| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Recently the Jerusalem Post ran an article by Mark R. Cohen, "The New Muslim Anti-Semitism," which repeated many politically correct and comforting historical fictions, including:
THE FLIP SIDE of the discriminatory regulations imposed upon Jews is that they (as well as Christians) were a "protected people," ahl al-dhimma or dhimmis in Arabic, who enjoyed security of life and property, religious freedom, freedom from forced conversion, communal autonomy, and equality in the marketplace. For all its religious exclusivity and hostility towards the Jews, expressed in the Koran and in other Islamic literature, Islam contains a nucleus of pluralism that gave the Jews in Muslim lands greater security than Jews had in Christian Europe. For other important reasons, too, Jews in the Islamic orbit were spared the damaging stigma of "otherness" and anti-Semitism suffered by Jews in Europe. They were indigenous to the Near East - not immigrants, as in many parts of the Christian West - and largely indistinguishable physically from their Arab-Muslim neighbors.
Bat Ye'or, the pioneering historian of dhimmitude, wrote this in response and sent it to the Post:
Response to Mark Cohen’s article in the Jerusalem Post of January, 2008
Bat Ye’or*In his article “The New Muslim anti-Semitism” (Jerusalem Post, January 2, 2006), Mark R. Cohen unfortunately provides nothing new on a subject that now involves a global jihad war and a genocidal threat. It merely rehashes a short-sighted article he published over twenty years ago, “Islam and the Jews: Myth, counter-Myth, History” (The Jerusalem Quarterly, n° 38, spring 1986) to which I wrote a rejoinder, “Islam and the Dhimmis” (JQ n° 42, spring 1987). Still no changes! Then, like today, Cohen stated that Muslim “anti-Semitism” (an inappropriate word borrowed from European context) is a new phenomenon as if this Princeton professor of Near Eastern Studies has never read the Koran, the hadiths and the biographies of the Prophet Muhammad. As in his 1986 article, he encompasses in one sweeping global judgment the civilizations expanding over territories covering Africa, Asia and Europe during thirteen centuries. History loses its events, transformations and evolutions as if it is reduced to the stillness of an empty shell.
This reductionist mental attitude upholds the dogma of Islamic goodness and tolerance versus Christian timeless evilness in all places. Cohen is not troubled by the complexities involved in comparing utterly different civilizations, religions, jurisdictions, political ideologies and transformations over a millennium. Faithful to himself over the years, he remains deaf to the Islamists’ Judeophobic references in their religious texts, praising the system of dhimmitude as one would admire slavery, since the slave might escape death if he obeys his master’s orders. As in his earlier article, Cohen pretends that the persecutions Jews suffered under Islamic jurisdiction are an invented myth, a mimicry of Ashkenazi sufferings in order to grab more than Oriental Jewry deserves of the “Zionist pie”. Thus Oriental Jewry not only should be grateful to its Muslim rulers for not having been wiped out entirely, but it is not even entitled to have its own history without being accused of posturing as Ashkenazim, thereby obtaining undeserved advantages by out-stepping its position in Israel.
Maybe Mark Cohen has never heard of the Human Rights Declarations promulgated in Europe and America with its subsequent developments in matters of equality and democratic rights. Or does he imagine that a caliphate ruled these continents? Has he even forgotten the letter sent by George Washington to Moses Seixas, president of the Newport Hebrew Congregation on August 17, 1790, and inscribed on a stone at the Touro Synagogue (Newport R.I.), stating the inalienable human rights for Jews, as opposed to tolerance? Does he unconsciously assume that George Washington was a caliph and that the regions from Afghanistan to Yemen and Algeria were Christian countries, since there – at the time of Washington and the Enlightenment – Jews were still obliged to walk barefoot, with distinctive clothing, live in social segregation, pay countless security ransoms, suffering the rape of their women, the abduction of their children, while the Muslim courts refused their testimony? They were exposed to murders (Maghreb, the Levant, Yemen), deportations, forced conversions (Persia, Afghanistan) and in many regions enslavement to tribal chiefs (Maghreb). Such situations, of course, could not happen in Islam according to Professor Cohen -- unless the Jews became arrogant by overstepping their place and imagined they were human beings.
The current fanaticism and mass killings perpetrated in Lebanon, Algeria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Darfur, Indonesia and the Philippines evoke the continual tribal wars that have permanently ravaged the dar al-Islam with their religious-cleansing, the exodus or the deportation of populations, mainly non-Muslim, and the associated pillage, destruction, abduction and enslavement. Jihadist terrorism that has, over the centuries, eliminated the indigenous Jewish and Christian populations from their Islamized homelands continues unabated today, giving us a glimpse of this past, rosy time of dhimmitude. It is strange that Cohen remains at Princeton instead of emigrating to Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, even Sudan, to enjoy, under a shari’a–taliban type rule, that dhimmi condition he admires so much for Oriental Jewry.
* * * * *
* The latest book by Bat Ye’or, Eurabia: the Euro-Arab Axis, (English, French, Italian, Dutch) will be published in a Hebrew edition by Schocken in spring 2008.
This article was not accepted for publication. Bat Ye'or received this response from an editor at the Jerusalem Post:
Frankly, I don't know what there is to "respond" to as Cohen's piece was a carefully nuanced balanced essay which could have been written by Bernard Lewis. You may disagree with his argument that Christian Jew-hatred influenced Muslim Jew-hatred but he did not downplay the nature of negative Muslim attitudes toward Jews.What you might want to consider is a brief letter to the editor.
He did not, as you can see, take up any of the points Bat Ye'or raised in her piece. Instead, it was enough for him simply to invoke Bernard Lewis. Yet as we have noted here before, Bernard Lewis is a great scholar, but he isn't infallible -- and his recent attributions of authoritarianism and antisemitism in the Islamic world to Western influences don't bolster trust in his powers of judgment and analysis at this point.
Later, this same editor offered Bat Ye’or “an original op-ed of up to 1,000 words”:
I will not run this attack on Cohen as an op-ed. I respect your decision not to cut it so that it can appear as a letter to the editor.However, we would be delighted to consider an original op-ed of up to 1,000 words -- especially if you can connect it to a news hook.
But that is not sufficient space to clarify so many important matters. It is sad to see the Jerusalem Post, particularly at this hour of such peril for Israel, contenting itself with purveying pleasing falsehoods that may make the prospect for Israelis of living under Islamic rule easier to contemplate, as horrific as it remains in actuality.
Posted by Robert at January 19, 2008 10:41 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
http://my.telegraph.co.uk/VirtualContent/97857/20071030004152.jpg
Posted by: interestinconundrum![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at January 19, 2008 11:27 AM
May not be the same people involved but the same reaction ↑
Posted by: interestinconundrum at January 19, 2008 11:30 AM
Bernard Lewis was a devout supporter of the Oslo Accords. He now says this was a "mistake" but has so far failed to explain the basis for his apparently mistaken enthusiasm. One wonders if he is now enthusiastic about the willingness of the Olmert government to make concessions intended to bring about a "two-state solution."
One also wonders if he is as certain that the American effort to remake Iraq was, is, will be, an intelligent deployment of resources, or whether exploiting the pre-existing fissures, sectarian and ethnic in Iraq, merely by doing nothing to lessen them, would not make more sense?
The statement of the Jerusalem Post's editor that Cohen's tendentious piece "could have been written by Bernard Lewis" and that, it was implied any questioning of it was unthinkable, bespeaks a mental docility, grading into imbecility, that is shocking in anyone, but especially shocking in an editor at what should be a paper staffed by those of a different mental level altogether.
The problem, then, is not limited to an occasional landau swerving off the road at Ha'aretz, when he tells Condoleezza Rice to "rape Israel" in order to get it, presumably, to behave. It's a general problem with the media, with those who are hired, and promoted, and then hire others who think just the way they think, and no one gets through, everyone is kept out, who might begin to discuss the full meaning, and menace -- to Israel in the first, most obvious place, to all the rest of the non-Muslim world in the second -- of Islam.
Posted by: Hugh at January 19, 2008 11:41 AM
This is indeed a surprising development . The Jerusalem Post is one of the rare papers where discussions on jihad are not avoided and where
Bat Ye’or’s book "Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide" was positively reviewed by Raphael Israeli
http://www.dhimmitude.org/archive/i_and_d_wherecivcollide_review.html and where “Eurabia” received a positive review by Mordechai Nisan as well http://inside.fdu.edu/fdupress/05101902review.html .
Lately, however the Jerusalem Post has been giving regular space to flat-earth supporters like Gershon Baskin and Larry Derfner, so maybe some of their insanity is contagious. Or it may just be that at this point Professor Bernard Lewis is on his annual visit to Israel ( he is giving a lecture this coming Monday titled CHOICES FOR THE MIDDLE EAST) so the JP editors probably decided that it is better not to embarrass the Master.
at January 19, 2008 11:56 AM
Can I guess that the JPost editor in question is Elliot Jager?
Mladen has it correct. The JPost has become a head-on wannabee competitor to Ha'Aretz in all spheres and they keep on trying harder.
We no longer subscribe. Many others have canceled their subscriptions. If anyone reading this subscribes, please do Israel a favor and cancel your subscription.
I miss the days when Israel had an English language daily I could call "national". No more.
Posted by: Shy Guy at January 19, 2008 12:16 PM
I wonder what one of our most respected writers and US administration advisors on Israel/US concerns Caroline Glicks take is on this? I believe she is still an editor on the Jerusalem Post
Posted by: Mackie at January 19, 2008 12:18 PM
Interesting that Mark Cohen lives in a soceity (Israel) that makes a hue effort to mimick the good things about the Western world.
If Cohen is right, the Jews, having been so well treated by the Muslims, should aspire to make civilizations such as those. But, alas, they don't. They, on the other hand, turn to the West,the same West Cohen says has always been bad for the Jews.
Posted by: Crusader at January 19, 2008 12:21 PM
I decided to send them a letter:
The Editor
The Jerusalem Post
Dear Sir,
Robert Spencer's site Dhimmi Watch reports that the Jerusalem Post turned down Bat Ye'or's response to Mark Cohen's "The New Muslim anti-Semitism" (Jerusalem Post, January 2, 2006). This is indeed a shocking development. The rejection Bat Ye'or received simply invoked Bernard Lewis's name: "Frankly, I don't know what there is to "respond" to as Cohen's piece was a carefully nuanced balanced essay which could have been written by Bernard Lewis."
With all due respect to professor Bernard Lewis, he has avoided writing about the area of Islam Bat Ye'or devoted all her career to. If the Jerusalem Post does not publish her article, the Jerusalem Post will have lost what made it almost unique among the world papers – the courage to write on topics everybody else in the mainstream media is avoiding. That would be a disaster for the Jerusalem Post and a great loss for all of us.
Posted by: Mladen at January 19, 2008 12:45 PM
Bat Ye'or wrote about Mark Cohen that "in his 1986 article, he encompasses in one sweeping global judgment the civilizations expanding over territories covering Africa, Asia and Europe during thirteen centuries. History loses its events, transformations and evolutions as if it is reduced to the stillness of an empty shell."
Funny how it's okay for the Mark Cohens of the world to treat Islam as a monolithic entity whenever they want to say anything GOOD about Islam, but they scold others for making any general judgements about Islam that might reflect poorly on Islam. Or beyond scolding they, like the Jerusalem Post, censor.
Moral: "Islam is not a monolith", unless you want to say something good about it.
Posted by: cantor at January 19, 2008 1:34 PM
Recall HAMAS began enforcing the dhimma since it took over. Christians, among others, have been feeling subdued. So this is the Jerusalem Post denying reality and hoping it conforms.
Posted by: Beagle at January 19, 2008 2:17 PM
The news-man as high priest and arbiter of the truth.
Posted by: joeblough at January 19, 2008 3:27 PM
The Jews of Israel need not worry about being dhimmis. They will be exterminated. Like the holocaust survivor said when asked the one thing he learned "When your enemy says he will exterminate you, believe him".
People, it is happening NOW. They shout it from the rooftops from Morocco to Malaysia. The six million Jews of Israel are targeted by a billion Muslims for annihilation. We are even help giving them the weapons (and the wealth of course) with which to do it.
Posted by: poetcomic1 at January 19, 2008 5:20 PM
How do you say "shuckin' 'n jivin'" in Yiddish?
Mr. Cohen has got it down to an 'intellectual' soft shoe routine that will surely raise appreciative giggles in the Arab quarters as they observe his obsequious dhimmi dance.
How dare Bat Ye-or notice his self-cannibalizing mental paralysis?
Posted by: profitsbeard at January 19, 2008 6:42 PM
Bernard Lewis: "Al Qaeda is no more representative of Islam than the KKK is of Christianity."
He may be the last great Orientalist, but in his old age, he has succumbed to many of the fictions of modern political-correctness.
Posted by: Cornelius at January 19, 2008 7:02 PM
Mark Cohen is dangerously deluded.
His puff-piece in the JP was nothing but chewing the cud, rehashed crap and wishful thinking, baseless, written without knowledge or substance.
It is frightening that the editor of JP won't allow Bat Ye'or to set the record straight.
at January 19, 2008 7:32 PM
The New Muslim Anti-Semitism has nothing on the old Semitic Anti-Semitism.
Posted by: Jauhara Al-Kafirah at January 19, 2008 9:52 PM
Looking to the future as the Dhimmi Jerusalem Post?
at January 20, 2008 2:47 AM
Audiatur et altera pars:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=2&cid=1200572498917&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
The op-eds editor responds:
The Post did not turn away Bat Ye'or. The tone and style of the piece she wrote in response to Mark Cohen's essay simply did not meet the basic requirements of a Jerusalem Post op-ed. We invited her to modify and resubmit what she had written as a letter to the editor. When she declined, we invited her to write a "fresh" op-ed for our pages that would take the issue forward; but she declined for lack of time. We then offered her a one-on-one interview with our features editor, which she is considering.
at January 20, 2008 12:48 PM
Shameful, amateurish, but at the same time predictable, on the part of the Jerusalem Post. Mark Cohen is an intellectual midget, and his ilk will forever remain in the shadow of giants like Bat Ye'or, Andrew Bostom and Hugh Fitzgerald.
Posted by: US_infidel at January 20, 2008 7:23 PM
Thank goodness for jihadwatch. It's mostly unpleasant news (sorry Robert!) but at least there's no soft-soaping.
Long may it continue.
(Hope you fixed that long-ago reference to Norma Khouri Robert! Cheers)
at January 21, 2008 2:17 AM
Shy Guy
is there any Israeli online news source or blogger that you feel able to recommend? (I can read French, German or Italian as well as English; unfortunately, though, not Hebrew).
I'll probably still read the 'Post' online, though with caution in the light of this business with Bat Yeor and Mark Cohen. I like reading some of their bloggers - the lady from Sderot was always good.
Take care.
I'm still saying Psalm 83 on behalf of you all, there in eretz Israel.
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at January 21, 2008 3:01 AM
Dumbledore, you might read Carlo Panella's recent book, Il 'Complotto Ebraico' (Torino: Lindau 2005) on the treatment of Jews under Islam. This is a good book and has some insights, although I don't necessarily agree with some of his remarks on Christianity.
For readers of Hebrew, Raphael Israeli has a new book, L'Hiyot `im haIslam לחיות עם האיסלאם (Netanyah: Ahiasaf 2006), especially pages 148-150.
Posted by: Eliyahu at January 22, 2008 2:03 PM
the unnamed Post editor claims that Cohen's silliness is: "carefully nuanced" and "balanced." That's ridiculous. Cohen is simply wrong. He has suppressed a great deal of information going against his argument. His piece is disgraceful.
Posted by: Eliyahu at January 22, 2008 2:17 PM
Run the op-ed and forget about the hand-wringing. Like MacLeans, JP should have editorial freedom, and getting some truth out is better than getting sidetracked on political and editorial issues, or than alienating publishers who are, on balance, sympathetic to the truth.
Besides, BY's piece has already run at JW, which at last count had a pretty sizeable readership, perhaps similar to the JP. Unfortunately it's preaching to the choir, but once it's on the web it's accessible to all.
Posted by: Archimedes2 at January 22, 2008 11:11 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)