News

Synagogue arson attack was a ‘protest’, not a hate crime

Synagogue arson attack was a ‘protest’, not a hate crime

A regional court in Germany ruled this week that an attempt to set fire to a local synagogue in 2014 by three Muslims was an act meant to express criticism against Israel’s conduct in its ongoing conflict with Hamas, and was not an expression of anti-Semitism.

The court sentenced the three men – Muhammad E, 31, Ismail A, 26, and Muhammad A, 20 – to suspended sentences for tossing firebombs at the synagogue and causing €800 (£700) worth of damage.

The picture above shows them in court with  faces blurred, accompanied by an interpreter.

According to this report, the regional court in the city of Wuppertal affirmed a lower court decision stating that a violent attempt to burn the city’s Bergische Synagogue by the three arsonists was a justified expression of criticism of Israel’s policies.

Johannes Pinnel, a spokesman for the regional court, said that the three men wanted to draw “attention to the Gaza conflict” with Israel and deemed the attack not to be motivated by anti-Semitism.

Israel launched Operation Protective Edge in the summer of 2014 to stop Hamas rocket attacks into Israeli territory.

The original synagogue in Wuppertal was burned by Nazis during the Kristallnacht pogroms in 1938.

Wuppertal has a population of nearly 344,000 and is located in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia.

The court noted that the men had consumed alcohol and there were no injuries to members of the synagogue.

A 13-year-old boy who lived near the synagogue and noticed the flames called the police. Several days before the fire, a person sprayed “Free Palestine” on one of its walls.

After the court’s ruling, Volker Beck, a leading Green Party MP, insisted that the “attack on the synagogue was motivated by anti-Semitism” and blasted the court for issuing a decision stating that the goal of the attack was to highlight the war in Gaza.

This is a mistaken decision as far as the motives of the perpetrators are concerned. What do Jews in Germany have to do with the Middle East conflict? Every bit as much as Christians, non-religious people or Muslims in Germany, namely, absolutely nothing. The ignorance of the judiciary toward anti-Semitism is for many Jews in Germany especially alarming.

Earlier in their trial the men confessed to the arson attack and expressed remorse for what they had done. They explained they had committed their crime under the influence of alcohol, following a celebration at the end of Ramadan. They said wanted to use bottles of diesel used in the attack to direct interest to what was going on in Gaza at the time, the Israeli offensive.

They said they weren’t aware that by throwing them they could burn the synagogue or injure other people.

Leonid Goldberg, Chairman of Wuppertal’s Jewish Cultural Association, said:

That is just an excuse. If you ask me, it was pure anti-Semitism.

He said that open enmity against Jewish people existed in German and European cities before both the Wuppertal arson and the Paris supermarket attacks, noting that several thousand Jews left France for Israel last year alone. In his community, however, not a single member has left the country, he says. That doesn’t mean, however, that nobody has entertained the idea.

Many community members, he said,  have expressed concern for their own security because they are Jewish.

For years now, our rabbis haven’t worn their kippahs in public as they go through Wuppertal. Jews that do wear their kippah in public attempt to hide it by wearing a hat on top so that they don’t have to hear insults from young Muslims, most of all.

He says young Muslims have constant access to anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic medeia coverage. As a result, anti-Semitism among young Muslims has grown strongly.

In 2014 news traveled around the world that Muslim men in Wuppertal were patrolling the streets.

Seven Members of the Muslim patrol were arrested but, according to the BBC, a German court ruled last November that the men who formed a Sharia street patrol did not break laws against political uniforms.

The group sparked outrage in Wuppertal when they approached people in orange vests bearing the words “Sharia Police”. They demanded that locals stop gambling, listening to music, and drinking alcohol.

The group’s alleged organiser, Sven Lau, above, is a well-known Islamist preacher.

Hat tip: Trevor Blake

13 responses to “Synagogue arson attack was a ‘protest’, not a hate crime”

  1. Broga says:

    Bloody pests who think they are holy warriors.

  2. Angela_K says:

    Suspended sentences and their faces obscured for a fire-bomb attack versus jail for hanging bacon on mosque – some are more equal than others eh?

  3. John says:

    Muslims here have tried setting up their own patrols too.
    However, they were told to stop and when the neo-fascist Britain First tried a similar tactic in Luton, their deputy leader ended up being fined £2,000.
    All of us must resolutely oppose any forms of religious “patrols”.
    They are nothing less than intimidatory and designed to harass people.
    While I sympathise with the Muslim youths’ distress over the murder of more than 2,000 Gazans in 2014 – including more than 500 children – by Israel, their protest should have been peaceful , as were protests in the UK.

  4. Justin says:

    What do you think the chances of successfully arguing the only reason you firebombed that mosque was because you wanted to highlight Christian persecution in the Islamic world are? Zero? 0.5%?

    “They said they weren’t aware that by throwing them [the firebombs] they could burn the synagogue or injure other people.”

    Right…

  5. Matt says:

    And I thought Germans were fair, just, thorough, rational and resolute. Seems not after this pathetic surrender to muslim intimidation and violence. What are the chances that the authorities were cowed by the strong possibility, nay the certainty, of islamist backlash aginst the public or even themselves? I’d say its pretty much a certainty that the fear of the ever present highly fissile muslim sensitivities and the ease with which they unleash indiscriminate extreme violence played a part here.
    Shockingly and dangerously submissive.

  6. L.Long says:

    Sorry-arse Police??? How do they accept being laughed at??
    I would not care one bit why they did it, just that setting fire to other property means you are a criminal!

  7. Were the members of the court leftists or liberals? Probably. Islam is the favourite religion of these people. They will forgive Muslims anything and everything, and will constantly make excuses for them no matter what they do.

  8. Trevor Blake says:

    Three lads having a lark, what’s the harm?

    Goodbye, Germany. You did it to yourself. You gave it all away so that you wouldn’t be called bigots, by people who will never stop calling you bigots because it makes you give it all away.

    I’d prefer no special sacred category of hate crime and no special blasphemy law of hate speech. Let arson be arson. All things sacred are exploited by those who see that others hold them sacred. The secular view that nothing is sacred neatly cuts off that avenue of exploitation.

  9. Angela_K says:

    Miss F.R. stop embarrassing yourself. You’ll find the majority of left or centre people are anti-islam – probably the only thing we share with the right. Furthermore, “my enemies enemy is my friend” is appropriate when it comes to religion, they band together to bash atheists, “liberals, LGBT’s etc.

  10. Paul says:

    I am astonished they even used this as a defence or in pathetic mitigation :-
    “They said they weren’t aware that by throwing them they could burn the synagogue or injure other people.”

    What did they expect then – with fire.
    This is unbelievable. Never can arson have any such excuse. In Britain it’s an incredibly dangerous crime just under murder and manslaughter for its severe punishment and I understand always results in a custodial sentce – the Germans clearly think setting fire to a building isn’t that bad. Incredible.

  11. 1859 says:

    Although I don’t have the facts at my fingertips, fire-bombing attacks on houses used for asylum seekers in Germany occurred in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s – but mostly, in those days, perpetrated by right wing skin heads and neo-nazis – all white of course. Several were caught by the police. What I wonder were the sorts of sentences they received back then? A comparison could be very illuminating.

    The leniency of this court’s decision is disgraceful and does show a quisling fear of an islamic backlash. Understandably, Germans are a people who are extremely sensitive to accusations of being ‘anti-semitic’. Now it looks like that same defensive sensitivity is being transferred to accusations of being ‘islamophobic’.

  12. Frances says:

    The plot has totally not so much been lost but has been thrown out by the globalists who seek to destroy our societies from within.

  13. Gui says:

    So, by the same logic a person can put fire in a mosque to protest against radical muslims or put fire in a catholic cathedral to protest against pedophiles priests?