Little Green Footballs

Sunday, July 29, 2007

The Charles Johnson Way



Let's all desecrate holy books! It's freedom of speech!

40 comments:

Anonymous said...

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=26447#c0224

If this guy's wish comes true, will we get an updated, color photo of what is on the left? Of course, sans Nazi salute.

Anonymous said...

Johnson reveals himself by throwing his support to a criminal who steals korans from the school library and sticks them in the school toilet in order to offend Muslim students.

The vile and odious comments flowing from Johnson's followers on his hate-site are a reflection of his own darkness and moral corruption.

Anonymous said...

Good point. It is.

Anonymous said...

Speaking which...

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=26449#c0545

The Sphinx said...

And what Charles, you and your horde of raving lunatics weren't outraged at people burning your flags? And surely even somebody like you should've realized by now that it's not nice to throw somebody's holy book into the toilet. After all, it's called common f*cking courtesy.

I'd also like to watch their reactions if a Muslim threw the Bible or the Torah into the crapper (which a real Muslim would never even think of doing anyway). Sheesh..

The Sphinx said...

Add to that:

The main reaction over at our favourite site: "w00t!! A crime to throw a Koran in the toilet? But.. people burn our flags all the time and insult Jesus and Mary. Waaaaaahh!! "

It's not about public reactions here, it's about what's right and what's wrong. And desecrating symbols that many people hold very high is plain and simply _wrong_, be it a flag, holy book, or a person sent by God to humanity. End of discussion.

Honestly, some people really need to take their heads out of their asses..

Anonymous said...

Johnson's new hero was released without bail, screaming and making obscene gestures at reporters. He'll fit right in with the liztards.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime_file/2007/07/29/2007-07-29_exstudent_in_koran_flush_freed_on_no_bai-1.html

A former Pace University student accused of flushing two Korans down a campus toilet was freed without bail after being arraigned on criminal mischief charges yesterday.

"Get that camera out of my face!" Stanislav Shmulevich, 23, screamed, making an obscene gesture at a photographer outside Manhattan Criminal Court.

Terre said...

Sphinx, do you think the person in this case deserves to be put in jail for what he did?

Does he deserve jail because it was a holy book he vandalized, or because of the vandalism itself?

Anonymous said...

You are right, Sphinx, but I hope you realize that the issue of hate crime is not so simple.

Oooon the other hand, stealing and ruining library books is a crime, and if it can be proven the man exhibited his act in a way geared to directly upset muslims then his crime was motivated by hatred.

But, the crime itself was against public property... On the other hand, muslims are partial owners of that book if you think about it...

Gwah, this is difficult...

The Sphinx said...

@Anonymous (12:52) : Seems just like the guy who would do such a thing. I can hear the groupies over at LGF drooling right now.

@Terre: I don't know the American hate crime laws and whether you're thrown in jail for any hate crime, so I can't really tell.
But beside all the juristic talk, let's just say it's a vile and despicable act. I'd bet my left hand that this fellow hasn't even read the book, and has restricted all his knowledge to all the lies the idiots over at LGF keep on repeating.
To be honest, I don't really care what they do to him, as long as he smartens up a bit and learns his lesson.

@Anonymous (09:26):
You're right, and there is a reason why I chose NOT to study law =) There are some things I'd rather not touch with a 50-foot pole.


Fairly interesting how the dimwits went stark-raving batsh*t and vowed to support this guy financially to cover his legal fees after Chuckles supposedly received a mail from him. The "Irish Rose" comment (See anonymous @9:11) serves as a perfectl example.

I can't help imagining how amusing it'd be if they got all caught up in their almost patriotic support of the guy, sent him a bunch of money, then he turned out to be a fraud and ran off. I'm usually not the sadistic type of person, but it'd probably serve them right for vehemently supporting what's wrong.

Pim's Ghost said...

Sphinx--I agree that it is a common courtesy to treat Holy Texts with more respect than that. But I have to admit, Charles is correct with his post that getting pictures of this guy and his Mother out everywhere regarding such an incendiary incident is rather irresponsible. Yes, perhaps a "real Muslim" would never desecrate Holy Texts of other religions (though you mentioned only the Books of Abrahamic religions there). A "real Muslim" or "real Christian" would not kill in the name of their religion either, but we have seen both happen.

This kid may be a little crapstain, but now his life is in danger over putting a book in a toilet. Did not G-d/Allah not tell all of us that we would be persecuted for our beliefs, and to strengthen them in the face of these things? This is part of Christianity, but I thought regarded by Islam as well.

As most I know would say (of any religion), hate the sin, pray for the opening of the heart of the sinner. Agreed that he is no hero, though. I just think he should be treated like any other petty nuisance criminal, not having CAIR swoop in with their legal might (of which they have quite a bit).

Dealer said...

I'll be honest here. No holy book should be beyond criticism. But hey, vandalism isn't criticism it's just vandalism. Especially when it isn't your property. So the 'crime' here is a pretty obvious one.

Terre said...

Sphinx,

The question I asked was, "Do you think the person in this case deserves to be put in jail for what he did?"

To put it another way, do you think he ought to be subject to legal punishment for what he did, beyond the standard punishment for vandalism?

Or do you really not care what happens to this guy, and other people who vandalize the Islamic holy book?

The Sphinx said...

Pim's Ghost,

Agreed with everything you said, however the thing with his picture being all over the place is pretty much the fault of the media. They could've just let it pass without the whole gutter-press attitude. I also don't see why Chuckles just had to put all the blame on the Islamonazifascistleftistmoonbatidiotarians for that specific incident.

And by the way, I'd have mentioned other holy books, I just couldn't think of any others at that moment.

Pim's Ghost said...

I think the Dealer wins on this one. Just my humble opinion.

Anonymous said...

Dealer said...
"I'll be honest here. No holy book should be beyond criticism. But hey, vandalism isn't criticism it's just vandalism. Especially when it isn't your property. So the 'crime' here is a pretty obvious one. "

Good point. However, it's not as if this guy took the book and put it in his own toilet at home. He intended the Muslims to see this. I think that's where it crosses the line from just vandalism and into hate.

If I took a can of spray paint and walked up to a synagogue and painted a 'happy face', that's vandalism. If I paint a swastika or some other antisemitic text it would go beyond that.

Maybe I'm wrong.

Anonymous said...

Are you guys reading the comments in any of these Koran dunking threads over there? I don't even know where to begin. This story has kicked of a frenzy of anti-Islamic hate speech that I've never seen before. This isn't anti-terrorism or anti-jihad...this is just plain rabid bigotry.

Red Tulips said...

Right now, RAV v. City of St. Paul held that you cannot prosecute someone for burning a cross based on a 'hate crime' law. There are numerous laws that say you can burn the American flag, there was a piss Christ at the Brooklyn Museum, Matt Stone and Trey Parker aired Jesus defecating on the American flag, and there were numerous swastikas at Pace University which went unpunished.

Prosecuting someone who flushes a Koran down the toilet means one law applies to Muslims and another applies to everyone else.

This is about freedom of speech, and about censorship. The fact that this blog shows a picture of Hitler is very amusing, since jailing someone for airing their opinion is a very fascist thing to do.

Anonymous said...

Red Tulips,

This was an obvious case of someone stealing the school's property (a Koran) and destroying it using the school's toilet with the intent of harassing Muslim students.

Had Shmulevich been a Muslim who stole a Torah from the library and stuffed it in a school toilet to offend Jewish students his crime would have equally qualified for prosecution under hate-crime statutes.

The state makes a distinction about how and where things like flag burnings and cross burnings can take place and be protected speech, just as it makes a distinction about yelling "fire" in a crowded movie house to create a disturbance. All speech is NOT protected everywhere, all the time.

Feel free to toss Korans and Bibles in the toilet as long as you're using your own books and toilets, but do it with and on someone else's private property (Pace is a private school) and you expose yourself to potential prosecution under hate-crime statutes. Don't like those statutes? Lobby your legislators to change them.

Finally, if you want to complain about fascism, take it to LGF where the childish blogfuhrer is quick to delete the account of anyone who dares to criticize him, and the group-think of his cult, and hurts his sensitive feelings, not where different points of view such as yours are tolerated.

Pim's Ghost said...

Anon--sorry, I stopped posting there and started posting here...a lot of people there are really angry at us brown folk who (hey, I like guns myself, but....) are for gay rights and don't want to talk CONSTANTLY about guns and hunting.

Boy am I good a burning bridges...LOL.

The Sphinx said...

Red Tulips I think it's safe to say that most of us reject the Christ-bashing or the swastikas, just like this incident here.

Your point is that the Islam related hate crimes shouldn't be harsher than any other ones. Well I'd say that one should put any hate crime accountable that was meant for the whole world to see. And like Anonymous said:

"Good point. However, it's not as if this guy took the book and put it in his own toilet at home. He intended the Muslims to see this. I think that's where it crosses the line from just vandalism and into hate."

Maybe the laws do need to change. It won't make such acts less despicable though.

Red Tulips said...

Sphinx and Anon:

I do not object to this individual being charged with vandalism. Likely he was guilty of that.

But charging him with a hate crime means that it is a crime to express your opinion that Islam is crap, but not a crime to express your opinion that every other religion is crap.

We have already seen this. There was a publicly funded virgin mary covered in elephant dung, there was a publicly funded cross dipped in urine - all at the Brooklyn Museum of Art. This was not only not criminalized, the NEA funded it!

Why the one standard for Islam and another for every other religion? Is it simply out of fear, that Muslims will riot? So this means we have a heckler's veto!

As far as Sphinx's point that it all should be illegal, that is patently absurd on its face. In a free society, people are able to mock and openly disdain any religion they want. They can throw any holy book they want into the toilet and not face hate crime charges. Saying somehow that religion is immune from criticism not only hurts the marketplace of ideas, it actively hurts religions, which can only grow and thrive if they are subjected to debate. It is a strong religion that can withstand criticism, and a weak one that is so terrified of criticism, people murder when the religion is criticized.

If you care about Islam in particular, if you want Islam to grow and thrive, you would be in favor of the Danish Cartoons as well as people mocking Muhammad. Only through such criticism can real faith and a deeper knowledge of the universe possibly be parseled out.

FGFM said...

I[, Charles Johnson, have] received an email from Stanislav Shmulevich

Funny how Stan knew who to contact over this matter.

Third, his income is on a borderline that disqualifies him for a public defender, so he stands to suffer incredible financial hardship as well.

Didn't Chuckles ever watch Dragnet? Anyhow, CJ was flogging this on Dennis Prager's radio show with a lot more restraint that he shows on his website.

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

Anonymous said...

"FGFM said...


Funny how Stan knew who to contact over this matter.

Third, his income is on a borderline that disqualifies him for a public defender, so he stands to suffer incredible financial hardship as well.

Didn't Chuckles ever watch Dragnet? Anyhow, CJ was flogging this on Dennis Prager's radio show with a lot more restraint that he shows on his website."


Dude, you rock! You got that on mp3! I was listening in the car and I thought "Damn, I wish I was recording this crap!"

CJ is officially busted here. He called it a "horrible crime"...."no one is defending it". Praeger actually shouted down a caller for even suggesting that Charles was defending Stan's actions.

Of course, what Charles didn't tell the home audience is that he immediately set up the "criminal" with an LGF account (StanS) upon getting an email from him, and many of his lizards are rallying around the guy suggesting that they all go dunking Korans in toilets.

And now, a couple of lizards have joined the hater's "legal defense team"

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=26478_Pace_University_Mindcrime_Update&only

"Not defending him" LOL Put it on the blog guys...this is just too rich.

The Sphinx said...

Red Tulips:

I find it strange to hear all that coming from you. You are by far the fastest person I've ever encountered to accuse people of antisemitism, especially when Judaism and Jews themselves weren't even subject of the criticism.

Cognitive dissonance?

Red Tulips said...

The only reason this guy has a defense is because people have decided to take on the case pro bono. If they did not do such a thing, he would never be able to afford an attorney, at least not a good one. Not on his salary.

All for a crime that only applies to Muslims, and no one else.

Sad.

Anonymous said...

I don't mind living in a world where people like Red Tulips, who fear and hate other ethnic groups, are intimidated by the law into behaving decently.

Punishing this idiot Shumlevich will make some other idiot think twice before he steals a Bible or a Torah and sticks it in a school toilet.

The haters at LGF are worried that someday they'll be severely punished when they get caught committing similar acts in their "fight" against Muslims, and won't be able to hide behind the First Amendment and have the charges limited to arson when they "express themselves" by torching a mosque.

I'm sure that some of them already do a bit more than just rant like crazies on the internet and do engage in acts of violence and intimidation against those they fear. Seeing the law being enforced in the Pace case has frightened Johnson and his minions, and that's a good thing.

The Sphinx said...

"All for a crime that only applies to Muslims, and no one else."

Answer this question: Wouldn't you be yelling "Anti-semitism" at the top of your voice and demanding punishment if it were a Torah that was stuffed down the toilet?

I'm rather sure you would..

Wendy said...

Sphinx:

Absolutely not.

It is freedom of speech to throw a Torah into a toilet. I would not be HAPPY if this were done, but I would not say the person should be jailed as a hate crime.

So no, I am not a hypocrite. I do not believe 'free speech for me, and not for thee.'

Anon:

Yes, you only seek to impose fear and intimidating upon people. You seek to silence the marketplace of ideas. I am glad you are at least honest about your goals.

I love that you say Charles Johnson and his ilk are haters. It actually does not matter whether LGF has a legitimate concern about Islamic fundamentalism (and they do); what matters is that LGF Watch are absolutely haters. This blog links to hate sites such as Sabbah's and Norm Finkelstein. What you are saying is 'free speech for me, and not for thee.' Those sites actively defame the one Jewish state in the world, and spout pap about 'Zionists' (i.e., Jews) on a regular basis. So you believe in free speech for me, and not for thee.

No.

It should all be legal. Let the marketplace of ideas sort of it out. That is what the first amendment is supposed to stand for.

Pim's Ghost said...

Sphinx--you're in Deutschland, right? Just a note on the entire "hate crimes" legislation. Americans are FAR less amenable to the idea in general of these sort of laws. The criminals usually are sentenced more heavily using the existing laws they have broken based on their intent, anyway. The idea of restriction of expression and speech here is catching on a bit, but is protested too heavily in general on the obvious grounds that our government was set up partly to stand up for such actions.

I'm not bashing you here, just trying to convey what most Americans tend to see as a strong part of our national character.

The Sphinx said...

@Pim's Ghost:
All in all it's quite similar here in Germany. However I think Germany is still sensitive to touchy issues like Nazism (Quite understandable). I'm not an expert on the German laws regarding hate crimes though, maybe I need to read up a bit.

As for Wendy:

First, what's with the new name?

And second:
"Those sites actively defame the one Jewish state in the world, and spout pap about 'Zionists' (i.e., Jews) on a regular basis."

For the umpteenth time:
1) Being the only Jewish nation on Earth is merely a fact, and does NOT give Israel a wildcard to do whatever it wants. It should be put accountable to its mistakes just like every other nation on this planet.
There is absolutely no country that is above the law or above criticism for its actions. NOT ONE SINGLE NATION. And that includes Israel. End of discussion.

2) Though you may not see it, there's a 5-foot thick wall between Zionism and Judaism. Judaism has existed for thousands of years and is an Abrahamic religion. Zionism is not even 1.5 centuries old and is a man-made political secular ideology, just like communism or liberalism.
Judaism is a religion of Peace. Zionism is a neither a religion, nor is it about peace. It has sought its goals by the means of violence, conquest, land-grabbing, segregation, racism and a complete disregard of the human rights of non-Jews. It's clear that in the process of creating Israel, the inhabitants of the land were never put into consideration for even a second. And that is a highly shameful achievement of this supremacist ideology.

Add to that that not all Jews are Zionists and not all Zionists are Jews. In fact, there are many Jews who categorically reject Zionism (Any accusations of self-loathing will fall on deaf ears, so don't even try).

What Haitham Sabbah does is pointing out the corrupt and immoral actions of the Israeli and American _governments_. Which has absolutely squat to do with Jews as a people, or Judaism as a religion. Furthermore, you can't prove him wrong for what he's saying.

I have great respect for Judaism, but Zionism.. Seriously, screw Zionism. There. I said it. Did I get the promotion to Antisemitism now? *sarcasm*

X said...

Wendy, PG,

If Charles Johnson were really in favor of free speech, he would promote it, not deny it. Instead, he blocks anyone with a disenting opinion from his site, and carefully vets those who join.

What's more, whenever a public figure (politician, journalist, activist, blogger) says something he doesn't like, instead of challenging their ideas with reasonable argument he sics his minions on them or their supporters.

I'm sure that if you asked CJ whether he was in favor of free speech he would say yes. But in practice his site promotes the idea that certain (very mainstream) things cannot be said (e.g. the Iraq war is a failure) without incuring the wrath of the righteous. Yet whenever anyone challenges him, he gets onto his high horse about being vilified by "moonbats". They guy is playing it both ways, you've got to recognize that.

Red Tulips said...

Sphinx:

No. You do not get it. Israel is the one Jewish state on earth. But holding Israel to an impossible standard that no one else is held to, you are engaging in antisemitism. By saying Israel is behind 9/11 and/or US foreign policy, you engage in antisemitism, as this is nonsensical babbling about the one Jewish state on earth with zero basis in fact.

Legitimate criticism of Israel is completely seperate from what Sheehan and her supporters engage in. It is also seperate from what Sabbah and Norm Finkelstein engage in. It is seperate from what YOU engage in. Israel is one of the most LEGITIMATE state in the entire world, using traditional indicators...

1. The land was lawfully purchased in Israel proper;
2. The UN partition plan explicitly called for a Jewish state in Israel;
3. The nation is made up of mostly refugees who were kicked out of the lands they were in before after the Holocaust as well as Islamic antisemitism;
4. There are long historical land connections to the land, and Jews pray towards Jerusalem;
5. Arab Israelis are still allowed to remain and have equal citizenship rights.

No other nation on earth can make such claims. As such, Israel is the most legitimate nation on earth. I know you are brainwashed to hate Israel and do not have hate in your heart, but when you spout such inane lies about Israel, then yes, you too write antisemitic speech with ZERO basis in reality, targeted at the ONE Jewish state in the world, and saying it is illegitimate at its core.

This LGF Watch blog links to wild-eyed conspiracy theorists as well as Hizballah supporters. (please not that the goal of Hizballah is to annhilate world Jewry, as exhibited by their terrorizing Lebanese Jews and bombing of a Buenos Aires synagogue) To then pretend that somehow LGF posters are haters and this blog is so peaceful is really rather amusing.

So that brings me back to my original point.

Anon, you believe Charles Johnson should be censored, but not your own babblings. Free speech for me, not for thee.

Charles Johnson is an individual running his own blog. He has no requirement to air ANYTHING, and he could censor EVERYTHING if he hoped to. He is not the government. So whether he censors viewpoints on his OWN BLOG is wholly irrelevant. The question is whether he believes that anti-Christian and anti-Jewish speech should be censored by the government in contradistinction to anti-Muslim speech. I will only answer for myself on that one: free speech for all, not just for me and not thee.

(the Wendy screen name was an accident)

The Sphinx said...

"1. The land was lawfully purchased in Israel proper"

Funny that the amount of Land Israel grabbed after it was created dwarfs the land that was officially Jewish property prior to 1948. Where'd they get the rest from? By asking nicely?

"2. The UN partition plan explicitly called for a Jewish state in Israel"

The UN partition plan is by no means

The only binding UN resolutions are of the security council, and the partition of Palestine was _not_ among those. Ever general assembly resolution is by definition a suggestion.

What gives _me_ the right to just decide to divide up _your_ country?

"4. There are long historical land connections to the land, and Jews pray towards Jerusalem"

The same applies to the Muslims too. Jerusalem was the first direction Muslims prayed in, even before Mecca, and it's the third most Holy Islamic city, after Mecca and Madina in Saudi Arabia. I can safely say also that Christians have their ties to the region too, so the city belongs to everyone.

"5. Arab Israelis are still allowed to remain and have equal citizenship rights."

Explain why Arab Israelis have access to poorer facilities, education, legal rights, etc etc etc.. Seems that the "beacon of human rights" isn't so righteous after all.

And you saying repeatedly that Israel is the most legitimate nation on earth isn't based on facts, but rather on your blind love and bias towards this one large entity that you refuse to separate into different aspects. For you, Judaism, Israel, Zionism, Jewish People and the current Israeli government are one single thing. I hate to break it to you, but it's much more complex than that. And you know exactly which two points of those I have problems with.

Do you know what your biggest problem is? You think in black and white only. Whatever has the least shade of gray to you is automatically promoted to pitch black. Whatever opinion is presented to you, your algorithm is to put all people in the "Good" basket as long as they're friends of Israel, and put people in the "Evil antisemitic" basket as soon as they utter anything against Israel, or have affiliations to anybody who has done so.

Despite all kinds of reasoning and arguments based on solid FACTS, you are completely oblivious to anything that's more complicated than whether the person in question loves Israel or not.

One can repeatedly show incidents that show the supremacist attitude of the current Israeli government and acts of racism towards the Arab population, and yet you keep raving on about

This is my last remark about Israel. I find it remarkable that every time I aruge with you, it has to end up about Israel. You know my opinion already, and no amount of preaching will change it. This post was to show what kind of hypocrite Charles Johnson is, so let's get back to the topic, shall we? Thank you.


"Anon, you believe Charles Johnson should be censored, but not your own babblings. Free speech for me, not for thee."

Charles Johnson should snap out of his hypocrisy and start developing some consistency in his attitude. He should also do something about the raving lunatics in his comments section that aren't really doing him or his blog a favour.
You're defending the same man who is constantly whining about caving in to group pressure and calling censorship "mindcrime".

And at the same time, his avid readership exert pressure against people they disagree with on a regular basis (Yes, the very same mob mentality they whine and bitch about) as he sends them on crusades by flooding their mailboxes with angry and rude mails.
I also don't want to imagine how much "mindcrime" Chuckles has already committed by banning dissidents.

Just like little brats..

Red Tulips said...

Sphinx:

1. Funny that the amount of Land Israel grabbed after it was created dwarfs the land that was officially Jewish property prior to 1948. Where'd they get the rest from? By asking nicely?

The land was won in 1967 through wars of attempted annhilation against Israel. And yet settlers only live on land that was either lawfully purchased, abandoned, and/or monetary compensation given for the land to the Palestinians. The land of 1948 was allocated to Israel via the UN partition plan, and was majority Jewish at the time. Later on, Jews bought up more land.

There is not one other country on earth that can boast that legitimacy.

2. The UN partition plan is by no means

The only binding UN resolutions are of the security council, and the partition of Palestine was _not_ among those. Ever general assembly resolution is by definition a suggestion.

What gives _me_ the right to just decide to divide up _your_ country?


There was no 'Palestine' in 1948.

There was no 'country,' it was a British protectorate and its status was in dispute. It is not as if the UN somehow divided up land of the Caliphate, even as many Muslims would like to see it that way.

"4. There are long historical land connections to the land, and Jews pray towards Jerusalem"

The same applies to the Muslims too. Jerusalem was the first direction Muslims prayed in, even before Mecca, and it's the third most Holy Islamic city, after Mecca and Madina in Saudi Arabia. I can safely say also that Christians have their ties to the region too, so the city belongs to everyone.


Muslims and Christians only have ties to Jerusalem due to the Jews. Muhammad sought to convert a group of Jews to Islam, and so started praying to Jerusalem at first. This did not work, so he went to converting pagans, and prayed to Mecca. This is the historical reality. Moreover, the Koran only says that Muhammad ascended to heaven 'at the furthest mosque.' It was taken that the holy temple of Jerusalem was the furthest mosque, because the Jews were holy, and hence it was a holy place. Yet, there was no functioning temple at the time! And so after Muhammad's death, when the area of Israel was conquered by the Muslims, an al aqsa mosque was built on the exact spot of the holy temple because it was on the exact spot of the holy temple.

In short, the claimed Islamic ties to Jerusalem are wholly based on Jewish ties.

And yet, despite this fact, despite the complete hoax that is the supposed Islamic necessity of having Jerusalem, the Waqf Authority is in charge of the Temple Mount, and they regularly destroy the archeological evidence of the Jewish holy temple. Jews are not in control of the holiest site for Jews, which is the same holy site Muslims usurped.

So even assuming Muslims in fact had the most legitimate connection to Jerusalem, you have literally zero point, as Muslims are free to pray at their holy spot all they want, in contrast to Jews!

For Christians, it is holy to them only because they share the Old Testemant. And yet even with that, they do not pray to Jerusalem. They do not every single Sunday say "Next year in Jerusalem," which is something I have been saying since a little girl. Many Christians acknowledge this, though some do not. Yet Christians who are smart want Jews in control, as they are able to peacefully go to their holy sites...in contrast to the situation elsewhere in the Mideast.

You know, you make a good point...Israel and specifically Jerusalem should be in Jewish hands as they have proven to be the only group that actually cares for holy sites, rather than destroying them. They are the only group who has shown to be ecumenical.

5. Explain why Arab Israelis have access to poorer facilities, education, legal rights, etc etc etc.. Seems that the "beacon of human rights" isn't so righteous after all.

Arab Israelis actually are in many ways treated BETTER than Jews. Sure, there may be unequal funding of their schools, but this is not limited to Arab Israelis. Jewish schools in the Negev are also underfunded. So the 'underfunding' is a question of economics more than racism. It is also a question of concern as to where the money will go. Why should Jews send money to Arab Israelis who then will teach Al Naqba (i.e., lies and hate) to their children? Why fund your own destruction? Yet Israel does exactly that, to my chagrin.

And you saying repeatedly that Israel is the most legitimate nation on earth isn't based on facts, but rather on your blind love and bias towards this one large entity that you refuse to separate into different aspects. For you, Judaism, Israel, Zionism, Jewish People and the current Israeli government are one single thing. I hate to break it to you, but it's much more complex than that. And you know exactly which two points of those I have problems with.

No, honestly you are so brainwashed to hate Israel, you do not realize that Israel is really that shining beacon of light in the Middle East. Name one other stable democracy? Name one other place where Muslims are treated with equality and respect? Name one other place where holy sites OF ALL RELIGIONS are not destroyed, and rather are preserved and studied to the extent they are in Israel? Name one other place which is so concerned about human life, that they jeopardize the safety of their own citizens, rather than attacking military targets where human meat shields are in the way?

There is not one other nation in the Middle East that can boast that; I would venture to say there is not one other nation on earth that can boast that. If you were really pro-Muslim (which you are not) you would love Israel and love Zionism. The truth is you are anti-Muslim even more than you are anti-Jewish, by being anti-Israel.

Do you know what your biggest problem is? You think in black and white only. Whatever has the least shade of gray to you is automatically promoted to pitch black. Whatever opinion is presented to you, your algorithm is to put all people in the "Good" basket as long as they're friends of Israel, and put people in the "Evil antisemitic" basket as soon as they utter anything against Israel, or have affiliations to anybody who has done so.

No. I never said those who dislike Israel or criticize Israel are antisemites. But those who engage in conspiracy theories about Israel and claim Zionists control US foreign policy are antisemites. There is no basis in fact to attack the ONE JEWISH STATE. Those who claim Israel is illegitimate to the core give one standard to Israel, the one Jewish state, and another to every other nation on earth. This too is antisemitism. Sorry, but it is.

Despite all kinds of reasoning and arguments based on solid FACTS, you are completely oblivious to anything that's more complicated than whether the person in question loves Israel or not.

HUH? Show me where I did that. You will not find a place. I do not find fault with your lack of love for Israel; rather it is your blind hatred of Israel.

One can repeatedly show incidents that show the supremacist attitude of the current Israeli government and acts of racism towards the Arab population, and yet you keep raving on about

Huh? Let's say there are some incidents, because Jews are not perfect. Are you going to say that Israel has such a large number, that it dwarfs the rest of the world? Everyone is a supremacist to some extent; it is particularly bad in Saudi Arabia, where dirty kaffirs cannot even set FOOT in many parts of it. It is true in most of the Arab world, where non-Arabs are treated like slaves.

If Israel is really so full of white supremacists, explain then why more than half the population of Jews are in fact Sephardic, and hail from Arab states? If Israel is really so 'white supremacist,' explain why Darfur refugees are fleeing to Israel from EGYPT, where they were treated like slaves and beaten, because they are black?

No, if you really are anti-racist, you would again be lauding Israel every single day. But instead, you actually support racism, through your hatred of Israel.

This is my last remark about Israel. I find it remarkable that every time I aruge with you, it has to end up about Israel. You know my opinion already, and no amount of preaching will change it. This post was to show what kind of hypocrite Charles Johnson is, so let's get back to the topic, shall we? Thank you.

What is funny is that whenever I back you into a corner and show that you have an opinion based on brainwashing and not logic, you censor me. You cannot handle the truth, and that is the sad fact.

"Anon, you believe Charles Johnson should be censored, but not your own babblings. Free speech for me, not for thee."

Charles Johnson should snap out of his hypocrisy and start developing some consistency in his attitude. He should also do something about the raving lunatics in his comments section that aren't really doing him or his blog a favour.
You're defending the same man who is constantly whining about caving in to group pressure and calling censorship "mindcrime".


I have to reiterate...There is a very big difference between censoring on a privately owned blog (which you do way more than Charles Johnson, so you are the LAST ONE to complain about), and censoring by the government. I could restrict whatever speech I want in MY HOUSE and MY PROPERTY. LGF is Charles's property - he could censor every comment he wants, and not run afoul of the first amendment.

And at the same time, his avid readership exert pressure against people they disagree with on a regular basis (Yes, the very same mob mentality they whine and bitch about) as he sends them on crusades by flooding their mailboxes with angry and rude mails.
I also don't want to imagine how much "mindcrime" Chuckles has already committed by banning dissidents.

Just like little brats...


People are allowed to comment on a PRIVATELY OWNED BLOG with what they want to say. It is not a public forum for the world to comment on, and Charles can censor who he wants. (again, you censor more than he does, anyway)

The question is whether the government has the right to say some speech is acceptable (when it criticizes Christianity/Judaism), and other speech is not (when Islam is criticized). This is ludicrous and unconstitutional.

The Sphinx said...

I said I wouldn't speak of this subject again, but there are some remarks I have to let out:

"Muslims and Christians only have ties to Jerusalem due to the Jews. Muhammad sought to convert a group of Jews to Islam, and so started praying to Jerusalem at first. This did not work, so he went to converting pagans, and prayed to Mecca. This is the historical reality."

Aaahahahahahahahahahaaahaa

Now who told you THAT crap? That's one of the most far-fetched and ridiculous thing you've ever said so far. Congratulations.

"Israel and specifically Jerusalem should be in Jewish hands as they have proven to be the only group that actually cares for holy sites, rather than destroying them. They are the only group who has shown to be ecumenical."

I'm sorry, which country was digging at the holy sites again, putting the whole construction of the mosque under risk, and didn't stop at demolishing an entire section of a mosque's wall which name I can't recall?

Right. The one and only Israel..


"If Israel is really so full of white supremacists, explain then why more than half the population of Jews are in fact Sephardic, and hail from Arab states?"

Number one..

No, if you really are anti-racist, you would again be lauding Israel every single day. But instead, you actually support racism, through your hatred of Israel.

.. and number two.

You were saying.. ?


"You cannot handle the truth, and that is the sad fact."

What do you reckon I think about you all the time? You're probably throwing a fit because of those two articles I just gave you as I speak. However read the very last passages of the second part. It fits perfectly, and no amount of denial will change that fact.

Also a preposterous claim to say that I practice more censorship than your beloved Charles Johnson. It's like saying a shovel is not a shovel.

Who was the only person to be "censored" on my blog so far? It was YOU. Yes, only you, and nobody else but you. And do you know why? Because every single time I post ANYTHING that has to do with politics or religion, you literally cling onto me and keep repeating the same old stuff you've told me many times before over and over and over again. And though I don't have anything personal against you, screw that. Seriously. I have exams coming up and certainly have better things to do than answer to the same claims like I'm some kind of f***ing machine. My time is more valuable to me than that.

Every time you manage to come with some statement that's even more absurd than anything you've said before, and no matter how many times I try to reason with you, you seem oblivious to anything that's said to you.

You think I'm blind and brainwashed, in fact it's your love for Zionism that is blinding you and putting your extreme bias more into the foreground with every comment you write. In your last comment here, there were hints that you have Jewish supremacist tendencies. And then you accuse me of hatred, have the inner urge to even call me antisemitic, and yet it doesn't shake me all one bit. Because I _know_ that you understand nothing about me. Really, nothing.

This isn't my blog anyway, and I apologize to the owners for using this comment section for this worthless argument. I told you before, and I'll tell you for the very last time: You are not changing me one bit, and I don't think I'm changing you either. So forget about it. This time, I promise never to talk about this subject with you EVER again.

Red Tulips said...

Sphinx,

You link to a conspiracy theory and blatant antisemitic website, and expect that to be 'proof' of supposed "Jewish supremacism"?

That is total nonsense.

You have yet to explain the fact that Arab Israelis have 100% equality before the law. No, let me edit myself. They are treated in some ways BETTER before the law. They do not HAVE to serve in the IDF (unlike Jews and Druze), and they get affirmative action in universities. So where is this 'Jewish supremacism'? The proof is an antisemitic hate site you link to? That is hardly 'proof' of anything. If you want to 'prove' something, link to an academic site or a news article, not a hate site, sorry.

You did not even address my points about how Israel was founded, and wholly ignored the historical reality that is behind Muhammad choosing to pray at Jerusalem at one point. Citation about that here. I have to assume, since you did not address the facts I cited re: Israel's foundation, that you agree with them, and/or cannot find a way to plausibly deny it.

It is a simple fact of history that the Islamic connection to Jerusalem exists solely because of the Jewish connection to the city.

But I will go on.

Palestinians have already desecrated and destroyed most of Joseph's Tomb. citation.

The Waqf Authority is actively seeking to destroy any evidence of a Jewish presence at the Temple Mount. source

In contrast, Israel tried to simply STRENGTHEN a walkway to the Temple Mount, which was buckling. From this, FALSE claims of al aqsa destruction arose.

The whole thing would be laughable if it were not tragic.

The reality is that only Jews have shown themselves trustworthy to handle holy sites in the Mideast. Again, historical reality.

Do I think you have hate in your heart? Answer: not deep in your heart, because deep down I know you are a good kid. But you are brainwashed, because the facts simply are inapposite to every single thing you say.

And yet while I disagree with you, I still believe you have a right to defame Israel and Jews all you want. Just as it is my right to present the light of truth to contrast your darkness of lies.

I do not believe you should be JAILED for having opinions that, if enacted, would lead to many Jewish deaths. No...I am not a hypocrite...unlike many people here.

MJ said...

As interesting as this conversation is perhaps it's best held elsewhere as it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic of the post.

The Sphinx said...

MJ, agreed. Sorry for that. Anyway I'm not contributing anything to the conversation anymore.

Anonymous said...

Sounds like this guy Shmulevich needs some psychiatric help, to be honest. He throws the Koran in the toilet twice, almost six weeks apart? That's attention-seeking, and there's something screwy in his head.

Is it a hate crime? I guess it's a minor and very cowardly one, yes, but remember that symbols are simply symbols. The main crime here is vandalism of school property.