Steimatsky books caves on selling Charlie Hebdo direct in their outlets

If there's anywhere you probably didn't expect somebody to cower in the face of violent threats over the Charlie Hebdo "survivor" issue, it's over here, where a major book chain decided only to sell the issue online:

For many years, the Steimatzky bookstore chain has distributed and sold the French "Charlie Hebdo" satirical magazine in Israel. Now Steimatzky has been caught in the eye of the storm following the terrorist attack on the magazine's offices in Paris earlier this month by Muslim extremists, which killed 12 journalists and policemen.

Steimatzky has received 600 copies of the special "survivors' edition," which was issued after the attack, and had been set to go on sale at the bookstore's Ayalon Mall outlet in Ramat Gan.

However, strong reactions from Israel's Arab sector, persuaded Steimatzky to sell the magazines over the Internet rather from the store.

MK Masud Ganaim (United Arab List) sent a warning to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, saying "The State and the booksellers will be responsible for the results," if Steimatzky sells the weekly.

A source at Steimatzky said, "We are not giving up on the sale but we are talking about a small number of magazines, and the chaos that the demonstration against it might cause will hit the regular sales of the store. So we prefer that the Charlie Hebdo sales will be over the Internet, and sales at the store will be unaffected."

Oh, put a lid on it. They're caving and they know it. Lital Shemesh says this is just capitulation in a place where it's very ill-advised to cower.

Nevertheless, the issue sold out quick in the online sales, and as shady as Yisrael Beitenu is, they were willing to protest the bookstore's cowardice.

‘Leave Canada’ Spray-Painted on Synagogue

From INN:

Temple Beth Israel in West Edmonton vandalized with anti-Semitic graffiti and the message ‘Leave Canada,’ shocking congregants. 

Anti-Semitic graffiti along with the chilling order, “Leave Canada” were found spray-painted on a synagogue in West Edmonton, the capital of Alberta province in Canada. 

The graffiti was located on the side wall of Temple Beth Israel in the Oleskiw neighborhood of West Edmonton, causing shock and anxiety to worshippers who noticed it as they walked into synagogue for early morning prayers on Saturday. 

The incident, however, was not reported on until Wednesday. “A number of the congregants were quite distraught, having seen the graffiti on their way into the synagogue. 

They alerted me to it and, of course, I was shocked and devastated as well,” Rabbi Daniel Friedman said. 

“We know that this is not typical of our Canadian brothers and sisters, most of whom share our Canadian values of openness and tolerance.” Rabbi Friedman added that Temple Beth Israel and been fire-bombed and vandalized with hateful graffiti in the past. 

This marks the second time in less than two weeks that a place of worship in Edmonton has been vandalized with hate messages. 

Last week, a Sikh temples was defaced with “Leave Canada” and other profane, racist messages spray-painted on its outer walls.

Hollywood's Jihad Against American Sniper

From Daniel Greenfield:

American Sniper is the movie that should not have existed. Even though the book was a bestseller, nobody in Hollywood wanted the rights. 

And why would they? 

The Iraq War already had an official narrative in Hollywood. It was bad and wrong. Its veterans were crippled, dysfunctional and dangerous. Before American Sniper, Warner Brothers had gone with anti-war flicks like Body of Lies and In the Valley of Elah. It had lost a fortune on Body of Lies; but losing money had never stopped Hollywood from making anti-war movies that no one wanted to watch. 

Even the Hurt Locker had opened with a quote from leftist terrorist supporter Chris Hedges. An Iraq War movie was supposed to be an anti-war movie. There was no other way to tell the story. 

Spielberg’s own interest in American Sniper was focused on “humanizing” the other side. When he left and Clint Eastwood, coming off a series of failed films, took the helm, it was assumed that American Sniper would briefly show up in theaters and then go off to die quietly in what was left of the DVD aisle. 

And then American Sniper broke box office records that had been set by blockbusters like Avatar, Passion and Hangover Part II by refusing to demonize American soldiers or to spin conspiracy tales about the war. Instead of pandering to coastal progressives, it aimed at the patriotic heartland. 

In a sentence you no longer expected to hear from a Hollywood exec, the Warner Brothers distribution chief said, “This is about patriotism and all the things people say the country is lacking these days.” 

The backlash to that patriotism and the things the country is lacking these days didn’t take very long to form and it goes a lot deeper than snide tweets from Michael Moore and Seth Rogen. 

Academy members were reportedly passing around an article from the New Republic, whose author had not actually seen the movie, but still denounced it for not showing Chris Kyle as a bigoted murderer. 

Hollywood progressives are both threatened and angered by American Sniper. And with good reason. 

The most basic reason is the bottom line. Between Lone Survivor, Unbroken and American Sniper, the patriotic war movie is back. Hollywood could only keep making anti-war movies no one would watch as long as that seemed to be the only way to tackle the subject. 

Now there’s a clear model for making successful and respectful war movies based around the biographies and accounts of actual veterans. 

Hollywood studios had been pressured by left-wing stars into wasting fortunes on failed anti-war conspiracy movies. Matt Damon had managed to get $150 million sunk into his Green Zone failed anti-war movie before stomping away from Universal in a huff. 

Body of Lies with Leonardo DiCaprio and Russell Crowe had a real budget estimated at around $120 million, but had opened third after Beverly Hills Chihuahua whose titular tiny dog audiences preferred to either star and their political critiques. 

But why spend over a hundred million on anti-war movies no one wants when American Sniper has already made over $120 million on a budget only half that much? 

Hollywood progressives don’t look forward to having to write, direct and star in patriotic pictures and if they can’t destroy American Sniper at the box office, they can taint it enough that no major star or director will want to be associated with anything like it.  

GO READ THE WHOLE THING. 

Aussie ISIS member, Khaled Sharrouf, teaches sons to torture girls after he rapes them

Aussie ISIS member, Khaled Sharrouf, teaches sons to torture girls after he rapes them

SYDNEY’S Islamic State butchers Khaled Sharrouf and Mohamed Elomar have been accused of buying, raping and torturing Yazidi slave girls in Syria and teaching their young children how to torture the girls. 

One woman has described how Sharrouf’s children threatened to behead them and film their deaths. 

“(They) said that they would make a video while cutting off our heads,” the woman, who says she was bought as a slave by Sharrouf told the ABC’s 7.30 Report last night.

Former ISIS Prisoner: “They Want Something Worse Than 9/11″

From Legal Insurrection:

A man named Ahmad Rashidi was interviewed on Meet the Press today and provided an alarming look into the goals of ISIS.  

He claims they want to be “better” than al-Qaeda and orchestrate an attack “more brutal” than the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center. 

Andrew Johnson of National Review has more: Man Who Escaped ISIS: They Want to Plan an Attack ‘More Brutal’ than 9/11 

The Islamic State is “happy” about the air strikes by the United States because it validates their efforts in emerging as a global threat, says a man who escaped after a month with the group. 

Ahmad Rashidi was captured by the Islamic State when he went to Syria from London to retrieve the two daughters of a family friend; the teenage girls had fled England to marry Islamic State fighters. 

When Rashidi found one of the girls, her husband accused him of being a spy and he was taken prisoner and tortured. He later won the favor of his capturers by telling them he was a doctor; Rashidi is, in fact, a first-year medical student. 

While embedded with the Islamic State for a month, Rashidi gained access to their computers and communications. 

He told NBC News’s Richard Engel that the group communicates with its contacts “every day” and is not worried about the West’s response to its attacks. 

In fact, the Islamic State was “happy” about the American military’s response of air strikes because it proved to the group’s leaders that they were considered as important a threat as al-Qaeda. 

“They want to be more . . . better than al-Qaeda,” he told Engel. “This is why they need to do something more brutal than the World Trade Center.” 

Here’s the video:

Sept. 2014: Obama Said Yemen Was a Success, Today He Says, HE KNEW IT WAS GOING TO FALL

September 2014.

Today, in the Washington Examiner:

President Obama was “not surprised” the Yemeni government fell into the hands of rebels backed by Iran, White House chief of staff Denis McDonough said Sunday. 

The senior Obama aide said the president has had concerns about the Middle Eastern country since the early days of his administration. 

“Governance in Yemen has always been difficult,” McDonough said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” 

McDonough touted counterterrorism efforts in Yemen that he said were designed to keep Arabian Peninsula terrorists “off-kilter.” 

“But the government fell,” host Bob Schieffer said. 

“I mean, the strategy obviously didn’t work.” 

The president’s chief of staff continued to defend the policies that led to the overthrow of the U.S.-backed Yemeni government this week. 

“We were not surprised that this government collapsed,” McDonough said. “We knew this was an ongoing challenge over the course of the last several months.”

Maher Confronts Howard Dean For Saying Paris Terrorists “Are About As Muslim As I Am”

Blindside Blues Band

Rockpalast Crossroads Festival (2010)

01. Led The Blues Do The Healing
02. Crying
03. Night Train
04. Raised on Rock
05. Born With The Blues
06. Renegade
07. Hot Shot
08. Smokehouse Shuffle
09. Bad Luck
10. Crossroads
11. Climb The Sky
12. Mojo Highway
13. Ramblin' On My Mind

::Blindside Blues Band::
Mike Onesko -- Vocals,Guitar
Scott Johnson -- Guitar
Fletcher Little -- Bass,Guitar
Emery Ceo -- Drums

BOMBSHELL: 1979 Article By Valerie Jarrett Fr-In-Law Reveals Start Of Muslim Purchase Of US Presidency

From Pat Dollard:

Why would Muslim oil billionaires finance and develop controlling relationships with black college students? Well, like anyone else, they would do it for self-interest. And what would their self-interest be? We all know the top two answers to that question: 1. a Palestinian state and 2. the advancement of Islam in America. The idea then was to advance blacks who would facilitate these two goals to positions of power in the Federal government, preferably, of course, the Presidency. And why would the Arabs target blacks in particular for this job? Well, for the same reason the early communists chose them as their vanguard for revolution (which literally means “change”) in America. Allow me to quote Trotsky, in 1939: “The American Negroes, for centuries the most oppressed section of American society and the most discriminated against, are potentially the most revolutionary element of the population. They are designated by their historical past to be, under adequate leadership, the very vanguard of the proletarian revolution.” Substitute the word “Islam” for the words “the proletarian revolution,” and you most clearly get the picture, as Islam is a revolutionary movement just like communism is. (Trivia: it is from this very quote that communist Van Jones takes his name. Van is short for vanguard. He was born “Anthony”). In addition, long before 1979, blacks had become the vanguard of the spread of Islam in America, especially in prisons.

Interestingly, in context with the fact that this article was written by her father-in-law, Valerie Jarrett has an unusual amount of influence over Obama (along with personal security that may be even better than his, another unusual and intriguing bit of business here). And equally interesting is that Obama, who may have been a beneficiary of this Muslim money, and may now be in this Muslim debt, has aggressively pursued both of the Muslim agendas I cited above. And, also equally interesting, is that Obama has paid a king’s ransom for court ordered seals of any such records of this potential financing of his college education, and perhaps, of other of his expenses.

Lastly, it’s very important to note that the main source for the article is Khalid Mansour, “the same lawyer who allegedly helped arrange for the entrance of Barack Obama into Harvard Law School in 1988.” (Valerie Jarrett, by the way, was born in Iran. The one country protected by Obama from the sweep of the Arab Spring.) Now all of this may seem sensational, but let’s face facts. What makes it most disturbing is that not only is it all logical, but it suddenly makes a lot of previously confusing things make perfect sense. – Pat Dollard

Excerpted from Daily Interlake: Searching old newspapers is one of my favorite pastimes, and I have tried to use them many times to shed light on current events — or to inform readers about how the past is prologue to our very interesting present-day quandaries.

Recently, I came across a syndicated column from November 1979 that seemed to point 30 years into the future toward an obscure campaign issue that arose briefly in the 2008 presidential campaign.

Though by no means definitive, it provides an interesting insight, at least, into how Chicago politics intersected with the black power movement and Middle Eastern money at a certain point in time. Whether it has any greater relevance to the 2012 presidential campaign, I will allow the reader to decide. In order to accomplish that, I will also take the unusual step of providing footnotes and the end of this column so that each of you can do the investigative work for yourself.

The column itself had appeared in the St. Petersburg (Fla.) Evening Independent of Nov. 6, but it was the work of a veteran newspaperman who at the time was working for the prestigious Chicago Tribune and whose work was syndicated nationally. (1)

So far as I know, this 1979 column has not previously been brought to light, but it certainly should be because it broke some very interesting news about the “rumored billions of dollars the oil-rich Arab nations are supposed to unload on American black leaders and minority institutions.” The columnist quoted a black San Francisco lawyer who said, “It’s not just a rumor. Aid will come from some of the Arab states.”

Well, if anyone would know, it would have been this lawyer — Donald Warden, who had helped defend OPEC in an antitrust suit that year and had developed significant ties with the Saudi royal family since becoming a Muslim and taking the name Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour.

Al-Mansour told Jarrett that he had presented the “proposed special aid program to OPEC Secretary-General Rene Ortiz” in September 1979, and that “the first indications of Arab help to American blacks may be announced in December.” Maybe so, but I looked high and wide in newspapers in 1979 and 1980 for any other stories about this aid package funded by OPEC and never found it verified. (Continued after the jump)

You would think that a program to spend “$20 million per year for 10 years to aid 10,000 minority students each year, including blacks, Arabs, Hispanics, Asians and native Americans” would be referred to somewhere other than one obscure 1979 column, but I haven’t found any other word of it.

Maybe the funding materialized, maybe it didn’t, but what’s particularly noteworthy is that this black Islamic lawyer who “for several years [had] urged the rich Arab kingdoms to cultivate stronger ties to America’s blacks by supporting black businesses and black colleges and giving financial help to disadvantaged students” was also the same lawyer who allegedly helped arrange for the entrance of Barack Obama into Harvard Law School in 1988.

That tale had surfaced in 2008 when Barack Obama was a candidate for president and one of the leading black politicians in the country — Percy Sutton of New York — told an interviewer on a Manhattan TV news show that he had been introduced to Obama “by a friend who was raising money for him. The friend’s name is Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, from Texas. He is the principal adviser to one of the world’s richest men. He told me about Obama.” (2)

This peculiar revelation engendered a small hubbub in 2008, but was quickly dismissed by the Obama campaign as the ditherings of a senile old man. I don’t believe President Obama himself ever denied the story personally, and no one has explained how Sutton came up with this elaborate story about Khalid al-Mansour if it had no basis in fact, and in any case al-Mansour no longer denies it. (3)

Back in 2008, while actually supporting Hillary Clinton in the New York primary, Percy Sutton was interviewed on TV and said that he thought Barack Obama was nonetheless quite impressive. He also revealed that he had first heard about Obama 20 years previously in a letter where al-Mansour wrote, “there is a young man that has applied to Harvard. I know that you have a few friends up there because you used to go up there to speak. Would you please write a letter in support of him?”

Sutton concluded in the interview, “I wrote a letter of support of him to my friends at Harvard, saying to them I thought there was a genius that was going to be available and I certainly hoped they would treat him kindly.”

Until now, there really has been no context within which to understand the Sutton story or to buttress it as a reliable account other than the reputation of Sutton himself as one of the top leaders of the black community in Manhattan — himself a noted attorney, businessman and politician. But the new discovery of the 1979 column that established Khalid al-Mansour’s interest in creating a fund to give “financial help to disadvantaged students” does provide a clue that he might indeed — along with his patron, Arab Prince Alwaleed bin Talal — have taken an interest in the “genius” Barack Obama.

It also might be considered more than coincidence that the author of that 1979 newspaper column was from Chicago, where Barack Obama settled in 1986 a few years after his stint at Columbia University. It is certainly surprising that the author of that column was none other than Vernon Jarrett, the future (and later former) father-in-law of Valerie Jarrett, who ultimately became the consigliatore of the Obama White House.

It is also noteworthy that Vernon Jarrett was one of the best friends and a colleague of Frank Marshall Davis, the former Chicago journalist and lifelong communist who moved to Hawaii in the late 1940s and years later befriended Stanley and Madelyn Dunham and their daughter Stanley Ann, the mother of Barack Obama. (4)

And to anyone who has the modicum of a spark of curiosity, it is surely intriguing that Frank Davis took an active role in the rearing of young Barack from the age of 10 until he turned 18 and left Hawaii for his first year of college at Occidental College in Los Angeles. (5)

It is also at least suggestive that Obama began that college education as a member of the highly international student body of Occidental College in 1979, the same year when Vernon Jarrett was touting the college aid program being funded by OPEC and possibly Prince Alwaleed. The fact that President Obama has studiously avoided releasing records of his college years is suggestive also, but has no evidentiary value in the present discussion. (6)

The nature of Vernon Jarrett’s relationship to Khalid al-Mansour is likewise uncertain, but it is very likely they had known each other as leaders of the black civil-rights movement for many years. Under his previous name of Donald Warden, al-Mansour had founded the African American Association in the Bay Area in the early 1960s. He had also helped inspire the Black Panther Party through his association with black-power leaders such as Huey Newton and Bobby Seale. Seale, of course, had a famous association with Chicago later, when he was part of the Chicago Eight charged with conspiracy and inciting to riot at the Democratic National Convention in 1968. (7)

In any case, it doesn’t matter if Vernon Jarrett and Khalid al-Mansour had a personal relationship or not. For some reason, al-Mansour had used Jarrett as the messenger to get out the word about his efforts to funnel Arab oil money to black students and minority colleges at about the same time that Barack Obama began his college career. That doesn’t mean either Jarrett or al-Mansour knew Obama at that time, but eight years later when Obama was a rising star in Chicago, a friend of Bill Ayers and Valerie Jarrett, it is much more likely that he did indeed have the assistance of very important people in his meteoric rise. The words of Percy Sutton about what al-Mansour told him regarding Obama certainly have the ring of truth:

“His introduction was there is a young man that has applied to Harvard. I know that you have a few friends back there… Would you please write a letter in support of him? (That’s before Obama decided to run.) … and he interjected the advice that Obama had passed the requirements, had taken and passed the requirements necessary to get into Harvard and become president of the Law Review. That’s before he ever ran for anything. And I wrote a letter in support of him to my friends at Harvard, saying to them that I thought there was a genius that was going to be available and I certainly hoped they would treat him kindly…” (2)

What possible significance could all this have? We may never know, but Vernon Jarrett, back in 1979, thought that OPEC’s intention to fund black and minority education would have huge political ramifications. As Jarrett wrote:

“The question of financial aid from the Arabs could raise a few extremely interesting questions both inside and outside the black community. If such contributions are large and sustained, the money angle may become secondary to the sociology and politics of such an occurrence.” (1)

He was, of course, right.

As Jarrett suggests, any black institutions and presumably individuals who became beholden to Arab money might be expected to continue the trend of American “new black advocacy for a homeland for the Palestinians” and presumably for other Islamic and Arabic interests in the Middle East. For that reason, if for no other, the question of how President Obama’s college education was funded is of considerably more than academic interest.

Percy Sutton on Obama and Khalid Mansour

Boko Haram Attacks Key Nigerian City, Resident Says “Please Pray For Us”

The Muslims Are Restless

From the BBC:

Fighters from the Islamist militant group Boko Haram have launched an attack on the key city of Maiduguri in north-eastern Nigeria, reports say. 

Fierce fighting was reported on the outskirts. The military is carrying out air strikes, and a curfew is in place. 

Maiduguri is home to tens of thousands of people who have fled Boko Haram attacks and was visited on Saturday by President Goodluck Jonathan. 

Another Boko Haram attack was reported in Monguno, north of Maiduguri.

"Netanyahu ought to remember that President Obama has a year and a half left to his presidency, and that there will be a price”

An unnamed, (chickenshit?) White House aide describing why Israel’s worry over their existence measured against Iran’s progress thru negotiations is less important than Obama’s measure of personal pique.

Perhaps the price will END UP being Israel cutting a deal with Russia, canceling all F-35 orders in stead of reducing them (as they ALREADY HAVE) as they already did with the total cancellation of the V-22 Osprey orders, and swapping Elbit, Rafale electronics and Heron Drone licensed production for SU-35’s (which have much greater range than F-15’s and better maneuverability than F-15, F-16 or F-18). Does this White House aide think about these things, and what such a switchover would mean for us?

And the impact in the world?
Michael Goodwin:

White House going nuclear on Netanyahu

By Michael Goodwin

January 24, 2015 | 11:07pm

Thou shall not cross Dear Leader.
With their gutter sniping failing to stop Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s planned March speech before Congress, White House aides are unloading their full arsenal of bile.
“He spat in our face publicly, and that’s no way to behave,” one Obama aide told an Israeli newspaper. “Netanyahu ought to remember that President Obama has a year and a half left to his presidency, and that there will be a price.”
It is pointless to say petty threats do not become the Oval Office. Trying to instruct this White House on manners recalls what Mark Twain said about trying to teach a pig to sing: It wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Still, the fury is telling. It reminds, as if we could forget, that everything is always about Obama.
How dare Israel be more concerned with the existential threat of Iranian nukes than with Obama’s feelings? And what do members of Congress think they are, a separate branch of government or something?
Yes, the presidency deserves respect, even when the president doesn’t. Although Obama routinely ignores lawmakers and their role in our constitutional system of checks and balances, there is an argument afoot that Congress should have taken the high road and consulted him before inviting Netanyahu.
The argument has a point — but not a compelling one. To give Obama veto power over the visit would be to put protocol and his pride before the most important issue in the world.
That is Iran’s march to nuclear weapons, and Obama’s foolish complicity. His claim at the State of the Union that “we’ve halted the progress of its nuclear program and reduced its stockpile of nuclear material” would be laughable if it weren’t so dangerous. The claim earned him three ­Pinocchios, with four being an outright whopper, by The Washington Post.
Outside the president’s yes-men circle, nobody believes the mad mullahs will voluntarily give up their quest for the bomb. International sanctions made life difficult for the regime, especially with oil prices cratering, but Obama ­relaxed restrictions with nothing to show for it except negotiations where he keeps bidding against himself.
He is desperate for a deal, and the Iranians know it, so they want to keep talking. They are gaining concessions and buying time, which means a reversal of their weapons program becomes much harder to achieve.
The ticking doomsday clock is what led to the remarkable comments by Democrat Robert ­Menendez. After Obama warned that more sanctions, even if they would not take effect unless the talks collapsed, could scare off the Iranians, the New Jersey senator said Obama was repeating talking points that “come straight out of Tehran.”
That’s a zinger for the ages — and has the added advantage of being true.
Any deal that leaves Iran with a capacity to make a nuke in weeks or months will ignite a regional arms race. As I have noted, American military and intelligence officials believe a nuclear-armed Iran will lead to a nuclear exchange with Israel or Arab countries within five years.
Israel has the most to lose from an Iranian nuke, and ­Netanyahu can be expected to articulate a forceful argument against Obama’s disastrous course. That’s why House Speaker John Boehner invited him, and it’s why the president is so bent out of shape and refuses to meet with Netanyahu. He doesn’t want Americans to hear the other side.
But we must. And Congress must not shirk from its duty to demand a meaningful agreement with Iran, or none at all.
An extra layer of sanctions waiting in the wings is good backup, but another pending bill is more important. It would demand that any agreement come before the Senate for a vote.
Naturally, Obama opposes it, but that’s all the more reason why it is needed. As Ronald Reagan famously said about Soviet promises, “Trust but verify.”
So must it be with Iran and, sadly, our own president.

No Clinton/Obama Plan For Libya – Unintended Consequences, or Just Failed Globalist Execution

Perhaps the least understood of all the Obama/Clinton follies.

The recent rise of extremist violence within Europe actually explains the 2011 decision to remove gatekeeper Kaddaffi. The 2010 Rivkin Project in France, combined with EU leaders simultaneously admitting the failures of multiculturalism led to a knee-jerk globalist reaction from the far left to save their collectivist vision.

WHAT IS THE RIVKIN PROJECT?

The Rivkin Project: Globalism Using Multiculturalism to Subvert Sovereign Nations.
During October 19-22, 2010, Charles Rivkin, US Ambassador to France, invited a 29-member delegation from the Pacific Council on International Policy (PCIP) to a conference in France, the stated purpose of which was to discuss Arab and Islamic relations in the country.  The meeting was part of a far-reaching subversive agenda to transform that entire character of France and in particular the consciousness of French youth, which includes the use of France’s Muslim youth in a typically manipulative globalist strategy behind the usual façade of “human rights” and “equality.”

Globalist Delegation at US Embassy – The PCIP report states of the conference:

…The delegation further focused on three key themes. First, the group examined Franco-Muslim issues in France through exchanges with Dr. Bassma Kodmani, Director of the Arab Reform Institute, and Ms. Rachida Dati, the first female French cabinet member of North African origin and current Mayor of the 7th Arrondissement in Paris. A trip to the Grand Mosque of Paris and a meeting with the Director of Theology and the Rector there provided additional insight. Second, meetings with Mr. Jean-Noel Poirier, the Vice President of External Affairs at AREVA (a highly innovative French energy company), and with Mr. Brice Lalonde, climate negotiator and former Minister of the Environment, highlighted energy and nuclear policy issues and the differences between U.S. and French policies in these arenas. And finally, the delegation explored the connections between media and culture in California (Hollywood) and France in meetings at the Louvre, the Musee D’Orsay, and at FRANCE 24 – the Paris-based international news and current affairs channel.

The over-riding concern seems to have been on matters of a multicultural dimension, including not only Arab and Islamic relations in France, but perhaps more importantly in the long term, a discussion on the impact of Hollywood “culture” on the French.

The USA has long played a duplicitous game of “fighting terrorism” of an “Islamic” nature as one of the primary elements of its post-Cold War stratagem of manufactured permanent crises, while using “radical Islam” for it own purposes, the well-known examples being: (1) supporting Bin Laden in the war against Russia in Afghanistan; (2) backing Saddam Hussein in the war against Iran; (3) supporting the Kosovo Liberation Army in ousting the Serbs from mineral-rich Kosovo, the KLA having been miraculously transformed from being listed by the US State Department as a “terrorist organization,” to becoming “freedom fighters.”

When US globalists pose as friends of Muslims, the latter should sup with the Great Shaitan with an exceedingly long spoon.

GO READ THE WHOLE THING.

Robert Cray

Cookin' In Mobile 2010

Gail Simone delights me with another honor

Simone has written several comic books over the years, but is sadly an ultra-leftist person, as she once made abundantly clear on the Chuck Dixon forum, where she no longer visits. And here now in this special post is a little something she had to say about me along with silly ol' Judd Winick:

@joeharris @ronmarz @JuddWinick @CullyHamner I swear, he had this long rant about something I never said and don't feel, just made it up.
— GAIL SIMONE (@GailSimone) December 19, 2014

LOL! Swearing is not enough, she's got to back herself up to boot, and she hasn't, so why bother writing that, other than to say, "I hate you", which is just what her tweet amounts to? If that's your sentiment, say so, Mrs. Simone, don't hold back. There's also this combo involving Ron Marz:

@GailSimone @JuddWinick @CullyHamner @joeharris Since he chose that address, I have zero sympathy for him.
— Ron Marz (@ronmarz) December 19, 2014

Good! Because asking for any from such an awful man would be foolish in the extreme. He's only made me feel honored as well. When did I ever ask for any from such a disgrace who's got such lack of caring for life?

@ronmarz @JuddWinick @CullyHamner @joeharris He's good for a laugh, he's just not very smart, or honest.
— GAIL SIMONE (@GailSimone) December 19, 2014

That could easily describe a certain somebody who sees nothing wrong with Islamofascism, and the misogyny and homophobia practiced within it. She's pretty good for laughing at herself. In fact, I think I'll put on a Hannibal Buress routine now and tell things like they are.

"See, I'm Gail Simone and I can talk down to everybody because I've got this great career writing comic books!" Yeah, but you turn a deaf ear and a blind eye to the plight of women and homosexuals in Muslim countries, Gail. So please, kindly tone down that shrieky little boast of yours, why don't you? Because you're a charlatan and a major embarrassment, that's what. In retrospect, you actually deserved to lose your gig writing Birds of Prey, and you've never even offered any genuine gratitude to Dixon for getting the series launched to start with. Any women who's a realist and figures out how your mind functions isn't going to consider you a big deal in the long run, and neither are gays and lesbians who figure that out. So wake up and smell the coffee, Gail, because you're only riding the same futile path as Don Quixote.

So far, Simone has never actually indicated she's willing to apologize for "media enablers" of people in comicdom who endorse or tolerate misogyny, in storytelling or real life. But with these tweets, she's come pretty close. I'm honestly not too surprised she'd be willing to act as some kind of apologist in certain instances, and it was probably bound to happen sooner or later. Ah well, it just shows how poor some folksies' judgement can be when money is involved.

Fight against anti-semitism still continues in France

World Israel News reports that Muslim anti-semitism still plagues France, and the authorities have their hands full combating it. A planned attack in Lyon was fortunately thwarted, and four men have been arrested for aiding the jihadist at the kosher supermarket.