Interview with debater and author Gertrud Galster. Made by Media1.dk, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2014. All credits goes to ©Medie1.dk All shown documents are available as PDF downloads here:
https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/22/medea/
https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/22/antisemi-rapport-2003-forward/
https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/22/antisemi-rapport-2003/
https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/2... https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/2... https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/2... https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/2... https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/2... https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/2... https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/2... https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/2... https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/2... https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/2... https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/2... https://www.pdf-archive.com/2017/02/2...
The EU elites corporations - all with ties to larger elite groupings - are constantly depending on large amount of competitive oil and fuel delivery (for machinery, factories, transport, infrastructure, aviation, seafarers etc.).
To meet these demands on competitive market conditions they need to be in good standing with the Arabs since Russia and China are not preferential partners. At the same time the Arabs put a lot of their investments into EU which the EU companies barely would be without.
In return the Arabs demand favorable conditions for their people - which means Muslims - and Islamization of Europe.
However, the numbers don't lie. Virtually none of the official aims has been reached or achieved significant improvements (because it's all fake excuses). Only big corporations seems to have benefited while the Islamization is rapidly expanding and dividing the population.
The whole hidden agenda is covered up in excuses about stability, development and integration which especially is culturally emphasized. That is in fact a smart move to achieve sympathy in the population - particularly among lefties.
E.U. Accused of Burying Report on Antisemitism
Pointing to Muslim Role
Marc Perelman November 28, 2003
The growing debate over antisemitism in Europe
took a new twist this week after the authors of a study on antisemitism
commissioned by the European Union accused the E.U. of burying their work for
political reasons.
A professor at Berlin Technical University and
one of the report’s authors, Werner Bergman, said that the E.U.-sponsored
European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia had deliberately shelved
the 112-page report since February because it concluded that Muslims and
pro-Palestinian groups were behind much of the recent antisemitic violence in
Europe.
“They are fearing that the report will
discriminate against Muslim minorities and that this would show that the E.U.
was siding with Israel,” Bergman said. “They put the blame on us because they can’t
admit they buried the report for political reasons.”
Adding to the debate, Israeli Prime Minister
Sharon declared this week in an interview with an E.U. newswire that the
growing presence of Muslims in Europe was a threat to the Jewish community.
The E.U. is under pressure from lawmakers in
Europe and America to publish the report.
“It is critical that E.U. leaders immediately
release this report in order to effectively combat the rise of antisemitism in
Europe,” Rep. Robert Wexler, a Florida Democrat, wrote on Tuesday in a letter
to Romano Prodi, the president of the European Commission, the E.U.’s executive
arm. “Suggestions that the E.U. would suppress this report based on politics
and in the face of growing hatred toward European Jewry are unconscionable.”
John Kellock, a spokesman for the racism
monitoring center, vehemently rejected the charges, saying the decision to
withhold publication of the report was prompted by the insufficient quality and
scope of the work. He said the center would publish a more comprehensive report
on antisemitism next spring.
“We don’t have a political agenda, and we don’t
hesitate to designate the perpetrators of racist and antisemitic acts,” Kellock
told the Forward. “We are surprised that the authors are now coming out with
those claims, since we told them about the problems four or five months ago.”
The alleged shelving of the report was first
reported on Saturday by the Financial Times of London. The news came a week
after twin suicide bombings at synagogues in Turkey and the arson of a Jewish
school in France led European leaders to vow new efforts to tackle
antisemitism.
Jewish groups blasted the monitoring center,
noting that while it had quickly produced three reports on Islamophobia in the
wake of the September 11 attacks, it failed to fulfill a promise to produce
quickly a report on antisemitism.
“This is just outrageous,” said Serge
Cwajgenbaum, secretary-general of the European Jewish Congress, who had pushed
for thecreation of the monitoring center in 1997. “There was a decision to hide
the truth and we want to know who took it.”
He and professor Bergman suggested that
responsibility for withholding the report might lie within the European
Commission, the executive arm of the E.U., which finances the center. Cwajgenbaum
said he would raise the issue at a scheduled meeting on December 18 with Prodi.
The commission came under fire recently for its
now- infamous poll that found that Europeans considered Israel the biggest
threat to world peace. In the past three years, pro-Israel politicians have
also accused the commission of refusing to closely monitor the use of European
funds by the Palestinian Authority.
The controversy over the report comes at a time
when Israeli officials are stepping up their pressure on Europe to address the
issue of antisemitism. In his interview with EUpolitix.com, Sharon warned: “An
ever-stronger Muslim presence in Europe is certainly endangering the life of
Jewish people…. E.U. governments are not doing enough to tackle antisemitism.”
Cwajgenbaum took issue with Sharon’s statement,
arguing that it was too simplistic. He said antisemitism in Europe was
multifaceted, coming from traditional extreme-right circles and far-left groups
as well as a radicalized Muslim minority.
“The vast majority of Muslims wants to be
integrated in Europe. So this is a much too general description of the
situation,” he said.
Between December 2001 and February 2002, the
European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia, known as the EUMC,
published three reports on instances of anti-Muslim incidents and promised that
it would quickly conduct a survey of antisemitic incidents, as well,
Cwajgenbaum said.
The EUMC assigned the study to the Center for
Antisemitism Research at the Technical University in Berlin, which has
extensive experience in the field.
Bergman said that although he raised
methodological concerns about the study, EUMC officials insisted that he
complete it. However, he said, EUMC officials later raised more substantive
concerns about designating Muslim perpetrators and asked the authors to avoid
generalizations. Bergman said EUMC officials also expressed discomfort with the
study’s broad definition of antisemitism, which included some anti-Israel
behavior.
The researchers presented their initial
findings to European Jewish community leaders in November 2002, and it was
agreed that an ensuing report would be released in March 2003 at the latest.
After they handed the EUMC what they considered
the final version of their work in February 2003, Bergman said he did not hear
back from the center, fueling speculation that a decision had been made to bury
the report.
Cwajgenbaum said he and other Jewish communal
leaders had continually asked about the report and that he now feels the EUMC
“was hiding the truth from us.”
Kellock denied the allegation,
stressing that the researchers had only focused their work on a period between
May and October 2002 and that it was deemed insufficient. He said the center
would publish a comprehensive report on the full years 2002 and 2003 in the
first quarter of next year.
He said the Berlin center refused
to conduct the expanded study and that a decision about the authors of the
study will be made soon.
An excerpt from the draft report
obtained by the Financial Times stated: “it can be concluded that the
antisemitic incidents in the monitoring period were committed above all by
right-wing extremists and radical Islamists or young Muslims.”
In late July, Wexler and three
other House members — Republican Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida and Democrats
Tom Lantos of California and Gary Ackerman of New York — wrote to E.U. foreign
policy chief Javier Solana, stressing the need for the E.U. to address the rise
in antisemitism and asking for the release of the draft report.
Similar letters were sent to
Prodi and to Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, whose country holds the
rotating presidency of the E.U.
In his reply to the lawmakers,
Solana explained that the work would not be made public because “it did not
meet the criteria of consistency and quality of data,” according to a copy of
the letter obtained by the Forward. Prodi endorsed Solana’s conclusions in a
separate letter dated August 12, arguing that there was “no complacency” toward
racism in Europe and that the problem of antisemitism also applied to the
United States.
On Tuesday, Wexler fired a letter
back to Prodi, saying he was “extremely disappointed” by Solana’s response. He
explained that one of the German researchers had contacted him and told him
that the shelving of the report was motivated by political reasons.
Since the beginning of the
intifada, Israel and its supporters have contended that anti-Zionism was a new
form of antisemitism. Critics counter that this definition is too broad and is
a ploy to stifle dissent over Israeli policies. In the exchange of letters with
Wexler, both Prodi and Solana insisted on the need to maintain such a
distinction.
In his letter, Prodi stressed the
“importance of distinguishing between legitimate political expressions and
criticisms of the policies of the government of Israel on the one hand, and
antisemitism on the other. The European Union will not tolerate antisemitism, nor
will it tolerate any insinuation that its policy towards the Middle East is
driven by antisemitism.”
Bergman said that while not all
anti-Israel activity is antisemitic, it often crosses the line into
antisemitism and it is therefore inappropriate to regard the two as completely
unrelated phenomena.
Euro-Arab dialogue strengthened
The MBI Al Jaber Foundation has strengthened the Euro-Arab dialogue initiative, which reflects universally shared values and the three cornerstones of the work of the foundation: good governance, cultural dialogue and particularly, education. The Foundation firmly believes that education constitutes a catalyst for building a better tomorrow, and since the past two decades, has helped many young Arab men and women develop their education through several scholarship programs in Europe and in the Arab world.
This two-day conference was opened by Eric Falt, Assistant Director-General for External Relations and Public Information of UNESCO, on behalf of Irina Bokova, Director-General of UNESCO; followed by Harald Stranzl, Ambassador, Alternate Permanent Delegate of Austria; Carolyn Perry, Director and Head of philanthropy at MBI Al Jaber Foundation; Samira Mohamed Moosa Al Moosa, Ambassador, Permanent Delegate of the Sultanate of Oman; Laurent Stefanini, Ambassador, Permanent Delegate of France and David Fajolles, Secretary-General of the French National Commission for UNESCO. It focused on topics such as harnessing cultural heritage for reconciliation, the importance of local governments (municipalities, regions, etc.) in the educational and cultural cooperation between Europe and the Arab world, and education as a vehicle for the prevention of violent extremism. The role of media in promoting intercultural dialogue and in preventing radicalization was also discussed.
The speakers and participants at this event included, among others, Metin Arditi, UNESCO Special Envoy for Intercultural Dialogue; Mounir Bouchenaki, Advisor to the Director-General of UNESCO on World Heritage; Francesco Rutelli, President of Priorità Cultura (Culture First); Ziad Hawat, Mayor of Byblos (Lebanon) and Moncef Ben Moussa, Director of the Bardo Museum (Tunisia). In addition, four short videos entitled “Words of radicalization” were screened with interviews with the writer Tahar Ben Jelloun, the philosophers Ali ben Makhlouf and Barbara Cassin, and Elias Sanbar, Ambassador, the Permanent Delegate of Palestine to UNESCO.
During the conference, the young personalities invited by National Commissions for UNESCO, provided elements for a Plan of Action to strengthen the dialogue between Europe and the Arab world, which shall also contribute to the International Decade for the Rapprochement of Cultures (2013-2022) led by UNESCO.
Michael Worbs, Chairperson of UNESCO’s Executive Board, addressed the audience on the first day of the Conference, and Nada Al-Nashif, Assistant-Director-General for the Social and Human Sciences, presented her concluding remarks at the end of the second day.
See also
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire