AN OPEN LETTER TO PAMELA GELLER (ASSUMING SHE CAN READ)

Seeing as she enjoys cartoons so much, this is done in a style she can easily identify with …. but one where lives are not at risk (which she also enjoys).

By Katie Miranda AT

By Katie Miranda AT

 

#JeSuisPamelaGeller (NOT)

For and Against…

Probably the most hated woman in America today …. making Hilary Clinton a mere second ….

Probably the most hated woman in America today …. making Hilary Clinton a mere second ….

Against…

Art Spiegelman Blasts ‘Racist’ Pamela Geller Group

 Cover of the graphic novel Maus by Art Spiegelman.  Description of book HERE from Wikipedia

Cover of the graphic novel Maus by Art Spiegelman.
Description of book HERE from Wikipedia

Art Spiegelman, the cartoonist best known for his “Maus” graphic novel about the Holocaust, called the group that sponsored a contest in Texas for cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed a “racist organization.”

Two gunmen attempted to shoot participants at the suburban Dallas cartoon contest Sunday, but police stopped them, killing the assailants in the process. Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has claimed responsibility for the Sunday attack.

In an interview with Time about an award the PEN writers’ group gave France’s Charlie Hebdo magazine in defiance of protests by some PEN members, Spiegelman said the American Freedom Defense Initiative, founded and led by New York-based blogger Pamela Geller, is “exactly the nightmare version that the writers who were protesting the PEN award thought Charlie was.”

In January, two gunmen stormed Charlie Hebdo’s Paris office, killing 11 people and injuring 11 others. The Charlie Hebdo shooting occurred three days before another gunman held shoppers hostage at the Hyper Cacher kosher supermarket, killing four.

Geller, Spiegelman said, “is intentionally trying to start war of culture with Islam by saying that all Muslims are terrorists under the surface, and we’re going to prove it.”

In addition to the cartoon contest, Geller’s group has also put out controversial anti-Muslim ads on public transportation in several U.S. cities.

While noting that Geller and her organization deserve free-speech protection, it does not, unlike Charlie Hebdo, deserve a “courage award.”

Spiegelman’s “Maus” was recently pulled from Russian booksellers because it features a swastika on the cover.

From JTA

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 For…

Meet Robert Shillman, the Tech Mogul Who Funds Pamela Geller’s Anti-Islam Push

Robert Shillman heads a publicly traded American technology company called Cognex Corp with a market value of $4 billion. He also says he is a big supporter of last Sunday’s Prophet Mohammad cartoon contest in Texas that was attacked by two gunmen who opened fire before being shot dead by police.

In a telephone interview with Reuters from his home near San Diego, California, Shillman said America’s free speech is under threat. He added that violent attacks on such events are making people fearful and prone to self censorship. Many Muslims regard depictions of the prophet – such as the caricatures displayed at the event – as offensive and against the religion’s teachings.

“It was a terrorist attack on the American way of life,” says Shillman, who says he isn’t anti-Muslim.

Shillman said he remains a director of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, whose Jihad Watch website helped organize the cartoon event in a Dallas suburb with activist Pamela Geller’s American Freedom Defense Initiative.

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which tracks what it describes as extremist groups, has called the Freedom Center’s founder, the right-wing commentator David Horowitz, “the godfather of the anti-Muslim Movement.” The Freedom Center says it “combats the efforts of the radical left and its Islamist allies to destroy American values.”

The SPLC also calls Geller’s AFDI a hate group because of the way it talks about and depicts Muslims.

Horowitz, in an email, called Shillman “an American hero” who is entirely transparent in his agenda. Horowitz also said the SPLC couldn’t produce one statement of his own that was anti-Muslim.

Geller did not return messages seeking comment.

PARIS ATTACK

Sunday’s attack had some echoes of the January assault on the offices of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo that left 12 dead in what was said to be revenge for its cartoons of the prophet.

As founder of Natick, Massachusetts-based Cognex, which makes machine vision products that help automate manufacturing, Shillman says he is more outspoken than a typical U.S. corporate leader. “Most CEOs are hired guns and their future depends on what their boards think of them. I don’t give a f—-.”

The Freedom Center, whose P.O. Box address is in Sherman Oaks, California, runs several blogs and websites, including the online FrontPage Magazine and Jihad Watch. Shillman has funded four fellowships for journalists who have have worked on the FrontPage, which is the center’s online journal for news and political commentary. He declined to comment when asked if he helped pay for the cartoon contest.

Shillman, who grew up in Boston, says he is an admirer of Geller for her defense of free speech and American democracy. “Blaming Pamela Geller for inciting violence is like blaming a victim of rape for wearing high heels,” he said.

Dr. Bob, as he calls himself, has the additional title of chief culture officer at Cognex, whose stock has produced a 373 percent return over the past five years. Shillman calls Cognex’s 1,300 employees Cognoids and rewards those who reach certain long-service milestones with trips to any one of the Wonders of the World. On their birthdays, U.S. employees get a cake delivered to their homes.

For years, Shillman – who owns about 5 percent of the company’s shares – has foregone millions of dollars in salary, bonus and stock options. Cognex donates the money to charity.

Anthony Sun, lead director on the Cognex board, could not be reached for comment.

FUNDS PRO-ISRAEL GROUPS

Shillman has in the past withdrawn support from organizations whose behavior he disagrees with. In 2002, he pulled funding from WBUR, a National Public Radio station in Boston, for what he perceived as anti-Israel sentiment.

His Shillman Foundation has funded a number of conservative and pro-Israeli groups, including the Zionist Organization of America. The ZOA has targeted both academics it perceives have been teaching anti-Israel doctrine and Palestine student groups accused of intimidating Jewish students on U.S. campuses, including a campaign at Shillman’s alma mater, Northeastern University in Boston.

Shillman is an emeritus trustee at the university and has given it substantial amounts of money, including $3 million for a classroom building that was then named after him.

From Reuters

IT TAKES MORE THAN ISLAMOPHOBIA TO BE PRO ISRAEL

Pamela Geller’s antics are an embarrassment to zionist groups

Indeed, mainstream pro-Israel groups like Anti-Defamation League have condemned Geller and the anti-Islam message of the Philly bus ad.

Daughter of Satan

Daughter of Satan

I found an interesting read on the pages of UK Media Watch, formerly called CIF Watch. They are the mouthpiece for British zionism and finally found something worthwhile to mouth off about. I’m pretty sure you will find it of interest as well ….

Guardian/AP falsely describes org founded by Pamela Geller as a ‘pro-Israel group’

Pamela Geller peddles in conspiracy theories, makes common cause with extremists, and advances hyperbolic, divisive and extremely misleading narratives about the so-called threat of “Islamization” of the United States. Geller was even bannedfrom entering the UK by Theresa May, the British Home Secretary, “on the grounds that her statements may foster hatred and provoke violence due to her extreme views”.

Here’s just one example of the kind of vitriol found on her blog.

“Obama is a third worlder and a coward. He will do nothing but beat up on our friends to appease his Islamic overlords.”
— Pam Geller, AtlasShrugs.com, April 13, 2010

Geller has also reportedly claimed that “President Obama is the love child of Malcolm X, that Obama was once involved with a “crack whore.”

On April 1st, the Guardian published an Associated Press (AP) report on an anti-Islam bus ad campaign in Philadelphia sponsored by one of Geller’s groups.

Here’s the ad.

american_freedom_defense_initiative_c0-53-640-426_s561x327

In the headline of the Guardian article (Hitler ads from pro-Israel group begin running on Philadelphia transit buses), and in the text,  Geller’s American Freedom Initiative is characterized as a “pro-Israel group”.

Here’s the opening passage of the article.

The ads from the pro-Israel American Freedom Defense Initiative will appear on 84 buses. One features a 1941 photograph of Hitler and supporter Hajj Amin al-Husseini, a Palestinian Arab nationalist.

However, if you look at site in question (and other sites affiliated with Geller and her campaign), they don’t claim to be “pro-Israel” groups. Their focus is clearly on opposing Islam and putatively championing “free-speech“.

Here’s the mission statement of American Freedom Defense Initiative:

The American Freedom Defense Initiative is a new organization launched by Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer. Our objective is to go on the offensive when legal, academic, legislative, cultural, sociological, and political actions are taken to dismantle our basic freedoms and values.

AFDI acts against the treason being committed by national, state, and local government officials, the mainstream media, and others in their capitulation to the global jihad and Islamic supremacism, the ever-encroaching and unconstitutional power of the federal government, and the rapidly moving attempts to impose socialism and Marxism upon the American people.

Indeed, mainstream pro-Israel groups like Anti-Defamation League have condemned Geller and the anti-Islam message of the Philly bus ad.

Though Geller supports Israel, that position alone doesn’t warrant characterizing her movement as a “pro-Israel” group. The Guardian article unfairly smears pro-Israel groups by associating them with Geller’s extreme views, and we urge editors to revise the text and headline accordingly.

US DISTRICT COURT BANS PRO PALESTINIAN ADS ON SEATTLE BUSES

A victory for Islamophobes

THIS is allowed

While

County officials in Seattle can prohibit an advertisement criticizing Israeli policies toward Palestinians from appearing on local buses without violating constitutional protections on free speech, a U.S. appeals court said on Wednesday.

Too true to be legal?

Too true to be legal?

Seattle Wins Right To Ban ‘Israeli War Crimes’ Bus Ads

Court Rules No Free Speech Violation at Stake

From Reuters VIA

County officials in Seattle can prohibit an advertisement criticizing Israeli policies toward Palestinians from appearing on local buses without violating constitutional protections on free speech, a U.S. appeals court said on Wednesday.

In a 2-1 ruling, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco found that Kings County acted reasonably when it barred the ad, which sparked threats of vandalism and violence that could have endangered passengers.

Neither a Kings County spokesman nor a representative for the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington Foundation, which challenged the ban, was immediately available for comment.

In 2010, a non-profit group opposed to U.S. support for Israel proposed a bus ad that read: “ISRAELI WAR CRIMES YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK,” along with a website address. The county originally flagged the ad as controversial, but decided it did not violate bus advertising policy and approved it.

After a local news broadcast about the impending ad, officials faced a public furor. Photos depicting dead or injured bus passengers appeared under the door of a transportation authority service center, the ruling said.

The county eventually rejected that ad, along with others proposed by pro-Israel groups. The pro-Palestinian Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign sued, and a judge in a lower court sided with the county.

“Because the county simultaneously rejected all of the proposed ads on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – from opposing viewpoints – no reasonable jury could find that it engaged in viewpoint discrimination,” 9th Circuit Judge Paul Watford wrote on Wednesday.

In dissent, Judge Morgan Christen said that while safety is a concern, “it also may be that the county inappropriately bowed to a ‘heckler’s veto’ and suppressed speech that should have been protected.”

She said the case should have been sent back to the lower court for more fact-finding.

#JeSuisIslamophobe ~~ ISLAMOPHOBIA NOT INCLUDED IN NEW FRENCH ANTI HATE LEGISLATION

French president François Hollande has said his government will soon announce a raft of tough criminal laws to crack down on anti-Semitism, racism, homophobia and Holocaust denial.

That’s fine, but what about Islamophobia?

Except in France?

Except in France?

France must treat online “anti-Semitism” like child pornography, president says

LESSONS FROM CHARLIE

YzWjm7q

A magazine can make a point of printing anti-Muslim mockery in response to threats because it knows that freedom of speech (and of the press) will be vociferously defended by the elites of Europe when the target is Muslim, whereas anti-Jewish cartoons will generate harsh condemnations.

Latuff's Spoof

Latuff’s Spoofs

charlie-hebdo-islamophobie-antisemitisme-carlos-latuff-2

It All Depends on Whose Symbols are Mocked: Lessons From Charlie Hebdo

By Kristoffer Larsson

More than a month has passed since the Charlie Hebdo shooting in Paris. How should we understand this dreadful massacre? That if you insult a minority that then a few individuals within that group might come after you? Or is it perhaps much worse than that, as some will have us believe, and that freedom of speech is under threat?

Demonstrations were held throughout France supposedly in defence of freedom of speech. As many writers have pointed out, the demonstration in Paris was attended by world leaders that—to put it mildly—don’t seem to find freedom of speech all that important in their own countries. One of the survivors of the shooting, Laurent Léger, lambasted the hypocrisy of Western governments who pretended to stand up for freedom of speech. In fact, France seized the opportunity to crack down on ‘hate speech’.

But the world leaders’ presence, despite their faulty records, is nonetheless understandable; they attended the demonstration to express their commiseration, and that’s perfectly fine.

Yet, the ‘freedom of speech’ aspect bothers me. It is an attempt to take this shooting out of its political context, to describe it as a story of two young Muslims who saw a cartoon, and got so angry that they decided to kill eleven people.

The fact of the matter is that the two terrorists didn’t care about freedom of speech (or lack thereof) in France. They were radicalized by the U.S.-led Western interventions in the Muslim world, and in their frustration over the endless killing that’s going on there, they decided to exact vengeance. In their eyes, Charlie Hebdo was a perfectly logical target because it had become a symbol of anti-Muslim mockery.

The message the perpetrators wanted to send is clear: if you continue to attack us, then you’ll pay for it. For a long, long time the West has been able to carry out bombing campaigns, invasions and occupations, stage coups d’état and targeted killings in other parts of the world, without fear of revenge attacks at home. Not so anymore.

Reducing the Charlie Hebdo shooting to a question of freedom of speech is convenient because it allows us to ignore the misery caused by Western interventionism, which ultimately led to the Jihadist resurgence. Massacres and shootings carried out by Muslims, like the ones we saw in France, are now an everyday occurrence in countries that have been ‘blessed’ with Western intervention. Though Islamist groups carry out occasional terrorist attacks in the U.S. and Europe, it is in the Mideast where most of their victims are to be found – and the greater majority of their victims there are Muslim. This is the ‘New Middle East’ that the neo-conservatives in the Bush Administration envisioned when they plotted the Iraq War.

But this is not the only reason for my skepticism towards the ‘we must stand up for freedom of speech’ crowd. Although this is a right that must be defended, it is important to do so without being hypocritical. Charlie Hebdo mocked Islamic figures, and when they were criticized and threatened for doing it, they made a point of not backing down. Instead, they kept publishing such cartoons, which they have every right to do. While this may seem admirable, or even heroic, the magazine doesn’t always stand its ground.

In 2008 Charlie Hebdo was criticized for ridiculing Judaism. Though the magazine had stood up for freedom of the press when it came to mocking Islam, in that case cartoonist Siné was asked by his editor Philippe Val to apologize. When Siné refused, Val sacked him. Siné also received a death threat on a website run by the Jewish Defence League (JDL). There is clearly a double standard being employed by Charlie Hebdo, and it’s not alone.

A similar incident occurred at the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, which published the infamous prophet Muhammad cartoons. An Iranian newspaper said that in response it would hold a contest with cartoons mocking the Holocaust as an analogous – and offensive – way to test the limits of freedom of speech. The culture editor at Jyllands-Posten, Flemming Rose, likely not wanting to be seen as a hypocrite, said he would consider publishing these cartoons. Upon hearing this, however, Jyllands-Posten’s editor-in-chief, Carsten Juste, declared that his paper would publish the cartoons “in no circumstances,” called the Iranian contest a “tasteless media stunt” (unlike his own provocation, I suppose) and urged Rose to “take a vacation.” The editor of the newspaper’s Sunday edition, Jens Kaiser, had a few years earlier turned down cartoons of Jesus’ resurrection, telling the cartoonist that they would “provoke an outcry,” although he later said the real reason was because the drawings were sub-par.

Blatant hypocrisy, or unintended bias? To many Muslims this double standard is hard to grasp, and it makes them feel even more outraged. However, there is an explanation for it.

It is important to understand that the criticism stems from different sources. When anti-Muslim cartoons are published, it is mostly the Muslim community that objects. The reaction under these circumstances from what one can call our ‘elites’ – politicians, editors, journalists, mavericks, etc. – is that no matter the content, freedom of speech must be defended at all cost. This elite responds very differently, however, to cartoons containing anti-Jewish mockery: all of a sudden, the content does matter. It is then characterized as a question of ‘hate speech’, not freedom of speech.

The Iranian newspaper chose to focus on a subject it knows to be a Western taboo. In a number of European countries Holocaust denial has even been criminalized (France included), yet you don’t see newspapers publishing texts that question the Holocaust to test the boundaries of freedom of speech. (If anything threatens freedom of speech, it is government-imposed restrictions of this kind.) The issue is so sensitive that even publicly defending the right to question the Holocaust is often regarded as support for Holocaust deniers, and those who occasionally dare to do so invariably make sure to emphasize their utter dislike for the people whose rights they are defending.

Around 50 million people perished in World War II, including millions of Jews. It was a huge disaster, not least for Europe. European school children of today are taught about the anti-Semitic propaganda disseminated by the Nazi regime and how it enabled the extermination of European Jews. They are taught that anti-Jewish hatred and propaganda is dangerous because we know what it ultimately leads to genocide.

This is why many Europeans (including our elites) respond emotionally to what they perceive as being anti-Semitic, while they don’t respond as emotionally to other forms of racist propaganda, including Islamophobia. This is the reason for the double standard. To oppose anti-Semitism is a value of the elite, and editors that act in violation of this value will be treated like outcasts. A magazine can make a point of printing anti-Muslim mockery in response to threats because it knows that freedom of speech (and of the press) will be vociferously defended by the elites of Europe when the target is Muslim, whereas anti-Jewish cartoons will generate harsh condemnations.

So when Charlie Hebdo or Jyllands-Posten mocks Islam, they are not really testing the boundaries of freedom of speech. And when an Iranian newspaper mocks the Holocaust, it’s not doing so either. If challenging taboos was their purpose, then the Iranian newspaper would publish anti-Islamic cartoons and Europeans magazines would run articles questioning the Holocaust.

What about anti-Christian satire then? If a ‘Christian’ newspaper in the West mocks Christianity it would not cause much fuss because it is no longer a taboo. But if a group such as ISIS did so while persecuting Christians, it would not be regarded as satire.

In short, context matters. That’s why we should not expect the publication of anti-Muslim cartoons while Muslim countries are being bombed and invaded to be perceived as harmless, just like the anti-Semitic cartoons published in Der Sturmer in hindsight cannot be presented to the world as ‘testing the boundaries of freedom of speech’.

After the massacre in Egypt in August 2014, that claimed the lives of maybe 1,000 people that protested against the Sisi regime, Charlie Hebdo mocked the victims by putting a cartoon on the cover of a Muslim man being shot. The text reads: “The Koran is shit, it doesn’t stop the bullets.” After the Charlie Hebdo shooting someone manipulated the cartoon and changed the text to: “Charlie Hebdo is shit, it doesn’t stop the bullets.” It would have been a suitable cover for the first Charlie Hebdo issue after the tragic shooting, and I’m sure the victims would have appreciated the satire.

 

Source

*

Read HERE how the zionists ‘defend’ ‘Freedom of Speech’ in Israel

Obviously, nothing was learnt from the above

High Court lifts ban on Liberman’s Charlie Hebdo stunt

As part of election campaign, Yisrael Beytenu plans to distribute free copies of French satirical magazine

VIDEO OF RACISM IN THE AIR GONE VIRAL

All over a lousy chocolate bar … Sell her the chocolate, what is she an Arab?

Leave it to Israeli tourists, known for their rudeness and arrogance abroad to pull a stunt like this …..

Big story going viral on Facebook and in the Israeli press about a vulgar and racist exchange between some Israeli passengers and a flight attendant on an Israir Airlines flight to Varna, Bulgaria.

Translation follows video presentation

Passenger 1: You will sell me Chocolate. Do you understand? You are my worker, I paid money for you.

Flight attendant: I am not your worker. You would die before I can be your worker 

Passenger 1: I want the chocolate. Why wouldn’t you sell me the chocolate. I want the chocolate. What is that. I want the chocolate 

Flight attendant: If you think you’re raising your voice and being a little bit more violent so most probably you won’t achieve what you want

Passenger 2: Sister of Passenger 1 from the other side of the aisle: Sell her the chocolate, what is she an Arab? F**your  god (Arabic curse), sell her the chocolate! Do you hear?She paid for her plane ticket sell her the chocolate! Yalla (Another Arabic word)

Lower your tone fast! Sell her the chocolate fast!Ya peace of trash! What is that he is not selling her chocolate? A peace of trash ! You will not sell my sister chocolate.

At this point, the flight attendant approach the sister and told her??Remember my words, To “Varna”(Bulgaria)  you will not arrive 

A third passenger sitting next to passenger 1 joined  by a string of curses toward flight attendant. 

 

Translation courtesy Reem Khamis-Dakwar

Via

21 YEARS LATER ~~ #JeSuisHebroni

Twenty one years ago this week terror struck out in Hebron. Thirty Palestinians at prayer were slaughtered by one Judeo nazi. There were no solidarity marches, there were no massive outcries in the Western Press, after all, the dead were only Palestinians. Instead there were graveside ceremonies glorifying the terrorist and his acts. Twenty one years later a compatriot of the terrorist is a candidate for the Knesset

ISRAEL MUST HANG ITS COLLECTIVE HEAD IN SHAME!

The following is by far the best account of the massacre itself. It was originally posted seven years ago…..

21 Years of Lessons after Al-Ibrahimi Mosque Massacre – A Memorial History for the 30 Palestinian Martyrs

The story:

The dawn of Friday 15 Ramadan 1414 a.h. / 25 February 1994 marked the first of three massacres perpetrated by Israeli settlers accompanied by the Israeli Army. There were more than 30 martyrs and 270 injured. The main massacre took place while the victims were performing al- Fajr (Dawn) Prayer at Al Ibrahimi mosque.


(Al-Ibrahimi Mosque – Al-Khalil, Occupied Palestine)

At 05:00 on February 25, around eight hundred Palestinian Muslims passed through the east gate of Al-Ibrahimi mosque to participate in al-Fajr prayer, the first of the five daily Islamic prayers. At that time of the holy month of Ramadan, there were many people who flocked the Ibrahimi Mosque to perform their prayers. The mosque was under Israeli Army guard.


That same day, a Jewish American Zionist physician decided to materialize the dream of the typical Zionist movement of annihilating the Arab existence in Palestine. Dr. Baruch Goldstein prepared for the move. It was during Ramadan when Dr. Goldstein decided to execute his old plan of vengeance.

Goldstein passed two army checkpoints at the dawn of February 25, 1994 from the northeastern gate of the mosque near privy. That privy could be the reason why Goldstein decided on that gate because he, probably, received his contemplation about Arabs from the Rabbis of Kach in Kiryat Arab where the Arabs were described as the demons of the privy. The privy of the mosque is important not only because it has two Israeli army checkpoints on its nearby mosque’s gate, but also because it is surrounded by Israeli army posts from the east and army patrols in the west. So Goldstein was acting from the deepest parts of the Zionistic ideology in liquidating the demons.

Goldstein was carrying his IMI Galil assault rifle, four magazines of ammunition, which held 35 bullets each and hand grenades. He thought about the best moment to execute the plan, maximize the number of casualties and secure the escape or rescue. The best moment, of course, was when the Muslim worshipers knelt on the floor with their backs towards Goldstein.

It was first a hand grenade that he threw among the worshipers causing casualties, confusion, and possibly an invitation to the Israeli soldiers in the halls and outside of the mosque to intervene for rescue. And in no time, the automatic massacre took place with the same kind of mercy that other Zionists like Goldstein shows all the time toward Arabs.

Standing in front of the only exit from the mosque and positioned to the rear of the Muslim worshipers, he opened fire with the weapon, killing 29 people and injuring more than 125. He was eventually overwhelmed by survivors, who beat him to death.

An eyewitness said that when Goldstein was executing the massacre and people attacked him, there was a soldier who attempted to come closer to the scene. But instead of “rescuing” Dr. Goldstein, the Israeli soldier shot his bullets in the air and then escaped from the inside eastern door of the northern hall to the previously known “women praying area.” In the opinion of the eyewitness, the soldier could have rescued Goldstein by killing 5 or 10 more Palestinians, but it appeared that his personal safety was above any blood value.

Al Ibrahimi massacre (a.k.a Hebron massacre) is not the last one. Muslims and Jews are and will remain candidates for victimization. But the cause will always be the same: “The Nazi style laws of the Zionists occupation in Palestine.”

Reports after the massacre were inevitably highly confused. In particular, there was uncertainty about whether Goldstein had acted alone; it was reported that eyewitnesses had seen “another man, dressed as a soldier, handing him ammunition.” The Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat said that the attack was the work of up to 12 men, including Israeli troops. However, Israeli Army denied that and confirmed that Goldstein had acted alone without the assistance or connivance of the Israeli guards posted at the mosque.

News of the massacre immediately led to riots in Hebron (Al-Khalil in Arabic) and the rest of the occupied territories. Additional Palestinian Muslims were crushed to death in the panic to flee the mosque and in rioting that followed.

Now that was history, a bloody history that marked Feb 25 of every year with memorials of the Palestinian Martyrs massacred that day for nothing but being Palestinians. So, what are the lessons learned from this?

First we will look at the ideology behind this massacre (and all the Zionist massacres), then how it is treated among Zionists. And last but not least, how does the media look at Zionist (terrorists) and how do they handle such massacres compared to other terrorist acts and massacres.

Prof. Israel Shahak wrote – The Ideology Behind Hebron Massacre:

The sympathy which Baruch Goldstein enjoys among the Gush Emunim, whose influence is more pervasive than that of the Kahanists, can only be explained by a shared ideology. However, Gush Emunim leaders enjoy Rabin’s friendship and strong influence in wide circles of the Israeli and diaspora Jewish communities. Therefore it is their version of this ideology which is more important. Gush Emunim’s thinking assumes the imminence of the coming of the Messiah, when the Jews, aided by God, will triumph over the Gentiles. Consequently, all current political developments call be interpreted by those in the know as destined either to bring this end nearer or postpone it. Jewish sins, the worst of them being lack of faith in Gush Emunim ideology, can postpone but not alter the predestined course of Redemption. The two world wars, the Holocaust and other calamitous events of modern history serve as stock examples of such a curative punishment for Jewish sins. Such explanations can go into a lot of specific detail. The rabbi of Kiryat Arba, Dov Lior (who attended Goldstein’s funeral and praised him), blamed Israel’s relative failure in its 1982 invasion of Lebanon on the lack of faith manifested through signing a peace treaty with Egypt and “returning the inheritance of our ancestors [i.e Sinai] to strangers”.[…]

The fundamental tenet of Gush Emunim’s thinking is the assumption that the Jewish people are “peculiar”. Lustick discusses this tenet in terms of their denial of the classical Zionist claim that only by undergoing “a process of normalisation”, by emigrating to Palestine and forming a Jewish state there, can the Jews become like any other nation. But for them this “is the original delusion of the secular Zionists”, because they measured that “normality” by applying non-Jewish standards. According to Gush Emunim, “Jews are not and cannot be a normal people”, because “their eternal uniqueness” is “the result of the covenant God made with them at Mount Sinai”. Therefore, according to Rabbi Shlomo Aviner, one of their leaders, “while God requires other normal nations to abide by abstract codes of ‘justice and righteousness’, such laws do not apply to Jews”.

Harkabi quotes Rabbi Israel Ariel, who says that “a Jew who kills a non-Jew is exempt from human judgement, and has not violated the prohibition of murder”. The Gush Emunim rabbis have indeed reiterated that Jews who kill Arabs should be free from all punishment. Harkabi also quotes Rabbi Aviner, Rabbi Zvi Yehudah Kook and Rabbi Ariel, all three of whom say Arabs living in Palestine are thieves because since the land was once Jewish, all property to be found on that land “really” belongs to the Jews. In the original Hebrew version of his book Harkabi expresses his shock at finding this out. “I never imagined that Israelis would so interpret the concept of the historical right.”

Gush Emunim’s plans for governing non-Jews in Israel are also based on “theological” principles. According to Rabbi Aviner; “Is there a difference between punishing an Arab child and an Arab adult for disturbance of our peace? Punishments can be inflicted on Jewish boys below the age of 13 and Jewish girls below the age of 12…But this rule applies to Jews alone, not to Gentiles. Thus any Gentile, no matter how little, should be punished for any crime he commits.” From this dictum, it is only a short step to slaughtering Arab children.

Even Israel’s Supreme Court compared Kahane to the German Nazis. The prominent Orthodox dissident, Professor Yeshayahu Leibovitz, said that the mass murder in Hebron was a consequence of “Judeo-Nazism”. But Gush Emunim’s ideology is no less like that of the Nazis than Kahane’s.

Celebrating the Hebron massacre:

Why do we hate them?

When you see the Israelis and Zionists from different parties and sections of the Israeli society, including their army, as well from around the world, gathering annually at the grave of Baruch Goldstein to celebrate the anniversary of his massacre of Muslim worshipers in Al-Khalil (Hebron), how can you but “LOVE” them?

Here is a sample of the news stories from BBC –Graveside party celebrates Hebron massacre (21 March, 2000):

Militant Jews have gathered at the grave of Baruch Goldstein to celebrate the sixth anniversary of his massacre of Muslim worshippers in Hebron.

The celebrants dressed up as the gunman, wearing army uniforms, doctor’s coats and fake beards.

Goldstein, an immigrant from New York City, had been a physician in the Jewish settlement of Kiryat Arba.

Waving semi-automatic weapons in the air, the celebrants danced, sang and read prayers around his grave.

“We decided to make a big party on the day he was murdered by Arabs,” said Baruch Marzel, one of about 40 celebrants.

The tribute was a macabre twist on the Jewish festival of Purim, when it is a custom to dress in costume and celebrate.

Massacre in mosque

In 1994 on Purim, Goldstein stormed a mosque and fired on praying Muslims in the West Bank city’s Tomb of the Patriarchs – a shrine sacred to both Muslims and Jews.

Twenty-nine people died in the attack, and the angry crowd lynched Goldstein in retaliation.

Israeli extremists continue to pay homage at his grave in the nearby Jewish settlement of Kiryat Arba, where a marble plaque reads: “To the holy Baruch Goldstein, who gave his life for the Jewish people, the Torah and the nation of Israel.”

About 10,000 people had visited the grave since the massacre, Mr Marzel said.

Note: the above news story is ten years old.

Not only that. The Israeli government allocated a special site for the grave, in the Tourist Park in Kiryat Arba settlement. Over the years, the grave has become a site of pilgrimage. Tens of thousand people from all over the world go to pray and honor this terrorist memory. The local religious council of Kiryat Arba settlement declared the grave site a cemetery. During the Feast of Purim, Goldstein friends celebrate the feast near his grave to honor him, in appreciation of what he did!

Last but not least, on the biased media side, Leon T. Hadar wrote:

Following the bombing of the World Trade Center in New York and the arrest of several Muslims who were charged with the crime, the American media were flooded with news stories, analyses and commentaries that warned of the coming “Islamic threat.” “Investigative reporters” and “terrorism experts” alleged on television talk shows and op-ed pages that the accused perpetrators of the bombing were part of an “Islamic terrorism network” coordinated by Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, or other Middle Eastern bogeymen.
[…]
Contrast those reactions with the media’s response to the massacre in Hebron. No analyst suggested that the event reflected the emergence of a global “Jewish threat. ” No terrorism expert was invited to discuss on “Nightline” or the “MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour” the rise of a “global Zionist terrorism” organization manipulated, say, by the Israeli Mossad. No scholar alleged that the massacre by a Jewish settler suggested that Western and Jewish values were somehow incompatible.

If one really had wanted to apply the journalistic methods that were used in the case of the World Trade Center bombing, it would not have been so difficult, after reviewing the biography of Rabbi Meir Kahane by Robert I. Friedman, to point to the strong ties between Baruch Goldstein and the other “fanatics” in the Jewish settlements and members of the Israeli political establishment, especially in the Likud party. One could even have reminded American readers that Kiryat Arba, where Goldstein resided, was actually the brainchild of a pre-1977 Labor government.

Any analysis of public statements and writings by some of the major political and spiritual leaders of the Jewish settlers, including the rabbis who head the movement, would reveal a fanatical hatred and racist attitudes toward non-Jews in general, and Arabs and Palestinians in particular.

Instead, most journalists and analysts adopted the official Israeli line and described the massacre as an “isolated” case of Jewish “extremism,” an act of a “lone gunman,” a “lunatic,” a “madman” who does not represent Israeli society or, for that matter, Jewish settlers in the occupied territories. Journalists, like the Israeli government, stressed that killing of innocent civilians violates the moral tenets of Judaism.

The above was originally posted by Haitam Sabbah seven years ago.

AMERICAN MEDIA GUILTY OF MURDER BY COMPLICITY

Western, especially American, reactions to this week’s cold-blooded murder of three innocent Muslim college students in North Carolina have been grossly inadequate.
 
Major American news networks, have, more or less, treated the monstrous crime as a passing banality. Critical questions that ought to be asked were never asked, which means the stage is set for the perpetration of the next act of murder targeting Muslims.

The media is also culprit  in the N. Carolina Triple murder

By Khalid Amayreh in Occupied Palestine
*

Western, especially American, reactions to this week’s cold-blooded murder of three innocent Muslim college students in North Carolina have been grossly inadequate.

Major American news networks, have, more or less, treated the monstrous crime as a passing banality. Critical questions that ought to be asked were never asked, which means the stage is set for the perpetration of the next act of murder targeting Muslims.

True, the alleged murderer was detained by the police. However, the American media was also culprit in this crime and bears an important part of the blame for its occurrence.

The unrelenting Islamphobic discourse, that we keep hearing and watching in the U.S., does make the perpetration of such a crime inevitable. It would be dishonest to claim otherwise.

This is not a far-fetched analysis of an “isolated incident” as some pundits might be prompted to argue. In the final analysis, anti-Muslim racism in the United States has assumed phenomenal proportions due to the constant defamation of Islam and Muslims by a brashly hostile media.

Needless to say, this hate-mongering has caused many Americans to lump all Muslims in one basket. Thus, all Muslims, near and distant, are portrayed as carbon copies or at least potential carbon copies or prototypes of Osama Bin Laden or Abu Musaab al-Zarqawi.

But this portrayal is actually incorrect. The vast majority of Muslims, I would say 99.99% are normal and peaceful people who are, like most Americans, busy making a decent living, raising their kids, supporting their families, and trying to make ends meet.

I strongly believe that this fact is well known to most media editors who probably choose to ignore it for reasons having to do with cultural bigotry  against Muslims.

In other words, this is not an expression of ignorance of the truth but rather a malicious and reckless disregard of it. Yes, it is an expression of willful dishonesty by much of the American media. And that is a real problem.

Of course, we cannot lump all American media in one negative category. Newspapers such as the Christian Science Monitor can’t be considered a carbon copy of the New York post or the New Republic.

But, unfortunately, the level-headed press has been reduced to a faint voice in a deep valley in a jungle of gung-ho media outlets where the dearth of honesty is conspicuous.

None the less, being “ignorantly dishonest” is not an excuse. In the final analysis, maligning a religious or ethnic community will sooner or later lead to murder or mass murder. We don’t have to go back many decades to demonstrate the evil power of incitement, especially when the targeted audience is uninformed, misinformed or dis-informed.

The recent genocidal episodes in Mynamar and the Republic of Central Africa are hair-raising examples of what public incitement could do. The same thing can be said about Bosnia.

We also do know that the holocaust didn’t start with Auschwitz or other concentration camps. It rather started with Mein Kampf and other expressions of hatred for Jews.

Where is the outrage?

The murderous killing of three young,  innocent American Muslims is by no means an isolated incident or thunder on a clear day. It is rather the inevitable effect of an undeniable cause and the cause is the affronting anti-Islamic messages that we keep watching on Fox News and so-called “Christian” TV programs.

That is why responsibility for spilling the blood of the three innocent victims in North Carolina doesn’t solely lie with the direct killer, but also with a morally callous media that made the killing inevitable.

I am not auggesting that press freedom ought to be restricted. However, a free press must also be a responsible press.

But a responsible press can’t be truly responsible unless it is well-informed and well-aware of the facts. Otherwise, the press, whether knowingly or unknowingly, would succumb to the Steve Emerson syndrom  whereby citizens are spoon-fed half-truths, disinformation and pure lies by charlatans presented as “experts” on Islam.

As a Muslim and journalist who, by  the way, studied and lived long in the United States, I am appalled by the lack of western indignation at crimes against Muslims in general, whether in the West itself, or indeed, in Palestine and other places.

This is moral hypocrisy in broad daylight. It is outrageous and therefore unacceptable. We are all human beings, created by the same God. We should be equal. Our blood should be equal. Our lives should be equal.

The fact that we are not equal in reality is not the result of an ineluctable fate. It is rather the result of the prevalence of an evil minset  which keeps pushing our world to the abyss.

Will we wake up before it is too late?

USA TODAY JOINS FORCES WITH CHARLIE

Below is a cartoon, by Cameron Cardow of the Ottawa Citizen, that USA Today selected as its daily editorial cartoon  for February 2. It’s not a terribly hard cartoon to parse: Islam is the modern equivalent of Nazism, and threatens a new Holocaust. The cartoon lists entities that have nothing in common with each other aside from their connection to Islam–political movements like Hezbollah and Hamas, who have been the targets of far more violence than they are responsible for, along with groups like ISIS and Boko Haram, terrorist groups whose victims are primarily Muslim. Hezbollah and ISIS are actually engaged in intense warfare with each other.

In case you missed the point, the cartoon puts one of the holiest phrases in Islam–”Allah Akbar,” or “God is great”–in the mouth of a Nazi skeleton.

Nazi

Muslims Are Nazis, USA Today Jokes

CHARLIE KICKED OFF THE STREETS IN JERUSALEM

Herr Lieberman and his cronies organised free distribution of a recent issue of Charlie Hebdo in Israel ….

LogoBut

Their plans were put to rest when one of the Palestinian Members of Knesset, Ahmad Tibi, appealed this decision to the Central Elections Committee.

Lieberman’s party activists responded with “We were astounded to learn that the Central Elections Committee acceded to MK Ahmad Tibi’s request to stop the distribution of copies of Charlie Hebdo,” the petition read. “This is a serious blow to the freedom of expression. It’s capitulation to radical Islamic terrorism and its representatives in the Knesset.”

charlie-hebdo-cartoon21

Suddenly, when their own hateful activities are at risk it is a serious blow to the freedom of expression.  

LogoBut

It’s OK to petition against a Palestinian Member of Knesset, Hanin Zoabi, from being allowed to run again in the upcoming election.

Fascism has no limits as can be seen in the following report. (click on link to read)

Yisrael Beytenu protests ban on Charlie Hebdo distribution in Israel

CHARLIE ON THE STREETS OF JERUSALEM

Image ‘Copyleft’ by Carlos Latuff

From cartoons to reality

From cartoons to reality

Is the above what the Moldavian fascist wants to see on the streets of Jerusalem?

Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman called on party activists Sunday to buy “thousands” of copies of the controversial “Mohammed edition” of the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine, which they will then distribute to Israelis on a mass basis.

We can make cartoons also ...

We can make cartoons also …

Liberman: Threats Won’t Stop Hebdo Distribution

Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman on Sunday called on party activists to buy, and distribute, the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine.

Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman called on party activists Sunday to buy “thousands” of copies of the controversial “Mohammed edition” of theCharlie Hebdo satirical magazine, which they will then distribute to Israelis on a mass basis.

Liberman called for the mass purchase after bookseller Steimatzky decided to cancel an in-store event celebrating the sale of the issues on Monday.

“We will not allow Israel to be turned in to an ISIS-style fundamentalist state,” said Liberman, before embarking on a state visit to Russia and China.

“Warnings by Arab MKs that the state would be ‘responsible’ for the results of the sale of the magazine by Steimatzky constitutes the crossing of a red line by the Israeli Arab leadership.”

Liberman was referring to a letter sent to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu by Masud Ghnaim, the head of the United Arab List, who called the proposed sale by Steimatzky “dangerous and stupid.”

The feelings of Muslims would be badly hurt, he said, and “no one can predict what will happen” as a result.

Israeli book chain Steimatzky dropped plans for an in-store promotion of the Charlie Hebdo edition depicting the Prophet Mohammed in what Muslims consider an offensive manner.

Israel Radio said over the weekend that the chain had intended to hold a promotional event in a branch in the Tel Aviv area but later decided that orders for the issue – which has sparked sometimes deadly protests across the Muslim world – would now be taken only through its website.

In a statement, Steimatzky said that it believed in freedom of speech, and that it has been selling Charlie Hebdo for years and would continue to do so.

 

Report FROM

CHARLIE’S DOUBLE STANDARDS … #JeAiDoublesStandards

Charlie Hebdo Fired ‘Anti-Semitic’ Cartoonist For Ridiculing Judaism In 2009

The cartoon world’s double standards on freedom of speech…

sine

These are some of Latuff’s cartoons that speak a thousand words:

double-standard 2

double-standard 3

7

 

Charlie Hebdo mocks the prophet Muhammad through insulting cartoons and calls it satire. As a result, half of the magazine’s staff is wiped out by terrorists in the name of Allah. The massacre raises questions about “freedom of speech.” The cartoon world, media, governments and intellectuals all have double standards regarding the answer.

When the world was condemning the January 7th attack on the satirical magazine, Muslim heroes were being applauded and world leaders and dignitaries were walking in a march for unity, although it was not shoulder to shoulder:

parismarchCritics suggest images show dignitaries ‘didn’t lead march’ after all, but many still speak positively about display of global unity

Then came the breaking news – a reminder that 80-year-old Maurice Sinet, political cartoonist withCharlie Hebdo for 20 years, was fired in 2009 for his anti-Semitic cartoons mocking the relationship of former French President Sarkozy’s son with a wealthy Jewish woman.

Maurice Sinet, known to the world as Siné, faced charges of “inciting racial hatred” for a column he wrote in July 2009. “L’affaire Sine,” followed the engagement of Jean Sarkozy to Jessica Sebaoun-Darty, the Jewish heiress of a major consumer electronics company, the Darty Group. Commenting on rumours that Jean intended to convert from Catholicism to Judaism (Jessica’s religion) for social success, Siné quipped, “He’ll go a long way in life, that little lad.”

It didn’t take long for Claude Askolovitch, a high-profile political journalist, to accuse Siné of anti-Semitism. Charlie Hebdo‘s editor, Philippe Val, who re-published Jyllands-Postens controversial cartoons of the prophet Mohammed in the name of ‘freedom of press’ in 2006, agreed that the piece was offensive and asked Siné to apologize. Siné refused, saying, “I’d rather cut my balls off.” He was fired and taken to court by the Ligue Internationale Contre le Racisme et l’Antisémitisme (LICRA), an organization which works to promote racial tolerance. In December 2010, Siné won a €40,000 court judgment against his former publisher for wrongful termination.

Charlie Hebdo publishes cartoons insulting Islam and Muslims as well as Jesus and Christianity, and tags them as “freedom of speech.” However, in the case of Siné, it failed to stand firm on its provocative “freedom of speech” stance.

Carlos Latuff, a world renowned Brazilian cartoonist, told Daily Sabah, “It is an everlasting discussion, because what is freedom of speech and what is hate speech? Why are some subjects protected by freedom of speech and others not? Why can we mock some issues and cannot do so with others? Should Holocaust denial, for example, be included as freedom of speech, or racial hatred? See, for example, the treatment given by the Western mainstream media to Muhammad cartoons and the Holocaust cartoons.”

Latuff added that the motive behind the urge to mock Islam remains unknown. “Who knows? Hatred against Muslims, testing the limits of freedom of speech, mocking Muslims just for fun, who knows? However, the fact is that they [Charlie Hebdo editors] died not for a good cause, what could be seen as noble, but for provoking Muslims and feeding the hatred against Islam.”

Click HERE to read more …. includes offensive cartoons both to Jews and Muslims

*

RELATED …. Cartoonists united for Justice

We, cartoonists, illustrators, writers, editors, distributors, translators, critics and workers in the comic book industry, alongside people of conscience from countries all over the world, re-affirm our February 2014 call for the Angoulême International Comics Festival to drop all ties with the Israeli company Sodastream. Furthermore, we urge the Angoulême Festival, and all festivals, conventions, and celebrations of comics and cartooning art in which we participate, to reject any partnership, funding, or co-operation with any Israeli company or institution that does not explicitly promote freedom and justice for Palestinians, as well as equal rights and equality for Israeli Jews and Palestinians, including the Israeli government and its local consulates, so long as Israel continues to deny Palestinians their rights. 

80+ Cartoonists And Comics Workers Tell Comics Industry: ‘No Business As Usual With Israel’

(Image: Ethan Heitner)

(Image: Ethan Heitner)

The following press release was published today:

Lewis Trondheim (creator of the Angoulême mascot), Jacques Tardi, Jaime Hernandez, Alison Bechdel, Warren Ellis, Dylan Horrocks, Kate Beaton, Eleanor Davis, Ben Katchor, Jeet Heer, and Palestine Comics festival expand on 2014 letter to Angoulême Festival

More than 80 cartoonists and other workers in the comics industry, including colorists, writers, critics, and editors, from over 20 countries, signed an open letter released today addressed to Franck Bondoux, the head of the International Festival of Comics at Angoulême, which opens in France on January 29th.

The letter, a follow up to a 2014 letter, demands that he sever ties between the Festival and Sodastream, an Israeli manufacturing company complicit in the occupation of Palestinian land. The authors of the letter include 10 prize winners at Angoulême itself, two winners of the MacArthur “Genius Grant,” many Eisner and Ignatz awardees, and a Palestinian cartoonist previously imprisoned for his work by the Israeli military.

The organizers of the letter also released an accompanying statement, in the wake of the slaying of cartoonists Wolinski, Cabu, Honoré, Tignous and Charb, among many others in Paris this month. “These horrific acts of violence compel artists of the world to act urgently for a world where the dignity, freedom, and equality of all people are respected and promoted,” said cartoonist Ethan Heitner and writer Dror Warschawski, organizers of the open letter. “We affirm that the Palestinian boycott movement is one important step towards that vision, and we urge others to join us.”

The 2015 letter expands on its predecessor in several key ways. Its signatories include workers in the comics industry beyond cartoonists, including critics Jeet Heer and former heads of the Cité internationale de la bande dessinée Thierry Groensteen and Gilles Ciment, and organizers of the first-ever festival of comics held in Palestine, Palestine Comics, which opened in November of 2014.

The letter also addresses itself beyond Angoulême, to “all festivals, conventions, and celebrations of comics and cartooning art in which we participate.” Finally, the letter expands its target beyond Sodastream, to all “Israeli companies and institutions” complicit in ethnic cleansing, discrimination, and war crimes. Noting that Israel’s assault on Gaza in the summer 2014 alone killed over 2,100 Palestinians, the signatories urge, “No business as usual with Israel.”

 

*************

Open letter to:

Monsieur Franck Bondoux
Direction du Festival international de la bande dessinée
71 rue Hergé
16000 Angoulême

We, cartoonists, illustrators, writers, editors, distributors, translators, critics and workers in the comic book industry, alongside people of conscience from countries all over the world, re-affirm our February 2014 call for the Angoulême International Comics Festival to drop all ties with the Israeli company Sodastream. Furthermore, we urge the Angoulême Festival, and all festivals, conventions, and celebrations of comics and cartooning art in which we participate, to reject any partnership, funding, or co-operation with any Israeli company or institution that does not explicitly promote freedom and justice for Palestinians, as well as equal rights and equality for Israeli Jews and Palestinians, including the Israeli government and its local consulates, so long as Israel continues to deny Palestinians their rights.

(Image: Ethan Heitner)

(Image: Ethan Heitner)

We cannot accept our art being used to whitewash these crimes, as the Israeli Ministry of Foreign affairs has explicitly stated it will attempt to do through its “Brand Israel” campaign. Angoulême, a center of appreciation for comics internationally, should not be used in this manner.

We again urge you to sever ties between the Festival and Sodastream, and we extend our call to directors and organizers, editors and associations of comics and illustration around the globe. No “business as usual” with lsrael!

Sincerely,

Leila Abdul Razaq (USA), Zainab Akhtar (UK), Khalid Albaih (Sudan/Qatar), Albertine (Switzerland), Hilary Allison (USA), Enzo Apicella (Italy), Alex Baladi (Switzerland), Edd Baldry (UK/France), Edmond Baudoin (France, 3 Angoulême prizes), Kate Beaton (Canada), Alison Bechdel (USA), Sofiane Belaskri (Algeria), Faiza Benaouda (Algeria), Peter Blegvad (USA/UK, Angoulême prize in 2014), David Brothers Paul Buhle (USA), Nicole Burton (Canada), Jennifer Camper (USA), Gilles Ciment (France, former director of the Cité internationale de la bande dessinée in Angoulême from 2007 to 2014), Rob Clough (USA), Sean T. Collins (USA), Gianluca Costantini (Italy), Jean-Luc Coudray (France, Angoulême prize in 1990), Philippe Coudray (France, Angoulême prize in 2011), Molly Crabapple (USA), Pino Creanza (Italy), Marguerite Dabaie (USA), Bira Dantas (Brazil), Eleanor Davis (USA), Marcel « Lidwine » De la Gare (France, Angoulême prize in 1999), Dror (France), Warren Ellis (UK), Magdy El Shafee (Egypt), elchicotriste (Spain), Brigitte Findakly (France), Ganzeer (Egypt/USA), Jenny Gonzalez-Blitz (USA), Graphic History Collective (Sam Bradd, Sean Carleton, Robin Folvik, Mark Leier, Trevor McKilligan, Julia Smith) (Canada), Dominique Grange (France), Thierry Groensteen (France, former director of the Cité internationale de la bande dessinée in Angoulême from 1993 to 2001), Jeet Heer (Canada), Ethan Heitner (USA), Delphine Hermans (Belgium), Anaële Hermans (Belgium), Jaime Hernandez (USA), Dylan Horrocks (nominated for 2 Angoulême prizes in 2002, New Zealand), Igort (Italy, nominated in Angoulême in 2003), Hatem Imam (Lebanon), Jiho (France), Monica Johnson (USA), Ben Katchor (USA), Mazen Kerbaj (Lebanon), Peter Kuper (USA), Carlos Latuff (Brazil), Wilfrid Lupano (France), Rodolphe « Ohazar » Lupano (France), Katie Miranda (USA), Anne Elizabeth Moore (USA), Mric (France), José Muñoz (Argentina, 3 Angoulême prizes and Grand Prix in 2007), Ernest Pignon-Ernest (France), Maël Rannou (France), Patricia Réaud (France), Barrack Rima (Lebanon/Belgium), Mohammad Sabaaneh (Palestine), Amitai Sandy (Israel), Gabby Schulz (USA), Siné (France), Jean Solé (France), Philippe Squarzoni (France, nominated in Angoulême in 2003), Sylvain-Moizie (France, Angoulême prize in 2000 and in residence at the Cité internationale de la bande dessinée in Angoulême in 2014-2015), Tardi (France, 5 Angoulême prizes and Grand Prix in 1985), Seth Tobocman (USA), Lewis Trondheim (France, 2 Angoulême prizes and Grand Prix in 2006, creator of the Angoulême mascot), Guillaume Trouillard (France), Willis From Tunis (Tunisia), Jordan Worley (USA), Wozniak (France/Poland), yAce (France), Germano Zullo (Switzerland)

WHY THE PROPHET WOULD NOT/SHOULD NOT ASK FOR FORGIVENESS

‘All is forgiven’ states the latest cover toon at Charlie Hebdo, with yet another image of the Prophet Mohammed holding a ‘Je Suis Charlie’ sign. The edition was sold out hours after printing and went into a second one …. The Guardian reported that a record 3 million copies of the magazine, in 16 different languages, have been printed for the return to the newsstand on Wednesday. News sources claimed they were sold out within minutes.

FORGIVENESS?

FOR WHAT???

My censored version of the image

My censored version of the image

new-charlie-hebdo-coverjpg-a9ad9675cd23fc1c (1)

See here why the Prophet would not/should not have asked for forgiveness

Kudos to Sky News for refusing to show the image!

The ziopress referred to Sky’s actions as Moral Cowardice …. strange accusation coming from folks who have no morals whatsoever.

Read the linked post to see why Islam forbids images of the Prophet Mohammed

IS THERE A LESSON TO BE LEARNT FROM CHARLIE?

IS THERE A LESSON TO BE LEARNT FROM CHARLIE?

In the words of Vittorio Arrigoni  "STAY HUMAN"

In the words of Vittorio Arrigoni
“STAY HUMAN”

YES to the question above!

A very simple lesson indeed … there is no reason to offend! I will elaborate …

Recently a very dear friend presented me with a beautiful porcelain statue of Buddha from his native Sri Lanka. It was very similar to the one in the image below. I placed it on a shelf in my living room. To my surprise it offended some of my close relatives as it is forbidden by Jewish Law to possess graven images of ‘other gods’. They asked me to get rid of it and without making a fuss I placed it elsewhere where I alone can enjoy its serenity and beauty.

If my relatives in question were extremists they might have destroyed the statue and/or caused me bodily harm for possessing it. Neither happened.

Simple and to the point!

vs115e
The above raises another question; why is it permissible for a devout Jew to enter, or even pray in a mosque but not a church?

Islam, like it’s brother religion Judaism, forbids images for the simple reason that the Prophet Mohammed Himself was aware that if people saw his face portrayed by people, they would soon start worshiping Him. He spoke against such images, saying “I’m just a man.”

Therefore, there are no images or statues of the Prophet in mosques, unlike many churches which prominently display images of their various Saints or of Jesus Himself.

A more comprehensive discussion as to Why Islam forbids images of Mohammed can be read HERE.

The Cave of Machpelah in Palestine houses the tombs of our Father Abraham and His Family. It serves both as a mosque and a synagogue.

The Cave of Machpelah in Palestine houses the tombs of our Father Abraham and His Family. It serves both as a mosque and a synagogue.

No one but the extremists themselves benefit from extremism. We saw that after 9/11 … 

We saw it from the 'Christian' extremists

We saw it from the ‘Christian’ extremists

*

We saw it from the zionist extremists

We saw it from the zionist extremists

… and we see it today.

Whitewashing his own crimes for the world to see

Whitewashing his own crimes for the world to see

So why does Charlie continue to feed extremism, both Islamic and zionist? Satire is funny …. hatred certainly is not. Charlie has in its pages poked ‘fun’ at everyone at one time or another. That’s fine UNLESS it’s an insult and a spit in the face of millions of people throughout the world. That’s what they do when they depict images of the Prophet Mohammed in compromising or rude situations. They know it will only hurt people yet they continue to do it and plan on continuing as can be seen HERE.

Charlie Hebdo’s Next Issue to Feature Cartoon of Mohammed

The cover this week’s Charlie Hebdo shows a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed crying and holding up a “Je suis Charlie” sign.
WHY?
Surely the editors at Charlie Hebdo know that within the Muslim and zionist communities there are extremists, not as tolerant as the relatives I wrote about above. Why continue to feed them the ammunition they seem to thrive on? Was there not a lesson from the horrors of a week ago?
Image by Gianluca Costantini

Image by Gianluca Costantini

WHY I AM NOT CHARLIE

Since the brutal attack at the offices of Charlie Hebdo there have been vigils throughout the world simply stating ‘I AM CHARLIE’.

That one of those murdered happened to be a Jewish ‘cartoonist’ gave call to the zionists to pull their anti-Semite card and raise the false flag to the top of the pole as can be seen HERE.

Satire is meant to be funny, not hateful. Mad Magazine has kept us laughing for decades and never has there been an attack at their offices. Charlie Hebdo has a history of offending people, especially Muslims. There is definitely nothing funny about hatred or racism.

I am one of many that state without hesitation that I AM NOT CHARLIE!

What happened was wrong. There is no argument that could convince me otherwise,   BUT

(Continue reading this post after the image)

Cartoon by Sudanese artist Khalid Albaih, from Aljazeera.com

Cartoon by Sudanese artist Khalid Albaih, from Aljazeera.com

There is no “but” about what happened at Charlie Hebdo. Some people published some cartoons, and some other people killed them for it.  Words and pictures can be beautiful or vile, pleasing or enraging, inspiring or offensive; but they exist on a different plane from physical violence, whether you want to call that plane spirit or imagination or culture, and to meet them with violence is an offense against the spirit and imagination and culture that distinguish humans. Nothing mitigates this monstrosity. There will be time to analyze why the killers did it, time to parse their backgrounds, their ideologies, their beliefs, time for sociologists and psychologists to add to understanding. There will be explanations, and the explanations will be important, but explanations aren’t the same as excuses. Words don’t kill, they must not be met by killing, and they will not make the killers’ culpability go away.

To abhor what was done to the victims, though, is not the same as to become them. This is true on the simplest level: I cannot occupy someone else’s selfhood, share someone else’s death. This is also true on a moral level: I cannot appropriate the dangers they faced or the suffering they underwent, I cannot colonize their experience, and it is arrogant to make out that I can. It wouldn’t be necessary to say this, except the flood of hashtags and avatars and social-media posturing proclaiming #JeSuisCharlie overwhelms distinctions and elides the point. “We must all try to be Charlie, not just today but every day,” the New Yorker pontificates. What the hell does that mean? In real life, solidarity takes many forms, almost all of them hard. This kind of low-cost, risk-free, E-Z solidarity is only possible in a social-media age, where you can strike a pose and somebody sees it on their timeline for 15 seconds and then they move on and it’s forgotten except for the feeling of accomplishment it gave you. Solidarity is hard because it isn’t about imaginary identifications, it’s about struggling across the canyon of not being someone else: it’s about recognizing, for instance, that somebody died because they were different from you, in what they did or believed or were or wore, not because they were the same. If people who are feeling concrete loss or abstract shock or indignation take comfort in proclaiming a oneness that seems to fill the void, then it serves an emotional end. But these Cartesian credos on Facebook and Twitter — I am Charlie, therefore I am — shouldn’t be mistaken for political acts.

Among the dead at Charlie Hebdo: Deputy chief editor Bernard Maris and cartoonists Georges Wolinski, Jean Cabut (aka Cabu), Stephane Charbonnier, who was also editor-in-chief, and Bernard Verlhac (aka Tignous)

Among the dead at Charlie Hebdo: Deputy chief editor Bernard Maris and cartoonists Georges Wolinski, Jean Cabut (aka Cabu), Stephane Charbonnier, who was also editor-in-chief, and Bernard Verlhac (aka Tignous)

Continue reading this at Mondowiess

ZION RECREATES LIES ABOUT ISLAM

Two months ago I posted the following …..

THE CIA AND MOSSAD COMBINE FORCES TO ‘FIGHT’ TERRORISM

Just one way the US  and the West keeps the truth hidden

Just one way the US and the West hides the truth

Here’s another way ….

Ever hear of MEMRI? (Middle East Research Institute)

The institute was co-founded in 1998 by Yigal Carmon, a former Israeli military intelligence officer and Meyrav Wurmser, an Israeli-born, American political scientist. MEMRI states that its goal is to “bridge the language gap between the Middle East and the West”. Critics charge that it aims to portray the Arab and Muslim world in a negative light, through the production and dissemination of inaccurate translations and by selectively translating views of extremists while deemphasizing or ignoring mainstream opinions. (FROM)

Emphasis on Critics charge that it aims to portray the Arab and Muslim world in a negative light, through the production and dissemination of inaccurate translations and by selectively translating views of extremists while deemphasizing or ignoring mainstream opinions.

Consider me one of those ‘critics’!

From their own Site

MEMRI’s work directly supports fighting the U.S. War on Terror. Highly trained staff thoroughly translate and analyze open-source materials that include television programming, radio, newspapers, textbooks, and websites.

Every single day, MEMRI receives requests from members of the U.S. government, military, and legislature. Since September 11, 2001, the demand for this material has significantly increased – providing thousands of pages of translated documents of Arab, Iranian, Urdu, Pashtu, Hindi, Dari, and Turkish print media, terrorist websites, school books, and tens of thousands of hours of translated footage from Arab and Iranian television.

This video takes you from the halls of government to the briefing rooms of the U.S. military to the frontlines of counter-terrorism efforts, and demonstrates just how MEMRI has become – A Vital Component in the U.S. War on Terror.

Members of MEMRI’s Board of Advisors and Directors are bi-partisan and have honorably served Presidents Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama. Read more…

They even operate their own TV Network …. The Palestinian Authority often broadcasts clips on their own TV Network in their attempt to justify the occupation and ethnic cleansing policies of their zionist brothers. 

Regarding a recent video clip, British zionists are campaigning with it in an attempt to discourage a YES Vote in Parliament as to whether or not  recognise a Palestinian State.

In the clip, which was recently posted to the internet, Palestinian Sheik Omar Abu Sara in a sermon given in the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem asks the following of those Arab countries currently helping NATO to attack Islamic State:

“Whom are they fighting? Are they fighting the Jews? The Russians? The Hindus? They are fighting our brothers. These planes are bombing our brothers. Is the Al-Aqsa Mosque too far for them? Is Jerusalem too far for them? Are the Jews too far for them?”

It is sentiments like these that persist not just throughout Hamas but throughout the more respected Palestinian Authority of Mahmoud Abbas.

Here is a clip that was broadcast on Palestinian Authority television in which the PA Mufti of Jerusalem Muhammad Hussein urges his followers to kill Jews.

Could we expect a combination of the CIA and Mossad to portray the honest aspirations of the Palestinian people?

Hope you noticed that none of those passing by stopped to listen to this guy.

Apparently their video didn’t reach the audience they were hoping for …. (only 30,847 viewers) so they are trying again in desperation.

Here’s their ‘remake’ … (Only 301 views at this posting)

Tens of Arabs can be seen sitting or standing, watching the preacher. 

PATHETIC!

Full report from ziocrap file HERE

DEMONIZATION OF ARABS CONDEMNED BY AMERICAN RABBINICAL COUNCIL

 

Image 'Copyleft' by Latuff

Image ‘Copyleft’ by Latuff

“We cannot countenance a response to terror that resorts to wholesale demonization, advocates for the collective punishment of Israeli Arabs, or calls for the destruction or dismantling of Muslim holy places. Such rhetoric is anathema to the Jewish religious tradition and has no place in civil society. Such rhetoric is wrong and must be repudiated, whether it is voiced by lay leaders, community leaders or rabbis.”

Orthodox Leaders Condemn Rabbi Steven Pruzansky for ‘Demonization’ of Arabs

O.U. Issues Statement After Incendiary Blog Post

Rabbi Steven Pruzansky speaks to women at Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in Teaneck, N.J.

CONGREGATION BNAI YESHURUN
Rabbi Steven Pruzansky speaks to women at Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in Teaneck, N.J.

By JTA

A growing chorus of Orthodox leaders are speaking out against anti-Arab rhetoric following racially inflammtory statements by Steven Pruzansky, a prominent Teaneck, New Jersey rabbi.

After last week’s terrorist attack at a Jerusalem synagogue, Pruzansky, the spiritual leader of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun, wrote a blog post titled “Dealing with Savages” that said Arabs in the Land of Israel are the enemy and advocated their emigration or deportation. He also suggested moving the mosque atop the Temple Mount to Saudi Arabia.

“There is a war for the land of Israel that is being waged, and the Arabs who dwell in the land of Israel are the enemy in that war and must be vanquished,” Pruzansky wrote. The Nov. 21 post, which was subsequently deleted, was first reported by JTA on November 23.

On November 26, the Orthodox Union, of which Pruzansky’s synagogue is a member, issued a press release that that did not name him but said, “We cannot countenance a response to terror that resorts to wholesale demonization, advocates for the collective punishment of Israeli Arabs, or calls for the destruction or dismantling of Muslim holy places. Such rhetoric is anathema to the Jewish religious tradition and has no place in civil society. Such rhetoric is wrong and must be repudiated, whether it is voiced by lay leaders, community leaders or rabbis.”

The O.U. declined to elaborate further on the statement when asked by the Forward if it applied specifically to Pruzansky. But speaking on background, a senior O.U. official told the Forward, “By implication the statement applies to Rabbi Pruzansky’s statement.”

The Orthodox Union had invited Pruzansky to speak at the group’s annual convention next month and placed advertisements in Jewish newspapers heralding his appearance, but Pruzansky recently told organizers he’d be unable to make it.

Pruzansky, whose synagogue has 800 member families and is the largest in Teaneck, also has held prominent positions at the Rabbinical Council of America, where is an executive committee member and a former vice president. Until last month, he also led the RCA’s conversion beit din (rabbinical court) in Bergen County, N.J. The RCA’s executive vice president, Mark Dratch, told JTA that the RCA supports the OU’s statement on Pruzansky.

Rabbi Shmuel Goldin, the RCA’s most recent past president and the leader of Congregation Ahavath Torah in Englewood, N.J., was one of several rabbis in the Teaneck area who distanced themselves from Pruzansky’s remarks, NorthJersey.com reported.

“Rabbi Pruzansky’s statements reflect the frustration that he feels and that many of us feel as we view the unfolding events in the Middle East,” Goldin was quoted as saying. “However, his conclusions and recommendations certainly do not represent my view nor the view of many others in the Orthodox Jewish community.”

Mohamed El Filali, executive director of the New Jersey chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, was also cited in the report calling on mainstream Jewish leaders to speak out strongly against Jewish extremists.

And T’ruah, a rabbinic human rights group, launched a petition for rabbis and cantors to sign to pledge “using our religious voices to build the world with more love, not to destroy it with more hate.”

Pruzansky long has used his blog and synagogue pulpit not just to criticize Arab violence, but to denounce Israeli leaders he perceives as too timid or misdirected. In 1995, weeks before the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995, Pruzansky called Rabin a Judenrat — the term used to describe the Jewish councils that did the Nazis’ bidding during the Holocaust.

Earlier this month, he likened the New York Jewish Week to the Nazi newspaper Der Sturmer, prompting a rebuke from the RCA and a condemnatory editorial in the Jewish Week.

In a clarification on his blog after the Nov. 21 post, Pruzansky defended his remarks, saying his views were not outside the mainstream and noting that he had written that Arabs who are nonviolent and accept Israel as a Jewish state are welcome to stay in Israel (so long as they are not related to a terrorist or live in a village from which two or more terrorists have emanated, according to his view).

In an interview Tuesday with the Voice of Israel, Pruzansky said the Temple Mount should be closed to Arabs so they can feel the consequences of “someone in their midst [who] dared to raise a hand against a Jew.”

SELECTIVE VISION AND MEMORIES OF ZION

To maintain the Islamophoebic atmosphere of the day, this is what they are sending out these days ….

What about the son of an Israeli General? … I guess it’s not important to their agenda

How quickly they forget or just don’t care to remember  that there are TWO FACES OF TERRORISM in Israel today …

And yesterday as well …

Obviously in their eyes, a zionist cannot be a terrorist

TERRORISM IS LEGAL IN CANADA

The JDL is a Kahanist organization that has been banned in Israel and the United States as a terrorist group. Its Canadian branch has been implicated in a long line of vigilante violence and fear-mongering. The fact that such a piece of dreck can solicit in a respectable Jewish establishment should make us sick to our collective stomachs.

But it doesn’t. That’s because the North American Jewish community, like its Christian and atheist counterpart, is infected with the scourge of Islamophobia. I define Islamophobia in the same way I define anti-Semitism: the delegitimization of a faith and the propagation of stereotypes and prejudice against its adherents. And it is endemic in our community.

*

Jewish Defense League Meets Pastrami

By Menachem Freedman FOR

The register at Ben and Izzy’s Deli in Toronto / Courtesy of Menachem Freedman

*

When the news hit my Facebook feed that Ben and Izzy’s, a restaurant in Toronto, had been named “North America’s Top Kosher Deli,” I immediately packed my bags. Under the guise of visiting family, I began a pilgrimage to what shalomlife.org called “one of the best delis around.” I have to say — the pastrami was perfect, the chicken soup was superb, though the lack of celery soda seemed a bit blasphemous. But what was less appetizing was yet another reminder that the Jewish community is beautiful, vibrant, caring — but also tainted by racism and Islamophobia. It’s about time we speak out.

This sad reminder came to me at the end of my meal. Next to the register, by the charity boxes for orphanages and social programs, I saw a black box with a raised yellow fist. I nearly lost my brisket. The Jewish Defense League (JDL) is soliciting in the #1 kosher deli in North America.

The JDL is a Kahanist organization that has been banned in Israel and the United States as a terrorist group. Its Canadian branch has been implicated in a long line of vigilante violence and fear-mongering. The fact that such a piece of dreck can solicit in a respectable Jewish establishment should make us sick to our collective stomachs.

But it doesn’t. That’s because the North American Jewish community, like its Christian and atheist counterpart, is infected with the scourge of Islamophobia. I define Islamophobia in the same way I define anti-Semitism: the delegitimization of a faith and the propagation of stereotypes and prejudice against its adherents. And it is endemic in our community.

It’s easy to find Islamophobia in fringe movements like the JDL. But it can be found in quieter forms across the Jewish spectrum. It exists in “mainstream” organizations like Aish Hatorah. Aish, which runs synagogues and youth programs across the continent, was associated with and possibly responsible for the fear-mongering “Obsession” video series that taught thousands of Jewish students and Birthright participants (as well as cadets of the NYPD) about the supposed Muslim plot to take over America with Sharia law. It exists in our synagogues, of every denomination. This Rosh Hashana, a Conservative rabbi made waves when he said five percent of the world’s billion Muslims were dangerous extremists (actually, he called them “Koran-waving, Allah Akbar-howling Muslim murderers”) and the rest were comparable to Germans who did not protest the Nazi regime. The Conservative movement has not denounced him.

Again, as figures like Bill Maher and Glenn Beck make evident, Islamophobia is not only, or even primarily, a Jewish problem. But it’s far too prevalent in a community that has historically stood at the forefront of civil rights causes on this continent. Judaism has a special relationship with Islam, as two religions that are centered around good deeds, prayer and an emphasis on charity and community responsibility. We should be the last to buy the message that Islam is a primitive, violent religion — especially when Muslim countries provided Jews a safe, though not equitable haven from thousands of years of Christian massacres.

Throughout the world, Islamophobic laws have also affected Jews. Anti-ritual slaughter legislation in Europe affected kosher meat as well as Halal. The ban on religious headgear in France and the attempted ban in Quebec targeted the kippah as well as the hijab. Anti-sharia legislation affects our beit dins (Jewish courts) and the protection of agunot (women whose husbands refuse to grant them a divorce).

In the fight against Islamophobia, Jews are not passive bystanders; we are secondary targets. We have an obligation to fight ignorance and educate ourselves about the many facets of our fellow Abrahamic faith. We have a duty to fight Islamophobia and any form of discrimination. Speaking out against baseless hatred and prejudice — well, that’s even more Jewish than pastrami on rye.

« Older entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,220 other followers