Diskussion:Manfred Gerstenfeld

Warum English?

Warum schreiben wir „Dutch Jewish Seminar“ und „Ph.D.“? --Erik Warmelink 01:41, 31. Aug. 2010 (CEST)

Ist „Dutch Jewish Seminar“ nicht englisch? Was denn sonst? --Pfiat diΛV^¿? 14:00, 6. Okt. 2010 (CEST)

Wenn man wüsste, wie der Verein sich in seinen Briefköpfen oder auf seinem Türschild selbst nennt, wär's wohl am leichtesten: evtl. ja tatsächlich Nederlands Israëlietisch Seminarium? --Wwwurm Mien Klönschnack 14:24, 6. Okt. 2010 (CEST)

@Pfiat diΛV^¿?: „Dutch“ ist englisch für „niederländisch“, aus dem Artikel: Manfred Gerstenfeld wuchs in Amsterdam auf. Siehe http://www.nik.nl/seminarium/, „Israëlietisch“ ist altmodisch, die Rechtschreibung ist „israelitisch“, das Niederländisch von heute hat „joods“ für die Religion, „Joods“ für die Ethnie. Ich weiß nicht ob es das Nederlands Israëlietisch Seminarium ist, es gibt keine Quelle. --Erik Warmelink 16:09, 6. Okt. 2010 (CEST)

Mag Dir altmodisch vorkommen, aber auf seiner Webseite schreibt das NIK nun mal „israëlietisch“. Eigennamen dürfen das. --Wwwurm Mien Klönschnack 16:14, 6. Okt. 2010 (CEST)

Oft mussen Eigennamen das (z.B. wann es eine inschrijving bij de Kamer van Koophandel gibt). Ich schrieb es nur um zu erklären warum „Israëlietisch“ mit „Jewish“ übersetzt sein könnte. --Erik Warmelink 17:43, 6. Okt. 2010 (CEST)

Und 20 Monaten später gibt es immer noch Dutch Jewish Seminar, teacher training degree und Ph.D.. -129.125.102.126 21:15, 18. Mai 2012 (CEST)

Und 28 Monaten später gibt es immer noch Dutch Jewish Seminar, teacher training degree und Ph.D.. --129.125.102.126 23:28, 25. Jan. 2013 (CET)

Rechtspopulismus

In videobeiträgen, die unter anderem bei "Youtube" zu finden sind, verbreitet das "Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs" Propaganda, die vor einer drohenden Übernahme Europas durch den Islam "warnt". Die geistige Nähe dieser Ansichten zu denen der europäischen Rechtspopulisten bis hin zu Rechtsradikalen und Terrorgruppen ist kaum wegzudiskutieren. E. Zeh. (nicht signierter Beitrag von 178.11.33.122 (Diskussion) 11:20, 10. Jul 2012 (CEST))

I agree. Gerstenfeld's main claim to fame is probably his writings about Norway, which received attention mainly due to the sheer extremeness of his claims. Some highlights from his career:

• In 2009 he accused the Norwegian people of being a "barbaric and unintelligent people" (a blatantly racist comment)
• He has accused most members of the Norwegian government (particularly those belonging to the centre-left Labour Party, sister party of the SPD), the King of Norway and so on of being "anti-semites" (by which he apparently means anyone who voices criticism about human rights violations and violations of international law in connection with the occupation of Palestine)
• In an editorial expressing the views of the newspaper, Norway's largest newspaper and main quality newspaper, Aftenposten (which is roughly Norway's equivalent of FAZ) described Gerstenfeld as part of the Israeli extremist far-right ("den ekstreme israelske høyresiden") and as a fanatic. This happened after Gerstenfeld had been a regular presence in Norwegian debates for a while with comments perceived by basically everyone, including the Jewish community and most Norwegian friends of Israel, as extreme and lacking in seriousness, and indeed, as virulently anti-Norwegian
• Gerstenfeld was dismissed as a disreputable and extreme person by Odd Bjørn Fure, Norway's main expert on anti-semitism and founding director of the Norwegian research centre devoted to Holocaust and Jewish studies.
• The Jewish community in Norway has repeatedly expressed shock and dismay at Gerstenfeld's extreme comments about Norway.
• Gerstenfeld is openly a writer for and supporter of the Norwegian blog Document.no. This blog has been described as a hate website that is comparable to Stormfront in an official report by the Ministry of Justice and Public Security. The Financial Times has described the blog as "a website rife with anti-Muslim and hard right rhetoric." The BBC has described the blog in the following way: "Anders Behring Breivik left racist, extremist right-wing comments along with fellow anti-Muslims" on the site [Document.no]". The blog is explicitly anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant and is generally considered close to the anti-Muslim English Defence League and its Norwegian "branch." One of their other writers was essentially fired from her public job in the UK when it was discovered that she was a writer for the website (North Wales fire service employee quits amid investigation into alleged posts on far-right website).
  • Gerstenfeld, on the other hand, has praised this hate website in the following way (published on two blogs which I will avoid linking to as a matter of principle, but it can be found using Google): "Were it not for a few brave people like the editors of the small Christian weekly Norge Idag and the leading Norwegian blog Document.no..." (it is "leading" in racist far-right circles, alright, although that description without a qualifier certainly reveals the political position of the author)
• In conclusion, in Norway the consensus among academics and media and other reliable sources, even including those who are specifically experts on anti-semitism and Jewish issues, is that Gerstenfeld is part of the pro-settler Israeli far-right, that he makes extreme and fanatic comments about Norway in particular that don't really count in polite discourse, and that he has ties to anti-Muslim/anti-immigrant far-right groups in Europe which are ideologically close to the English Defence League, "counter-jihadism" and anti-Muslim conspiracy theories about "Eurabia." --Bjørn G. Eriksen (Diskussion) 22:23, 10. Apr. 2017 (CEST)

Defekter Weblink

Dieser Baustein verhindert die automatische Archivierung dieses Abschnitts und seiner Unterabschnitte.

Der folgende Weblink wurde von einem Bot („GiftBot“) als nicht erreichbar erkannt.
Ausführliche Erläuterungen und Hilfe zur korrekten Behebung dieses Fehlers finden sich auf Wikipedia:Defekte Weblinks. Ist ein von einem Bot als defekt gemeldeter externer Link doch erreichbar, dann bitte berichten – wie auch sonstige Probleme.

• http://www.ejpress.org/article/news/14742
  • Vielleicht ist eine archivierte Version geeignet: archive.orghttp://giftbot.dwl.invalid/http://www.ejpress.org/article/news/14742

– GiftBot (Diskussion) 10:43, 21. Jan. 2016 (CET)