► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Caroline Glick’

An appreciation of Martin Peretz

by Mojambo ( 63 Comments › )
Filed under Anti-semitism, Bill Clinton, Israel, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Palestinians, Progressives at January 2nd, 2013 - 8:00 am

Boy do I remember the 1968 New york City Public Schools strike and the anti-Semitism and anti-White hatred that flowed from the militants in Ocean-Hill Brownsville. That anti-Semitsm made a lot (but not nearly enough) of Jews question the fact that the alleged Black-Jewish alliance appeared to be a one-way street.

by Caroline Glick

By the time I began developing a political consciousness in the early 1980s, I didn’t have any choice but to be on the right side of the political spectrum. By the early 1980s, the political Left in the US had already abandoned support for Israel.
When I grew up in what would later become Barack Obama’s neighborhood in Chicago, the black political machine in the neighborhood and the city, led by the likes of Jesse Jackson and Louis Farrakhan was openly anti-Semitic and pro-Muslim. The white Left was also hostile. The Communists were anti-Israel. The media was anti-Israel.
As a proud Jewish girl, it was clear to me from adolescence on that I could only locate myself on the political Right.
This was not the case for people who came of age in the 1950s and early 1960s. At that time, the USSR had not yet cut off its relations with Israel. The civil rights movement was a joint Jewish-black movement.
For those of you who don’t know the history, the NAACP was founded by Jews. The plaintiff in Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka, the landmark Supreme Court decision from 1954 that opened the path to school desegregation, was represented by the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund’s legal team of Jack Greenberg and Thurgood Marshall. The famous Mississippi Burning incident where three civil rights workers were lynched in 1964 involved the murder of one black civil rights worker James Earl Chaney and two Jewish civil rights workers, Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwermer.
But starting sometime around 1965, the blacks began the process of expelling the Jews from the Civil Rights movement, as they embraced anti-Semitism and the Arab war for the destruction of Israel. In New York City, this period reached a culmination in the 1968 teachers strike. The strike was caused by the decision of a black school board in Brownsville, Brooklyn to fire many of the Jewish teachers and administrators from the local schools and replace them with black separatist teachers and administrators.
The head the teachers union Albert Shanker dated the end of Jewish-black cooperation to the strike.
While researching my book, yesterday I came across a fascinating FBI report from 1970 that was declassified under the Freedom of Information Act in 2009. Titled, “FBI Monograph: Fedayeen Impact – Middle East and United States, June 1970,” it is focused on the PLO, and Fatah’s penetration of the American political Left.
Here’s the link:
http://www.governmentattic.org/2docs/FBI_Monograph_Fedayeen-Impact_1970.pdf
[……]
As the report puts it, “Since the June 1967, war, reports emanating from various sources have suggested that the Arabs have co-opted black extremists in the United States to assist the ‘struggle’ against Israel in the Middle East and in the United States.”
The report makes specific mention of the co-optation of the Black Panther Party, (BPP), the Student National Coordinating Committee, (SNCC), Stokely Carmichael, and the Nation of Islam.
Several BPP leaders participated in anti-Israel conferences in Africa and the Middle East where they gave stridently anti-Semitic speeches calling for the destruction of Israel. In one speech in Algeria in 1969 BPP “Minister of Information” Eldridge Cleaver, “Proclaimed BPP support for the Arab position and criticized ‘US-Zionists,’ mentioning Arthur Goldberg, Henry A. Kissinger, and Judge Julius Hoffman. He also expressed BPP admiration for Yasir Arafat and al-Fatah. Cleaver and Arafat reportedly hugged and kissed each other and received a standing ovation from those at the conference.”
In an interview with the New York Times on August 15, 1967, SNCC leader Ralph Featherston launched an all-out assault against Israel and Jews.
According to the FBI report, in the interview he said that “SNCC is drawn to the Arab cause because it is working toward a ‘third world alliance of oppressed people all over the world – Africa, Asia, Latin America – and considers the Arabs have been oppressed continually by Israelis and by Europeans as well in such countries as Algeria.’ He denied that SNCC was anti-Semitic, but was interested in indicting only ‘Jewish oppressors,’ a category he applied to Israel, and ‘to those Jews in the little Jew shops in the ghettos.'”
[…….]
The Soviet Union openly sided with the Arabs in the Six Day War and cut off relations with Israel immediately following the war. The radical American Left, populated by the Communist Party USA and other Communist front groups and New Left groups abandoned Israel at the same time. This mass abandonment included the Progressive Labor Party; Students for a Democratic Society, (SDS); SDS-Weathermen; the Socialist Workers Party; Workers World Party; and the Communist Party – USA, (CPUSA).
Since President Obama’s political world is populated by individuals from all these groups, and since Obama launched his political career in the living room of SDS-Weathermen terror commanders Bernadine Dohrn and Bill Ayers, it is worth noting that in the SDS-Weathermen magazine “SDS Fire” December 6, 1969 issue, contained an editorial stating that “Arab peoples, above all the Palestinian people, will not and cannot accept the existence of Israel, a colonial-type creature imposed by outside forces on the area.”
A notable exception to the far Left’s abandonment of Israel and embrace of anti-Semitism was Ramparts Magazine, the New Left publication founded by David Horowitz and Peter Collier. Among other pro-Israel Ramparts articles the FBI report cites, it notes in particular one by then Harvard Professor Martin Peretz from July 1967.
In his article, Peretz took on the propaganda claims against Israel one by one and discredited them. Among other things, he said that Israel is not a colonialist state; there is no similarity whatsoever between the US war in Vietnam, which as a self-proclaimed radical he opposed, and Israel; the creation of Israel was not sponsored by imperialist powers; Nasser is not a socialist.
Peretz excoriated the Third World and Communist countries for their failure to recognize the Arab threat to Israel’s existence, calling their behavior “disgusting.”
The FBI report notes that the CPUSA’s support for the Arabs against Israel caused massive dissention in the ranks of the party, mentioning that some 75 percent of CPUSA’s members were Jewish. Jewish Communists in Chicago collected blood and plasma for Israel and donated money. Dissenters were also heard loudly in New York.
The reason I entitled this post “Martin Peretz, an appreciation,” is not for what he wrote in 1967, but because of what has happened to the Left, the Jewish Left and to Peretz in the 46 years that have passed since he wrote that article.
[…….]
But in the intervening years, fewer and fewer voices on the Left, and specifically on the Jewish Left were willing to take such positions and pit themselves against their movement. And so as the decades passed, what were the positions of the radical Left in the 1960s became increasingly the positions of the mainstream Left, until by last summer, they became the positions of the majority of delegates at the Democratic National Convention.
When I was growing up in Chicago, the local Jewish establishment’s refusal to support Israel in the 1982 Lebanon War is what made me decide to make aliyah. By the time I arrived at Columbia in 1987, and the Palestinian uprising broke out, it was hard to find Jewish leaders who were willing to stand up for Israel without stuttering.
Today the situation has become simply untenable. [……]
Yet through it all, Martin Peretz has rarely wavered. Despite his attempts to support the Palestinians, he has not allowed his desire to see the Arab conflict with Israel resolved  diminish his support for Israel. He has remained a staunch, loyal defender of Israel. When I was growing up, I relied on his New Republic for its reporting on Israel and the Middle East. Peretz was one of my intellectual heroes.
In recent years, I’ve felt more bemused by than respectful of Peretz. A colleague of mine quipped some years back that Peretz and Allan Dershowitz live in an intellectual universe populated only by Peretz and Dershowitz and they refuse to acknowledge that they are alone. That quip has probably anchored my thinking on both men ever since.
But even if my colleague’s remark was more true than false, reading the FBI report, I decided I should discard its snide diminution of Peretz. The fact is, he has been fighting this fight for nearly fifty years. As a man of the Left, he has fought the fight for Israel and Jewish rights, increasingly alone for nearly fifty years, and has done so despite what must have been enormous personal costs as his comrades all jumped ship, and in many cases, joined the cause of Israel’s enemies.
don quixote.gif
Cervantes’s Don Quixote is generally reviled as a fool for his futile battle against windmills. By the same token, Leftists who insist that their movement — which long ago parted company with the ideals it claims to represent, and serves as a warm political home for totalitarian anti-Semites — must  side with good against evil, necessarily call up the image of Don Quixote fighting the forces of nature.
But when you think about it, there is something heroic about keeping up a battle even if it is doomed to fail, simply because it is the right thing to do. So hats off to Peretz for keeping true.
Read the rest –  Martin Peretz – an appreciation

It is possible to frustrate Obama on foreign policy issues

by Mojambo ( 101 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Gaza, Hamas, Iran, Israel, Middle East, Palestinians at December 27th, 2012 - 8:49 am

Miss Glick reminds us that despite his second term victory, Obama can be stymied on foreign policy by a determined, united, focused, and coherent oppositon.

by Caroline Glick

Today the National Journal reported that Obama is reconsidering his decision to appoint Chuck Hagel Secretary of Defense. As I wrote in my previous post, there is no chance that Obama will appoint a supporter of a strong Israel to any senior foreign policy post because he wouldn’t appoint someone who doesn’t share his basic animosity towards Israel. But in Hagel, he chose someone even more outspoken in his animus towards the Jewish state than Obama.

Hagel’s looming appointment provoked angry responses from many leading Jewish voices in the US. Whether this opposition made a difference in driving Obama to reconsider his choice is unclear. Plenty of other influential groups – including senators, members of the military and lobbyists for homosexual rights – expressed their discomfort and opposition to the prospect of having Hagel serve as Defense Secretary. Still it is notable that Hagel’s possible appointment sparked an outcry among prominent American Jews and that this outcry had some unknown impact on Obama’s possible decision to cancel Hagel’s appointment.

If Obama indeed scuttles Hagel’s elevation to Defense Secretary, it shows that it is possible to fight Obama on foreign policy even in his second term, and win, at least sometimes. This is important information for Republicans, American Jews, and the Israeli government.

Obama will have multiple, massive domestic challenges to contend with in his second term. If he wishes to focus on advancing his domestic agenda, he may well punt on foreign affairs.

The US President’s inbox is always overflowing. One of the hardest things for a president to do is take control over his own agenda.

Just consider the issue of gun control. Certainly, as a liberal Democrat, Obama is for it. But Obama has never made the issue of restricting gun ownership  a priority during his presidency. Now in the aftermath of the Newtown massacre, he is suddenly spending a lot of time on the issue and going into a head to head battle with the National Rifle Association.

Maybe Obama will win this battle. Maybe he’ll lose it. But he will be focusing on it a lot in the coming weeks. Again, this is not an issue that was ever central to his agenda. But due to an unforeseen event, it has become an issue that he is now forced to spend time on.

There are of course, many more foreseeable issues Obama will have to devote his presidential time, energy and capital to. The biggest among them is Obamacare. Budgetary and tax woes are not far behind. With only 24 hours in the day, Obama will not be able to focus on Israel or foreign policy on a daily basis. And in order to make time for other things, which are more important to him, or more immediately pressing, Obama may be willing to back down.

[…….]
In retrospect, it would certainly have been better for Israel – and for America – if Sharon had stood up to Rice and simply refused to permit Hamas to participate in the elections. It would have been better to have had a public fight with Washington and kept Hamas out of power than maintain warm relations with the Bush administration while empowering a terror group that openly seeks the annihilation of Israel and the Jewish people.

This brings us to Obama, his apparent decision to stand down on Hagel,  US relations with Israel in Obama’s second term in office, and finally to how the Israeli election campaign plays into all of these things.

HERE IN Israel, the Left’s basic diplomatic attack on Netanyahu involves accusing him of having wrecked  Israel’s relations with the US by standing up to Obama. But whereas by not standing up to Bush and Rice, Israel got Hamas in power and missiles on Jerusalem, by standing up to Obama, Israel is still in control of Judea and Samaria and the two-state delusion has been increasingly discredited in Israel, and to a lesser degree in the US.

Moreover on Iran, Israel has coaxed a reluctant US administration into passing serious sanctions against Iran, and while the economic pressure hasn’t made any dent in Iran’s nuclear weapons program, Israeli pressure has made it harder for Obama to simply accept Iranian nuclear weapons. Vocally expressing Israeli concerns has certainly helped Republicans maintain pressure on Obama to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and publicly support a potential Israeli strike against Iran’s nuclear installations.

It is understandable that Netanyahu is keeping mum on his diplomatic achievements. He can’t risk even worse relations with Obama by mentioning his success in keeping the US President at bay in his quest to diminish Israel’s strategic options.

[………]
Israel faces massive challenges in the coming years. The apparent scuttling of Hagel’s appointment is a hopeful sign that if we keep our heads about us, we can prevent Obama from taking steps that are truly antithetical to Israel’s survival.

But we must understand, the reason Hagel’s appointment was apparently abandoned is because the opposition to his appointment was strong, coherent, and unified. Israel needs a strong, coherent government to meet the challenges it will face in the next four years, including working with a hostile Obama administration. We won’t get one if the leaders of the nationalist camp are using the Left to weaken and discredit one another.

Read the rest – Hagel, Obama and theIsraeli elections

With the nominations of John Kerry and Chuck Hagel there should be no illusions about America’s role in the world

by Mojambo ( 205 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Elections 2012, Israel, Politics at December 17th, 2012 - 3:00 pm

Miss Glick agrees with me that Susan Rice would  have been far less harmful then John Kerry as Secretary of State. Kerry is a skilled left-wing  politician while Rice pretty much is a follower. Kerry has his own agenda – an agenda that he has not wavered from since 1971. As for Chuck Hagel, the good thing about his appointment is that there should be no  illusions about where America is going under Barack Obama as regards defense/national security matters.

by Caroline Glick

Many in the American Jewish community are aghast to discover that President Obama is planning to appoint former Senator Chuck Hagel to serve as Defense Secretary. If you want the skinny on how Hagel has come to be known as one of the few ferociously anti-Israel senators in the past generation, Carl from Jerusalem at Israel Matzav provides it.
Meantime, all I can say is I don’t understand how anyone can possibly be surprised. Shortly after word came out that Hagel is the frontrunner for the nomination, I read a quaint little blog post written by a conservative leaning commentator voicing her belief that Obama wouldn’t want to risk his relations with Israel’s supporters by appointing Hagel. But as Powerline pointed out today, this is the entire point of the nomination. Obama isn’t stupid. He picks fights he thinks he can win. He hasn’t always been right about those fights. He picked fights with Netanyahu thinking he could win, and he lost some of those.
But he is right to think he can win the Hagel fight. The Republican Senators aren’t going to get into a fight with Obama about his DOD appointee, especially given that it’s one of their fellow senators, even though many of them hate him. The Democrats are certainly not going to oppose him.
[…….]
Some commentators said that Susan Rice would be bad because she was anti-Israel and they hoped that Obama would appoint someone pro-Israel. But John Kerry is no friend of Israel. And as far as I was concerned, we would have been better off with Rice on the job.
Unlike Kerry, Rice is politically inept. She walked into Sen. John McCain’s office with the intention of convincing Sens. McCain, Lindsey Graham and Oympia Snowe that she was competent to serve as Secretary of State despite the fact that she deliberately misled the public on what happened at the Sept. 11 jihadist attack on the US consulate in Benghazi.
But she failed. In commenting on the meeting, all three senators said they were more concerned after speaking with Rice than they were before they did. That is, they said she was a political incompetent. Can there be any doubt that Sen. Kerry will be able to play the politics of Capitol Hill far more effectively than Rice?
And what reason does anyone have to believe that Assad’s great defender will be any more supportive of Israel than Rice would have been? But with him in the driver’s seat now, instead of having a political incompetent whom no one can stand serving as the spokesman for Obama’s anti-Israel foreign policy, in Kerry we will have a competent, reasonably popular politician on the job.
It’s time for people to realize the game has changed. Obama won.
Obama won with 70 percent of the Jewish vote despite the fact that his record in his first term was more hostile to Israel than any president since Jimmy Carter.  […….]
So far, he has made clear that he feels no constraints whatsoever. Take the Palestinians at the UN for example. Obama enabled the Palestinians to get their non-member state status at the UN by failing to threaten to cut off US funding to the UN in retaliation for such a vote.
Both Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush issued such threats during their tenures in office and so prevented the motion from coming to a vote. Given that the Palestinians have had an automatic majority in the General Assembly since at least 1975, the only reason their status was only upgraded in 2012 is because until then, either the PLO didn’t feel like raising the issue or the US threatened to cut off its financial support to the UN if such a motion passed.  This year PLO chief Mahmoud Abbas said he wanted to have a vote and Obama responded by not issuing a threat to cut off UN funding. So the Palestinians got their vote and, as expected, it passed overwhelmingly.
[…….]
And Obama made that move and no one balked. Indeed some New York Jews applauded it.
Let there be no doubt, Obama will get Hagel in at Defense. And Hagel will place Israel in his crosshairs.
The only way to foil Obama’s ill intentions towards Israel even slightly is to be better at politics than he is. And he’s awfully good.
Moreover, one of his strongest advantages is that Israel’s supporters seem to have never gotten the memo. So here it is: Obama wants to fundamentally transform the US relationship with Israel.
He isn’t playing by the old rules. He doesn’t care about the so-called Israel lobby or the Jewish vote. As he sees it, to paraphrase Jim Baker, “F#&k the Jews, they voted for us anyway.”
As strange as it may sound, I am slightly relieved by Hagel’s appointment, and by my trust that Kerry will be a loyal mouthpiece of Obama’s hostility. The more “in our faces” they are with their hostility, the smaller our ability to deny their hostility or pretend that we can continue to operate as if nothing has changed. As we face four more years of Obama – and four years of Obama unplugged — the most urgent order of business for Israelis is to stop deluding ourselves in thinking that under Obama the US can be trusted.
So welcome aboard Secretary Hagel. Bring it on.
Read the rest – Chuck Hagel for Defense Secreatary, bring it on!

 

A few memorable anniversaries on the Palestinians’ big day; and Hungarian Prime Minister raps far right while vowing to protect Hungary’s Jews

by Mojambo ( 103 Comments › )
Filed under Anti-semitism, History, Holocaust, Israel, Palestinians, World War II at December 4th, 2012 - 11:30 am

The time is long past for Israel to politely but firmly tell Hillary Clinton where she can put her “outrage”.

Mufti-and-Hitler.jpg

by Caroline Glick

With the nations of Europe and the rest of the world lining up to support the PLO bid to receive non-member state status at the UN General Assembly, it is worth noting two anniversaries of related but forgotten events.

Of course, everyone knows the obvious anniversary – Nov. 29, 1947 was the day the UN General Assembly passed the plan to recommend the partition the British Mandate of Palestine into a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Jews accepted the plan. The Arabs — both local and regional – rejected it. The local Arabs who 25 years later became known as “Palestinians,” responded to the passage of UNGA resolution 181 by launching a terror war against the Jews. Their war was commanded by Iraqi and Lebanese terror masters and supported by the British military and its Arab Legion from Transjordan.

On May 15, 1948 five foreign Arab armies invaded the just-declared Jewish state with the declared aim of annihilating all the Jews.

Now for a couple less known anniversaries

On November 28, 1941 the religious and political leader of the Palestinian Arabs and one of the most influential leaders of the Arab world Haj Amin el Husseini met with Adolf Hitler in Berlin. Husseini had courted the Nazis since just after the Nazis rose to power in 1933. Husseini was forced to flee the British Mandate in 1937 when he expanded his fourth terror war against the Jews, that he began in 1936 to include the British as well.

He fled to Lebanon, and then in October 1939 he fled to Iraq. In April 1941 he fomented a pro-Nazi coup in Iraq. As the British — with massive unheralded assistance from the Jews from the land of Israel — were poised to enter Baghdad and restore the pro-British government, Husseini incited the Farhud, a 3-day pogrom against the Jews of Baghdad that took place over the festival of Shavuot. 150 Jews were murdered. A thousand were wounded and 900 Jewish homes were destroyed.

With the coup defeated and the Jews murdered, Husseini escaped to then pro-Nazi Iran and then in October to Germany by way of Italy. [……..]

He arrived in Berlin and two and a half weeks later he had a prolonged private meeting with Hitler. There, on November 28, 1941, two months before the Wannssee Conference, where the German high command received its first orders to annihilate European Jewry, Hitler told Husseini that he intended to eradicate the Jewish people from the face of Europe.

Husseini remained in Berlin through the end of the war and served as a Nazi agent. In Berlin he broadcast daily diatribes to the Arab world on German shortwave radio in Arabic. Specifically Husseini exhorted them to kill the Jews in the name of Allah and make common cause with the Nazis who would deliver them from the Jews, the British and the Americans.

In 1943 Husseini organized the Hazhar SS Division of Bosnian Muslims. His division carried out the massacre of 90 percent of the Bosnian Jewish community of 12,000.

[……..]

During the war Husseini used his broadcasts to shape the political and religious  consciousness of the Muslim world by fusing Islamic Jew hatred with annihilationist Nazi anti-Semitism. Whereas much of the Nazi anti-Semitic ideology was discredited in postwar Europe, it has remained the single most resonant theme of Arab politics since World War II.

In 1946, as his fellow Nazi war criminals were being tried in Nuremberg, Husseini made a triumphant return to Egypt where he was welcomed as a war hero by King Farouk, the Muslim Brotherhood and the young officers in the Egyptian army who fused Nazi national socialism with the Islamism of the Muslim Brotherhood and took over Egypt after deposing Farouk in 1951.

The founder of Palestinian nationalism’s singleminded dedication to the genocide of Jewry brings us to the second notable but forgotten anniversary we passed over this month.

On Nov. 12 1942 the British led forces  — with the massive and unreported support of Jewish commando and engineering units from the land of Israel — defeated Germany’s Afrika Corps led by Gen. Rommel in the second Battle of Alamein. [……..] Husseini and Himmler had planned that under German occupation, the Arabs would expand the Holocaust to the 800,000 Jews of the Arab world and the 450,000 Jews in the land of Israel. To this end, the Germans had organized the Einzatzgruppen Afrika unit attached to Rommel’s army. Under the command of SS LTC Walter Rauff, it was tasked with murdering Jews located in the areas that were to come under German occupation.

It is fitting that yesterday, on the anniversary of Hitler’s meeting with Husseini, Germany announced that it would not oppose Husseini’s heirs’ bid to receive UN recognition of a Palestinian state that seeks Israel’s destruction.

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

The more things change, the more they remain the same.

 Read the rest – A few notable anniversaries on the Palestinian’s big day

Lately there has been some disturbing indications of an increase in anrti-Semtism in Hungary, a nation with a tragic past for its Jews and which has the largest Jewish population in Eastern Europe

BUDAPEST – Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban on Monday condemned a call by a far-right Jobbik lawmaker to draw up lists of Jews as “unworthy” of his country, promising he would protect all citizens from any kind of discrimination.

Orban was responding to comments by Marton Gyongyosi, one of Jobbik’s 44 lawmakers in the 386-seat parliament, who said on November 27 during a debate on violence in the Gaza Strip that it would be “timely” to draw up a list of people of Jewish ancestry who posed a national security risk.

His remarks, for which he later apologized, triggered international outrage. The US Embassy said it condemned “in the strongest terms the outrageous anti-Semitic remarks made on the floor of Parliament by a Jobbik parliamentarian”.

Seeking to distance himself and his country from the comments, Orban said Gyongyosi’s outburst had no place in modern Hungary.

“Last week sentences were uttered in parliament which are unworthy of Hungary,” Orban told parliament, responding to a lawmaker from the opposition Socialist party.

“I rejected this call on behalf of the government and I would like you to know that as long as I am standing in this place, no one in Hungary can be hurt or discriminated against because of their faith, conviction or ancestry.”

He and the rest of the country would protect Hungary’s Jewish population, he added.

Lawmaker claims his remarks “misunderstood”

Gyongyosi has said his remarks were misunderstood, saying he had only been referring to Hungarians with Israeli passports in the government and parliament. He has refused to resign over the scandal.

On Sunday, more than 10,000 Hungarians protested against the far-right with leaders from governing and opposition parties denouncing Gyongyosi’s call, which they said echoed the Nazi era. The rally united the country’s deeply divided political scene in an unprecedented way.

Jobbik dismissed the protest as “political alarmism” and Gabor Vona, its leader, told parliament on Monday that Gyongyosi had only been suggesting examining “the citizenship of MPs and government members”.
[……]

“But there were those professionally frightful, those policy-bereft hysterics who thought otherwise and put on the old record crying anti-Semitism,” he said.

“In between two bouts of hysteria you should not forget that this country had been destroyed by Fidesz and the Socialist party, and not Jobbik. And its Jobbik’s task to rebuild it.”

Orban’s conservative Fidesz party swept to power with a two-thirds parliamentary majority in 2010, ousting the Socialists.

[…….]

The party has since retained support in the recession-hit central European country and some analysts believe it may hold the balance of power between Fidesz and the left-wing opposition in the next elections in 2014.

Read the rest – Hungary PM raps far-right, vows to protect Jews