 |
| From left to right: Fred Hiatt, Washington Post moderator, Peter Wettig, German Ambassador, Gerard Araud, French Ambassador, and David O'Sullivan, EU Ambassador to U.S. Photo: Ileana Johnson 2016 |
Despite the snowy conditions in Washington, D.C., the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum held a program on International Holocaust Remembrance Day, January 27, 2016 on the topic of “Combating Hate in Europe.” http://www.ushmm.org/online/
In advertising the forum, the museum explained the importance of such a program.
“Around the world, antisemitism, religious persecution, and violent extremism are on the rise, and each threatens the stability and freedoms that democratic leaders are working to preserve.”
The Museum’s intent was to
examine how the lessons of the Holocaust could help “combat extremism and also
stand up to antisemitism and violence against religious minorities.”
Ambassadors were to
address what can be done to confront these challenges today, “what their governments are doing and still need to do to
educate young people, counter hate speech, and create economic opportunity
while also maintaining secure borders and offering safe harbor to refugees.”
Speakers included Gérard Araud, Ambassador of
France to the United States, David O'Sullivan, Ambassador of the European Union to the United States,
and Peter Wittig, Ambassador of Germany to the United States. Fred Hiatt, editorial
page editor at the Washington Post was the moderator.
The special unannounced guest
and speaker was a Holocaust survivor, Dr. Alfred Münzer.
 |
| Dr. Alfred Munzer |
In her opening remarks, the
museum representative described the day as a “day for education and reflection,”
keeping in mind the social unrest in Europe, the fear on the ground, the resentment,
xenophobia, hate speech, vicious, sexual attacks, and the treacherous slide
into the worst extremism, the rise of terror groups and of government leaders who
engage in hate speech. She described the rise of radical groups in Poland, “which
are bolder and stronger than ever,” and the “anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim,
anti-Jewish, anti-NATO, anti-Europe feelings, “the unbridled threats and
actions against minorities; the anti-s have taken over the global discourse.”
Fred Hiatt remarked that
America spoke with “moral arrogance” about Europe but “nobody is in a position
to lecture anybody else when we are talking about these topics.” He mentioned how
dismayed many were at the level of intolerance in parts of our presidential debates,
“the ease with which other human beings were dehumanized.”
Peter Wettig explained
that his country, Germany, has a moral responsibility to never forget the
Holocaust, and that shapes its foreign policy, especially towards Israel. Anti-Semitism
is not tolerated – “my country has strict laws on incitement, on hate speech, and
on Holocaust denial which are punishable under the law, under the full force of
the law.”
Those who decide what
constitutes hate speech are lawyers and judges, an obviously subjective
decision. One of the panelists explained that, in order to be hate speech, it
must “incite” violence. I thought violence in general is caused by hate, an “intense
and passionate dislike” of something or someone, by revenge, or insanity.
What is then “hate speech”
as determined by progressive scholars. There is a legal and a dictionary
definition.
“In law, hate
speech is any speech, gesture or conduct, writing,
or display which is forbidden because it may incite violence or prejudicial
action against or by a protected individual or group, or because it disparages
or intimidates a protected individual or group.”
In the
dictionary, it is “speech that attacks, threatens, or insults a person or group
on the basis of national origin, ethnicity, color, religion, gender, gender
identity, sexual orientation, or disability.”
By this
definition, most Democrats should be fined for “hate speech” and inciting riots
and violence. But we do have freedom of speech, particularly unpleasant and
offensive speech.
The audience expected the
forum to address “the growing concern of most of Europe and many here in this
country of the virulent spread of hatred meted out by the growing Muslim
population in their host countries.” Instead, “the general position taken was
that the rest of us aren’t tolerant enough of their customs and religious
ideas.”
According to Chriss
Rainey, “the discussion was presented in a panel of like-minded socialists who
represented their socialist governments. I don’t think anyone has the answers
yet for the Muslim infiltration of Europe and the western world, but to think
we can do nothing but increase tolerance is irrational.”
Rainey continued, “Did it
ever occur to anyone that the repeated mention of Republican candidates running
for office, Trump in particular, was offensive and bordering on hate speech? Or
is it only acceptable to speak your mind and express your sincere beliefs if
you are Democrat or a socialist?”
The German ambassador Wittig
expressed his country’s position of respect for Jewish groups, for Israel’s
right to exist, and his country’s stance of intolerance towards any form of
anti-Semitism. He almost foolishly insisted that anti-Semitism, “if it existed,
was a German problem and not a threat from the million Muslims they have
invited and allowed into the country.”
An interesting word used
by several people on the panel raised my radar, “stakeholders,” a word that points
to the one world governance socialist-speak coming from the United Nations.
Ambassador Gerard Araud
focused his remarks on the French secularist society which “has just opened its
doors to a very religious body of immigrants who do not share a common morality
with host countries.” Reeducating and training the immigrants to the French way
of life was presented in such a positive light as if it was remotely possible.
Never mind the two massacres in Paris in 2015; that must have been just an
exception to the peacefulness and good intent of the new comers to build a
progressive life in France.
Chriss Rainey believes
that “Araud’s remarks reflect an attitude that they don’t like religion because
it puts barriers on human progress. They have ideas of right and wrong and anyone
will be trained in the proper conduct of a citizen. The French expect to do
this not through any religious body, which has been the source of morality for
centuries, but from within state run schools that are set up to mold the next
generation, outside the loving eye of home and family. But then, how could it
be otherwise since they have basically destroyed the family already and the
only thing left to train children—what few of them there are, is the state.”
Ambassador David O’Sullivan,
representing EU, a house of cards threatened by the possible exit of Greece and
U.K., explained his organization’s interest in controlling the 28 member-states
to make sure they stay in line and preserve the EU. To succeed, EU bureaucrats
must make sure any nationalist idea is rejected as dangerous, racist, hateful,
xenophobic, backwards, and simple-minded. Anyone who opposes global government
control is uneducated.
O’Sullivan expressed his
disdain for Donald Trump, a presidential candidate who loves his country and
speaks openly about protecting Americans’ rights to preserve their way of life.
Ambassador O’Sullivan added that he had faith in the American voters to do the
right thing, meaning, to vote for some other candidate who shares his
progressive, globalist control views.
During the panel
discussion and Q&A, the bashing of Donald Trump was almost a lait-motif. Trump
voters were derided as “nativists,” “lower class” and “uneducated” for
considering a vote for such a persona-non-grata whom the Labor Party in the
U.K. contemplated banning. The two remaining ambassadors expressed their faith
in the American voters that they would do the right thing and vote as the
elites and the media desire.
As Chriss Rainey so aptly
put it, “Could it be that the remarks about our conservative candidates that we
heard mentioned again and again, are merely a reflection of their own fear of a
growing conservative movement in Europe?”
After the conclusion of
the panel discussion and Q & A, a Dutch survivor of the Holocaust, Dr. Alfred Münzer, made brief remarks about how he survived “the fury
of anti-Semitism that had engulfed Europe,” having been hidden and protected “by
a Dutch family and their Muslim housekeeper.” But his older sisters, 6 and 8
years old, did not survive. They were turned in to the authorities and taken to
Auschwitz. “The father of a Catholic family whose wife had taken them in did
not like Jewish children.” Sadly, he explained, the murder of six million Jews
did not end the anti-Semitism that is very much alive today.
I was surprised that not
once the real culprits of anti-Semitism and perpetrators of heinous crimes
today were not mentioned. Yet every panelist and the moderator repeated ad
nauseam the idea that somehow, conservatives and nationalists in Europe and
around the globe who disagree with progressive goals and ideals are “far right
loons” who deserve derision, contempt, and legal punishment of hate crimes.
Freedom of speech must fall
under progressive censorship law; eager judges should eliminate the right to
speak and think which is divergent from the ruling elites. Working hand in
glove with social media, especially Facebook, these European bureaucrats and
Democrats want to nip in the bud any resistance against their speech dictates.
Unlike Europe, which is a
basket case of linguistic Tower of Babel, of broke socialist states thanks to
their open borders, multi-culturalism and diversity at all costs, most Americans
like their borders, their sovereignty, and their culture, and would like to
keep it this way.
Americans do not want to
lose their national identity to hostile, invading cultures that do not wish to
assimilate but desire to change the demographics of the host country, its
history, and replace the local customs and religions with Islam. It seems that the
ruling progressives and invading Islamists, who rape and pillage across Europe,
make strange bed fellows. The media and the socialist authorities are on high
alert to hide the chaos.
The panelists spent more
time protecting minorities that actually engage in hate speech, incitement, and
murder, while condemning the “hate speech” coming from the “far right” fringe
and those so intolerant and disagreeable with the progressive open border,
destroy western civilization agenda.
No mention was made of all
the violence, chaos, and rapes committed by the military age Muslim refugees
harbored in ever-increasing numbers and welcomed with open arms by EU leaders
determined to change the arrogant and intolerant face and demographics of our
western civilization.
Unfortunately, thanks to progressive
tyrants, career politicians in Washington who only represent the interests of
their capitalist cronies, billionaires, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
lobbying around the world with coffers full of grant money, the fix is in for European
style global socialism.
Further reading sources cited by the Holocaust Museum:
*Antisemitism in Germany. Ahead of International Holocaust Remembrance Day, German Chancellor
Angela Merkel said that antisemitism is "more widespread than we
imagine." http://www.jta.org/2016/01/24/news-opinion/world/merkel-anti-semitism-in-germany-more-widespread-than-we-can-imagine?utm_source=Newsletter+subscribers&utm_campaign=e4d5d21674-Daily_Briefing_1_25_2016&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_2dce5bc6f8-e4d5d21674-25299385
*Extremism in Poland. Our opening speaker and USHMM Council member, Amy Kaslow recently reported on the growth of nationalist movements in Eastern Europe.
http://fortune.com/author/amy-kaslow/
*Holocaust
Remembrance events in Paris. To mark the global Day of Remembrance, the Museum and UNESCO Paris will
co-host a series of events and open an important exhibition on propaganda,
called State of Deception.
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/oppose-new-propaganda-of-hatred-by-irina-bokova-and-sara-bloomfield-2016-01
