France2 Steps in the Pallywood Doodoo… and what a revealing whopper!

A recent incident, well covered in both the blogosphere and (some) of the MSM, casts a brilliant light on some of the darker alleys of the media theater of war, particularly on the inner workings of Pallywood.

France2’s combination of “the tailor” Talal abu Rahme and his boss, “the chamberlain” Charles Enderlin, producing the Pallywood magnum opus al Durah, first revealed the workings of this disturbing symbiosis of Palestinian and Western media to me in October 2003.

Not content with his work, Enderlin, in one of those fits of arrogance that often befall those who fool too many people too often, got France2 to sue Philippe Karsenty for saying France2 had presented the staged Al Durah Hoax as real news. In the appeals case, the court demanded that Enderlin show the (Pallywood) footage (which he cut), and then presented the court with a video that used Pallywood footage to try and convince the court they didn’t use staged footage.

They deservedly lost in court.

Now we see them in a particularly egregious error that anyone who had been paying the slightest attention to what the issues involved in Palestinian footage would have caught:

I. The incident: On September 23, 2005, at a celebration of the “victory” of having driven the Israelis from Gaza after the “Disengagement,” a victory float of Hamas “activists” and their arsenal exploded, killing more than a dozen Palestinian civilians including several children drawn by the sight of the weaponry. Hamas tried, in true Pallywood style, to blame Israel, but with a less than united front between Hamas and Fatah, the real story leaked so badly the press did not snatch at the proferred bait. Of course, once the Israelis were no longer to blame, the story — Palestinian militants kill Palestinian civilians — had no legs. For the MSM, it died there.

II. The resurrection of the mutilated flesh: On January 1, 2009, Mounir1426 put up one of his first videos at LiveLink entitled, ISRAEL CARNAGE CIVILIANS CHILDREN GAZA. The explanation offered: Israel just bombed a large civilian street market in Gaza. His logo reads: FOR GAZA.

III. Viral Spread: The video spread rapidly particularly in Muslim and radical anti-Zionist circles, with half a million hits in some cases. Including a French site. [Documentation of its viral spread welcome here.]

IV. The immediate response of the critical blogosphere nails the video as incorrect. Already Sunday, January 4, Little Green Footballs summarized the discussion to that point. Even the poster of the video admitted error (although he refused to take down the libelous running header for fear of “losing the conversational thread that would ensue with changing it).

V. France2 runs with it: On the afternoon, Monday, January 5, 2009 France2 ran the following program in which they both reported Palestinian claims of a bomb hitting a house and killing a family of five, and then this report of a Gaza market place:

The narrators voice (not Charles Enderlin but that of Renaud Bernard, a signatory of the embarrassing letter of support for Charles after his loss in court) tells us:

“To show the violence of the combat, Arab televisions and Internet broadcast these images, photographed by a telephone. It would be a question [il s’agirait] of a missile strike on the first of January. The military [in the footage] wear the Hamas armband. In the crowd there are military, but also many civilian corpses.

Analysis

This sequence of events is immensely revealing about the dynamics, the driving forces that keep up Pallywood inertia, long after they’ve been brought to light. In a sense, this is the “Adnan al Haj” incident of the war, the poster-child for how the war has been waged in the media theater, and prima facie evidence of the perduring MSM attraction to Pallywood footage.

First, note that the original incident is actually a terrifying example of the contempt for human life that the people in Hamas — and many other Palestinian leaders — have for the lives of their civilians. To parade with live ammunition so badly maintained that it explodes in front of gawking youth at a demonstration, renders our legal term “criminal negligence” impoverished. This is a terribly and terribly revealing insight into the mentality of people enlisted in a death cult.

Of course, as with the Gaza Beach tragedy a year later, Hamas tried to blame Israel for their work — the classic scapegoating instinct that informs so much of Pallywood. At the time, given the presence of an opposing Palestinian voice (political rival Fatah), their efforts failed. But since the MSM showed no interest in the affair once it violated their framing narratives, what might have offered Western audiences an important insight into the dynamics of Palestinian political culture, failed to make much of an impact in the MSM.

But it stayed in the toxic blogosphere and reappeared as a Hamas originally wanted to use it — an accusation against Israel for precisely the brutality that Hamas directs, not at Israeli civilians, but at their own! It would be harder to find a more morally corrupt act of disinformation than this, even though such deeds abound in cyberspace.

Second, note how rapidly France2 was forced to retract, from the action of the blogosphere. This is, in a sense, the equivalent victory for the French empirically-critical blogosphere, whose gestation period benefited from the revelations of the Al Durah case, and which had already made itself felt when France2 circulated their stunningly ignorant petition for Charles Enderlin. The many comments on the Figaro article about it are overwhelmingly critical of France2 and fully aware of the links between this and the Al Durah affair. As one punned, “Pourvu… que sa Dura. [“As long as/would that it last/s.”]

The apology of Etienne Leenhardt, Adjunct Director of Information at France2, is revealing:

It is an error on our part to have broadcast these images, which in fact, date from 2005. The sequence that we broadcast was supposed to ilustrate the war of images on the Internet. The people who prepared the subject went too fast. It’s a good warning inoculation for our production unit. It reminds us to be very attentive on verifying our sources. We will present our excuses to our viewers tomorrow [Tuesday], during the JT of 1 PM.

Arlette Chabot, key player in the Al Durah trial, added her dismissive apologies — “In any case it’s not a manipulation, and the diffusion of the images only lasted 10 seconds…”

Note that the France2 team in Paris had every opportunity to check the viability of this video on the internet before running with it. A half a minute would have revealed the real story to any minimally competent fact checker. But it’s actually worse: France2 is the poster child for Western media dupe to Pallywood. They were forced to show (and felt compelled to censure!) their footage before a packed courtroom, and when they tried to defend themselves with their own video, they made more mistakes.

Part of what makes this video so shocking to people who know this material, is how sloppy this is. And it doesn’t stop at one piece of footage. It’s a whole mentality, fed by a systematic lack of familiarity with the issues at play.

Apparently the whole fiasco wasn’t warning enough. France2 and Enderlin tried to maintain their dignity even as it maintained a flatlined learning curve.

And what about the documentary that came to their defense that warned against toxic content on the internet? Surely they knew about that.

So, une petite piqure, a little shot innoculating them from missteps is actually pretty weak language. France2 actually participated in the very viral war of images — on the side of the haters, on the side of those who are destabilizing Arab governments throughout the Middle East, and tearing up the streets of Paris and London.

This is hardly a “petite bavure,” a little slip. On the contrary, this incident deserves closer attention and denunciation. Fortunately, call for serious censure has come from a number of anti-raciste organizations in France, including LICRA the one whose director is supposed to do the investigation into the Al Durah case. France2 cannot be happy.

Note the careful circumlocutions and the framing of the presentation: the narrator makes it clear this is not France2 footage, that it may be suspicious (although that word is never uttered). He may well know that this is unrealiable but wants to use it anyway.

And the reason for that, is that this footage fits into his narrative seamlessly: “Israelis slaughter Palestinian civilians mercilessly.” The preceding scene covered a strike that Palestinian sources claim came from an Israeli naval vessel firing off the coast. Then, to drive home the point, he runs with the toxic footage.

The narrative is clear: Everything we ever read about how Western imperialists engaged in rampant, genocidal slaughter of native populations… is true again, of the Israelis. Think a scene from The Last Samurai, where he feverishly remembers the slaughter of Indian civilians… that’s the Israelis.

(The bitter irony of it all, is that the Arabs are unquestionably frustrated genocides, who openly declare their intentions to anyone who cares to listen.)

What this incident reveals most strikingly is what one might call the irresistible appeal that MSM reporters — especially Europeans like the folks at France2 — have for footage and stories that make Israel look bad, or even worse, like the most ruthless murderers around. Little truffles of moral Schadenfreude that make Europeans feel so superior to the Israelis, a sense that permeates the challenges posed to them by TV anchors with limited understanding of the conflict. With such bait within reach, our journalist could not resist snapping at it.

The wretched irony here is that had Stephane Malleterre and his Canal+ crew, who did an investigative report on the toxic elements on the web, rather than putting Philippe Karsenty and me in the same bag with Holocaust Deniers and 9-11 Truthers as “conspiracy nuts,” but showed how France2 had fed a worldwide hatred by being duped by Talal abu Rahmeh, then perhaps this might have been avoided. Had Canal+ held its colleagues at France2 up for criticism as dupes of this conspiratorial toxic web culture, rather than smeared us, who know? Maybe France2 would have already gotten their “inoculation”?

And so, the cost of spreading the toxic environment that fuels the street demonstrations, that rally useful fools like Annie Lennox, France2 feeds the fatal addiction of Europeans for anything that gives them a sense of moral superiority to the Israelis. Alas, what a tragedy for everyone, Palestinians included.

pouring gas on jihad ansm

39 Responses to France2 Steps in the Pallywood Doodoo… and what a revealing whopper!

  1. oao says:

    Little truffles of moral Schadenfreude that make Europeans feel so superior to the Israelis, a sense that permeates the challenges posed to them by TV anchors with limited understanding of the conflict.

    that’s one driver, no doubt.

    but i think there is another: the europeans, part. the french are scared shitless of their unassimilated, violent muslim populations (the police does not dare enter large swaths of cities where they reside, and cannot control their violence). this creates an atmosphere of “israel is a problem, it should be eliminated” which the MSM senses and reinforces by these videos.

  2. abu yussif says:

    just curious about one point: i’m confused about the references to jihadists as “arabs”. aren’t arabs in the middle east primarily composed of essentially muslims and christians? do we explain the iranian element behind the palestinian, syrian, and lebanese proxies as promoters of the “arab” cause? or is iran’s interest of a, say, religious motivation?

    i can understand how someone would not want others “putting Philippe Karsenty and me in the same bag with Holocaust Deniers and 9-11 Truthers as “conspiracy nuts,”” but is castigating all arabs who are non-jihadist, christian/non-muslim, jew-loving (yes, there are), israel-loving (yes, there are), anti-muslim, secular, and indifferent in with the radical islamists with the inaccurate label “arabs”?

  3. RiP says:

    Wow, it seems that Augean Stables have a secret fan in the Czech TV (our little middleeuropean BBC):
    http://www.ceskatelevize.cz/ivysilani/209411058250111-168-hodin/
    Time: 17:17, Smrt myšáka Farfúra (Death of Farfour the Mouse) goes against all that we hear from MSM and that is being criticised here…

  4. oao says:

    abu,

    those who know enough about the ME and the conflict make the proper distinctions.

    in general when the term arab is is used in this context, it means muslim arabs (although there are christian exceptions).

    the iranian behavior is religiously driven, but reinforced by its desire to dominate the ME. some of the arabs, part. sunnis, are not in love with iran, which is part of the reason hamas/hezbollah are not getting too much support from them.

    the core thing to be remembered is that about the only thing that unifies arabs (and muslims) is hatred of israel and the jews. were israel to disappear they would be immediately at each other’s throst. then, of course, jiahd against the west will become the next active unifier.

  5. abu yussif – I think you ask a good question. I have thought about this too and here is my opinion for what it’s worth.

    During violent conflict it is human nature to become very suspicious toward any person that has characteristics that can be be generally associated with the enemy – anything that allows a distinction to be made – correctly or incorrectly – logically or not.

    Parts of the brain that react to danger (amygdala) are designed to generalize and not worry about distinction. The greater the danger the broader the generalizing. Some insecure people in the US watch the news and I am sure now experience irrational fear of any foreigner, anyone who doesn’t speak English, anyone who has a beard and dark complexion, etc.

    Most terrorists by far that have attacked the West, that have hijacked commercial planes, etc. are Arabs or they look like Arabs or they self-identify as Arabs in mannerisms and dress – like many anti-Israel demonstrators on the news these days wearing kafiyahs and chanting “Allahu Akbar”.

    Fearing anyone who matches that image in any way is an instinctive survival strategy that works. There’s little survival cost fearing someone who means you no harm. There’s great cost not recognizing someone who wants to kill you.

    One good thing is this is an emotional reaction. It will go away if and when Arabs are no longer such easily generalized enemies of the West.

    Also, there are many Westerners who understand this and who know that all Arabs are not our enemy. I’m one. Letters like yours that gently point this out are also helpful.

  6. oao says:

    Some insecure people in the US watch the news and I am sure now experience irrational fear of any foreigner, anyone who doesn’t speak English, anyone who has a beard and dark complexion, etc.

    seems to me, watching the rallies and riots, that their irrational response is towards the juice, not the arabs — and we know what that is called. if it were towards arabs, it would not be that irrational at all. they are the only violent ones, and in the US too.

    add to this the fact that those suspicious towards the arabs are threatened or sued or attacked, and what do you think you get?

    check out the demonstration of moonbats in SF. tons of violent and idiotic inciters to murders and who does the police take away? the only pro-israel guy quietly holding a peaceful sign. this replicates police behavior in the rest of the west.

    the dhimmitude is exploding and once people accept it, it’s over.

  7. abu yussif says:

    oao & pelican,

    nice explanations, but they still miss the point. so should i call, say, all brits “anglicans” or all jews “zionists”? sure, not all are zionists and even some are anti-zionist, but according to your logic this is an appropriate stereotype. as with arabs, it’s a close enough generalization so why not?

    iran does not support the arab cause in any way. it supports the islamic(specifically shi’ite) and anti-israel reasons for eliminating israel. if the sunnis beat them to it, will they become less interested in supporting hizbullah, hamas, etc?

    the islamic element is not secondary, but primary by far. to misidentify one’s enemy is to fundamentally misunderstand things. sure the vast majority of israel’s immediate enemies are arab, but the christians in all practicality (and not to mention their curious absence in active participation) are non-players/uninvolved. the christians may have a land dispute with the jews but are they ready to do anything remotely jihad-like or even relating to taking up arms of any sort?

    if those of us know the distinction, why not be accurate in what we say? it helps everyone, even ourselves, in so many ways.

  8. E.G. says:

    abu yussif,

    As I understand it, using the Arab term here is a shortcut, given the disproportion of non-Arabs and non-Moslems vs. Moslem Arabs in the ME. I think most people here are aware of the many distinctions among the diverse populations composing the ME.

    I also think (quite sure actually) that Israel, and Israel’s supporters do not conceive either all Arabs, or all Moslems, or all non-Arab and non-Moslem people in the region (and the world) as enemies. On the contrary, Israel deals even with (mostly Arab populated, and Arab ruled) countries that have not (yet) signed a peace treaty with her.

    And please, don’t forget the Lebanese Christian involvement. Or Anwar Sadat’s FM’s Boutros Boutros-Ghali’s religion, for example.

    I rarely read Lebanese press, but I’ve often read articles dealing with Christian’s (and some other minorities’) problems in the ME in the Jerusalem Post and in Yediot Aharonot.
    In Le Monde too, but they’re usually inserted as examples of Israeli brutality in the Territories ruled by the P.A.

  9. abu yussif says:

    eg,

    if labeling israel’s jihadist problem “arab” as a “shortcut”, what is that accomplishing? does it streamline, facilitate, or crystallize our grasp of the facts, or is it out of laziness? so we can call all jews “zionists”? how about all israelis “zionists”? just wondering if this corresponding shortcut is suitable.

    and am i correct in assuming your inclusion of egyptians and and, say, lebanese & syrian druze as “arabs” too?

  10. abu – You are the one who missed the point. You asked why the West tends to stereotype Arabs implying that it is irrational to do so.

    I offered an explanation – it is irrational but it is human nature to stereotype an enemy who wants to kill you. Human brains do it automatically.

    You reply – but isn’t that irrational?

    I did not say it was rational. I said it was human nature – which means it was not rational, it was not a reasoned conclusion.

    You persist – asking what’s to be gained from irrational stereotyping?

    I’ll say it one more time. Your life is to be gained. There is little or no cost fearing someone irrationally who means you no harm. There is great cost failing to fear someone who intends to kill you. Evolution has neatly solved this problem – by designing brains to over-identify possible enemies.

    If you want to talk about how unfair it all is go ahead but that’s an ethical question. At the end of the day – when people are being attacked by an enemy – those who stereotype will be more suspicious of threats and will survive better than those who are less suspicious. In future generations those prone to stereotype their enemies will be more represented in the population because their ancestors survived better.

    That’s just how it is and that’s why all humans stereotype threats to their survival.

  11. andrew says:

    It should be pointed out that the France 2 network
    only “apologized” for having made a broadcast with
    an inaccurate date, not for their interpretation of
    the images, which fully conformed with Hamas’. This
    is just the same as retracting a wrong claim that some
    drug trafficking takes place on the 3rd floor of the
    building owned by Mr soandso, only to imply tacitly that
    it takes place on the 4th.

  12. Cynic says:

    abu yussif,

    For many in the West Jews have to be zionists (going by the media) just as American and British Jews are considered “dual loyalty” risks, and Israelis, well nazis. For some untold reason Muslims and their loyalty to Islam above all else are not viewed as being a risk.
    And when one gets those Christian clergy gun running for the PLO especially after Arafat and co., had slaughtered thousands of their kind in Lebanon, and those bishops from the Sabeel organization behaving in the manner they do, demonizing Jews etc., well I suppose it becomes too much trouble differentiating one’s enemies into separate entities.
    Yes Islam is the primary one by far, but unfortunately when the Christian communities don’t distance themselves they tend to blend into the crowd.
    In 1976 the Israelis didn’t have to go out of their way to help those Christian communities in South Lebanon, but they did and not much thanks they got from the Vatican and Greek Orthodox Church or the Angicans. They could have kept the border closed and worried themselves with other things.

    Way back in 2003 Archbishop Atta Allah Hana praised the suicide bombings of Israelis. He wanted to set up an Islamic-Christian union to free Palestine from the river to the sea.

  13. E.G. says:

    abu yussif,

    You’re right in pointing a certain degree of generalisation that using “Arab” indicates. I don’t think pan-Arabism is a term coined by anyone here, though.
    Indeed, when it comes to discussing some specific issues, the term is often unpacked: I recall at least 2 discussions here, on Israeli Arabs (following the Kippur riots and following one of the Bulldozer attacks in J’lem) where indeed finer distinctions were made (inter alia, by me).

    But I think you’re wrong in writing that Israel has a Jihadi problem. It’s the other way around: Jihadis have a problem with Israel.
    Not all Arabs are Jihadists.

    Unfortunately, I’ve read/heard the Zionist-Jew-Israeli confusion so often during many years – still today, with the rise of Judeophobic acts. So I very well understand your indignation. I’m glad to read/hear more and more independent voices like yours, because in most ME countries the nature of the regime has made it difficult if not impossible for dissonant voices to be heard. And in many Western countries, community rules also impose consonance (due to solidarity).

    To the best of my knowledge, most Egyptians are Arabs (especially after driving out the Jewish minority and, more recently, the Christians). The Druze are a different story. I never found out whether they define themselves as Arabs (if you can provide this info – please do), but I do know that they’re not Moslem and that their allegiance traditionally goes to the ruler of their land.

  14. abu yussif says:

    pelican,

    i’m not seeing how trying to have an semi-intelligent conversation about how we here discuss something is life-threatening.

    cynic,

    the christian community is not blameless, but often the leadership of those communities do not represent the population’s sentiments. they are irredeemably corrupt, everyone knows that. as for speaking out, clearly you have never lived with family where muslims as your next-door neighbors.

    eg,

    egyptians are not arabs, though some like to refer to themselves as such. they are a different race altogether. my point is that the common denominator around the world, from the philippines to pakistan to western sahara the common denominator to all of this is islam. we can resort to fear tactics and populism to shape our opinions, it’s a free world. or you can go with the facts.

  15. E.G. says:

    abu yussif

    Didn’t you argue (in #2) that the populations are more diverse than just Islamic?

    I think we all differentiate leadership from population. And I’m the one who mentioned the great freedom of speech in most ME countries.

    Are you trying to say that Jihadic Islam is the problem?

  16. oao says:

    nice explanations, but they still miss the point. so should i call, say, all brits “anglicans” or all jews “zionists”? sure, not all are zionists and even some are anti-zionist, but according to your logic this is an appropriate stereotype. as with arabs, it’s a close enough generalization so why not?

    every social generalization has exceptions, that does not stop us from generalizing. the vast majority of arabs are sunni muslims amd shia mulsims. it is mainly to them that we refer to when we say arabs and about the only thing that unites them is hatred of jews.

    this is not the same as calling the british anglicans, because most british are secular and even the anglicans are not terribly driven by religion. this is not the case with muslim arabs.

    in fact muslims and arabs are different than christians in that their religion is a fascist and supremacist political ideology which compels them to murderous jihad. can you say the same about any other religion?

  17. oao says:

    abu,

    i already argued that the islamic factor is central.
    however, islam is an arab religion and it caught in the arab world becaus it is rooted on and suited to arab culture.

  18. E.G. says:

    andrew,

    It’s even worse. The great professional chain suggested that some sort of “Human error” occurred, you know, sh*t happens… and got away with it. It’s forgiven and forgotten.

  19. E.G. says:

    Not directly linked to the France 2 incident, philosopher Robert Redeker (who had to hide after an op-ed “Fatwa-ed” as Islamophobic) published an interesting op-ed in today’s Le Figaro.

    Here’s a translated excerpt (emphases mine):

    [T]he rallies, in France, signal a novel feature that carries a worrying future [message]: they’re the outcome of the encounter between the TV and the Mosque. As we all know, TV is a hot medium, hostile to elaborate thinking, [inducing] emotionally generated identification. TV is often the only culture in [poor] suburbs. In this case, we deal with this emotional background to ethnic and religious identification processes. Identifying with the rioters on the 2nd Intifada produced, as we recall, a great wave of anti-Semitism in French suburbs. Today’s rallies are produced by identification not with the victims, about which we know nearly nothing, but with the images of Gazan victims as TV spills them upon [public] opinion.

    Let’s take a closer look at this notion of the image as object of ethnic and religious identification. TV is a medium that prevents understanding of either causes and effects or of context, partly because it’s the medium of the instant, that retains time to the instant, that concentrates all the emotional weight on the moment of the image, and partly, given the pressure of keeping audience with the chain, [because it] excludes the lengthy, tedious, anti-specacular, [yet] indispensible explanations that are necessary in order to disengage from the identification, disengage so as to better comprehend. The Islamic colouring of these rallies, the emotional content of the identifications at the origin of these rallies, testify of the influence of Islam, of the Mosque. The majority of participants expressed themselves in a perspective of Moslem solidarity. The development of Islam in France is no stranger to the success of these rallies. We’re really far away from the May 1968 rallies, where [students, people] called for freedom, exalting values most of which are incompatible with Islam. Yesterday, the French street […] was light-years afar from 1968 […] it resembled any street in the Arab world in turmoil, those of Egypt for example, where the same rallies took place, their clones, with the same flags and the same slogans.

  20. EG re:#19

    Damned good analysis. The image connects directly to the emotions that control behavior. It requires no intellectual process to be understood.

  21. oao says:

    the analysis is true as it stands. however, there is at least one ommission and one commission error:

    1. the audience and the journalists, due to the collapse of education in the west, has been rendered devoid of kknowledge and ability to reason. this produces uses of tv which serve them both. if the two sides were knowledgeable and able to reason (and APPRECIATED BOTH), it would be harder for tv to act as it does.

    2. the vast majority of those who riot do not do so because they are affected by the tv images. they are using those images to do what they constantly want to do anyway, that is to attack the jews and western society. one has to listen to what they scream to realize this.

    the tv is a tool. it can be used for good and for bad. it depends on the quality of audience and media as to which occurs.

    pelican, you’re again wrong. everything can be better understood via intellect.

  22. aoa – Your intellect has failed you again. ;-)

    I think intellect is a powerful tool that offers the only path to understanding because understanding is an intellectual task. I think understanding is good. The way to really understand is to approach a topic with no emotional bias. Even then it won’t be easy but at least you have a chance.

    My premise is that humans always do what emotionally feels right for them. They seldom use their passionless intellect to guide them.

    Instead they absorb their worldviews through the emotional events that occur in their lives. That’s why so many liberals have irrational views of conflict and war and what causes it. They are not dumb. They are largely products of their past emotions. i.e. their Vietnam experience.

    Calling them dumb, improperly educated and unable to think properly is objectively wrong. It’s an example of an emotionally-driven view IMO. This is the result, no doubt of past emotional experiences in your life. Your posts are often written in a way that reveals strong anti-liberal emotions. I don’t blame you for that. I’m just saying those emotions are produced by irrational beliefs that you picked up – not by some objective examination of liberal brains.

    My premise is that emotion, not intellect, is the driver of human behavior – yet almost anyone will tell you that they (and those who agree with them) are objective thinkers. They’ll also say that those who disagree with them are dumb, improperly educated and unable to think properly. I think your posts prove my point.

  23. oao says:

    My premise is that humans always do what emotionally feels right for them. They seldom use their passionless intellect to guide them.

    but i already agreed to that, which is obvious.

    my point is to explain why this occurs, which involves analysis and understanding, which requires intellect, knowledge and ability to reason.

    Calling them dumb, improperly educated and unable to think properly is objectively wrong.

    well, you see, it’s your interpretation of what I say that they are dumb, i did not call them dumb. i said that they are improperly trained/educated to appreciate knowledge reason. without the proper tools the only thing they can is to apply emotions. there is no doubt that many are also dumb, but mostly are dumbed down, which is different.

  24. abu yussif says:

    15,

    that’s basically what i’m saying. the british (non-muslims) may be virulently anti-israel but they’re not going to take up arms over the issue.

    16,

    your statement “in fact muslims and arabs are different than christians in that their religion is a fascist and supremacist….” doesn’t make sense to me. arab is an ethnic designation. christian or muslim is religion. one can be an arab christian or arab muslim, or even arab jew. that’s why you can have a pakistani muslim but not a pakistani arab (unless you mean an arab with pakistani citizenship, but still the question of which religion remains).

    17,

    if, as you say, “islam is an arab religion and it caught in the arab world becaus it is rooted on and suited to arab culture” – then explain why in the arab world there have always been significant numbers of arab christians, while in say, pakistan, iran, afghanistan, and indonesia the populations have statistically insignificant numbers of anything except islam? sounds like islam took root much deeper in other places than the arabs could have dreamed.

  25. oao says:

    the british (non-muslims) may be virulently anti-israel but they’re not going to take up arms over the issue.

    they don’t have to. they become powerful by political or violent means and they distort british policies to suit them. which is what is happening in europe. you can already see beginnings of dhimmitude out of cowardice and appeasement. look at how europe cannot control violent muslims and are unwilling to defend their jewish citizens.

    one can be an arab christian or arab muslim, or even arab jew.

    not aware of any arab jews.

    anyway, as I explained, there is a reason why christian arabs are a minority in the ME.

    then explain why in the arab world there have always been significant numbers of arab christians

    my guess is probably historical context, and the consequences of being a christian in a muslim world.
    but I don’t presume to have expertise in that area. however, I am trying to acquire some, though, I have just ordered some books that might offer some answers.

    sounds like islam took root much deeper in other places than the arabs could have dreamed.

    it was spread by the sword and in some cases it was a reaction to other dominant religion (hindo in india). but these are guesses. historical and cultural context were probably at work.

    the important point is that islam was INVENTED by arabs and therefore must reflect their culture.

  26. Cynic says:

    abu yussif,
    clearly you have never lived with family where muslims as your next-door neighbors.

    But I have worked with Christians who lived in the same town (Dabouriyeh) as Muslims and the oppressive existence they had especially at Ramadan.
    And I met Christians from Nazereth who let slip the tensions, especially during the lead up to 2000.
    But then the Jews were dammed if they did and dammed if they didn’t.

    I had several experiences of having to pass Arab villages on the way to and from work and let’s say that I was pleased that I did not have them for neighbours.
    But amazingly if you visit parts of Afula and other towns you will find Arabs living peacefully alongside Jews. It never came to my attention of the Jews behaving in that typical overbearing Muslim manner.

  27. Cynic says:

    while in say, pakistan, iran, afghanistan, and indonesia the populations have statistically insignificant numbers of anything except islam?

    Pakistan slaughtered millions of Bengalis and for example Assad of Syria belongs to a group, Alawite, that is persecuted in Pakistan as not being Muslim and treated worse than untouchables,. The Iranians have persecuted a sect so much that their spiritual centre is the Bahai temple in Haifa where they have found sanctuary.Indonesia has has been typically harsh of non-Muslims especially those of Chinese descendents and Afghanistan, well just look at the manner in which the Taliban behaved. Iran, the Persians, has mistreated the Arabs of Southern Iran so basically the answer is that they have allowed no other groups to exist. Basically what the Muslims are doing to the Copts in Egypt. Slowly but surely grinding them into the dust.
    As for Lebanon well enough has been said about that place, but then Brazilians of Lebanese descent root for the Palestinians and so does the Syrian Christian community there. Go figure.

  28. aoa – I ran across this today. Here is all-time world chess champion Bobby Fischer whose brain certainly ranks near the all-time top in computing power.

    Yet, he is one of the most vicious non-Muslim, non-Arab anti-semites I’ve ever seen. The human race is full of such examples where emotional belief easily overpowers the minds of even the most brilliant humans – and renders them completely incapable of reaching reasoned conclusions.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=px2PoGr0AkE&eurl=http://theeprovocateur.blogspot.com/2009/01/video-of-day_14.html&feature=player_embedded

  29. oao says:

    It never came to my attention of the Jews behaving in that typical overbearing Muslim manner.

    christians are not supremacists. muslims are.

    Have you seen this video?

    yup. europe is gone. forget it. I fear for the jews, but as for the europeans, they deserve what they’ll get.

    Yet, he is one of the most vicious non-Muslim, non-Arab anti-semites I’ve ever seen.

    quite familiar with the specimen. kooks can be found at all levels of intellect, but chances are better at the extremes.

  30. E.G. says:

    Cynic & oao,

    The video – Police was ensuring the right to free-speech. Incidentally also protecting property (the hotel’s entrance). The scary nature of this and other rallies is in their many intimidating features.
    There seems to be a policy of letting the local Moslems express their hate via democratic means (i.e. rallies, op-eds), in hope that once it’s publicly expressed they’ll calm down. I sure hope there’s a plan B, because they’ll not calm down. On the contrary, getting protected for the anger and hate expressed (a) refuels the hatred (b) is interpreted as a sign of authorities’ weakness that in turn may give way to more vigorous intimidation attempts.

  31. E.G. says:

    Just to keep with the subject.
    The French “Conseil Supérieur de l’Audiovisuel” was called by the Jewish umbrella org. about the state’s chain “mishap” and the venerable council issued a warning to the chain requesting it to “respect its obligation to honestly inform the viewers”. They also reminded the poor taxpayer funded chain that it really needs to keep a “particular vigilance in the exercise of its editorial responsibility, especially in matters concerning the verification of the exactness of broadcast information.”

    All comforted?

  32. Cynic says:

    E.G.
    The video – Police was ensuring the right to free-speech.
    But when the shoe’s on the other foot the police sure know how to oppress a counter-protestor.

    German police officials in the cities of Duisburg and Düsseldorf, located in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, prohibited pro-Israeli supporters from displaying Israeli flags.

  33. E.G. says:

    Cynic,

    The authorities are very scared of what they call “inter-communitarian” clashes – Moslems attacking juice. So anything that might be deemed as a provocation is verboten (and we know that the juice’s specialty is provoking hatred towards themselves, don’t we?). They also know that attacking the juice is only one preliminary aspect. There’s a lot of under-reporting going about “regular people” aggressed and Churches/Temples attacked.
    All they seek is to let the storm pass with minimum short-term damage. Juice’s outrage is not violent and can easily be contained. Why go out of the way?

  34. Cynic says:

    Here’s another for what it’s worth, this time from Canada:
    United under the swastika

    At a protest in front of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s constituency office in southwest Calgary January 2nd, Gazan supporters called the cops to complain when one man showed up waving an Israeli flag. There were 150 pro-Palestinian protestors, but the single Israeli supporter was told by police that he must leave or be charged with “inciting civil disorder,”

  35. oao says:

    yield to the bully and see what you get.

    i very much doubt they have a plan B. what you’re looking at is the end of europe.

    cynic,

    in america too. i mentioned the violent moonbat rally in SF and the police a single guy standing quietly with a peaceful sign close by.

    once these crowds learn that they are not only tolerated, but they can be effective intimidators, just watch what’ll happen.

  36. oao says:

    folks,

    assume that the west is no more. the sooner you accept it the less shocks to your system will happen.

  37. […] recently wrote in a recent post about a notable media misrepresentation from the Gaza War coverage: Note the careful […]

  38. […] made Bob Simon the butt of my movie, but there were plenty of examples to draw from, that continued throughout Operation Cast Lead). Now, perhaps because having once had the faking pointed out, and having been stung by bloggers […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *