OK, so because there is a political cartoon showing Ariel Sharon, that is inherently antisemtic? Because Fouse thinks it looks like a cartoon from a Nazi newspaper, the motivation of the artist/MSU was antisemitic? You're always making alot of assumptions about others, but these really tell us more how your minds work.

Also, Sharon isn't reviled simply because he is a warrior. He's especially reviled because of his role in the Sabra & Shatila massacre. For those unfamiliar, during Israel's war with Lebanon, a group of Lebanese Christian militants, under the protection of the IDF, entered two PLO affiliated refugee camps and murdered between 700-3500 civilians. The official Israeli commission found that Sharon held "personal responsibility" for the massacres and he was dismissed as Defense Minister.

I think people may attempt to depict him in an unflattering way, not out of Antisemitism, but instead to show their view of his true nature. It seems like you both are again confusing political criticism with Antisemitism.

I spent 25 years in DEA having to deal with obnoxious attorneys-no longer. I have no intention of engaging a lawyer with CAIR in any kind of dialogue-about anything.

"I think people may attempt to depict him in an unflattering way, not out of Antisemitism, but instead to show their view of his true nature.

-the incredibly obtuse Mr. Toady May 26, 2008 8:04 AM "

Imagine, if you will, Toady Gallinger being depicted as a person in black, lawyerly robes and hands covered in blood, being humped over a table by a clearly Muslim/terrorist individual in a Keffiyeh and carrying an AK-47. I have no problem with Toady being shown this way, as this is his true nature. Anybody else?

"I have no intention of engaging a lawyer with CAIR in any kind of
dialogue-about anything.

- Garry Fouse May 26, 2008 8:31 AM"

No prob, Garry, I'll take your light work!

CAIR must pay well enough for Gallinger to suppress his conscience and rationality.

It doesn't even look a thing like Sharon.

"Emanuel said:
It doesn't even look a thing like Sharon.

May 26, 2008 10:32 AM"

Yes, and I'm sure that Toady G's next brain-fart wasn't something like "That dirty Jew..." Care to enlighten us, Counsel? Or would you have to refuse to answer the question?

"I have no intention of engaging a lawyer with CAIR in any kind of dialogue-about anything."

Way to be open to debate and new ideas. Academic freedom exemplified.

Again, the minions of this blog, rather than engage in meaningful conversation, engage in ad hominid attacks including saying they would like to see me assaulted. Constantine, you delete Antisemitic content, expose anonymous posts from IP addresses of people you don't like, but can't block Islamaphobic posts or personal attacks on me?

Some of us are attempting to depict Toady G. in an unflattering way, not out of "Anti-QuislingLawyerism", but instead to show our views of his true nature. It seems like you, Toady G., are again confusing political criticism with "Anti-QuislingLawyerism". We're merely engaging in political satire and WebTheatre of words. Surely Toady G. is not against Freedom of Speech, is he? After all, this is what groups like MSU are all about when they engage in their "truthy" depictions of IDF operations.

Sound familiar, Toady G.?

Toady Gallinger talks shit about Constantine, then cries for his protection. Kind of like the MSU which throws cinder blocks at the FBI, then moans about Islamophobia and asks for police intervention. Toady, CAIR, and MSU are friends of terrorists and they deserve no respect, let alone help from people they want to hurt.

is it really a stretch to think that the cartoon is anti-semitic when it mixes the targeting of young children - "ages 3 and younger will be shot on sight" - with a headline titled Cannibal? If it smells like a blood libel, and quacks like a blood libel, oh I guess it must be a chicken. Anti-Semitic much?

Oh yeah, and the probably ADL thinks so too:

Khalil Bendib is the artist of the MSU's cartoon
http://www.adl.org/Israel/anti_israel/KhalilBendib/

"Khalil Bendib, a Berkeley-based Muslim-American artist and cartoonist, has disseminated anti-Semitic English language political cartoons since the 1990s. Like cartoons appearing in newspapers across the Arab world featuring anti-Semitic caricatures and motifs, Bendib's have employed a wide range of classic anti-Semitic images, commentary and ugly stereotypes."

"Bendib has portrayed Jews as demonic-looking, crooked-nosed blood-thirsty killers, and Israelis as monolithic, malicious schemers plotting to control the planet. He has perpetuated the blood libel accusation, rehashed Jewish conspiracy theories, trivialized the Holocaust and blamed Israel, Zionists and the American Israel lobby for much of the world's ills."

Todd,

Your affiliation with CAIR, an unindited co-conspirator in a terror case, is known.

Plus, why dont you protest Islamic intimidation, violence, and hateful rhetoric? because if that goes away, "Islamophobia" will follow.

It's funny calling me Toady, that's what the kids in 4th grade used to call me. Something never change.

Again, the hate that is directed towards any dissenting opinion shows what this blog is really about. It's not about fighting hate, but encouraging a particular type (that geared at Muslims) of hate. This post started because of an assumption that a comic was antisemitic, my initial point that this assumption is because of the way Fouse's and others' minds work is proven by the attacks here in this chain. You assume that others are discriminatory and hateful because you yourself are discriminatory and hateful.

To respond to somethings quickly, I think the cartoon and the labels it puts on Sharon are much more likely to be related to Sabra and Shatila than as blood libel. It seems like the goal is to make any political commentary negative towards Israel or its officials appear as Antisemitic.

This blog and the people on it have condemned the ADL when it does not agree with them (for example, about the UCI admin). Now they are an authority on everything? Moreover, accusations = fact?

Emanuel - the fact that I'm a private attorney who has represented CAIR-LA, along with many many other nonprofit and other clients. I've worked with and volunteered for the local office of CAIR for many years. They are great guys, anyone who has questions about their intentions should get to know them. If you think I don't protest against hateful acts committed by Muslims, you don't know me. For a better idea of my religious/philosophical beliefs, check out my blog on the subject: postmodernmuslim.com. Also, isn't blaming Muslims for Islamaphobia the same as blaming Jews for antisemitism? Would it be appropriate to say, "If the Jews just give up Zionism then antisemitism would go away"? Obviously not. It's a ridiculously stupid statement, as is yours.

No, Zionism is not the same as Islamic terrorism. 'Islamophobia' is the most ridiculous made-up prejudice to date. The people who use the term never condemn Islamic violence and get around their corruption by defining 'terrorism' as something Jews and Americans commit. Islamic anti-Semitism is the same anti-Semitism seen during the 20s and 30s in Germany. Anti-Zionism to Arabs is the same as the ill feeling Germans had towards the Weimar republic before the rise of Hitler. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, among many other Islamic big-shots in the Middle East, met with Hitler and admired him. Sayyid Qutb--in his day, a member of the Muslim brotherhood, a decedent of the modern MSA--adopted the Hitler look because Hitler was so popular among Islamic revivalists.

CAIR is known to be a front for terror--NOT FREEDOM FIGHTER--groups such as Hamas and Hezbolla. Their affiliation with the UCI MSU only further demonstrates that.

I don't know what you problem is Todd. How you got through law school as someone who sees Third Century BC Near Eastern law as something compatible with today baffles me. You are nothing but a quack and I can't wait until your corrupt ways get you disbarred.

"Todd Gallinger said:
Also, isn't blaming Muslims for Islamaphobia the same as blaming Jews for antisemitism?

May 27, 2008 8:59 AM"

Yeah, I saw just the other day a mob of Jews rioting because of cartoons describing Moses as a Chasid with a bomb in his turban.

And I recall the Nun killed in Israel because she believed that Jews kill Christian children for Matzah-making.

I especially remember the Muslim woman who was threatened because she named her child's teddy-bear King David.

Or were those the actions of 'moderate' Muslims?

When your group acts like blood-thirsty killers every time you think your religion has been insulted, perhaps you shouldn't wonder why you're treated like the blood-thirsty killers you are. Or maybe Toady G., the lackey of Islamofascist conspirators, thinks as Theo Van-Gogh did when, as his chest was being turned into Swiss cheese, he said, "We can talk about this!"

if it was a comment on just sabra and shatilla, than why not title it "Murderer" instead of "Cannibal"?
quack quack

Would to agree with you, Jonathan, but the drawing is a parody of the poster for the Anthony Hopkins film, Hannibal. Same fat lips and nose--you can look it up.

It doesn't look anything like Anthony Hopkins or Ariel Sharon. They might be parodying the 'Hannibal' poster, but that is only so they can use the word 'Cannibal.' Comparing Ariel Sharon, an Israeli Prime Minister, to Hopkin's character in the Hannibal series is appalling, libelous and anti-semitic by itself.

I have a request of the pro-Israel crowd:

Could one of you (or more) please give me an instance (with evidence) in which a Jewish person is shown in a political cartoon or criticized in any other way, where you feel the depiction or criticism is not anti-semitic?

I eagerly await your replies. Thank you.

I have a request of the pro-black crowd:

Could one of you (or more) please give me an instance (with evidence) in which a black person is shown in a political cartoon or criticized in any other way, where you feel the depiction or criticism is not anti-black?

I eagerly await your replies. Thank you.

I have a request of the pro-Muslim crowd:

Could one of you (or more) please give me an instance (with evidence) in which a Muslim person is shown in a political cartoon or criticized in any other way, where you feel the depiction or criticism is not anti-Muslim?

I eagerly await your replies. Thank you.

I have a request of the pro-Mexican crowd:

Could one of you (or more) please give me an instance (with evidence) in which a Mexican person is shown in a political cartoon or criticized in any other way, where you feel the depiction or criticism is not anti-Mexican?

I eagerly await your replies. Thank you.

BRYAN, I DOUBT YOU WOULD ASK YOUR QUESTION TO ANY OF THE ABOVE-MENTIONED GROUPS, AND I KNOW YOU WOULDN'T PHRASE YOUR QUESTION THE SAME WAY TO THEM. SO WHY DO YOU ADDRESS JEWS LIKE YOU DID? THAT SHOULD MAKE YOU THINK.

"Could one of you (or more) please give me an instance (with evidence) in which a Jewish person is shown in a political cartoon or criticized in any other way, where you feel the depiction or criticism is not anti-semitic?"

Sure, whenever the depiction doesn't have the individual with a hook-nose, a Star of David embedded in his or her clothes, or has the blood of children on their hands. As for criticisms, those that don't mention Israel and focus strictly on their policies.

A good example is when Joe Lieberman ran as Vice-Presidential Candidate. Of course, that contrasts rather poorly with how HuffPo, Daily Kos, etc. treated him when he ran against Ned Lamont. BTW I didn't vote for him in 2000, as he was anti-school choice.

"A good example" = what I felt was a positive example, BTW.

Bryan,

I can't recall specific cartoons, but I am sure that Henry Kissinger was the subject of many political cartoons back in the 1970s that nothing to do with his Jewishness.

More specifically, could anyone please provide instances of political cartoons or other criticisms of ISRAELI figures that you do not consider anti-semitic.

I am asking this because I feel you folks jump on ANY criticism of the Israelis or satirical depiction of them as anti-semitic.

I think if you look at this picture of Sharon objectively, as I have, you will find that it is a combination of a couple of things. First of all, it is a caricature of Sharon. These types of drawings tend to purposely over-emphasize the distinguishing characteristics of the subject. If you go look at actual pictures of Sharon, as I have, you will see that his nose is somewhat long and sloping, he has chubby cheeks/jowls, and bags under his eyes. All of these features are slightly exaggerated in this cartoon, because that is the nature of political cartoons like this one.

Secondly, like many political cartoons, this one needs to be viewed in its historical context to fully "get" it. In the lower-right corner, you can see that it is from 2001. This is the same year that the movie Hannibal was released. I don't see an exact date for the cartoon, but I am assuming that it came out around the same time of the year as the film. If you go and look at the poster for Hannibal, you will see that this cartoon is also a take-off on that.

caricature of Sharon + parody of contemporary film poster = this political cartoon, which is not anti-semitic

Also, I believe I have found the original source of the cartoon. The artist(s) website can be found here:

http://www.bendib.com/

Take a look around that site and learn something about caricature and parody. I found this cartoon particularly interesting:

http://www.bendib.com/islam/A-11-15-Zarkaoui.jpg

Is this unflattering depiction racist against Arabs? If you use the same logic as you have with the Sharon cartoon then I suppose so. But the artist(s) are both anti-Jew and anti-Arab? How does that even work?

It doesn't, that's how. Very clearly, both cartoons are unflattering caricatures of their particular subjects. I hope this has helped you folks better understand the art political cartoons.

Bryan @ May 29, 2008 1:45 PM,

Well, when I look at this particular caricature again, I see a Star of David and the word, "Eretz Israel" by it. These are Jewish symbols and words, are they not? Why not "State of Israel", instead of "Eretz Israel" to ensure that people get the message that MSU hates a particular nation, instead of a people? As for the Star of David, despite the fact that it is on the flag of the State of Israel, it is obviously a Jewish symbol that has been made well known to the World as being so. You can thank the Holocaust for that!

Lastly, if even you (who are supposedly so 'enlightened' that you have to lecture us "folks" about how to understanding political cartoons) can not distinguish between JEWISH...

"Could one of you (or more) please give me an instance (with evidence) in which a JEWISH person is shown in a political cartoon or criticized in any other way, where you feel the depiction or criticism is not anti-semitic? @ May 28, 2008 8:05 PM"

...and ISRAELI....

"More specifically, could anyone please provide instances of political cartoons or other criticisms of ISRAELI figures that you do not consider anti-semitic. @ May 29, 2008 1:45 PM"

...than obviously you don't get the symbolism as well as you high-and-mightily thought you did. Maybe you, yourself need a class on the Art of Political Cartoons, not us. Until the World at large (and, yes, you insufferable JackA**, that includes Mr. Bryan Garcia) starts showing they can mentally separate the State of Israel and Jews, then all criticisms of Zionism and the State of Israel is Anti-Semitic. Xinh-Loi as to that....

Of course I can distinguish between Jewish and Israeli. I just changed my mind and felt that an example of an Israeli being shown in a political cartoon or criticized in other ways would be more relevant to the conversation.

Your views, shared by others, also seem rather ironic to me. You complain that critics can't/don't separate Israel from Jewish people and culture, yet at the same time point out how intertwined the two are.

Anyways, having a debate with someone such as yourself who is immature enough to constantly use the user name that you have is fairly pointless. I might as well be trying to debate Ann Coulter. So good day to you.

"Bryan Garcia said:

Anyways, having a debate with someone such as yourself who is immature enough to constantly use the user name that you have is fairly pointless. I might as well be trying to debate Ann Coulter. So good day to you."

Another Anti-Israel pseudo-intellectual who got his feelins' hurt. Too bad they don't make them tough enough to deal with any criticism...but, then again, you can't get so tough boxing in an echo-chamber like HuffPo or DKos. I wonder what colour burkah Bryan will be forced to wear? Pink?

No one here fails to make the distinction between Jews and Israel. It is an obvious point to make under the circumstances that Muslim 'anti-Zionism' is just an alias Muslim anti-Semitism (I say that because Muslims want the entire Middle East to be for the Muslims... until they set out to take the whole world).

The whole concept of believing that the Jews have no right to nationhood or to defend themselves from attackers is anti-Semitic (this is proven by the rhetoric ridden with lies and the racist cartoons). Even the 'Judaism YES! Zionism NO!' slogan implies that the only good Jew is a subservient Jew. Most MSU members aren't even Palestinian, so they are protesting Israel's existence in the name of Islam, not in the name of the made up nation 'Palestine.'

People who draw embellished cartoons of Arab terrorists are doing it in reaction to their brutal attacks on innocents at every hemisphere of the globe, not because they are merely trying to survive and maintain their sovereignty.

A moral equivalency cannot be drawn here. Caricatures of Jews exist all over the place; one could say that they are racist, but not necessarily anti-Semitic, so no one really complains. The cartoon in question is not only racist, but depicts Jews as ogre-like cannibals and incites mass violence against them... it is very hard to get around these observations.

I must once again point out that that cartoon looks nothing like Sharon.

It actually looks a lot like Sharon, in my opinion. Well, an embellished caricature of Sharon, but Sharon nonetheless. To say it looks NOTHING like him is pretty ridiculous.

I feel I made a pretty strong case in my analysis for why this image is not anti-semitic, but you seem eager to just dismiss everything I said.

Emanuel, are you saying that it would be okay to produce and distribute racist depictions of Arabs because some of them do bad things? Again, you're not applying the same standards and logic to the side you choose to defend. The Israeli government has no doubt done bad things. Yet you seem to start with the base assumption that they have never done anything wrong, ever. Going from this assumption, you declare Israelis immune from these types of depictions. Basically what I am saying is that BOTH sides are guilty of wrongdoing and BOTH sides are fair game for being depicted in an unflattering light, as this artist has done.

No one has really yet addressed the comic of the Arab that I posted. It is a pretty unflattering depiction. The guy even has fangs. Your logic is that an unflattering depiction = racism. So this artist is both anti-semitic and anti-Arab? How does that work? Especially since he himself is Arab, I believe.

You are right about the fact that only some Muslim Arabs do these things, but most don't seem to object. I really don't care about racial stereotypes in cartoons or cartoons in general; I have major reservations about intentions to insight the resurrection of genocidal Nazi tendencies however.

If you can't see the similarities between what is happening in the Muslim world today to what happened in Germany before the Holocaust, you must be completely braindead.

A moral equivalence cannot be drawn between rogue Palestinian Arab terrorism and Israelis defending their internationally recognized country. Whatever you think is fair game(ie. anti-semitic cartoons) is not necessarily endearing for UCI as an academic institute to allow on campus.

Emanuel, why should I engage in any sort of dialogue with you when you just insult me by insinuating that I am "braindead?" Or implying that I support anti-semitism.

You've once again shown zero proof that the cartoon in question is anti-semitic. It is a cartoon critical of very specific Israeli officials, not a blanket statement against all Jews. You have still yet to explain why the artist, if they are in fact anti-semitic, also draw cartoons VERY unflattering and critical of someone like Zarkaoui? Wouldn't this mean that they are both anti-semitic AND anti-Arab (look at how grotesquely Zarkaoui is portrayed)? That wouldn't even make sense. Therefore it's logical to say that they are more than likely NEITHER.

"I say that because Muslims want the entire Middle East to be for the Muslims... until they set out to take the whole world"
Emmanuel in his book The Elders of Mecca

Bryan,

There is a difference between cartoons that exaggerate an individual's physical features and those of an ethnic stereotype. For example, every US president has experienced this from Jimmy Carter's small stature to Clinton's red nose to Bush's big ears. That is one thing, and there is nothing wrong with that.

But when you draw characters that portray an ethnic stereotype, that is another. I strongly suggest you google Der Stuermer and examine the drawings of Jews that were portayed in the Nazi era. I am intimately familair with Der Stuermer and the life of its editor, Julius Streicher. When I saw the caricature of Sharon, I recognized the style immediately. (I have read-I don't know myself, that this cartoon was drawn by an anti-Semitic Muslim cartoonist in Berkeley.)

There are also old drawings of blacks from the deep South many decades ago that did the same thing, images of lazy blacks laying on a front porch couch in overalls with big lips and eating watermelon. I saw them in an old Georgia flea market. They are insulting, and I am sure Chancellor Drake would have stepped in if they appeared at a UCI rally. (and I would have stood with him.)

I never told you to engage in dialogue with me, you decided to do that on your own. The lips, eyes, nose, and especially the eyebrows and far-head on the cartoon are way off--in fact too off to be a worthy caricature of Sharon; His face is much more square-like too... if you are correct, the artist just has no talent.

But being that the word 'cannibal' is next to to the picture and the Star of David is present at the bottom of the poster, it is obvious what the implication is(certainly not a critique of the Israeli's policies). I believe that the author of this article has brought up plenty of examples as to why this cartoon is ant-Semitic however.

And I didn't call you braindead, I said you must be braindead if you can't see the similarities between 1930s Germany and contemporary Arab society.

Todd, I don't know what you mean by Elders of Mecca... If perhaps you a alluding to some sort of reverse parallel to the anti-semitic hoax 'Elders of Zion' you are only further proving your intellectual incompetence.

For Muslims, ambition for world dominance is no hidden conspiracy. The past reality--which today is an idea--of a united armed Caliphate since Mohammed's successors that within a century conquered through violence most of the known world contained within it a mentality of coerciveness and theological backwardness that not surprisingly resonates to this day.

But its funny that you use 'Mecca,' because the Islamic world has not been able to organize itself very efficiently around one point of reference since it's conception... Damascus lasted less than one hundred years. Within the five hundred years of Baghdad's prominence, it was only able to exercise its full 'spiritual' authority with any sort of efficiency for only a fraction of that period and was not able to have any influence on its Mongolian conquerors. The Ottoman Empire, that abhorrent regime, began to decline just as soon as it ascended in the face of the much more sophisticated modern European civilizations. And as for Mecca, it unfortunately fell victim to the Muslims of Medina only because it was the richest city in Arabia. Since then, Muslims have just been praying to that rock thats over there, which doesn't mean much... I really wouldn't compare Mecca to what Zion once was, because thats just an insult to Judaism and its history.

There are only three things that unite Muslims more than any spiritual authority and/or superficial ritual today and even in the past however, and those are conquest, booty and hatred of other communities and religious traditions, especially those which were Jewish.

Today, this coalition of hate and violence seems to be lead by Iran, whom Hamas and Hezbolla are only vassals of. The main contender to this leadership was the Sunni terror group Al Quaeda, but they decided to engage us in Iraq and Afganistan like the braindead cavemen that they are... You know however, that this little pissing contest is just Islamic tradition since the 'martyrdom' of that barbarian Ali 1400 years ago.

I am certainly not going to say that there is some sort of grand well organized conspiracy in the Islamic world--certainly not one centered in Mecca--to exterminate Jews or take over the world because the Muslims were never really that good at organizing. But their hatred and violence in of themselves could certainly go far enough to be as effective as a well organized conspiracy to exterminate Jews and start worldwide violence in the name of their religion. In this I am going only on what I see that is evident in the Middle Eastern mentality, even that which exists at the UCI campus.

I'm sorry, what part of the guys is anti-semitic do you not get?
again, from the ADL:
"Bendib has portrayed Jews as demonic-looking, crooked-nosed blood-thirsty killers, and Israelis as monolithic, malicious schemers plotting to control the planet. He has perpetuated the blood libel accusation, rehashed Jewish conspiracy theories, trivialized the Holocaust and blamed Israel, Zionists and the American Israel lobby for much of the world's ills."
a slideshow:
http://www.adl.org/Israel/anti_israel/KhalilBendib/khalil_bendib_slideshow.html

and the questions isn't can he be anti-semitic if he's anti-muslim. It's irrelevant. Being one doesn't negate the other, or vice-versa, or any combination of that. What does relativity have to do with it??? The question is does he unfairly treat jews in his subjects, painting them in an anti-semitic light, and the answer is yes.

Another question-
what do you think antisemitism is if its none of the things we've said above? Or to you, does it just simply not exist?

Anon,

To the extent that your question was directed to me, Antisemitism certainly exists. Like pornography, it is difficult to define and I think the answer of whether something is or isn't Antisemitic (or any other type of hate literature) should consider the creator's motives and the context that it is displayed in. If you want an easy answer to a complex problem, you can look to the hate-mongers on here but I ain't giving it.

My concern is when claims of Antisemitism are used to promote some other political objective. This is an enemy to the process of discovery the truth, and also belittles those who actually do suffer from any sort of discrimination.

Once again, Todd the lawyer can't even define something as simple to define as pornography. We might as well end the whole debate because anti-Semitism is so difficult to define as well... I guess you win Todd; I mean, being that nothing can be defined.

CAIR, please keep this guy.

LOL. Emanuel, I would like to be amused. Please define both Pornography and Antisemitism in a matter which does not require a subjective determination.

If you knowledge of these subjects is anything like your knowledge of Islamic history the answer is sure to be hilarious.

Pornography - Printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings.

Anti-Semitism - hostility to or prejudice against Jews. It May be manifested in many ways, ranging from individual expressions of hatred and discrimination against individual Jews to organized violent attacks by mobs or even state police or military attacks on entire Jewish communities.

Extreme instances of persecution include:
-the German Crusade of 1096,
-the expulsion from England in 1290,
-the Spanish Inquisition, the expulsion from Spain in 1492,
-the expulsion from Portugal in 1497,
-the pogroms in Russia between 1881-1884, 1903-1906,
-the Holocaust under Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany.

See? Pretty simple.

I apologize if my language on this matter lacks the irony that it possesses when I am discussing Islamic history... I suppose there just isn't anything really as ridiculous as the history of Islam.

"I suppose there just isn't anything really as ridiculous as the history of Islam."

Try the history of Judaism and the Jews. LOL, ROTFL.

To begin you have some wacky Iraqi guy named Abraham who thinks he is getting messages to take his family and move to Palestine. Old Abe does this, has sex with a lot of women, produces a lot of sons, and even tries to kill one of them (because "god" told him too).

Next up is Abe's grandson Jacob, who like his grandpa has a lot of sex with a lot of different women, and produces a lot of sons. Soo many sons that some of them conspire to sell the others into slavery.

Next we move from massive amounts of sex into massive amounts of violence. For this we have the Jewish heroes Moses, Joshua, David, and Solomon. Their lives are spent mostly murdering innocents, looting their possessions, and raping the women folk of other nations. Typical activities for Jews.

After centuries of this, the non-Jews decide they have had enough and decide to strike back. Great men of the ages such as Nebucadnezzer, Martin Luther, Jesus, Mohammed, Voltaire, Richard I, and most importantly Adolf Hitler rose up with courage and determination to challenge the Jewish menace.

Let us Goyim keep fighting the good fight.

That comment by "King David the Pedophile" should be enshrined in gold for posterity. ("Great men of the ages such as......most importantly Adolf Hitler.."

Jonathan, whatever you do, don't ever erase that comment. If it turns out, like I suspect, that it comes from an MSU member, it proves our case once and for all.

gary fouse
fousesquawk

Gary Fouse must have alzheimer's disease, being old and all.

First off Mr. Fouse Im not a member of the Muslim faith, let alone of the MSA/MSU. As I have stated before I am from a Catholic background (non-practicing).

Secondly I do not belong to any religious or cultural clubs at UCI.

Please note these facts and remember them in the future.

Goyim Pride 4Ever.

Judaism is a mental disorder.

Fouse -

Your comment makes no sense. While "King David" is obviously an idiot and Antisemite, why would you want him to be a member of the MSU? Then it "proves our case once and for all"? What's your case? That Antisemitism exists? If one member of the MSU is Antisemitic what does that prove? Nothing, unless you believe in guilt by association.

Emmanuel -

I said in a matter which does not require a subjective determination. Who decides whether something is "intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings." Moreover by looking at the creator's intent, it is an inherently subjective test. Under your definition, if someone were to photograph a amazingly graphic sexual act, with an intent completely undetectable to any other human being of making social commentary, that is not pornography.

Your definition of Antisemitism is of even less use. It is simply "prejudice against Jews" and you provide accurate historical examples. But, who makes that determination? You? Give me a test that I can objectively apply and I will concede the point, I'll have learned something new.

To King David, aka X, aka X marks the spot,

Pls note that I said " IF". So now, since you are not a member of MSU, I will try to keep that in mind. It just means that you are a sick, bigoted person (who is not a member of MSU).

PS:

If you are so proud of your beliefs, why don't you get rid of the pseudonyms and sign your real name?

gary fouse

First of all, that definition of pornography is from the dictionary, just copied and pasted.

Second, anti-Semitism is not simply prejudice toward Jews. The prefix 'anti' means to be against something. Prejudice is something a little more innocent then that. It would better be defined as hatred toward Jews.

But then again it really doesn't matter. It is easy enough to see through your superficial veneer that you are an activist attorney and a total quack at that. Your sophistical refutations are very mediocre and depend on total relativism to the point where you can only slander--not weaken--a person's argument without offering any sort of sense as an alternative... You have a motive; you, for whatever reason Gallinger, are a Muslim; Practicing Muslims lie, cheat, steal, kill, knave, and do whatever else is necessary to gain ground, and never concede to what is right and true, but only to what that Saddam Hussein of a god is pleased with... Was it just a nostalgia for the Orient that got you interested in signing on to this cult?

Actually, let me reiterate, they lie, cheat, steal, kill, knave, and do what ever else is necessary to grain ground FOR THE CULT...

I just wanted to clear this up just in case you accuse me of attacking their inner character when I am only going after their adherence to virulent forms of brutality.

Emanuel,

Thank you for making your true feelings known. Anyone who reads will be able to see the hate. God Willing, we'll all be able to get past it.

Because I think Islam is a violent cult because of what I read, see, hear, and know about it and its history and teachings?

I am allowed to hate an ideology without being a bigot. Islam is not a race OR a culture. Their are plenty of endearing things about the Islamic world, but most of them date to pre-Islamic times...

My hatred for an ideology that has enslaved and oppressed so many people in the East for so long and now threatens to enslave MY hemisphere of the globe should not be seen as a stigma.

"King David the Pedophile said: Let us Goyim keep fighting the good fight.

May 31, 2008 7:53 PM"

Just out of curiousity, pedophile, where are Nebuchadnezzar and Adolf Hitler these days? And the answer to the "Holohoax" question is.....? Have you selected your Holiday name yet? Maybe it will be...Stenzel-Day? We can all wear a fluffy hair-piece like your hero over at JewWatch.com, eh?

BTW Has your "troofy" website added links to CAIR, MSU, or Toady Gallinger yet? I think now is the time for all great Anti-Semites like y'all to stand together, don't you agree? I notice you, Bryan Garcia, and Toady all share the same philosophy, and I'm sure that's no accident...

Shavua-Tov, pedophile, one more week with no defeats to the likes of you; great, huh? Keep up the "Good fight", you, MSU, CAIR, Bryan, and Toady are doing great!

"Todd Gallinger said:
Emanuel,

Thank you for making your true feelings known. Anyone who reads will be able to see the hate. God Willing, we'll all be able to get past it.

June 1, 2008 12:03 PM"

And Toady, MSU, CAIR, and the Islamic world will get over their Jew-hate....when? Like, Never? When they do, get back to me, won't you?

Emanuel has finally shown himself for the true bigot that he is.

Gary, I am curious as to how you feel about his comments, since you associate with him. You seem to be more level-headed and I would hope you'd condemn such remarks.

Oh and I've also taken the liberty of taking screencaps of Emanuel's comments in case they happen to disappear.

"Bryan Garcia said:
Emanuel has finally shown himself for the true bigot that he is.

Gary, I am curious as to how you feel about his comments, since you associate with him. You seem to be more level-headed and I would hope you'd condemn such remarks.

June 2, 2008 10:58 PM"

From someone who doesn't know the difference between "Israeli" and "Jewish", and from someone who stands in the same vicinity as our local pedophile, MSU, and JewWatch.com, I'm underwhelmed by such "morality" on the part pf Bryan Garcia.

Bryan,

Emanuel has said a lot of things. What specifically do you want to know if I agree with?

Let me state my feelings about Islam briefly. I believe in freedom of religion, and as long as a Muslim is willing to practice his/her religion peacefully and be tolerant of others, I am ok with that. I am trying not to condemn an entire religion, rather point out objectionable acts and words that are occurring, especially at UCI. I have written glowingly about brave folks like Nonie Darwish, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and others (born Muslim) who have stood up to Muslim violence and hate.

Emanuel has doubts about the true nature of Islam. Is it not understandable when one sees and reads about all the things that are happening around the world in the name of Islam? We all have our doubts myself included. What we would like to see is our Muslim fellow Americans stand up and reject extremism and violence in the name of Islam. But the silence is deafening. Instead, what we see is folks like Malik Ali and Mohammed Al-Asi coming to our campus and engaging in hate speech.

You will note that I have tried to avoid the language of "Mohammed" the whatever. I think there is a better way to express it. However, what kind of conclusions do you want us to draw? We are not going to follow the dictates of political correctness that reign supreme on college campuses. When we see hate being practiced by the MSU and other Muslim speakers, we will point it our because it has no place in American society.

Gary, I was referring to the following things Emanuel said:

"Practicing Muslims lie, cheat, steal, kill, knave, and do whatever else is necessary to gain ground, and never concede to what is right and true, but only to what that Saddam Hussein of a god is pleased with... Was it just a nostalgia for the Orient that got you interested in signing on to this cult?"

and

"Actually, let me reiterate, they lie, cheat, steal, kill, knave, and do what ever else is necessary to grain ground FOR THE CULT..."

and

"Because I think Islam is a violent cult because of what I read, see, hear, and know about it and its history and teachings?

I am allowed to hate an ideology without being a bigot. Islam is not a race OR a culture. Their are plenty of endearing things about the Islamic world, but most of them date to pre-Islamic times...

My hatred for an ideology that has enslaved and oppressed so many people in the East for so long and now threatens to enslave MY hemisphere of the globe should not be seen as a stigma."

In the last quote he incorrectly uses the word "ideology" in place of the word religion. So he's made it quite clear that he hates the religion of Islam and all Muslims. This is all by his own admission. He even used the word hate. Despite what he says, this does indeed make him a bigot.

Gary, your response makes me respect you more than Emanuel, although you sound a LITTLE bit too forgiving of his comments for my tastes.

Bryan,

I think I will let you continue your own private little debate with Emanual without me trying to analyze and critique all the things he says. I am responsible for my own words. I know what I have said and what I haven't said. The reason I sign my name to everything I write is because I am comfortable with my beliefs. I may occasionally get a fact wrong, but we all do.

It is not for me to be forgiving of Emanuel. He can fend for himself. If that doesn't conform to your tastes, well, sorry.

Gary

Fair enough, Gary. I was just hoping you would condemn such bigotry coming from your side.

Anyways, isn't Emanuel the brother of Jonathan Constantine? Someone can orrect me if I am wrong, but that is the impression I have been under. If so, I find it hard to believe that their views differ from one another all that much...

"gary fouse said:

You will note that I have tried to avoid the language of "Mohammed" the whatever. I think there is a better way to express it.

June 3, 2008 10:16 AM"

Indeed, Gary...whatever...You're so correct. I should absolutely refrain from upsetting those who wish to kill me (like pedophile, MSU, CAIR, etc.) and under no circumstances should I insult and throw barbs at the dimwits (such as Bryan Garcia and Todd Gallinger) who aid and abet these folks whether through words, deeds, inaction, or some combination of the three. Otherwise, people's 'feewings' might get hurt, and all. Can't have that, can we?

I feel thoroughly upbraided to my soul, I do.

Shh, quiet "Mohammad," the grown-ups are talking.

"Bryan Garcia said:

Shh, quiet "Mohammad," the grown-ups are talking.

June 3, 2008 2:53 PM"

Then why aren't you listening to what we're saying, dimwit?

I just think that using expressions like Mohammed the dog is not enhancing anyone's argument, and just puts one on the level of King David the pig. C'mon! We can make better arguments than that can't we? I take a back seat to no one when it comes to Islamic terrorism and bigotry.

I think I have upset plenty of folks on the other side with what I write, (especially folks like Rusty Kennedy and the UCI administration). You note however, that several of the questions I have directed at the other side have never been responded to.

I don't hate all Muslims. I said that practicing Muslims align themselves not only with killers, but with oppressive regimes and those who want to expand a coercive ideology with violence, terror, and manipulation. I also said that their is much in the Islamic world that is good, but these things exist just despite and/or independently of Islam.

If an Islamic modern wants to discard all of the violent instruction in the Koran and Hadith, thats fine... but such instruction will always be their lurking over humanity nonetheless. I have even heard a Muslim or two condemn Islamic violence, but that is extremely rare and I only heard it immediately after 9/11, which was just too horrible a thing for the average Muslim to support just then. It seems today, however, that 9/11 has been forgotten by many Muslims, and the only ones who seem to remember it blame either Bush or the Jews for staging it.

And Islam is a religion, thats true; however, it has the properties that make it a radical ideology as well, similar to the way in which Marxism and Fascism are radical ideologies. Beginning in the 7th, century, it was imposed on much of the world forcefully. In fact, it was SO radical that they couldn't enforce its orthodox rules with little reservation until the 11th century, which was the same century that the Christians in Spain began to retaliate with a violent warlike form of Christianity in response. The Crusades followed at the end of the same century and were inspired by this Spanish 'Reconquest.' The Crusader movement was perpetuated by the Islamic Turks' advance on Christendom's Eastern frontier, the Egyptian Amir's burning of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and the molestation of Christian pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem.

The 11th century also saw the persecution of musicians, scientist, poets and philosophers in the Islamic society. I think this happened during this period not only because the Islamic leaders were unhappy due to the decentralization of the Caliphate by the growing power of Amirs, but also because they could not impose Islam's ideological distain for the arts and sciences in such cultured areas as Persia, the Near East and Anatolia until 400 years after Islam's presence was made. Islam's domination in the Middle East was earned partly through many concessions which would HAVE to have allowed many of the arts and sciences to exist AT LEAST for a little while. Plus, many of the Muslim conquerers were not really that aware of what much of the Islamic theology stood for, and they assimilated into these areas and took part in the lifestyles of the conquered.

Now let me tell you a few reasons why I have such a problem with Islam. I am going to explain it in a way that makes it very difficult to defend. Most Islamic apologists spend more time talking about how Christians have done things just as bad--if not worse--than what Muslims have throughout history than actually defending Islam itself! So I am going to leave the violent aspects of Islam out as much as I can and get to the core of why Islam is a dangerous ideology.

First of all, Islam is a religion of laws, similarly to Judaism, but unlike Judaism, it sells its laws as being universal for mankind rather than just for those who make up the 'Umma.' Judaism is national, but Islam is imperial!

I must mention, however, that Judaism has such a long history and has developed even since the 7th century AD, much less the 2nd millennium BC, and THATS why they no longer stone adulterers to death or execute people for working on Sunday and so on.

Christianity, in contrast to Islam, is not a religion of laws. I takes a better account of human nature by defining evil and giving man freedom to make his own decisions so long as it does not conflict with the prerogatives of secular government rather than forcing him to live an austere and moral lifestyle through physical regulation. Christian governments, with the Church's support, have enforced moral regulation in the past, but it was the Christian world that also gave birth to the separation of lay and secular authority, of Church and State and the freedom of religion as well. These are things that seem almost impossible in an Islamic society.

Islam's concept of God as totally sovereign and not bound by goodness causes their leaders to reflect 'Godliness' by being tyrants; this notion also justifies a man's heavy handedness over his household and deprives women's sovereignty within their own being and sphere. Christianity differs in this as well because it professes that God is man's redeemer and only offers man the opportunity of perfection if only he(or she) so chooses.

Islam holds women to a higher moral standard than men wile it explicitly defines them as being 'a step below men.' Thats an imbalance in and of itself and it causes men to literally fear female sexuality to the point that they lose control the minute they see a woman's ankles. The lure of heaven as being a great carnival of food, drink and sex doesn't help this either. If man could learn to have a distain for excesses, he might learn to control himself and his urges more skillfully instead of beating the hell out of women for being immodest.

Im going to end on one more point. The fact that criticism of the Koran could never be allowed is something that makes Islam especially dangerous. The Koran is suppose to be written by God's hand as a timeless revelation of how men should live, yet it conflicts with much of what makes the world modern and civilized.

I can't see how any of this makes me a bigot. The reason why the language of my statement MIGHT have seemed to paint me as such was because it was a response to Todd Gallinger's rendering of himself as the quintessential Mohammedan weasel that he is. This is because Islam instructs the Umma to lie, cheat, steal, kill, knave, and do whatever is necessary to advance the Islamic ideology!

I don't see how Jonathan being related to me or not is relevant. That doesn't change the content of the MSU rallies he records and the reporting he does. His reporting is accurate enough to be affirmed by many of the commenters of this blog and he supports his stories with hard evidence, photos, and video.

And like Mr. Fouse, I too am comfortable with my beliefs, which is why I don't post Anonymously. Brian: unlike you however, I have a spine and the courage of my convictions, and I provide substance and history to my arguments.

Emanuel,

You are certainly not a bigot, and you should not be concerned about anyone calling you a bigot because you have doubts about Islam. It is only natural that any sane person would have concerns and doubts about the nature of Islam in the light of world events. Like you, I don't hate Muslims either. I teach mnay Muslim students from places like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, and I enjoy a good relationship with them.

Do not be deterred by those who will throw out the R word if you say anything about terrorism or intolerance by Muslims. As for those Muslims who are bigots themselves, we need to stand up to them. They will not impose their radical version of Islam upon us here in America, and they should know that we will stand with our Jewish-American brothers and sisters.

And most certainly Mr. Fouse you would not call be a bigot for having doubts about Judaism and the Jews.

- Judaism the religion that states that girls are born as the property of their fathers until they reach the ripe old age of 12 and became the property of their husbands

-Judaism the religion that states that a common man may have up to 4 wives and an aristocratic man may have 18

-Judaism the religion that states that anyone who leaves the religion is to be ritually stoned to death

-Judaism the religion that uses the symbol of a man (King David) whose greatest accomplishment was cutting off another mans head

-Judaism the religion that states that the black race is cursed by God and meant to serve the other races

-Judaism the only religion that advocates the complete genocide of a people based on their ethnicity/nationality

-Judaism the religion the requires the killing of all those that work on the Sabbath

-Judaism the religion of the likes of Jack Abramoff, Scooter Libby, Monica Lewinsky, Eliott Spitzer, Johnathan Pollard, Roman Polanski and numerous other criminals and f*ckups.

Anxiously waiting your response Cry-Baby Fouse.

I'll try to waste as few words as possible on "Little Adolf" writing from his boiler room.

It's been awile since I heard of Jews having multiple child wives (No, Warren Jeffs is not Jewish.)

Also been a spell since I heard about Jews stoning apostates to death (unless those were Jews in Iran I read about). Help me out folks, any news to report? Actually, I think the boy has been reading the wrong book.

During the Civil Rights Era, many Jews stood up for the rights of blacks.

Jews conducting genocide? I missed that too. Just like I missed the news reports of Jews killing folks who worked on the Sabbath.

You mention a few "disreputable" folks who happen to be Jewish. C'mon! Anybody could play that game. We could put your name on that list too-if we only knew your name.

Finally, I really don't care what King David did 2,000 years ago. I care more about people getting their heads cut off as we speak.

Boy, this job is too easy.

Hey, Chazer (AKA pig AKA pedophile), have you decided on the name of your Holiday yet? What do you think of Stenzel-Day? Will you finally enlighten me as to the "Holohoax" Paradox?