Brigitte Bardot passes away at 91

The French actress who later became a political activist has died at 91:

Brigitte Bardot, the French screen legend who walked away from the film industry to support animal rights and lead opposition to open borders and mass immigration, has died. She was 91.

The Guardian reports Paris-born Bardot shot to international fame with the 1956 film And God Created Woman, written and directed by her then-husband Roger Vadim.

For the next two decades she embodied the idea of the archetypal “sex kitten.”

But what's amazing is that she did recognize the Muslim threat:

Bardot’s outspoken support of animal rights evolved into comments about ethnic minorities and open support for France’s Front National, resulting in a string of convictions for racial hatred.

Acknowledged as a symbol of woman’s liberation, Bardot told Le Figaro in 2015 she was against the Muslim face veil.

“Communitarianism takes on too much importance. It is the culmination of thirty years of laxity.”

A committed free speech activist, the actress faced trial five times between 1997 and 2008 for “inciting racial hatred” including for comments criticising mass Muslim immigration in France.

On one of these occasions, she was convicted for “decrying the loss of French identity and tradition due to the ‘multiplication of mosques while our church bells fall silent for want of priests’.”

She always maintained she simply respected the French way of life and sought to protect it and its inheritors.

Bardot was also a vocal opponent of Muslim halal slaughter, which often involves slaughtering an animal without stunning it, causing pain and distress before death.

And she also said years ago:

– “I am against the Islamisation of France! Our ancestors, our grandfathers, our fathers have for centuries given their lives to push out successive invaders.”

– “I like Marine (Le Pen, the leader of the French far-right) a lot. I won’t hide it. She is the only woman … who has balls.”

So much that the courts are now seeking to ban Le Pen from running in the next election. If there's anything we can appreciate from Bardot, it's that she was a realist on the topic of the Religion of Peace. And we should thank her by helping to defend her country from the Islamic invasion. No country should have to fall victim to such a horrific ideology.

Self-hating Jewish actress soils the Emmy awards

Like countless other award conventions today, the Emmys have become a political atrocity. Case in point: a Jewish actress, Hannah Einbinder, who took the side of the crowd hostile to Israel and the USA:

Smart's castmate and constant scene partner, Hannah Einbinder, who had also been nominated for all four seasons but, unlike Smart, had never won, took best supporting actress in a comedy.

She said she had become committed to a bit where "it was cooler to lose."

"But this is cool too!" the Jewish actress shouted, then ended her speech by cursing the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency and saying "Free Palestine!"

Signs of the tense political climate were evident even on the red carpet, as actor Javier Bardem arrived with a keffiyeh around his neck, while actresses Amy Lou Wood (The White Lotus) and Einbinder appeared wearing pins from the pro-Palestinian group Artists4Ceasefire.

Bardem's no surprise. As for this Einbinder, never heard of her, and don't care about her portfolio is this is how she's going to behave. And how does being foul mouthed make one a better person? According to this item, some of hers and other nominees' speeches were censored for the vulgarity involved:

Both Hannah Einbinder and John Oliver were bleeped during their acceptance speeches amid the Sept. 14 CBS broadcast, leaving many viewers wondering what the stars said to earn the censoring.

Einbinder's win came before Oliver's, as she won her first Emmy for Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Comedy Series for her role as Ava in Hacks.

The actress, 30, thanked the creators of the hit HBO comedy for "changing my life in every conceivable way, but not just by giving me a great gig, but by being my friends and being my family," and also gave a shoutout to her costar Jean Smart, who she said is "like the sun."

She ended her speech with three last shoutouts, one of which included an expletive, so it was censored. "Finally, go Girds, f--- ICE and free Palestine. Thank you."

Later on in the night, Oliver, 48, was censored during his acceptance speech for Outstanding Variety Series for Last Week Tonight With John Oliver.

“F--- you, Nate Bargatze, that is a lot of money for you,” he said, referring to the show's host's bit about how lengthy acceptance speeches would mean a smaller donation to the Boys & Girls Clubs of America.

"And you can add a f--- to the swear jar as well," the late-night host added.

This is what this ceremony is all about? No wonder it's best to avoid these broadcasts like the plague today. A commentor to the article said:

I don't know who those people are but I knew there was a good reason I didn't watch the Emmys. It's completely irrelevant to real life and in many cases completely the opposite of real life.

When they're as crude and obscene as they were, you know moral compasses were lost. It's one more reason why Einbinder's MO is so repulsive as she's a self-hater. And the time's come to stop watching these shoddy award ceremonies, which practically exclude conservatives for years now.

One more thing shameful about Einbinder is that she'd actually wear a revealing dress while making her repugnant acceptance speech. Anybody who sides with the Religion of Peace, an ideology opposed to such outfits, has no business wearing such clothing.

Died Suddenly

Black Adam movie's screenplay builds on left-wing metaphors

Overrated wrestler-turned-actor Dwayne Johnson's new Black Adam movie, last time I looked, fell to 40 percent on Rotten Tomatoes' approval ratings. But that aside, when I looked at the reviews so far, Vanity Fair had quite an eye-opener for the political metaphors turning up in screenplay, which surely were to be as expected as what turned up in Wonder Woman 1984. First:

Kahndaq, you see, is a stand-in for not-Iraq/not-Afghanistan under longtime occupation by not-America, but a band of villainous swine called Intergang who plunder the nation’s resources and make the people wait at long checkpoints. They also zoom around on sci-fi skiffs that glow blue (just like Eternium!) and really want that crown.

Soon Adrianna summons the trapped hero, Teth-Adam, who is the gargantuan Johnson wearing a superhero suit and a scowl. Bullets and missiles and grenades can’t stop him, and a mere touch of his hand can turn someone into a skeleton. He goes on a wild PG-13-style kill spree, flinging bodies thousands of yards in the air and ripping off limbs, but without any blood, terror, or agony. [...]

Ah, so that's there excuse for the violence: they didn't add any blood spilling out of severed limbs. Sorry, but doesn't make it any more acceptable, and children shouldn't have to be subject to this kind of mayhem any more than what you see in a Mortal Kombat game. Whether the film lacks terror and agony, however, doesn't really matter when disgust and insult could sum up the proceedings much better. According to the UK Independent, the filmmakers had to remove at least 5 scenes to avoid an R-rating, which confirms just how blatant their vision truly is. And as for the hints given in the above regarding the leftist metaphors, here's that part of it from VF:

There’s not really much to stew on with Black Adam once you’ve left the theater, except to be somewhat amazed at how the story comments-but-doesn’t-comment on the actual political situation in the Middle East. An early checkpoint sequence is clearly meant to mirror the struggles of everyday people crossing from the Palestinian Territories into Israel, and Adrianna’s fed-up line about world powers not doing much for the people after a decades-long presence could be about Iraq or Afghanistan or both. And while there is much reverent talk of Khandaq’s indigenous cultural heritage, there are no Muslim signifiers center stage throughout the picture. Indeed, the Hollywood staple of the muezzin call to prayer is nowhere on the soundtrack, probably a first for a movie set in this part of the world, even when it’s a fictional country. One must marvel at how this massive international project goes out of its way to be even remotely apolitical, taking its cue, perhaps, from the famously politically-unaffiliated Dwayne Johnson. It takes a special kind of movie where the most interesting thing is what’s not in there. During its two-hour runtime, you won’t be asked to exert yourself, either with backstory or political reads. Viewers can just sit back in their cushioned seats, silence all brain functions, and enjoy the CG fireworks.

Oh my, why am I not shocked they could resort to these kind of metaphors, building as they do upon anti-Israel propaganda to boot, with Intergang as the stand-ins? And that's something that'll have to be considered by all concerned when it comes to past and present movies based on DC properties: they may have more leftist metaphors, stealthed or out in the open, than we think. The Marvel movies too, lest we forget. One more reason they're not aging any better than the overload of special effects accompanying the "actors". I hesitate to think what'd a screenplay containing a metaphor for opposing war with Iran's brutal regime would be like, because it's not impossible for these obsessed ideologues to go that far too.

Interesting how the reviewer here seems disappointed specifically because there's little or no serious allusions to Islam, as though this movie couldn't be bad enough. The filmmakers, who should be ashamed of themselves, are already doing enough harm with the metaphors they've injected as it is. The following reviewer from Buzzfeed seems disappointed for similar reasons, and is much more blatant:

It’s too bad that Black Adam ultimately punts on most of the big questions it attempts to raise, because the movie does have something sorely lacking in much of its peers: a willingness, however slight, to engage with the world around it. It’s hard to miss the similarities between Kahndaq, a Middle Eastern country occupied by white military personnel, and a variety of real-world analogs, ranging from the American occupation of Iraq to the ongoing occupation of Palestine. [...]

It’s pretty jarring to see a major superhero movie that even gestures at treating America as the bad guys in anything beyond a “there are a few bad apples in the military” sense. After all, the genre entered its modern era with 2008’s Iron Man, where a weapons contractor is kidnapped by terrorists and escapes captivity in Afghanistan. Black Adam isn’t the movie that’s going to continue exploring that territory, but it’s refreshing to see it try.

So here, the writer is much more hostile to Israel in the sense he won't even mention the country, replacing it as he does with the Roman era name for Israel that's been distorted in modern times for the sake of delegitimizing Israel's claim to Judea/Samaria, by fabricating the lie that there was ever an Islamic/Arabic country there? Now that's even sicker, as is the strong hint his opinions on the USA are extraordinarily hostile too. (Interestingly, the Boston Herald says movie co-star Mohammed Amer is a "Palestinian-American". Could such casting have been intentional, coinciding with the filmmakers' politics?)

I also noticed this review by NPR's terrible writer Glen Weldon, who surprisingly enough actually panned the movie, but, he really screwed up on just who reintroduced Black Adam:

In the early 2000s, writers Geoff Johns and David S. Goyer — with art by Stephen Sadowski and many others — introduced to the comics pages a new version of Black Adam. The character had been around since the 1940s as a supervillain who dogged the family of superheroes that, like him, had been given powers by the wizard Shazam. As such, he came factory-installed with the basic supervillain-threats package: I'll destroy you, I'll rule the world, etc.

Man, is this sloppy, but to be fully expected from such a charlatan who's not a comics fan, no matter how much he insists otherwise. Black Adam was first reintroduced to the DCU proper in 1994, in Jerry Ordway's GN, The Power of Shazam, which later led to an ongoing monthly series for Billy Batson that ran at least a few years. And reprehensible Weldon would rather rob Ordway of the credit, and bestow it upon some of the least deserving of DC's overrated modern writers, Johns and Goyer, instead. As disappointing as I find Ordway's leftism these days, this is still too much. So shame on far-left Weldon for this deception as well.

Now, one more review I checked is from Midwest Film Journal, and in addition to panning the movie, they also make an eyebrow raising note regarding a certain 2013 movie whose star is brought back in this new movie as a special guest for Teth-Adam to clash with:

Man of Steel, which launched the whole misbegotten DCEU in 2013, introduced the world to a darker and more “grounded” take on these heroes. It had its flaws but feels like a masterpiece compared to Black Adam. The two have some very direct points of comparison, too, as supposed launching points for future films. Zack Snyder’s Steel, for example, featured a breathlessly cool prologue on Krypton whereas Adam features an extended sequence narrated by an annoying child. In Snyder’s film, the violence of two Kryptonians battling is destructive and purposely reminiscent (however wrongheadedly so) of 9/11. Here, Adam’s supposed brutal fighting is nowhere near as destructive and, 10 years later, considerably worse-looking. Steel’s fights still inspire awe; Adam‘s are nauseating at best.

Of course, Adam also invites comparison because it delivers on what “fans” have been supposedly clamoring for — the return of Henry Cavill to the role of Superman, a half-decade after his experience filming Justice League turned him off the role and turned Warners off of the franchise he headlined. Bringing Cavill in for a post-credits tease is a Hail Mary by a studio desperate to garner interest in a movie that they clearly know has no interest to any sort of general audience. It’s kind of pathetic, particularly because there’s a blatant joke about Superman being an empty role early on in this film. I’m a fan of Cavill in that role, but there’s no part of me that thinks he deserves to be thrown into more shitty iterations of the character, if Black Adam is any indication of where it will go from here.

Well, like I said, if this new DC movie could be so blatant in its political metaphors, chances are there'd be earlier ones going that route too, and looks like Man of Steel had one that was bound to be troubling. If Batman vs. Superman could boast a scene alluding to protests against illegal immigrants in real life that was insulting to the intellect, we can't be shocked if any 9-11 metaphors Snyder's Man of Steel attached to its screenplay could be just as tasteless. That's why I for one am not pleading for Cavill to resume the role, even in a stand-alone movie for Superman proper, because what if more blatant leftist metaphors seep in? This whole "franchise" of the past decade was decidedly never worth looking forward to in the first place, and the dark angle didn't help matters.

So now, if the above descriptions say anything, I have far less reason to admire Johnson, whom I recall was among several far-leftists who created controversy for the sake of attacking podcaster Joe Rogan over distorted reasons (and Johnson himself wrote extremely crude comments years earlier). And recalling Rogan was just as critical of Hollywood for romanticizing violence as Bill Maher was, he might want to take issue with the Black Adam movie next, because physical/sexual violence has tragically been glorified in Hollywood too over past decades, and this new film is no improvement with its portrayal of Teth-Adam. A most shameless embarrassment it decidedly is, and I wish WB would stop making superhero movies already if this is what it's all coming down to.

Marvel's Sabra comes under assault by Muslim activist group with terror ties

The Council of Islamic-American Relations (CAIR), which has documented connections to terrorist organizations like Hamas, recently ran the following podcast on Facebook, where they attacked Bill Mantlo/Sal Buscema's Israeli character, Sabra, who first debuted in the Incredible Hulk in the early 1980s:

Join us today at 3:00 p.m. ET for a discussion on the Marvel superhero Sabra, Islamophobia and anti-Palestinian racism with American Muslims for Palestine's Outreach Director Taher Herzallah.

From this alone, it's pretty easy to guess where they went with this. No matter how left-leaning Mantlo was in his time as a writer, and no matter how much that influenced his comics writing by extension, it makes zero difference to anti-Israeli sources like these. Whatever they say isn't worth the bytes it's produced on, considering their offensive platforms, for which the FBI later cut off contact with them. It's not too difficult to guess what they think of Gal Gadot as well.

One commentor said:

The Jewish people have so few representatives in comics, do take her away from us

And:

Sabra's young son was killed in a terrorist attack

Yes, it was established, possibly in New Warriors by Fabian Nicieza, that Sabra had a young son who'd been murdered in a terror attack, and that these anti-Israeli movements would invalidate even that viewpoint is definitely reprehensible. The commentor also said:

Did you read Union Jack: London Falling?

In that miniseries, the whole clash-on-the-side between Sabra and Arabian Knight is regurgitated, and Islam is otherwise whitewashed. It's another pathetic example of failure to provide an Israeli with a better depiction. Mostly because in the 2nd part, Sabra gets shot in the eyes, blinding her. Next:

You need to do more research on the character. Your knowledge of her is incorrect

Worse, their standings are entirely deliberate. And all coming from a movement that was an unindicted co-conspirator in terrorism. One more comment made was:

The plot for Captain America: New World Order has not even been released. How do you even know how her character will be portrayed?

Of course, if the screenplay comes within even miles of portraying Israel negatively, that'll be abominable, but not a surprise. Disney and Marvel studios have long been sellouts to anti-Israeli campaigners, and even Steven Spielberg did this almost 2 decades ago with Munich.

So now, another, far more notorious activist movement's damning Mantlo and Sal Buscema's creation for being Israeli, and being written with a background they believe illegitimate. Naturally, you have to wonder why these ideologues want anything to do with publishers that were originally founded by Jewish businessmen, whose viewpoints were anything but aligned with what phony pop culture critics think. It's practically laughable.

Israeli cartoonist warns new Captain America film's portrayal of Sabra could be woke

There's been news - superficial as could be expected - that Israeli actress Shira Haas was cast in the role of the Bill Mantlo/Sal Buscema-created Sabra in Captain America: New World Order. Here's what i24 News is saying about it:

Israeli actress Shira Haas joined the Marvel cast in the fourth "Captain America" film, in which she will play an Israeli superheroine, according to an announcement made Saturday evening at Disney's D23 Expo conference in California.

According to Variety, Haas will play a former spy agent named Ruth Bat-Seraph aka "Sabra," a term used for Israeli-born Jews. She first appeared in the Marvel comics in 1980.

Sabra served in the Mossad and has superpowers, which include extraordinary strength, stamina and speed. She also possesses anti-gravity devices, allowing her to fly through the air faster than 300 miles per hour.

Alas, this alone is not reason enough to watch a film coming at a time when Kevin Feige's turning their screenplays into woke garbage, as the recent Thor installment makes clear. And on that note, YnetNews says veteran Israeli cartoonist Uri Fink is not optimistic. It also tells what he thinks was a case of plagiarism, based on a character he created early in his art career in the late 1970s:

Since Disney announced that Israeli actress Shira Haas will play an Israeli superhero named Sabra in the next installment of the Captain America series, veteran Israeli comic book artist and writer Uri Fink's world went abuzz.

The reason? In 1978, at the tender age of 15, Fink created Sabraman — the first Israeli superhero — who shares some striking similarities with Marvel's heroine, first and foremost, their names.

"I'm getting messages from people who know the character, asking what I'm going to do about it, as if they're encouraging me to sue Marvel and make a killing off the whole thing," Fink tells Ynet.

"It's not the first time. It already happened in 1980 when [Marvel] first created the character, two years after Sabraman, but I didn't think it was right to sue them and I still don't think this is appropriate and that I would make anything out of it. It's just a word. You can't copyright a word. Sabra is just a word."

Sabra is a prickly pear cactus that is very common in Israel and has become a colloquial term used to describe native Israelis — rough and tough on the outside but soft and sweet on the inside.

Fink says it is likely the American comic book publisher drew inspiration from his work back in the day.

"I do believe they saw Sabraman back in the day. There were articles written about it the world over and I gave interviews to various papers, so it is likely they saw it," he says.

"Many guys in DC and Marvel were Jewish back then and the book made it to the Jewish communities abroad too. The comic was in English, and Jewish American guys dug it, it likely reached them, but it wasn't the most polished comic book in the world."

Yes, maybe it's possible, based on how similar their costumes look, although Sabraman appears to have a mask on, while Ruth Bat-Seraph doesn't wear one. That aside, here's where Fink provides a realist view in context of the PC mentality now ruining much of showbiz:

However, Fink voiced pessimism about how the Israeli character would be portrayed by contemporary comic artists.

"Sabra went on to feature in some stories that weren't very pro-Israel, it was already weird back then. So I don't think this would augur well for how she'd be depicted by Marvel now that they've gone woke," he said, using a term that is popularly used to describe people highly alert to social injustices but is also used by some as a derogatory term for a flavor of contemporary progressive leftist ideology which, among other things, is highly critical of Israel.

Sadly, her first official appearance in 1981 is nothing to write home about, because of the troubling moral equivalence and downright sloppy writing that permeated the story, and some of that unfortunately questionable scripting that took place in the original Hulk #256 where Sabra officially debuted (she may have made her first appearance 6 issues prior in a cameo) is further elaborated upon here. First:

In a move that is already thrilling some Jewish audiences and stirring controversy among other international fans and activists, Marvel Studios announced that an Israeli comic book hero will appear in the next installment of its Captain America movie franchise.

Seriously, I find it dismaying, no matter how much it does happen, when audiences just go bonkers over the mere announcement, when the finished product can be anything but a celebration. And the original debut is just why it could be thought otherwise:

Sabra (also the word for an Israeli prickly pear, which has a bristly outside and soft and sweet inside, and is used as a nickname for an Israeli person) is a Mossad agent and police officer with superhuman speed and strength. The 1981 comic that first prominently features her involves multiple quotes and plot points that would be seen as taboo in a contemporary Hollywood blockbuster.

In the comic, the Incredible Hulk mistakenly ends up in Tel Aviv, where he befriends an Arab boy who gets killed in an attack by identifiably Arab terrorists. Sabra — real name Ruth Bat-Seraph — witnesses the attack and assumes Hulk is in cahoots with the terrorists. She attacks Hulk with “energy quills,” weakening him, but the Hulk explains that the boy was his friend — and references the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“Boy died because boy’s people and yours want to own land!” the Hulk tells Sabra. “Boy died because you wouldn’t share. Boy died because of two old books that say his people and yours must fight and kill for land!”

This is all delivered without any genuine quotations from the Judaist Bible/Torah or the Islamic Koran/Hadith provided. What Mantlo injected was incredibly embarrassing, and it makes little difference that it's a "product of its time". That doesn't make it any less poor. This is another example where people don't realize that a specific storyline where a character debuted is, unfortunately, the result of bad writing rushed into production. That the sea port in Tel Aviv isn't even portrayed very accurately is the least of the tale's problems.

Things are not getting better when seeing a columnist for the far-left Forward exploit the moment for confusing propaganda:

Even as the MCU has made efforts to stare down institutionalized American racism and overreach of government surveillance a la the Patriot Act, many still view these movies and shows as little more than military propaganda. (The studio has, in fact, partnered with the military quite a bit.)

He makes it sound as though the army's anything but influenced by leftism. That aside, it's loathsomely reprehensible how this puff piece builds on anti-American propaganda of the sort that claims the USA is "systemically racist". And it's just like them to cite Civil War as though it were a positive example, when it was most definitely not. Once, superheroes, if they fought each other in the past century, it wasn't over partisan politics, and IIRC, in the Avengers/Defenders War of 1973, it was over misunderstandings, and communications with a paralyzed Black Knight that got warped by Loki and Dormammu along the way. Yet these propagandists on the left never care.

Introducing the Israeli counterpart to Captain America, then, whose comic origins tie her directly to the Jewish State’s intelligence agency, has raised eyebrows. It’s scarcely surprising, given how over at DC the mere casting of Gal Gadot as an Amazon from a fictional island generates perennial outrage.

A critic on Twitter wrote that Sabra’s powers will include “demolishing Palestinian homes with her mind.” Many others noted how Sabra’s debut, in an issue of “The Incredible Hulk,” featured the killing of an Arab child (the word “Palestinian” is never used) so that Sabra can have a teachable moment. As we delve into the controversy a little more, let’s start there.

At least this is making clear that, no matter the content of the upcoming film, antisemites reject Mantlo's creation from the outset. Then:

She first shows up in 1980’s “Incredible Hulk” No. 256 “Power in the Promised Land!” She mistakenly believes that the Hulk is working with terrorists and the two fight. In their final confrontation, the Hulk cradles the body of Sahad, an Arab boy he befriended who was killed in an explosion caused by terrorists. The Hulk then lectures Sabra about the toll of the ongoing conflict.

“Boy died because boy’s people and yours both want to own land!” the Hulk yells. “Boy died because you wouldn’t share!” (Remember, this is the Hulk talking.)

What makes the Hulk even angrier is that the crux of the conflict is because of “two old books” (i.e., the Quran and Hebrew Bible) and “now boy is dead — but boy didn’t even read books!”

Many online have rightly noted how Sahad, who first tells the Hulk about the “two old books,” is a racist depiction of a Palestinian kid. He is illiterate, steals and lies to tourists for money. The only other sort of Palestinians the issue shows are terrorists. If this is indeed the nuance we can expect from Sabra’s corner of the world, there’s reason for concern.

Now, let's hold on here for a moment. The kid tells Hulk about the books...yet he's illiterate and never actually read either?!? If that's not some of the most slapdash writing, I don't know what is. Of course, why does the columnist keep insisting on referring to the Arab boy in focus as a "palestinian", and not as an Arab or even a Moslem? Funny how the columnist doesn't suggest maybe the boy should've been a Jewish child instead, since that way, Mantlo could've proven he wanted to at least try to provide insight on Jewish society from a child's perspective.

But Sabra has had a few decades to develop and she has gone on other adventures — helping to keep the son of an ambassador to Israel from turning into the next Adolf Hitler; becoming an advocate for mutants; even working alongside a Palestinian teammate called (sigh) Arabian Knight.

Overall, she’s a pretty minor character with just 50 appearances and it’s far too early to tell what her role in the new film may be.

Oh, and what's this here? I thought Arabian Knight, introduced an issue later, was of Egyptian background, and this sorry excuse for a columnist is taking this out of context too? I'm sorry, but this only compounds the perception he's telling all this out of contempt for Israel, to undermine its birthright history, and suggests he doesn't respect Golda Meir, who refuted the "palestianian" propaganda decades ago. He does make one fairly accurate observation, though:

While some will always balk at the idea of featuring an Israeli superhero at all, this may, in fact, not be where much of the world is at, even as many rally behind BDS. That said, it’s more than likely the film will face a ban in the Middle Eastern countries that have yet to normalize relations with Israel.

Even after the Abraham Accords, don’t expect Haas to be walking a red carpet in Saudi Arabia for the premiere. That new world order is still out of reach.

That is bound to be the case, sadly. If a number of Muslim dominated countries wouldn't screen Gal Gadot's movies, there's no reason to assume this'll be any different.

Through this, I found a Twitter thread posted by Simcha Gross, an assistant professor on ancient Jewish history at the University of Pennsylvania, who found the 1st full tale guest starring Sabra cringeworthy after researching it. He describes the following, in example:

Sahad tells Banner "sometimes it is very hard to be an Arab in Israel. Both my people and the Israelis say that this land is theirs. They could share it, but two very old books tell them they must kill each other over it." Some oversimplification for you! 7

— Simcha Gross (@Simcha_Gross) August 24, 2020

Sahad also tells Bruce "Me, I don't read books." In this issue we encounter only two types of Arabs in Israel; terrorists, and a kindhearted illiterate child thief/con-artist. As for Israelis, we only encounter police officers, soldiers, and Sabra. Not good. 8 pic.twitter.com/AIXP1gGgEy

— Simcha Gross (@Simcha_Gross) August 24, 2020

Not quite, in regards to Arabs: the adult marketeers who yell, "stop, thief!" and give chase are not just Arabic, they're clearly identified as Moslems by the keffiyes they wear on their heads. But, the point about the pseudo-citation of the Bible/Koran is well made, mainly because the boy, as indicated, didn't even read books.

The Hulk takes Sahad's body and flees, with Sabra in pursuit. Here comes the denouement of the story, as the savage Hulk informs Sabra that the Israelis and Arabs are the true savages, mimicking Sahad's geo-political analysis: 12 pic.twitter.com/3TjGQVBpbD

— Simcha Gross (@Simcha_Gross) August 24, 2020

I did think it was odd, in addition, that it's made to sound like Sabra never actually cared about the child in the first place. There's many stories built around the problems of misunderstandings. But this, from a political perspective, really takes the cake. The way it's set up also has the effect of watering down the serious issue of Islamic terrorism, which was just as relevant a topic in the early 80s as it is today.

And, just in case we missed the point of the savage hulk pointing out the inhumanity of the various actors in the conflict "It has taken the hulk to make her see this dead arab boy as a human being. It has taken a monster to awaken her own sense of humanity." 16

— Simcha Gross (@Simcha_Gross) August 24, 2020

And here, it is silly and superfluous to use those kind of descriptions for her personality. Now, you could argue it wouldn't be entirely implausible for the Hulk to dish out an ill-informed lecture. There were other times when he was depicted taking questionable positions, and in Hulk form, Bruce Banner could be mentally messed up (let's also note that in later years, around the time Peter David became writer, multiple personality disorder was emphasized circa issue #377). Even so, the script by Mantlo is very slapdash and the product of people who resorted to cheap paths instead of firm challenges. Not many may realize it, but Sabra's early entries, unfortunately, were not very good, as this story suggests.

And considering Hollywood's track record in the past few decades on the subject of Israel's history, that's one more reason why I'm not optimistic this new Capt. America sequel would respect Israel, let alone Sabra herself. Let's remember, Feige is a bad lot, and has already proven so with the most recent Marvel movies containing wokeness.

The shocking movie made by Jihadi John's sister: a dead schoolgirl, bloodied footsteps and a hooded maniac brandishing a knife

The shocking movie made by Jihadi John's sister: a dead schoolgirl, bloodied footsteps and a hooded maniac brandishing a knife

Jihadi John's 19-year-old sister (pictured) is now a media student at Middlesex University while their brother, now 21, is a small-time criminal with hardline and outspoken Islamist views.

Act of Valor -- Opinion?

Waddup peeps! Long time, no see!

Anyway, I just watched this movie and I thought it was A-mayy-zing!

They portrayed things accurately and well, I just didn't expect a movie to do that anymore.

Here's the making of/trailer.



I'd like to know what you guys thought about this movie (if you've seen it).

Here's the IMDb link for it.

You can watch one of the official trailer here.

Courage. Loyalty. Honor. These words (from the trailer) have lost their true meaning in our modern civilian society, sadly.

Inglourius Basterds

I've always enjoyed WW2 films. I never tire of watching the Nazis get defeated at the hands of freedom. But this film takes that idea to the hilt.

The first trailer of Quentin Tarantino's latest film, which stars Brad Pitt as a Nazi-killing commander, was released today. Inglourious Basterds sees Pitt play commander of the unit Lt Aldo Raine who sets about on a mission to kill and dismember Germans during the Second World War. The film – inspired by 1978 Italian war movie The Inglorious Bastards – follows a band of Jewish-American soldiers dropped into France to spread terror among the Nazi occupiers.

Wow.

A New Movie: "The Messenger of Peace"

Given the title, what kind of movie do you think it's going to be? Here's an excerpt from an article on Fox News:

If film producer Oscar Zoghbi has his way, Americans will be soon be flocking to movie theaters to see a film about the Prophet Muhammad and his followers that Zoghbi hopes will clear up misconceptions about Muslims, including what he says is "the understanding that all Muslims are terrorists."

Nonie Darwish, the author of the upcoming book "Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Sharia Law," said the film will likely try too hard not to offend.

"The movie will probably avoid or justify Muhammad's violent and unprovoked battling years in Medina, where assassination and mass murder were done by Muhammad … in order to spread the religion, take control and silence his critics," Darwish said.

"We will probably see the image of Muhammad that most Muslims were spoon-fed in their religious education."

Robert Spencer, director of JihadWatch.com, said Western audiences looking to learn more about a religion tangled in stereotypes of suicide bombers will be disappointed by "The Messenger of Peace."

"They're already taking a stand on a controversial issue with the title alone, denying and downplaying the manifest fact that numerous Muslims around the world have justified acts of violence by invoking Muhammad's words and example," Spencer said.

But Zoghbi says his film will very deliberately take a moderate approach.

"We are trying to depict the values and teachings of the Prophet. It's not a historical film in any way," he said.

"And it's not a Muslim propaganda film. This film is also for Muslims, and I hope it will encourage them to condemn violence."

One thing Zoghbi hopes to avoid is the violence and outrage in the Muslim world that has followed some recent depictions of the prophet Muhammad.

Islamic conventions forbid the showing of Muhammad in any form, and violence has often followed the release of newspaper cartoons, books and films that criticized or simply depicted the Muslim prophet.

In 2005, the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten ran a cartoon depicting Muhammad wearing a turban with a bomb in it, sparking riots that killed more than 30 people throughout the Islamic world. This year, protests began on news of "Fitna," a film critical of Islam, and Random House cancelled distribution of the widely anticipated book "Jewel of Medina" out of fear of such a reaction.

Zoghbi said that he will make every effort to ensure that "The Messenger of Peace" is in line with Islamic traditions.

"Islam itself doesn't stop you from showing the Prophet," Zoghbi said. "But it is convention and tradition, and we will abide by that. We do not want to offend anyone."

The film will also follow tradition by not portraying various close companions of Muhammad in human form. And the Dubai-based Dar Al Sharia Legal and Financial Consultancy, a branch of the Dubai Islamic Bank, has been hired to make sure the film is in keeping with Islamic standards.

"The Messenger of Peace" has a $130 million budget and is being funded by individual investors located throughout the Middle East — especially in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt. Zoghbi said that a list of investors is expected to be released next month, unless those involved object.

Zoghbi says he hopes his new film will bring people together.

"Nothing has been done on this for 30 years, and I decided it was time to build some bridges."

Bring people together. Build some bridges. What does that even mean? "Hey, you kafirs, let's all just sit down and figure out how you can be happy with us taking over the world. Now, what is it you don't like about paying the jizya?"

Quantum of Solace Trailer Set To Music

In theaters November 14th.

The Shorter Obsession DVD

I just finished watching the one-hour version of Obsession that the Clarion Fund sent out to 28 million people. After reading CAIR's newsletters every day for the last three weeks doing their best to discredit the movie in every way they can think of, I found the movie surprisingly balanced. If anything, I think the film is too generous to Islam.

At the end of the film, for example, several of the interviewees make the point that most Muslims repudiate the violence, which in many ways misses the point. A Muslim can repudiate violence, but Islam does not. And besides, there are other ways to wage jihad (by silencing critics and gaining concessions, for example). So I think the film is too biased toward Muslims.

But in a way, thinking of this as a campaign of changing someone's mind (rather than trying to do it in one shot), this movie is a good introduction to the subject for someone who knows almost nothing about it. It would help open someone's mind to learn more. And the movie is visually and auditorily engaging. Please help me in encouraging the Clarion Fund to make this available for purchasing in packs of ten.

The Emperor Has No Clothes

Somebody needs to say it to those who haven't heard it yet: Islam is a danger to a free society. And what better way to hear it than while you're laughing?

I just saw another movie last night, Religulous, a documentary by Bill Maher. And it, too, broached the subject that Islam isn't really a religion of peace. In fact, it was quite clear the Qur'an is a violence-provoking book. This is a message people really need to hear, and there it was on the big screen, said openly, and also entertainingly.

The movie makes fun of every religion, so Christians and Jews will not like it. But if you have any friends who are agnostics or atheists, send them to see this movie. They will love it, and they will also have their eyes opened to the danger of Islam and they'll even get some good demonstrations of taqiyya in action.

If you have Christian or Jewish friends, send them to An American Carol. It is not only anti-Quran, it is pro-Judeo-Christian.

An American Carol Experience

I just got back from seeing An American Carol. It was great. It was really funny in some parts, and it was refreshing to see jihad spoken about so openly. But the thing that really lifted my spirits was the place was packed! I've never been in a theater that was so jam-packed. There was actually someone sitting on the floor because there were no seats left. And I live in a liberal city.

And at the end of the movie, everyone clapped.

It was definitely worth seeing, and I encourage all of you to go see it this weekend. It would make a huge difference if more movies like this were made in Hollywood. And if movies like this make money, someone will make them.

Watch American Carol This Weekend

It starts playing in theaters this Friday, October 3rd. I think it's going to be a hit and it'll make it easier to talk about Islam's relentless encroachment to our friends, because movies are good for that.

The movie is comedy about a filmmaker who looks a lot like Michael Moore, He's visited by three ghosts who show him the true meaning of America. That's a photo of two of the ghosts.

Check out the official website for the movie.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali on Geert Wilders's New Anti-Islam Film

Mark Alexander (Paperback)
Mark Alexander (Hardback)