that every coalition of Arab armies that has tried to destroy Israel has been defeated by the Jews. The Arab nations, and Iran, refuse to accept defeat in war with Jews is possible, and so the wars are seen as battles in God’s greater war leading up to the final apocalyptic last battle, which Islam will win.

What I did not mention is my piece last week is that this envisioned last great battle is very much rooted in end-time, or ‘Apocalyptic’ Jihad (cf. Heaven on Earth, the Varieties of Millennial Experience, Dr Richard Landes, Oxford University Press).

When the Arabs finally take Jerusalem (not least according to the Hamas Covenant), heaven will be properly linked to Earth, through Islam, following which the whole world will be so awed that we all convert to Islam, all of us that is apart from the Jews, who are to be pushed into the sea because they are to be eternally punished in Hell in any case. (According to mainstream Islamic teaching since Hitler and 1930s, Jews are “descendants of pigs and apes” and therefore beyond redemption.)

At this Islamic end time, alas, we infidels of the West will all come to accept that the Ayatollah, Mahmoud Abbas, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Prime Minister of Malaysia, and the Sultan of Brunei were right all along. The Sultan of Brunei will relocate to Jerusalem Al-Quds, where, in the name of his “religion of peace”, he will turn up with his sacks of rocks to stone gays and adulterers. Or perhaps this elder Muslim statesman will discover that there is a better philosophy in Jerusalem than any he will find in the whole of Islam: “let he who is without sin cast the first stone”.

Contemporary Islamic shame-honour (including the shame of losing Jerusalem), and contemporary Islamic apocalypticism, are in fact very much the fuel for contemporary Islamic antisemitism. I have written in several places on this blog about how contemporary Islam (and much of Christianity in fact) is committed to the belief that it must appropriate Time itself.  “Supersessionist” belief, prevalent in Islam and Christianity, sees the need to appropriate the plan for the end that God of Israel revealed to the world when He centred the world on the People Israel, fixing the very centre of history and geography on Jerusalem.  Antisemitism/anti-Israelism, for those of us who have analysed and studied it properly – as monotheists rather than as secular sociologists or political ‘scientists’ – is fundamentally the attempt to either appropriate God – in the case of religious types – or to hide from God – in the case of irreligious types (cf. Antisemitism and its Metaphysical Origins, Dr David Patterson, Cambridge University Press, 2019).  Antisemitism is not, essentially, racism.  It is something far more serious.

Of course, what would really happen if the Muslims took Jerusalem is that all the internecine Muslim factions that are already tearing the Arab nations to pieces would be energised by the prospect of being the rightful and deserving and God-sanctioned owner of the centre of the world: God’s seat on Earth. Each faction would think it should have supreme authority in the Holy Land, as in fact happened in the mid-19th century between Christian factions: the cause of the Crimean War (1853-1856), which dragged in the empires of Europe, Turkey and Russia, was caused by a Christian inter-denominational dispute over who should have authority over Jerusalem’s Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

The First Stage of the Two-Stage Solution:

Philosophical Reform (using the example of post-War West Germany)

The first stage is to cure the Arab nations, and the wider Muslim Ummah, of genocidal antisemitism. Until this is done, “deals” or “solutions” or “agreements” can never work, and should not be attempted.

The “Trump Deal of the Century”, from the outline I have seen of it this week, cannot possibly work. It is largely a product of the liberal Western mind. It has a large monetary element in it: $50 billion, sold as “Peace to Prosperity”. I doubt there is any region of the world that receives more money that the Gaza Strip and the regions administered by Palestinian Authority.  Little if any of this money goes to truly helping the people, rather it goes to helping to bring about the goals of the anti-Israelist ideology of the donor Arab nations.  The Arab nations, such as the Gulf States, and many Muslim nations, do not lack money.  Money will not bring peace to the Arab nations or the Muslim nations.  I mentioned the Sultan of Brunei, perhaps the richest leader of any regime in the world, and ruling over one of the world’s richest nations by GDP.  A nation that wants to stone gays to death, and to amputate thieves, is not a nation at peace with itself, and no amount of money is going to make it so.

Offering genocidal-antisemites money in the hope that their new “prosperity” will change their ideology is naïve and immoral in the extreme. Qatar has the highest GDP of all nations of the world, and yet no nation is as committed to supporting the goals of the Muslim Brotherhood, goals which begin by wiping Israel off the map. The $billions that are already pumped into the region are not used to support the ordinary people, such as the Arab ‘refugees’ that have been held in refugee tents and shacks, by Arabs for decades. The money is embezzled, used for terrorism, such as the miles of terror tunnel networks in the Gaza Strip, and used to reward the slayers of Jews, or their families if the slayers ‘martyr’ themselves. And it is used to keep the Gazan leadership in luxury: mansions, luxury hotels, restaurants and exclusive shopping malls (i.e. the parts of the Gaza Strip that are not filmed for the Western media). One does not need to visit too many Arab nations to quickly see that, today, Arabs do not generally care about Arabs or other peoples, and this is even outside the few Arab nations where there are presently no inter-Arab wars and conflicts. What Arabs do care about, and about the only thing they can agree on (even agree with the Turks and Iranians) is taking Israel from the Jews in the name of Arab/Islamic honour.

Antisemitism is a chronic disease of the mind and soul. When it resurges – as it has somewhere in world in every generation since the advent of Christianity – it becomes genocidal antisemitism, i.e. the form of antisemitism in which the antisemite becomes so intellectually and spiritually sick, and lacking in compassion, that, with a perverse and quasi-religious  conviction, he becomes convinced of the need to murder Jews, and even that he needs to do so for God, on the grounds that God’s Chosen are now the Unchosen, to be replaced by the antisemites.

I am not suggesting that all contemporary Muslims and Christians can be cured of antisemitism. They certainly cannot in my own faith community, the Church of England. As I have written elsewhere on this blog, the default position for the CofE clergy is antisemitism: and the problem is institutional in the sense that the antisemites don’t know that they are antisemites, and are unaware that they are teaching it.  But I do think that those who are now suffering from genocidal antisemitism can be cured. Within living memory, Germany, Austria, France, Romania and other nations of Europe were cured, if not of antisemitism, of genocidal antisemitism.

What I called the Two-Stage solution has in fact worked, within living memory. The two stage solution cured Germany and other nations of Europe, but let’s look at Germany in particular.

The Germans, as they entered the 20th century, were arguably the most advanced nation in the world in terms of science and cultural heritage. Like the Arabs at their peak, Germany had the best thinkers in many domains, not least science. (Fortunately, some of the leading German scientists were Jews, who fled Germany and worked for the Allies, and through whom the Allies discovered the atomic bomb before Germany.)

If you think about it, West Germany was saved through philosophical reform.

In Germany, this philosophical reform began by destroying the regime that was brainwashing its people and its youth. Unfortunately, in the case of the Germans, this reform first required the Allies’ commitment to total war. It was only when the Germans were literally grovelling around in the dirt, their stomachs empty, their Führer dead, their women raped and murdered by the Red Army, that they gave up the quasi-religious ideology of genocidal antisemitism, and rethought what it means to be “Germans”. Britain, which took responsibility for rebuilding Germany’s industrial heartland, did so according to the British vision of “Christian civilisation”. As Britain set about the reconstruction of the Ruhr Valley, it also set about the reconstruction of philosophy, compelling the judges to swear loyalty to Almighty God (i.e. Judicial Independence), rather than loyalty to this or that regime, or to Hitler or Stalin. Britain rebuilt the institutions of government, education, police, the law courts… a process the British called “denazification”. Hence the new German political parties were explicitly “Christian” political parties (as they are to this day), but, again, Christian in the sense of faith in God Almighty rather than the perverted faith of almost all the wartime Protestant churches, which were loyal to Hitler under the ecumenical umbrella of the antisemitic “Protestant Reich Church”.

Good philosophy is vital. To see how vital philosophy is, we simply need to see the difference in humanity between West Germans and East Germans after the War.

East Germany continued to corrupt its people and its youth through loyalty to Socialism and Stalin. (The Socialist Unity Party, Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands, formed in 1946.) And the Lutheran Church in East Germany was compelled to be loyal to the Party, and was allowed to remain antisemitic (according to the German Protestant theologian Dr Petra Heldt, who has written and spoken much on contemporary Christian antisemitism, easily available in English on the Internet).  Although many East Germans tried to escape, many were loyal to the new regime, even though that meant killing fellow Germans who were not loyal to the regime’s “socialist unity”. In other words, East Germany fell out of the frying pan and into the fire: from German National Socialism to Russian International Socialism. There was no judicial independence, and there was no  underlying philosophical theology which insisted “thou shalt not kill”.  Rather, the underlying philosophy was what the Soviets called “Scientific Atheism”.  Germans were persuaded to spy on one another, to ensure universal loyalty to the Socialist state. The judges were loyal to the Stasi, nay were the Stasi, and would condemn fellow Germans to death for lack of loyalty, or for planning to escape to the West. East German border guards were issued a shoot-to-kill order. And like the Arab nations and Iran today, there was no true meritocracy, but rather reward and punishment according to one’s loyalty or lack of loyalty to the party.

And so, you see, it is only through good philosophical reform that corrupted nations can come into peace and prosperity. Nations whose regimes corrupt their youth with murderous ideologies are condemned nations with a doomed youth.

Today, the Arabs of the Levant, like the Germans of 75 years ago, need philosophical reform, which includes of course denazification of the people. Just as European Christianity was denazified, I’m sure that contemporary Islam can emerge from its dark age and denazify.  The question is, can we bring down the Nazi regimes of the Levant without war?  How do Muslim reformers reintroduce good philosophy, revelant to our times, to Islam?  One thing we cannot do is enter into the conflicts of the region with the view to “regime change”.  Take Syria for instance.  If the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party were to fall, it would most likely be replaced with its main opposition, the Syrian Social Nationalist Party, which is equally genocidally antisemitic.  In fact the Syrian Social Nationalist Party is a pan-Arab-nation Nazi party, founded in the 1930s, which has kept the swastika as the party flag to this day.  The party was so in love with Hitler’s Germany and antisemitic philosophy that it chose as its party anthem Deutschland über alles.

I have hope. News travels fast these days. Communication is more intense than ever. Perhaps all it takes is for one good Muslim philosopher to break through, just as one bad Muslim philosopher – Sayyid Qutb, 1906-1966 – inspired the global political movement that calls itself “Islamism and the “Muslim Brotherhood”, drawing from the terrible Western “isms” and bad philosophies that overwhelmed the world with darkness in the 20th century.

I should say that our Western/Christian philosophy also needs reform. There has, as yet, been no convincing philosophical response to the damage done by the most influential European philosophers – including the Socialists, Postmodernists and Neo-Marxists – of the 20th century, whose ideas still dominate Western universities, and are corrupting our youth.  And there has, as yet, been no convincing philosophical-theological response to the relativisation of time and geography on Earth since Einstein.  The West too, then, has lost its philosophical centring, and there is a resurgence of antisemitism/anti-Israelism, including, if not especially, amongst Christians (that I have written about elewhere on this blog, and will continue to do so).

The Second Stage of the Two-Stage Solution:

Eretz Israel

My second-stage ideas are, of course, nothing more than that: simply ideas. But perhaps they can help open up different kinds of discussion than the conventional wisdom quacked by liberal virtue-signallers and by Western politicians afraid to deviate from the “two-state solution” script.

I think the second stage can be summed up with the two words Eretz Israel, whose loyalty is to nothing less than God Almighty, God of Israel.  Great Israeli leaders such as David Ben-Gurion, Golda Meir and Yitzhak Rabin would have disagreed, but they were committed atheists/secularists.  Israel, of all nations, must have good philosophy that aims to serve, and aim for, nothing less than God.

As I wrote in a piece a few weeks ago, once there is peace in Jerusalem, there will be peace in the world. This is not my idea, but the idea of the Biblical prophets and teachers of both Jewish and Christian scripture, including Jesus. Jerusalem was, is, and always will be, the microcosm of the world.

A great challenge in the second stage is to encourage the world – almost all the nations – away from hatred of the Jewish state to love of the Jewish state. Can the United Nations move from hatred of the Magen David to love of the Magen David?

I have mentioned the perversity of the UN’s antisemitic treatment of Israel in several of my pieces. For the benefit of the new reader, here is something I wrote a few weeks ago:

Recently Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch, has tweeted a list of the UN Human Rights Council condemnations of human rights between 2006 and 2016:

Israel – 68 UN human rights condemnations
Iraq – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Cuba – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Qatar – 0 UN human rights condemnations
China – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Russia – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Turkey – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Somalia – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Pakistan – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Venezuela – 0 UN human rights condemnations
Zimbabwe – 0 UN human rights condemnations … etc, etc

The annual United Nations General Assembly nation-specific condemnations are similar. Typically the UNGA will issue about 20 condemnations of Israel, and a total of 5 or 6 for all the other nations of the world combined!  Israel 20, Rest of the World 5. How outrageous and stupid and dangerously-antisemitic the UN has allowed itself to become!

When the nations become united in their love of Israel, rather than hatred and furious rage towards Israel, then the world will be at peace.  Israel, which, despite being permanently under seige (cognitive as well as physical violence and Gazan vandalism), already offers the world so much through her great ideas and innovation, not least in medicine, ecology and re-greening the deserts.  Imagine what she could do, and give, if we freed her up and encouraged her to live up to God’s vision.

Israel can never be a true liberal democracy, and, I suggest, must not aim to become one. I would argue that every nation in the world apart from the nation of Israel can potentially be a true liberal democracy, and I wish that more nations would aim for liberal democracy (ideally with secular/religious constitutional balance, as in my native England).

And so when, or if, the walls within Eretz Israel come down (after stage 1, or the denazification) as did the Berlin Wall and the Iron Curtain, something resembling the status quo of power in Israel must be maintained. From what I know of Israel, the Jews want to extend the hand of friendship to Arabs, but this cannot happen until the Arabs (Muslim and Christian, including the Anglican bishops) surrounding Israel are cured of their deep and overwhelming antisemitism. The Jewish tribe must rule Israel, whose primary loyalty is to God Almighty, God of Israel, and not some lesser god or judge or alternative to God, such as liberal democracy for its own sake.

Pray for the peace of Jerusalem.



Posted in Antisemitism, Christianity, Israel, Judaism, Political philosophy, Theology, Uncategorized | 3 Comments

There is no Two-State Solution

Yesterday, 20th January 2020, twenty-odd British political worthies of the left and right –and of both chambers –  wrote a short letter to The Times titled, “The Time is Right to Recognise Palestine”. (I’ve put a screenshot of the letter after the footnote references.)

The “time is now”, we are told, to “best serve the cause of peace”, because “Israel’s actions are pushing a two-state solution beyond reach”.

The signatories of the letter finish by telling us they want “equal rights for peoples in two states”.

The two-state solution is beyond reach – through no fault of Israel – regardless of the fact that two-states remains the official foreign-policy position of the UK Government. The two-state solution was emphasised by Boris Johnson when he was Foreign Secretary, who on the centenary of the Balfour Declaration in 2017 wrote his “vision for Middle East peace”. Prime Minister Johnson’s piece is still on, where you will see that it is not visionary at all, but the same old British broken-record stuck on “two-state solution”, oblivious to the realities. [i]

The two-state solution was pushed beyond reach not by Israel, but by the region’s Arab regimes, and it still is. Jews accepted the two-state solution agreed by the UN in 1947. Arabs immediately turned it down, and told the Arabs and Bedouins of the land to temporarily move out of the way, to allow 7 Arab armies (or 7.5 if we include the British officers and men who fought with the Transjordan army) to destroy the nascent Jewish state and push all the Jews – including many refugees of the Holocaust – into the sea.  Arabs lost the ensuing Arab-Israeli wars, of course.  Many of the Arabs of the 1948 war who had been told to move out of the way, or were otherwise caught up in the conflict, became refugees.  There were about 700,000 Arab refugees. And there were about 850,000 Jewish refugees who fled, or were expelled from, the Arab nations – the majority of whom aimed for Israel. Today, approximately half the Jewish population of Israel are refugees, or descendants of refugees, from the Arab lands.  The Arab nations to this day have, cruelly, refused to absorb the Arab refugees, or even their descendants, now into the fourth generation.

Arabs didn’t just lose the wars, but lost honour. And this loss of Arab honour, and its cultural association with blood and sacrifice, is something that is rarely acknowledged or understood in the UK.  Arab loss of honour is, in Arab culture, a catastrophe that passes from generation to generation [ii] .  The Arab medieval codes have, as yet, far from petered out, just as, in Christian Europe, salvaging honour by duelling to the death was not outlawed until well into the 20th century.  For 1400 years of Islam, the Jews were not even allowed to arm themselves. And so how could this ill-equipped start-up army of WWII survivors defeat the whole of the mighty Islamic Arab world?  The shame of it.

Many times since 1947, the Arabs have been offered two-state solutions.  Israel has complied with agreements, such as unilaterally pulling out of Sinai, south Lebanon and the Gaza Strip, and offering to kick-start their agriculture and economies, only to immediately see these areas filled with rockets and terrorist organisations (including from Iran) and the construction of miles of terror tunnels (costing $billions, and using all the concrete and other materials that should have been destined for schools, hospitals, homes etc.).

Today, who in their right mind, truly believes that Israel could defend herself against, say, all the factions now roaming Syria, if they were allowed access anywhere near the Green Line of the two-state solution, which is within an easy and flat stroll of Tel Aviv and the international airport?

And would Iran remove its 150,000 rockets from south Lebanon if Arabs were to get a new nation called “Palestine” neighbouring Israel? No, it wouldn’t because Iran wants nothing less than the obliteration of Israel, which the Iranian clerics have convinced themselves is “little Satan”: the Middle-Eastern metaphysical enemy of Islam that must be put to death before conquering the USA, the “great Satan”.

Few in the UK acknowledge, or even seem to know, that the whole of the Arab world, like much of Europe, had been thoroughly propagandised with Nazi and Christian antisemitism, largely through colonial powers, i.e. Fascist Italy, Vichy France (and before that the antisemitic French Third Republic) and even the British.  And from Berlin, hosted by Hitler, the so-called Grand Mufti of Jerusalem – Mohammed Amin al-Husseini – broadcast Nazism globally in Arabic through powerful shortwave transmitters.

Post-War Europe, including in the 1960s the Roman Catholic Church, tried to reflect on why and how Christian Europe had become genocidally antisemitic and thereby to make amends. Germany and Austria banned the teaching of Mein Kampf and Holocaust denial, and the RC Church published its Nostra Aetate declaration on relations with Jews.  The Arab world never tried to cure its antisemitism, and never came to share Western Europe’s sense of Holocaust guilt and shame (and neither did Communist Eastern Europe come to that). Hitler is still as admired throughout the Arab world as he was in the 1930s and 40s.  Arabic translations of Mein Kampf and Protocols of the Elders of Zion are, today, bestselling.  Protocols is believed to be true by the Arab elite, and is taught in the universities.  Protocols is quoted on authority in the Hamas Covenant.

I wrote a long piece in August 2019, explaining that the primary and sustaining cause of the Arab-Israel conflict is genocidal antisemitism[iii]. If you do not acknowledge the seriousness of the region’s genocidal antisemitism, you have nothing serious to say about solutions for peace.

The British politicians want, “Equal rights for peoples in two states”? Show me any Arab nation that has equal rights, or anything resembling universal human rights, including for Jews, Christians, Sufis, Druze and others.  Former Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt told us last year that persecution of Christians in the region is now “near genocide”. [iv]

“The time is right” for a Palestinian state?  Really?  Who is to govern it?  Who is going to prevent genocide?  The three bodies that currently administer the Jew-free Arab regions are Hamas, Fatah (or Palestinian Authority) and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Even according to their own covenants and charters, these three bodies are genocidally antisemitic and committed to the obliteration of Israel.

Antisemitism is a chronic illness that, when it flares up, eats away at the mind of those it infects, and destroys the hater more thoroughly than the hated.  It can be cured, or at least controlled. The Germans, Austrians, Italians, French, Romanians… today are largely cured of genocidal antisemitism, but the Arab nations are not, and, alarmingly, we see much evidence now of cross-infection back to Europe (not least British politics).  If British politicians are seriously interested in solutions to peace, they should be seeking solutions that help to cure the Arab nations and Iran of genocidal antisemitism.  Only then can we say, “the time is right”, to do something constructive.


[i] (Boris Johnson)

[ii]  (Dr Richard Landes)

[iii] (Mark Pickles)

[iv] “Christian persecution ‘at near genocide levels’ “:



Posted in Antisemitism, Israel, Political philosophy, Uncategorized | 1 Comment