I am replying to the letter by Chinese Chew ('Jews used as bogeyman to unite Muslims'). It seems that he is somewhat upset by the recent anti-Jewish remarks made by our prime minister during the Organisation of Islamic Conference meeting.

This sentiment I'm sure is shared by many other Malaysians who have subscribed to the belief that anything anti-Jewish is considered to be 'bad', 'evil' and sometimes even 'inhumane'.

But such a belief is solely based on the outcome of the dramatic events that took place in the middle of the 20th century, that is the Holocaust under the Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime in Germany. It is somewhat surprising that Hitler's atrocities against the Jews have been looked upon as the only benchmark in such matters.

Jews have been for persecuted centuries by many other nations under varied reasons. Thus in today's modern world, anyone who is thought to be anti-Jewish is immediately associated with either Hitlerism, Nazism, or even fascism.

History provides us with the best answers. Thousands of Jews (and Muslims) died during the Spanish Inquisition. The 30-Year War in the Holy Roman Empire during the 17th century between Protestants and Catholics also saw the massacre of the Jewish population. The infamous Crusades, although mainly directed against Muslims, also killed Jews especially during the sacking of Jerusalem.

If Jews have been persecuted on a regular basis, why does the modern world suddenly consider that such actions are no longer 'acceptable'? The answer is again Hitler, since the main difference between the Holocaust and other events is that the former was conducted on a scale never before seen.

Nations whose history has even a small trace of atrocious acts against Jews have tried very hard to suppress such information from being made public. This they have achieved by changing from an anti-Jewish to a pro-Jewish stance.

This indirectly has gained Israeli Jews a tremendous amount of sympathy from various nations to a level where their actions, good or bad, have gone unquestioned. The illegal occupation of Palestinian cities and territories was merely condemned by UN Security Council members due to the influence of Israel's No. 1 supporter, sympathiser and benefactor who are also not entirely Jewish-loving people.

The problem lies in that no action is taken against Israel when it illegally occupies a neighbouring country, while the damage attributed to 'Islamic' extremists gave a superpower the power to conquer Afghanistan and Iraq. There is hypocrisy in such affairs, which works to the advantage of Israel.

If this goes on, then there will be almost no room for peace for Palestinians. Perhaps as a means of last resort, anti-Jewish remarks could then be justified, even if considered as wrong by certain parties who have vested interests on Israel. Better to be outspoken and heard rather than be silent and oppressed.

I agree that we must understand the difference between the Israel Jewish population and the Israel Jewish government but, since both parties are so closely interwoven, it seems almost impossible to differentiate between the two. This will inevitably offend both parties.

Nevertheless, even if Mahathir's anti-Jewish remarks are seen as "irresponsible", "unjust" and "racist" by the world's non-Muslim population, it is a necessary act on the part of the world's Muslim population.