Britain has seen an unprecedented number of anti-Semitic “hate crimes”, with more incidents recorded so far in 2009 than in any previous entire year, a Jewish advisory body said on Friday.

Up to the end of June, there were 609 anti-Semitic incidents ranging from verbal abuse to extreme violence, compared with 276 in the same period last year.

And what, exactly, would the cause of that be?

Israel’s Gaza offensive against Hamas militants which was launched at the end of December was the main cause, it said, with many of the incidents taking place in January and including direct references to the fighting.

Right. But of course, it’s not anti-Semitism. It’s anti-Zionism. Because after all, isn’t it perfectly acceptable that if Israel invades the Gaza Strip to try to stop the flight of hundreds of rockets at her civilian areas, then British Jew-haters should be able to beat up British Jews at will? After all, it’s cause-and-effect. Why, it’s just like someone in Virginia being allowed to beat up a random black youth because his mother was mugged by some other black youth. Right? Right?

Of course that’s wrong. And yet, the world utterly accepts this behavior. What? They don’t? Really? Just go read the fever-swamps of comments on any newspaper that carries this story (evenYnet).

The CST said there had been 77 violent anti-Semitic incidents including two it classified as “extreme violence”, an attack which could cause loss of life or grievous bodily harm.

Most incidents took place in London and Manchester, the two biggest Jewish communities in Britain.

To sum up: Jews defend themselves against terrorists. World attacks other Jews. Yeah, not much has changed, except for the fact that Jews in Israel can defend themselves.

And yet, Hillary Clinton’s speech said nothing specific, and did not live up to its hype. In fact, Secretary Clinton gave me the most recent in a long line of examples of The Exception Clause. Add “except for Israel” to the end of this excerpt, and you will see what I mean.

We’ve also begun to adopt a more flexible and pragmatic posture with our partners. We won’t agree on every issue. Standing firm on our principles shouldn’t prevent us from working together where we can. So we will not tell our partners to take it or leave it, nor will we insist that they’re either with us or against us.

It’s a fabrication. Because in Cairo, Obama did exactly that:

The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.

And Israel must also live up to its obligation to ensure that Palestinians can live and work and develop their society. Just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel’s security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be a critical part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress.

And referring to the President’s speech, Hillary said:

With respect to settlements, the President was very clear when Prime Minister Netanyahu was here. He wants to see a stop to settlements – not some settlements, not outposts, not natural growth exceptions. We think it is in the best interests of the effort that we are engaged in that settlement expansion cease. That is our position. That is what we have communicated very clearly, not only to the Israelis but to the Palestinians and others. And we intend to press that point.

Both of those quotes sure look like “take it or leave it” to me.

As for the “muscular” speech that would demand action from the Palestinians, well, here’s what Hillary demanded:

Ending the conflict requires action on all sides. The Palestinians have the responsibility to improve and extend the positive actions already taken on security; to act forcefully against incitement; and to refrain from any action that would make meaningful negotiations less likely.

They have to “improve and extend” actions already taken. They have to “act forcefully” against incitement. Hillary didn’t even ask them specifically to end it. She could have demanded that the Palestinians should stop publishing textbooks that paint the entire land of Israel as “Palestine.” But the administration prefers to turn a blind eye to these realities, or downplay them. Instead, Obama calls in some Jewish leaders for a charm offensive, and most of them fall for it.

I haven’t. Obama is no friend of Israel. And Hillary is a fair-weather friend. When it suits her to be pro-Israel, she will be. When it doesn’t—well. Read the speech again. And don’t believe the hype. It’s almost never true.

The only thing you can count on is that Israel will always be the exception to every world rule.

A man found guilty of firebombing attacks against Jewish targets in Montreal wasn’t the brains behind the attacks and should be given a suspended sentence, his lawyer argued yesterday. Gaetan Bourassa said his client, Azim Ibragimov, 25, did not plan the firebombing of a Jewish boys’ school, a Jewish community centre or a car on Sept. 2, 2006, and should receive three years’ probation. Crown attorney Mario Dufresne argued in Quebec Court yesterday that a distinction must be made between vandalism and terrorism. “The goal was not to just damage property but to cause fear and intimidate … the Jewish community,” he said, in asking for a four-year sentence. While Ibragimov’s actions were serious, Mr. Bourassa argued, it was his co-accused who planned the attack and took advantage of his friend’s immaturity to carry it out. Omar Bulphred, 23, faces nine charges. Ibragimov pleaded guilty in April to three counts of using fire or an explosive to cause damage to property, and one of uttering threats. He is to be sentenced on Nov. 17.

Please note how the defense is minimizing the anti-Semitic aspects of the case, even though all he did was attack Jewish institutions. And he has admitted his guilt.

He pleaded guilty earlier this year to firebombing Skver-Toldos Orthodox Jewish Boys school in Outremont in 2006, and attempting to attack a community centre the following year.

Ibragimov has admitted to throwing a Molotov cocktail at the school and trying to set one off at the Snowdon YM-YWHA.

He also admitted to writing letters that claimed the crimes were committed in the name of Islamic Jihad, a militant group that has vowed to destroy Israel and set up an Islamic Palestinian state, and hinted more incidents would come.

This must by why the CHRC didn’t get involved:

His former girlfriend, Anna Zelenko, told the court she didn’t believe Ibragimov was racist because he knew she was part Jewish and had lived in Israel for seven years.

Zelenko told the court he never made any anti-Semitic remarks while they were together. She testified she chose not to marry Ibragimov because he’s not very bright.

Oh, so it wasn’t a hate crime, because he had a part-Jewish girlfriend.

Mind you, I think I’ve come full circle about the concept of hate crimes, and I’m just about to decide that I’m against them in principle—but when a nation has an organization whose sole purpose is to seek out and destroy ideological haters, it’s funny that they didn’t have anything to do with, well, an actual hate crime trial. Well, no, not really. It’s The Exception Clause. Just add the phrase “except the Jews” to any case, such as, “The CHRC is against hate crimes against all people and groups.” Then you’ll understand.

The secretary general conveyed his heartfelt condolences and said he is deeply satisfied that the humanitarian aspects of Security Council Resolution 1701 have finally been met.

Really? Because just a few months ago, he said that any conditions on the release of Regev and Goldwasser were “outside the scope” of 1701.

“Hezbollah continues to refuse to provide any information on the release or fate of abducted soldiers, and places conditions and demands for the release that are far outside the scope of resolution 1701,” Ban wrote in the report, a copy of which was obtained by Haaretz.

The secretary-general also cites Israeli intelligence reports of Hezbollah’s rearmament drive since the end of the Second Lebanon War. The militia is said to have replenished its arsenal of rockets and missiles – including 10,000 long-range rockets and 20,000 short-range projectiles – which are now deployed on both sides of the Litani River.

“The reports of Hezbollah rearming are a cause of great concern posing serious challenges to the sovereignty, stability, and independence of Lebanon and the implementation of resolution 1701,” Ban wrote in the report.

It’s amazing, isn’t it, how the world’s memory fails at every instance of Arabs and Muslims breaking UN resolutions, and yet, they hold Israel responsible for breaking resolutions that are nonbinding, or that she never broke in the first place.

The Exception Clause, in all of its wonder.

Now imagine that two molotov cocktails were thrown at the home of a representative of an African-American organization. Imagine the outrage, the news articles, the media notice.

Now imagine that two molotov cocktails were thrown at the home of a representative of a Jewish organization. Imagine the outrage, the news articles, the media notice—or not.

PROVIDENCE — A Molotov cocktail was thrown into the apartment of a graduate student from Israel but did not explode and a second liquid-filled bottle landed in the yard outside the apartment building, exploded and burned itself out early Saturday, triggering an intensive investigation by several agencies including the FBI.

Targeted in the 1:15 a.m. episode was the second-floor apartment of Josef Knafo, 25, at 122 Camp St., a Brown University graduate fellow who also works at the the Brown University/Rhode Island School of Design Hillel House, on the city’s East Side. Knafo was home at the time, said Deputy Police Chief Paul J. Kennedy.

“At this point, we just don’t know whether to call this a hate crime because we don’t know the motivation,” Kennedy said yesterday.

Funny how they’re so quick to call a firebombing of any other minority a hate crime, yet they hesitate, and hem and haw and insist they have to find out the “motivation” behind the crime before they can even think about whether or not it’s a hate crime.

Kennedy said Knafo was in the kitchen of his apartment when he heard a bang. After looking out the window and seeing the fire on the ground, he came upon the unexploded bottle inside his bedroom, Kennedy said.

So what’s the Jewish agency?

The Jewish agency has hundreds of envoys worldwide that engage in all manner of educational, Zionist and PR endeavors. The agency furthermore organizes numerous solidarity rallies with Israel, including a recent rally following the shooting attack on the Mercaz Harav yeshiva in Jerusalem.

Uh-huh. No idea if it was a hate crime. Because it’s so normal to throw molotov cocktails into apartments in Rhode Island. Happens every week or two, right? To everyone. Really. Nothing to see here. Move along.

Israel continues to expand many of the 122 settlements in the West Bank, where 267,500 Israelis lived as of last month, according to government statistics.

Peace Now, an Israeli settlement-watchdog group, issued a report Wednesday saying building is going on in 88 of the settlements, though most of the work is in the areas Israel hopes to retain in a peace deal.

The Palestinians said Monday that they received assurances from Washington that Israel would meet its short-term obligations under the “road map,” a U.S.-backed peace plan being revived in hopes of boosting confidence between the two sides ahead of a peace conference later this month.

The plan’s initial stage called for Israel to freeze West Bank settlement construction and dismantle dozens of settlement outposts scattered across the territory. But the road map foundered after its introduction four years ago, with each side accusing the other of not meeting obligations.

And that is all you get about Palestinian obligations until you get to this paragraph:

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said this week that Israel is willing to meet its road map obligations. He also urged the Palestinians to fulfill their commitment under the plan to crack down on militant groups that stage attacks on Israelis.

The story, mind you, is all about settlements. The headline alone is biased: “Israeli Settlements Burden Peace Push.” Funny how rockets are falling on Sderot nearly every day, and that’s not burdening the “peace push.” Terrorists are trying to kill Israelis every day, but that’s not burderning the “peace push.”

And it’s interesting also how the Road Map is being applied only to Israel, not to the Palestinians. Because the Road Map was absolutely explicit about the Palestinians’ responsibility to end violence, incitement, and terrorism.

Phase I: Ending Terror And Violence, Normalizing Palestinian Life, and Building Palestinian Institutions — Present to May 2003

In Phase I, the Palestinians immediately undertake an unconditional cessation of violence according to the steps outlined below; such action should be accompanied by supportive measures undertaken by Israel. Palestinians and Israelis resume security cooperation based on the Tenet work plan to end violence, terrorism, and incitement through restructured and effective Palestinian security services. Palestinians undertake comprehensive political reform in preparation for statehood, including drafting a Palestinian constitution, and free, fair and open elections upon the basis of those measures. Israel takes all necessary steps to help normalize Palestinian life. Israel withdraws from Palestinian areas occupied from September 28, 2000 and the two sides restore the status quo that existed at that time, as security performance and cooperation progress. Israel also freezes all settlement activity, consistent with the Mitchell report.

At the outset of Phase I:

• Palestinian leadership issues unequivocal statement reiterating Israel’s right to exist in peace and security and calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire to end armed activity and all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere. All official Palestinian institutions end incitement against Israel.
• Israeli leadership issues unequivocal statement affirming its commitment to the two-state vision of an independent, viable, sovereign Palestinian state living in peace and security alongside Israel, as expressed by President Bush, and calling for an immediate end to violence against Palestinians everywhere. All official Israeli institutions end incitement against Palestinians.

Note that there is nothing ambiguous about the Road Map. The Palestinians must end violence and incitement. There is no exception clause for “resistance.” Done. Finis. End. The thing is, while you hear constant reproaches towards Israel for not freezing settlement construction, you hear not a word about ending Palestinian violence, terrorism, and incitement. Why is that, exactly? When did the Palestinian obligations cease to be obligations? If Condi Rice is being honest, why is she not demanding a cessation of all Palestinian violence and incitement? Why does she not demand the Palestinians stop teaching their children to hate the Jews? Why is she only demanding that Israel meet the obligations of the Road Map, while insisting only on “confidence-building measures” by the Palestinians?

I have no real answer for that, other than the standard answer: Apparently, the Palestinians have no obligations to do anything but demand a homeland, a “Palestine” that never existed on the land that was the Jewish homeland for thousands of years—except, according to Palestinians, that never happened, either.

You have to wonder why it is that only Israel is held up to any kind of Road Map standard, and only Israel is criticized for violations of a document that was never approved by the Israeli government, and is, quite frankly, about as non-binding as a document can get—because it was perfectly clear that in order for the Road Map to work, both sides had to implement responsibilities simultaneously.

A quick look around Palestinian Media Watch and MEMRI show that the Palestinians have never ceased teaching their children to hate Jews. Incitement has never ended. Nor has terrorism, nor have the rockets.

Why, exactly, is only Israel expected to fulfill her obligations? The only answer I can see is the soft bigotry of lowered expectations. Or perhaps that other reason, the one that makes the world so much more difficult for Jews: The Exception Clause.

Would that make you guilty of treason?

Would that give the world a reason to think that perhaps you are working against the nation that elected you and sent you to parliament?

Well, in every other nation, yes. But here is where the Exception Clause comes into play. Because the nation is Israel, the member of parliament is an Arab born in Israel, and the world simply closes its eyes to the treachery because, of course, his grievance is that he is an Arab born in Israel.

Arab Knesset Member Azmi Bishara (Balad) warned Hamas against making any substantial concessions to win the international community’s support.

Bishara’s comments were made during an interview with Jordanian newspaper al-Ra’i prior to the publication of his intention to resign from the Knesset.

“Fatah’s willingness to make concessions during the 1970s and in the framework of the Oslo Accords and the Madrid Conference just so it could remain in power under the (Israeli) occupation hurt the movement,” he said.

Bishara has fled to Jordan, and word has it he is set to resign from the Israeli Knesset soon. Of course, he’s now denying it. But he is going to be charged with visiting enemy states (from where he spoke against Israel, if I recall correctly).

The MK’s reported upcoming resignation could be connected to suspicions that Bishara had violated a 2001 law forbidding political officials from traveling to enemy states after he visited both Lebanon and Syria in 2006.

When Bishara is charged with working with Israel’s enemies, watch for the world to excuse it on the grounds that Israel “colonized” his family’s land or something. Because Israel can never do right by most of the world. Probably has something to do with all those damned Jews in it. You see, if it were only the state of Palestine, the world would like it so much better… because they cared so much about the nation called the Mandate of Palestine prior to Israel’s birth.

Yes, that last paragraph was simply chock-full of sarcasm. Why do you ask?

Israel’s envoy to Spain said on Thursday the two countries’ relations had been damaged after the Spanish prime minister accused Israel of using “abusive force” during an event at which he also wore a Palestinian scarf.

Spain’s ability to use its influence to help defuse the growing Middle East conflict could suffer following the speech by Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero to a meeting of young Socialists on Wednesday, Ambassador Victor Harel said.

His comments came as European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana, himself a Spaniard, was involved in talks aimed at ending fighting between Israel, Lebanese Hizbollah guerrillas and Palestinian militants.

“Each declaration which is not balanced has consequences for parties who want to use their influence,” Harel told reporters at Madrid’s Ritz Hotel where he listened to Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos at a conference.

Moratinos, Solana, and Zapatero should stop looking East and instead sould look South at Spain’s own brutal and shameful longtime occupation of another country’s lands.

According to the CIA World Factbook, Spain currently occupies sovereign Moroccan territory, the land of Arab Muslims:

Morocco protests Spain’s control over the coastal enclaves of Ceuta, Melilla, and the islands of Penon de Velez de la Gomera, Penon de Alhucemas and Islas Chafarinas, and surrounding waters…

Spain uses attack dogs that are trained to kill, armed troops with shoot-to-kill orders, double-fencing, barbed and razor wire, and electrified barriers to protect their illegal and humiliating occupation of Ceuta and Melilla.

Territory won in colonial wars on conquest, not defensive wars protecting Spain from utter destruction and its population from genocidal massacre.

And unlike Gaza, Judea, Samaria, Golan, and Southern Lebanon, if Spain were to hand over that territory now they wouldn’t be sacrificing Spanish security in the slightest or putting the existence of Spain at risk by one bit.

Well, except if you’re talking about Israel.

Indonesia, that large Muslim nation that just released the man who praised the Bali bombers and said there should be more like them in the world, just canceled a Federation Cup tennis match with Israel. Why? Because of politics, of course.

Indonesia pulled out of a planned Fed Cup tennis match in Israel to protest against Israeli actions in the Gaza Strip, an Indonesian foreign ministry spokesman said Tuesday.

“We are witnessing a military invasion by Israel and the arrest of scores of Palestinian officials,” spokesman Desra Percaya said. “It is now impossible to play there,” he said.

Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim nation, earlier asked that the venue be changed to another country, because Jakarta has no diplomatic relations with Israel.

Gee, that kinda sounds like politics were involved from the get-go, doesn’t it?

At first, the Indonesian team was hesitant to come, citing the lack of diplomatic relations between the countries.

Two weeks ago, after an Indonesian appeal to move the tie to a neutral site was rejected by the ITF, behind-the-scenes efforts were made to host the squad in mid July.

Yep. Politics were in from the start. A “neutral” site, eh? Why would the world’s most populous Muslim nation not want to play in Israel?

Oh, that’s right. Israel Derangement Syndrome, a.k.a. Jew Cooties, a.k.a. Israel Double Standard Time, a.k.a. The Exception Clause. Why, I could name a bunch of WP categories after it and populate them with posts. Oh, wait. I already did.

The Israel Science Foundation, the largest funder of basic research in Israel, sends out some 10,000 letters a year asking scientists to examine research proposals by Israeli researchers and decide whether they deserve funding. According to Professor Joseph Klafter, the ISF’s chairman, about 10 scientists have refused to participate in the review process this year. He said that the foundation first began encountering such refusals following Operation Defensive Shield in March-April 2002. Such refusals typically say something like “I respect my Israeli colleagues, but until Israeli policy changes, I will be compelled to refuse your requests.”

What was Operation Defensive Shield? Why was it instituted?

After two months of intensive suicide bomber attacks inside Israel culminating in the attack on the Park Hotel in Netanya on Passover eve, killing 30 people including entire families, the government authorized the IDF to enter Palestinian controlled areas (Area A) with full force.

Over 30,000 reservists were called into duty for the operation that included incursions into most of the major Palestinian cities on the West Bank.

The goal of the operation was fourfold: to destroy as much of the terrorist infrastructure as possible; to re-establish Israeli deterrence; to place the terrorist organizations on the defensive, and to isolate Arafat and weaken his authority.

An important byproduct of Operation Defensive Shield was utterly overlooked by most of the world at large: The IDF discovered documents directly linking Yasser Arafat to terrorist attacks on Israel while he was supposedly working for “peace.” The world issued a collective yawn, and denials that this proved Arafat was behind terror. The usual accusations of the Mossad manufacturing evidence occurred, in spite of incidents like the Karine A, in which 50 tons of weapons were prevented from reaching Israel, and Arafat’s complicity was again proven — and again ignored.

In March alone, more than 135 Israeli civilians were murdered in terrorist attacks.

That was the reason for Operation Defensive Shield.

The spring of 2002 is when world opinion, never very fond of Israel, turned vehemently against the Jewish state. The constant terror attacks were ignored, or excused as an expected response to the “crimes” of “occupation” (this, in spite of the fact that the PA ran the terrortories [sic] under the corrupt Jew-hater, Yasser Arafat (may his name be erased). Jews blown up on buses? Well, hell, that’s what they get for not letting the palestinians have their own state. Jews gunned down at a Bat Mitzvah celebration? It’s their own damned fault for occupying the indigenous people’s territory. Jews fight back to destroy the terrorist infrastructure? Hey! Hey! YOU CAN’T DO THAT TO THE POOR LITTLE UNARMED, UNDERFED, UNEMPLOYED, INNOCENT PALESTINIANS!!! YOU HAVE TANKS! THEY DON’T! YOU HAVE HELICOPTERS! THEY DON’T! YOU HAVE AIRPLANES! THEY DON’T!

That is essentially the attitude and the argument that came out of Israel’s actions of self-defense. You will still hear that argument today, as well as the accusations of massacres, war crimes, etc., etc. You will never hear a peep from the world about palesitnian atrocities. They have pretty much ignored the murder two days ago of a couple who were accused of “collaboration.”

This is the turning point for British academia. In the spring of 2002, when Israeli children on their way to school were being blown to pieces on buses, and the Israelis finally said “Enough!” and began to clamp down on the palestinian terror infrastructure, the world rose up in indignation against — Israel. Not against the murderers of children. Not against the murderers of Holocaust survivors at a Passover seder. Not against the corrupt, murderous, lying regime of Yasser Arafat.

Against Israel.

The British academic boycott has nothing to do with academic freedom. It has nothing to do with ending “apartheid” policies. It has everything to do with the British intellectual elite being unable to get over its centuries of Jew-hatred, or to allow the Jews full citizenship in the world.

If the British academics truly believed that it is wrong to take over a country, displace the indigenous population, colonize and settle it with your own, and force your rule on it — they’d be boycotting themselves, because that is what Great Britain did to Ireland.

I say again: Thank you, Great-grandfather, for emigrating from Scotland to America. Thank you for not making me a citizen of the U.K.