Benjamin Netanyahu and Instability

With all the disruption and uncertainty surrounding uprisings in the Arab world Israel has had to be aware of two things:

First:      Political Islam will always be a religiously murderous theology. It will experience no ethical conflict if it chooses to renege on any agreements it has made with Israel or any other country. It can find enough theological precedent to justify this if it wishes.

Second:     Revolutionary change creates triumphalism, triumphalism is jingoistic in temperament and jingoism destabilizes nations even as it unifies societies.

A new paradigm is open to testing and just as we learn from our relationships through experience, change creates opportunities for new interactions that are not necessarily mutually beneficial.  Multiple uprisings in the Arab world present both opportunities and dangers to all players in the region and it may be a number of years before the overall picture can be fully viewed.

What has particularly frightened me is not the speculation around multiple ‘what-if’ scenarios but the electrical impulses surging through Benjamin Netanyahu’s brain.  Correct me please (if I was misled) but in disbelief I read that he thought the cost of coping with this new ‘threat’ would be an extra $20 billion.  We can all guess from whom he intended to ask for this cash.

The world has gone through tremendous economic trauma since 2008. It will take a long time before any of us (perhaps excepting the wealthy) are able to recover from this onslaught on our national pockets. Most of us will not recover from this latest economic downturn as future pensions are squeezed and as prospects for increasing real, inflation adjusted net income are marginal at best over the medium to long term.

For Benjamin Netanyahu to suggest that he may need the kind of help that will never trickle down let alone make most of his or anyone else’s citizens safer showed gross political insensitivity.  As an exemplar of grotesque silliness I find it difficult to begin to speculate from where his thoughts emanated. It is as if Benjamin occupies a space of serenity and insensible calm completely oblivious to the pain everyone else is experiencing.

It is very damaging to Israel and one must question the motive of the man who seems intent on alienating his nation’s principal benefactor by his bizarre and irreverent behavior.

If the States citizens can no longer see the fundamental error in their Prime Ministers thinking then the original heroic vision upon which Zionism built the State of Israel has been truly lost.

We know from global history that collapse is orchestrated from the margins. The extremes of left and right restrain the center and by exercising de facto veto over policy, paralyze or severely restrict a nation’s efforts to deal with either an external or an internal threat. When an extreme minority dictates debate over what constitutes the national vision atrophy ensures. Those who are best at manipulation, profit from dysfunction to the detriment of everyone else. Consensus and that means the nation, is the only loser.  In democracy it is consensus that binds us together as a nation because it provides a vision that is overwhelmingly shared by the people.  A vision that is shared by the alienated and peripheral figures at the margins of society by its nature precludes the majority and therefore is damaging to the society that it infects.

Egypt’s total aid package from the USA was tied to Israel’s aid by the terms of its 1979 Peace Treaty with Israel. It was conditioned and it remains contingent on Egypt’s good behavior. As a guarantor of good conduct its effectiveness  has been hampered by Israel’s reluctance to use this particular weapon.  Perhaps it is time to remind the Egyptian people that their aid may not be as visible as Israel’s is but it is no less significant for the Egyptian military establishment and therefore the Egyptian people.  Of course China, Iran, Turkey and even Saudi Arabia may be eager to jump in with the next 60,000 million dollars of loose change (as the US has given Egypt since 1979 - $2.5b in 2010) but I suspect not.

If I was Prime Minister Netanyahu I would have stood before the people of America and offered to share their pain.  I would have massively reduced or better still, ceased Israel’s government aid from the USA immediately. 

But the Prime Minister simply does not appear to inhabit the same world the rest of us do. If Bibi is incapable of seeing the enormity of his present failure he must go before the damage to Israel is irreparable.

Itamar Infanticide and the British Press

Sometimes events impel a response that rudely pushes its way to the front of the queue.  I wrote the conclusion to this blog before I thought out anything else. As often happens I awoke into consciousness with an idea. It refused to leave and grew with intensity. My first thoughts of the morning should be of light and calm; peace and a new day. Instead I considered the response of the British Press to the decapitated body of a three month old baby, the blood soaked remains of humanity discarded like the lies of the press and the self-righteous boycotters cheering hypocrisy, on a fathers lifeless body.

A society that celebrates infanticide has no humanity.  A society that justifies this slaughter has no soul.  The Politically correct British press, the BBC (funded by $7.3 billion of British taxpayer’s money) and the Guardian Newspaper failed to mention this atrocity and when they did it was in order to justify their own pornographic agenda of equivalence, cause and effect, justice and punishment. The Jews, it seems, make Muslims do bad things.  Gee whiz – where have we heard that before, o yeah, Der Sturmer, 1923-1945, Nazi Germany, or if that is too offensive, The Peoples Observer, its ‘quality’ sister newspaper. Welcome to 21st Century Britain.

The Settlements, it is implied, supply the reason behind the celebration of child killers. Murder is not murder when the victims are Zionist babies. Allah’s followers have the Koran to keep them calm as they go about their important work, putting civilians to the sword, in the midst of their blood soaked killing fields.

The British press, in creating this false dichotomy, this obscene linkage once again affirms its outright ethical failure. Butchery is only thus, in the wrong hands.

I understand frustration and despair.  I appreciate outrage and anger.  The Britain that collaborated in the Shoah has never forgiven its survivors and now actively encourages the re-writing of Israeli history.

It explains an end, the Fogel family atrocity can only hint at.

Britain ignored Hitler because the job he did was agreeable to its largely ‘aristocratic’ leadership. In 1948 it was Britain that orchestrated the ethnic cleansing of Jewish Jerusalem and the almost complete destruction of its physical architecture.

I awoke this morning and from the Press I understood that nothing has changed.  Israel and ‘The Jews’ have never had ‘a chance’ to influence British opinion.  The morally indigent revanchist British press has always needed a hate figure to motivate it but has nearly always displayed scrupulous care to not damage UK plc’s profitability in its pursuit of ‘the truth’. Cant, has always been a staple of British journalism’s diet.  One theory has it that Robert Maxwell was murdered and his funds stolen by Her Majesties government in order to silence dissenting opinion.  Were they afraid that a Jew might finally have an opportunity to present another side to the story?  Rupert Murdoch (who is generally regarded as portraying Israel in a positive light) as owner of News International has had to give up Sky News in order to gain permission to acquire a greater share of British broadcasting – is there a British conspiracy afoot here too? A pattern soon emerges of a society that refuses to acknowledge a legitimate Jewish narrative, a society that will do everything in its power to suppress legitimate debate, a society that is capable only of acknowledging Jewish subservience and eternal victim-hood.

Now that is interesting. Is there a British conspiracy targeting Jews as a race and as a people? Should we speculate about a secret book, or a secret society, just as the Russian secret police wrote the Protocols in the middle of the 19th Century? Does a book or a program exist that is the product of her Majesties loyal secret servants here, too?  Now that would make for an interesting movie!

As a Jew I am unable to agree with a lot of what passes for Israeli government policy. But living in Britain I am beginning to fear living in Britain just as the Jews of Berlin must have feared living in Germany before the World War.  A British judiciary that makes public theater out of criminal trials (as long as they concern Israel, that is), cant, legalized incitement, and justifiable homicide: this is Britain today and its quality press rules.

I awoke this morning to a vision of hell. The Jewish village of Itamar is a metaphor for Israel itself.  The press reaction, a reminder that the past, for some of us at least, is also our present.

Prejudice and Fear

We live in urban England.  My daughter has friends from many communities within British Society.  Her high school is majority Muslim and I do not pretend that being a minority (White and Anglo-Saxon) automatically encourages disadvantage.

After her first week in high school I waded in with indignant fury at the head teachers’ platitudes about zero tolerance for racism and a level playing field for all when one of her little friends was called a nigger by older Muslim boys. On other occasions I tried to explain that the need to be ‘protected’ by ‘good Muslims’ was intrinsically wrong.  Equality is not the absence of prejudice. To make a virtue of fear is to accept discrimination as a fact of life. To teach that nothing can be done teaches children an obscene lesson that authority is meaningless.  We can celebrate the fortitude of the children that subsequently grow up without prejudice but just as likely, is the outcome that there will be an equal number for whom hate will be their constant companion.

In order to now explain my fears I must take you on a diversion.

Why is the conflict between Israel and the Arab world so intractable? The answer can be found in the following analysis.

History, psychology and the dynamics of power are central to all abusive relationships. 

Missionary faith by the nature of its theological construction is abusive.  There are two missionary faiths in this world, Christianity and Islam.

As a missionary faith Islam has three bedrock narratives.

1. Everything that came before Islam is redundant. This is called Supersessionism or Replacement Theology.
2. Within every missionary community a minority will only ever be tolerated but never, will they be equal.
3. Degradation and humiliation demonstrably reinforces the ‘superior’ communities self worth, irrespective of the class they belong to.  This last point is particularly appreciated by tyrannies and fascist democracies.  In Islam it is central to the theology of global conquest and that status theologically ascribed to the infidel (called ‘Dhimma’).  For a more detailed explanation I recommend the following by Bat Ye’or:

http://www.dhimmitude.org/archive/by_lecture_10oct2002.htm

As a faith, Islam has had 1,400 years of almost wholly unimpeded Global colonial expansion.  Successful conquest is the only determinant of what constitutes appropriate behavior in a setting where asymmetrical power is not balanced in favour of the missionary faith.  Islam is a faith of global conquest.

There are three reasons that the conflict is currently intractable:

1. After 1,400 years of successful conquest the conqueror can never understand that a persecuted minority has the right to reverse that trend of harassment and ethnic cleansing that by its previous success self-justifies and therefore, is self-perpetuating of discrimination.
2. Even if the Arab and greater Muslim world can accept physical defeat by a Dhimmi nation it can never theologically accept spiritual and cultural defeat. And this will always inform its relationship with the Non-Muslim world. The cultural construct that demands acquiescence to inferior status with all its concomitant legal and material consequences cannot psychically digest a contrary position. This imbalance constantly feeds the destructive tensions that exist within the relationship.  For Israel it means that there can rarely, if ever, be a relationship with the Muslim world that is based on trust.
3. The theological need to strike out at an inferior human being is not only a religious but also a cultural paradigm of Islamic faith. And the significance of this last statement is that the difference between the bigotry of a secular and a religious Muslim is far too often only in the narrative.  In the Arab world it is key to understanding the prejudice and discrimination that infects Arab thought and that infests Arab society.

An aside.  I am a Jew, I am an Israeli, and I am a Zionist. I am immensely proud to be known as and called all three of these things in no particular order.  I am British also.  To the person who questions my loyalty to Britain I ask why I have never read an article questioning the loyalty of my British Muslim compatriots, or of any other faith group?  Is this bizarre omission something we need to contextualize in terms of a conspiracy against Jews only?

I am sensitive to the feelings of others but it appears to me that in this world of abusive power there are two missionary faiths that have controlled my destiny for far too long and they have not ever truly accepted my right either to self determination or the right to have a homeland that is free of threat.  Having practiced a military strategy of ‘Divide and Rule’ as a vehicle for domination and conquest a third party interferes with this spurious 'conflict-free' philosophy of appeasement.

Here lies the essence of the conflict between Israel and the Rest.

It is why the fascist left has found it so easy to slip into bed with Islam and it is why the fascist left accepts without questioning the Arab/Islamic narrative. It is why the fascist left embraces every lie.

I accuse the fascist left of including the British Guardian Newspaper Group and the BBC (recently named as one of the three most powerful media groups in the world and, the most influential).  I include in this fascist conspiracy the British Liberal Democratic Party which relishes their enfants terribles for their forthright manner and their political and personal bigotry while allowing the party to distance itself from what they privately cheer.

British Television recently completed the showing of a four part anti-Jewish diatribe called ‘The Promise’ (see my posting dated 8th February 2011). This vile propaganda was the contribution of the BBC’s co-conspirator ITV4.  I only managed to sit through a single episode but that was enough to convince me that once more British Television was celebrating its sycophantically Antisemitic tradition by adding yet another showpiece Arabist anti-Zionist narrative to the colourful British literary canvas.  A friend once told me that the British cultural landscape was replete with Jewish luvvies and cultural icons. Therefore, he continued, the Islamist and left wing fascist narrative (and thus its agenda) was unsustainable. I disagreed with his optimistic prognosis then and am more than convinced today that his foresight was mistaken.

And so I return to my little girl. She has completed her education relatively unscathed by the prejudice that has damaged so many others.  When my daughter questions my identity I understand that she has the right to construct her own. It is not all her choice because she did grow up in my home and I hope she has absorbed some of my positive values. 

When she brings a boy into my home and his name is Mohammed I am overwhelmed however by philosophical angst.

I do not want to hurt her. I am not a racist. I am overwhelmed by history and I live in current times where history is repeating itself. The scapegoat is never a happy sacrifice.  Today I live in racist, left wing McCarthyist Anti Jewish Britain. This country, complicit in the Shoah, denigrates me for my ingratitude when I fail to listen to my moral and intellectual ‘betters’, when I refuse to turn the other cheek. When I don’t do as I am told.

Britain is today at the forefront of the campaign to denigrate my history and annihilate my future.

And now I despair. My daughter is too young to internalize my fears and too naive to appreciate the threat her relationships pose to me and to her.

There is nothing I can do if I do not want to drive her away.  I have never been nervous with any of the people my children have brought into my house and my home has been their home. I have always, without exception, given them free rein, irrespective of their race, their religion or their color.

Do tell me then why I should not be nervous about secular Mohammed?

Stability, Muammar Qaddafi and Oil

We are told that there are two kinds of international political relationship.  The first is enunciated by the neocons.  It expresses the desire to create a democratic state structure that will encourage freedom and equality. In theory, democratically elected nations are unlikely to sanction military adventurism as a means to resolving their conflicts.  The second view is provided by the foreign policy realists. We should all ‘live and let live’. Culture, we are informed, is king.  The clichés roll off the tongue like an insipid broth of chicken soup that slides down the gullet without ever touching the sides.  So countries that stone to death its female child victims of rape, execute homosexuals, eat the liver of albinos and hang mothers who speak out against crimes committed in the name of the national deity (or the blasphemy laws) should be allowed their institutionalised slavery, child rape, torture and state legalised slaughter.

We are told that stability is paramount to the retention of international security and that without it we will always be fighting other nation’s wars for them.  In the morally relativistic cesspool we now intellectually inhabit, flexibility has become our closest ally.

Of course the bombing in Bali (200 murdered), Madrid (also 200 murdered), on 911 (3,000 murdered) and in London (52 murdered) are simply aberrant and isolated chinks in the global armor of fortress hypocrite.

Europe has lectured Israel on the finer points of diplomacy.  The State of Israel has been less than competent in framing a credible response to global threats of deligitimization.  A people famed for their literacy have been barely literate in fighting off the narrative disinformation of their enemies.  And Israel has scarcely addressed the supercessionist bigotry of the Kairos Document and the Methodist Church.  Meanwhile the Arab world, convulsed by social and political upheaval kills its own people by the thousand and we intimate that we may consider proposing a possible strategy that could potentially include the threat of selective sanctions and maybe, perhaps even a wrap on the knuckles at the United Nations (for Libya’s president, Mr Qaddafi).

If we do not have a vision for the world in which we sojourn, we will be overwhelmed by the barbarians.

The West dealt with Libya as if Qaddafi’s forty year rule was not a dictatorship cemented in blood. Left and Right, liberal and conservative, the leadership of the West and not just the West, has sold its soul for the oil soaked sands of Arabia.

Putting My Cards on the Table

King David seduced Bathsheba, the wife of one of his Captains (Uriah) and for this seduction he was punished. King Arthur's Guinevere had an adulterous affair with Lancelot. The story of human frailty has concerned us for as long as we have had an imagination and provided the subject for morality tales probably for almost as long. We do not deify human beings or rather we should not allow it to happen. But it does, and it places their crimes outside of morality, sanctifying evil. And then we mimic the worst aspects of our idols flawed human personality.

If our era is known for one thing it will be that we have been driven to worship without ever considering its consequences. Rock stars, royalty, footballers, big breasted women, gangsters, politicians and priests have all been objects of our adoration; the list is endless of those whom we imitate in a desperate desire to be somehow touched.

The global press by kowtowing to extremism has encouraged violence and is unlikely to be sympathetic to critical comparisons of differing histories. But a more pernicious reason for this obsequious and too often conciliatory demeanor is that commercial considerations lead to society justifying and then condoning asymmetrical morality.

I am going to put my religious cards on the table. I do not believe that I or anyone else is in some way born to possess superior ethics. The soul is a fiction that was created at a time of ignorance and fear and now exploited by those who want to separate us all into neatly defined categories so that they may condemn us and make use of the invisible and indefinable for their own greed. The soul is the Emperors new clothing for the intellectual and the theologian. We are all given choices in our life. My convictions are perhaps no better and no worse than anyone else’s religious beliefs. Unless that is, you insist on telling me that your faith, or your way of life is superior to mine. Because history has consistently demonstrated that power is a stronger driver than ethics, and religion is the perfect vehicle for intolerance, paving the road to conquest by discrimination and terror.

Respect is an absolute that we have lost. The one test that humanity has consistently failed is to put itself into the place of the ‘other’. Hillel reduced this to a simple formula, he said ‘do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you, all else is commentary.’ Perhaps it is time for the Protocols of the Elders of Zion to be reissued, replacing Jews in the fantasy with Muslims and Christians; to lose its meaning, obscenity has to be generic not specific, but human empathy is emotional, not intellectual, and we learn to respect others from fear, not principle.

Ken Stern, director of Antisemitism and extremism for the American Jewish Committee neatly summarized it this way: "One of the ways I determine whether bigotry applies in a situation is to take the same scenario, change some of the players and see if the same results apply."

We are told that we should not dwell on the aspects of God because as speculation it is unprovable and therefore a waste of human energy; time is better spent doing good deeds. But men have created gods of terrible power and brutality. Justice and mercy is consigned to followers only and denied to the ‘other’. Men may have recorded the words of their gods but they fashioned them in their human image. If God was a man we should laugh at him because one does not kill in the name of an object of fun.

I do not believe that my god is the misogynistic bigot society portrays her to be. I do not believe her to be the destroyer of worlds, the polluter of planets and the misanthrope who tortures and kills. Instead I look at the beauty around me and I am certain that God is a woman.

Egypt and Israel

People ask me what I think about the tsunami of unrest convulsing the Arab world and specifically what my thoughts are concerning Egypt.

Egypt is representative of one of a number of Aryan ideologies that in themselves pose a threat to global security and world peace in the 21st Century. Others include the ancient empires of Persia (renascent post modern Iran) and Byzantium, which after its conquest seeded the Ottoman Empire (resurgent post modern Turkey).

Sadly, the Arab world is overwhelmingly racist.

People have responded by pointing out that Hamas has moved towards a possible ten year truce with Israel thus implicitly recognising ‘the Zionist entity’.  One makes peace with ones enemy, to quote former President Bill Clinton. But historically it is more complete to say that one imposes peace on a defeated enemy.  A foe that remains theologically predisposed towards observing an Islamic truce intends to honour that truce only for as long as the advantage weighs against its conquest of infidel lands. It is a Hudna or truce that remains in force as a respite between wars, between Islamic nations (Dar al-Salam) and ‘tributary’ states (such as the UK which pays £180m per year to British Muslim institutions as a bribe to coax them into teaching ‘British values’).

I am told the Arab world is more complicated than that. That to deny the nuance in the man is to deny the humanity of the Arab nation and that I am guilty of racial stereotyping.  Actually, turn that on its head – this is the way Jews are treated (‘The Jews’ should know better).  It is the wholly monochromatic view of Israel and to a lesser extent, of the USA.  And yes that view of Israel, Jews and the USA is racist.  Only a fool believes suffering ennobles. For example, no one but a racist would tell a black person, post slavery, to turn the other cheek, or that their continued suffering will ennoble them.

But international hypocrisy is unthinkingly embraced when it is committed in the name of Palestine or in favour of the selective morality of the Green-Red alliance. It defies belief.

Yusuf al-Qaradawi is an Arab gentleman beloved of tens of millions of Arabs and hundreds of millions of fundamentalists throughout the global Muslim nation. He is also hugely admired by the former Mayor of London and current Labour Party contender for the same job, Ken Livingstone. To place Yusuf al-Qaradawi into the existential Nazi pantheon he dominates in the Muslim world, he is opposed to any reconciliation with Israel and has described the Holocaust as “punishment from heaven.”  “Inshallah (God willing), next time our faithful will do it” (murder all the Jews, everywhere) and “Oh Allah, count their numbers, and kill them, down to the very last one.”  It does make one wander exactly to what kind of deity the Muslim world prays when it sanctifies genocide.

And this is someone major British politicians and the British Left admire.

al-Qaradawi is a fundamentalist Muslim who believes that it is correct to execute homosexuals and permissible to beat women. He views female genital mutilation as wholly beneficial. In a misogynistic world view this is perhaps understandable – physically, sexually and psychologically abusive, but understandable. In a world that sanitises hate as long as it springs forth from a theological fountain domination can take many forms.

In Egypt, on February 18th 2011 two million or so people allegedly greeted this fascist sheik who returned from a fifty year exile in order to participate in Egyptian celebrations of the ‘victory’ over President Mubarak.

So I return to the original question of how I view Egyptian unrest.  We complicate in order to obfuscate. The Arab world hates Israel because it hates the other. It is intolerant not because it cries for justice but because it demands injustice.

Let us not forget that the world has conveniently ignored the plight of some thirty million Kurds denied the most basic right to self-determination in order to placate today’s artificially created Arab nation states. Israel should not ever forget this lesson of human duplicity.

Egypt will retain a peace treaty with Israel only for as long as it remains beneficial for it to do so. Whether it be the USA or perhaps even China (?) that finances it or something else that drives its view of what it defines as ‘benefit’ the frigid peace Israel has with Egypt will remain in place only for as long as it is of benefit to Egypt.

Yes, it is that simple.

Zorba the Greek and the Archbishop of Piraeus

There is this ‘thing’ that does not ever go away of its own accord. It manifests itself wherever human beings gather and it is only by attacking the poisoned spring from which it emerges that we have a chance at all of defeating it.  It is hate.  We live in a world where hatred is carefully nurtured but we fail to tackle it either at home or abroad.

My view of history should help to explain the problem.  Some 2,000 years into humanities collective past a people refused to accept domination by an economic and military power whose empire stretched through Europe and the Mediterranean. This subject people were troublesome because their economic system was humane. This may seem surprising but the oil that kept Rome running smoothly was slavery. And Rome being an autocracy rested most easily on a platform of violence and repression.  Violence is an act of oppressive domination, submission by its victims indicative of inferiority, and acquiescence by those same victims the proof of individual or even a divine right to punish.

And so ancient Israel was overthrown to silence competition.  Christianity’s earliest followers also had a problem. They were associated with Jewish dissent and Jewish revolution.  It is the reason that they gradually rewrote their own history, first to exclude any discussion of Roman atrocities and then to distance their faith from its Jewish roots which by association made them also a threat to Rome.

But the Greek founders of the Christian empire took it one step further. They internalized the violence that fueled Rome and made discrimination and hate a weapon of Church expansion.

In 1965A.D.  Pope Paul VI issued a document that was named Nostra Aetate. It renounced the charge of deicide; the idea that all Jews past, present and future were guilty of killing the son of God. To quote Nostra Aetate “…. in her rejection of every persecution against any man, the Church, mindful of the patrimony she shares with the Jews and moved not by political reasons…..decries hatred, persecutions, displays of antisemitism, directed against Jews at any time and by anyone”. Pope Paul VI (28-10-1965). Declaration on the relation of the church to non-Christian religions – Nostra Aetate http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html (retrieved 10th February 2011)

The problem is that neither the Russian Orthodox Church nor the Greek Orthodox Church nor the Protestant churches are obligated to embark on a similar journey towards repairing the past.

In December 2010 The Metropolitan Seraphim of Piraeus said that Hitler was just a Zionist instrument. And that was only one of the toxic statements made about Judaism. If he had said this of Islam churches would have burned down across the Islamic world and many innocent Christians would have been murdered. In February 2011 Mikis Theodorakis, the Greek composer who wrote the music for the film "Zorba the Greek," said in a television interview that he is an "anti-Semite and anti-Zionist."  So I have a problem.

If the Ground Zero of Greek hatred is a communist composer admired by millions of Greeks and a senior Greek religious figure then what can be done to control the contagion of hate that the two sides of Greek society are loath to touch for fear of offense? Ultimately the financial and political benefits of immorality are 1,400 million Muslim punters of everything from prostitution and drugs to the non physical kind such as university places and holidays to the more prosaic material commodities such as cars and clothes.

Let us be clear of the effect the words of such venomous human specimens can have on society.  Zorba and His eminence appear on public TV and basically state that it is OK to hate me. They are saying that it is OK to kill the toddler walking with his mother because the youngster is Jewish. They do not have to say the word ‘kill.’ They and their kind have used the language of denial to mask their evil intent for most, if not all of their respective histories. Existentially they are no different to the Nazi that once tried to exterminate them to.

Be clear that I do not ever advocate violence.

Only however, the most unambiguous response to their kind of human ugliness and despair will help to inoculate humanity against them.

We must demand equal access to the same media and through the same programs to make clear the damage that their mind vomit causes. It is an unfortunate characteristic of the human psyche that we accept what is thrown at us unless we are told something to the contrary. The Archbishop and the Communist are two sides of the same coin. The devil they both worship may appear different to both of them but for me and for the child that is degraded, beaten or killed in their name they are no more than Janus faced twins.  And if they speak evil they are evil. I am unwilling to tune into their perceptions or beliefs and I refuse to bow to their demands that I submit meekly to their narrative and to their flawed and toxic history.

Do I hate this human detritus? No – Their kind lives off hate. My religion implores me to hate injustice but to also be wary of the hypocrite. Intellectual cowardice and flaccid morality is far too prevalent because of people like them. I will not turn the other cheek. And we mustn’t. They must be confronted.