Zombie reveals some German dhimmitude:
FRANKFURT-AM-MAIN, GERMANY (Zombietone News) -- The official Iranian pavilion at this year's Frankfurt Book Fair prominently featured virulently anti-Semitic literature, in violation of German law.The display was noticed by Hamburg-based author Matthias Küntzel, whose first-hand account appeared Sunday on both the euroneuzeit blog and on the German Jewish site Die Jüdische....
Some of the books on sale at the Iranian pavilion at the 2005 Frankfurt Book Fair: The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, The International Jew, and Tale of the "Chosen People."...
With 280,000 attendees this year, the Frankfurt Book Fair is the world's most important (and by far the largest) publishing industry event, with exhibitors, publishers, buyers, agents and authors from over 100 countries arriving every year to make the business deals that keep the book industry humming....
At the time of this writing (Monday, October 24), the media has not yet discovered the story: the only evidence of it is in a blog entry from UK blogger Colin Meade, who provides rough translations of portions of Küntzel's German text, and a news article in the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Photos, more details, and addresses to send protests -- all at Zombie's site.
Books don't kill people, people kill people. Those who would burn books will eventually burn people. I've written on this topic too many times to orepeat much here. The short version is that censorship is only right when the speech in question will lead directly to violence.
Books don't lead to violence. Mein Kampf is readily available, and yet more of it won't lead to more Nazis. The same is true of the Koran. More Shakespeare won't lead to more dramatists and poets.
But professional propagandists and demagogues inciting hate and passing out books and pamphlets will lead to violence if that's their purpose. And Muslims can use The Three Little Pigs in the right context to exhort the ummah to riot. We too can turn the book-table around on this one and use it as propaganda. The value is obvious. The more exposure the Muslims get the better for us. better to open the can and let the world see the kind of worms we're dealing with than to hide them and let them move underground without our knowledge of their evil doings.
Forget biblioclysms, burn people. Or something like that. I forget exactly. I read it in a book somewhere.
I don't know why but it seems to be the case that some people are impressed by Schopenhauer. Maybe they like aphorisms and can't get all the way through a solid book. But for anyone who wants to read German aphorisms in the first place one should at least read good ones. These are some I like:
Georg Christoph Lichtenberg
Zezu Island. This island has remained undescribed for so long because the foolish customs of its inhabitants gave publishers everywhere the idea that an acount of it was a satire on their own country...
We ought really to call "a book" only that which contains something new: the rest are only a means of learning quickly what has already been done in this or that field. To discover new countries and to fournish accurate charts of what you have discovered: that is the difference. What has not yet been said on this matter?
When a book and a head collide and a hollow sound is heard, must it always have come from the book?
A book is a mirror: if an ape looks into it an apostle is hardly likely to look out. We have no words for speaking of wisdom to the stupid. He who understands the wise is wise already.
We do not think good metaphors are anything very important, but I think that a good metaphor is something even the police should keep an eye on...
This entire doctrine is worthless except as a subject of dispute.
There can hardly be stranger wares in the world than books: printed by people who do not understand them; sold by people who do not understand them; bound, reviewed and read by people who do not understand them; and now even written by people who do not understand them.
As I take up my pen I feel myself so full, so equal to my subject, and see my book so clearly before me in embryo, I would almost like to try to say it all in a single word.
Sometimes men come by the name of genius in the same way that certain insects come by the name of centipede--not because they have a hundred feet, but because most people can't count above fourteen.
***
So how's that for aphorisms? If Mohammed had any sense he'd have written something equal to those above. He hadn't, he didn't, and let's know just how stupid the guy is, and how revolting and evil his followers are. More books.
KingIgnorance: B-b-b-b-but islam isn't antisemitic! It's only people within islam.
Right. That's why the OFFICIAL Iranian table featured the Protocols of Zion and The International Jew. Why, they're also popular in Turkey, I understand. But of course, it's all a plot by corrupt officials in those countries. Or, well...in all islamic nations, I guess. Even Turkey, which is supposedly so secular it hurts.
Sure sure. Right right.
Prophet Geoff
Beer and Pretzels Be Upon Me
This is a touchy subject for me. I don't want the government making my reading choices for me, but Germany should enforce their laws without regard to who is breaking them.
Books don't kill people, people kill people. Those who would burn books will eventually burn people.
I disagree.
Books incite hatred and violence. Books can comfort the reader by confirming the animus and malevolent ill will of the reader.
If your theory is correct then it's of no consequence that Palestinian school books constantly denigrate Jews in the worst way possible. Books instruct. They lead the naive into thinking what's in books is true by the very fact of its existence.
Books are not innocent tools used by evil people. They are included as part and parcel of Josef Goebbles big lie.
Your theory may be applicable to guns but not books. Or movies. Or any propaganda.
And I disagree with you Kemaste.It isn't books that incite violence and hatred. Antisemites abound, just peruse the internet, and none of them have read Mein Kampf, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion or any such literature, they can scarcely read a post that is over three, one or two sentence, paragraphs.. yet they exist. Why? Because someone has formed their opinions, usually before they even have booted their first computer.
And Jews aren't the only victims of violence and hatred, ask people of color, gays and lesbians and any class of person that is not of the "dominant" classification. And it isn't books that cause the violence and hatred, but it is books that are used to justify the violence and hatred,besides the Qur'an and Mein Kampf, there is also the likes of the Bible, such as Leviticus and death and men who sleep with men. Ask the family of Matthew Shepherd for instance.
A case can be made, that the Bible should be banned, because of the terse commandments and instructions in Deuteronomy and Leviticus, for starters. And women have complained about the misogyny in the Pauline Gospels (man is head of the woman, women should not speak in Church and if they have questions ask the man, man is not made for woman, but woman is made for man, etc).
So where does it start and stop and who decides?
There is probably room for everyone on earth to be offended by at least one book, "holy or not".
Kemaste - I agree. Books are very powerful,hence it is a fine line between freedom of the press and censorship.
Books do have power, they are part of the educational process (be it for good or evil) - and every worldview from Communism, to secularism, any other “ism” one can think of, to Christianity, to Islam, to Humanism etc etc etc – all have seeked to control what books one should learn from, and what books should be forbidden.
Books do inspire, they do sow the seeds for both good, and evil (depending on the book).
At any rate, at least Germany seems to be fitting in with Eurabia. Only a matter of time before its heads down and bums up five times a day….
"And it isn't books that cause the violence and hatred, but it is books that are used to justify the violence and hatred,besides the Qur'an and Mein Kampf, there is also the likes of the Bible, such as Leviticus and death and men who sleep with men."- Nariz
Or the old Biology Books that espoused Social Darwinism (evolution) that inspired white people to oppress and enslave people of colour, or commit genocide like Hitler, Stalin, Mao etc.
Books are a tool where we get our ideas. Yes there are many other sources today, but books do play a role.
"A case can be made, that the Bible should be banned, because of the terse commandments and instructions in Deuteronomy and Leviticus, for starters"
Oh really - Didn't know that you were a theologian Nariz. So if a moral code differs from yours Nariz, you want it banned? Rather hypocritical from someone who espouses equality for all things?
“And women have complained about the misogyny in the Pauline Gospels (man is head of the woman, women should not speak in Church and if they have questions ask the man, man is not made for woman, but woman is made for man, etc).”
Seeing you bring up the Bible Nariz, please explain the time, place, and context that this passage was written in, along with the culture toward the people whom it was written, along with the original root meanings of the greek language it was written in. Oh that’s right, this is Jihad watch, not Bible watch. But keep on spewing out your vitriol fo Christianity Nariz, even though Christians are not killing innocents and proclaiming that they have justification in the Bible for it, or the fact that more Christians die every day by the thousands to Islam, while atheists in the West by the thousands proclaim Islam as a Religion of Peace.
I suppose you think men and women are equal in all things? I’d hate to tell you this Nariz, but in case you hadn’t noticed, we are different. Obviously your hate for books meant you didn’t read your Biology books to well.
Going by your logic Nariz, we are all equal, just some (like you Christian hating lefties) are just more equal than others. Gee whiz, what ever happened to survival of the fittest? Not much equality in that one!
Animal rights activists would have us ban Little Red Ridinghood because it incites hatred against wolves. Muslims will ban porcelin pigs from window sills. And so on. Yes, Shakespeare, too, he's gone outta here. Jihadwatch/Dhimmiwatch can't be too far behind him. No, I'm not kidding.
I take your right to be ridiculous very seriously. Some don't. Some think you don't have a right to be ridiculous in public. They don't want to let you be ridiculous even in the privacy of your own thoughts. I do. I want you to be able, should you so choose,to be as ridiculous as you like and as you are capable of. I don't even want you to agree with me because then I'd have to work up something to disagree with just to find something to write about. but we might not have the problem if things continue as they are. Look at UNESCO recently:
http://nodhimmitude.blogspot.com
This isn't harmless fun and feel good multi-culturalism, Kemaste, this is ourtright fascism. The worst of it is that most people will look at the appearence and not see it for what it is. That would be fine if nt that it cripples my right to read and think and say what I please so long as nothing I do causes direct harm to another, and I'm not writing about hurting anyone's sensitivities. I mean real harm. If we start banning dooks because of what others might make of them then we must stop all book publishing because people might read books and get the wrong idea, ideas that aren't even there in the first place. It's fascism, friend, not protecting people from harm.
The Koran in itself does no more harm than any other book. It's who uses it and for what. If people read it and don't take it seriosly, it's not harmful. And if people read it and do take it seriously, it's not becasuse of the text but because of what they make of it, what they get from their culture, what they want from themselves. I read the damned thing and I get bored, not murderous. If it incites Muslims to murder, it should have the same effect on anyone. It doesn't. It's a boring and stupid text. Yes, some people use it to incite violence, but I insist that they could do the same with the same crowd using toilet paper.
If you disagree with me again, please expect a letter from my attorney. My feelings are hurt. Look at my self-esteem. I'm crushed. How could you do that to me. The pain. I'll kill ten innocent by-standers for those remarks, Kemaste, and it's all your fault.
Look at my self-esteem. I'm crushed. How could you do that to me. The pain. I'll kill ten innocent by-standers for those remarks, Kemaste, and it's all your fault.
Awwww. Shall I throw out my piggy bank? How about if I put a hijab on my pig?
By the way. I never called for censorship or "burning dooks" . I just disagree in the way books can influence people. However I am in full agreement with you when you talk about who is influenced by what books.
That was my point really. Ordinary humans won't be effected. It's a Muslim thang. Muslims are driven insane by the kornbung. I can't even muster enough respect to spell it correctly.
No, I'm not advocating burning books but perhaps the LA Times?
"Books don't lead to violence. Mein Kampf is readily available, and yet more of it won't lead to more Nazis. The same is true of the Koran. More Shakespeare won't lead to more dramatists and poets."
-- posted by sonofwalker
Whoa whoa WHOA!
Man, what kind of vacuum is it that you operate in?
Mein Kampf is a book (that was indeed loosely based on the Koran) left to stand with no buttressing organization, except maybe a few hundred skinheads shod in hobnail boots, striking poses in mouldy Berlin basements.
Much the same for Shakespeare, except that they instead strike their poses beshod in pink slippers in plush metro theater complexes.
The Koran, by stark contrast, is organized around a cult-as-religion that actively re-energizes every Friday afternoon, worldwide. A billion strong.
Islam's Koran is further buttressed by hundreds of thousands of Mosques and their satellite organizations, funding from petrodollars, fundraisers, pseudo-intellectuals at USC (Go Trojans, you're number 1!), Columbia, Sorbonne, Harvard, ad nauseum. Not to mention innumerable Jihadist political and military organizations. Plus, the MSM stands erect and ready to do its part. Not to mention the befuddled EU elitist bureaucrats, and those ever-earnest and ever-naive progressive/leftist/liberals/socialsists everywhere.
And of course we don't wanna forget dozens of Moselm governments, fronts all, including the EU's latest blushing debutante, Turkey.
Oh, also sonofwalker, could you please tell me how many religions (or theatre companys, for that matter) have their own legal systems and military arms equivalent to Sharia and Jihad?
Would that be your local Shakespeare company?
Chaz is right -- the Koran is a different kind of book, for the reasons he mentioned, than others mentioned in order to dilute this issue.
The Koran, in varying degrees, galvanizes millions of Muslims to wage the internal Jihad that closes their minds and hardens their hearts to freedom of thought, freedom to doubt, freedom to experiment, freedom to question, freedom to laugh and relax and poke fun at holy cows, freedom to tolerate others.
The Koran also galvanizes untold minions of Muslims to wage the external forms of Jihad that are threatening Infidels around the world.
However, the Koran has not yet become a smoking gun for our PC-dominated West; so it cannot be banned, and its uniquely dangerous features must be diluted into a murky soup of multiculturalism.
After reading the arguments between Kemaste and Sonofwalker, I find that I agree with both of you! Censorship is a dangerous path to follow. But as Kemaste pointed out, propaganda is very powerful; look how it brainwashes Palestinians to the point of creating genetically altered mutants. The psychotic ethos of the Palestinian muslims appears to be hardwired, intrinsic, after decades of a steady diet of lies, half-truths, distortions of history, and Islamic mind poisoning.
In the case of anti-Semitism, some people are anti-Semitic for no logical reason. Maybe because their parents were, because of something they READ or heard via an urban legend--who knows. Anti-Semitism utterly baffles me and I think I know why. When I was very young, my mother told me that the Jews are God's chosen people. I didn't even understand the Biblical explanation of that statement at the time but I implicitly trusted my mother. Throughout my life, that trust never wavered. When I got older, we sometimes disagreed and I was certain that she was wrong and I was right, but she was always right in the end. Because of my mother, I was disinclined to have anti-Semitic proclivities, although I read and heard many derogatory things about Jews later in my life.
If my mother could influence my lifelong attitude toward Jews with one simple statement when I was about five years old, the same could occur aversely---witness the dysfunctional, deranged Palestinian "refugees" who literally feed off of their collective abhorrence of the Jews. This unfounded hatred has become their sole reason for existing and will culminate in total self-destruction. I can't say I'll miss them.
Should the virulent textbooks used by the Saudis and throughout the Islamic world, even here in the U.S., be censored? Hell yes they should, they should be burned in the gym of the biggest Saudi hate school in the U.S., along with the venomous literature prevalent in Wahabi mosques. Burning the hate literature will not change the ideology, but it would make a powerful statement to these rabid creatures that we will not tolerate their delusions of superiority and their agenda to destroy our country.
Should anti-Semitic books from Iran be banned from a book fair? If anti-Semitic literature/propaganda is illegal in Germany, then yes they should. However, I doubt if one or two books comprised of wild conspiracies and blatant bigotry would turn an otherwise sane person into a crazed Jew-hater. Such books usually have much more to say about their authors and the sick mentality that inspires them.
The Fair's web site has a broken "Contact" link, you can let them know what you think via their feedback page here.
I did:
Just curious, but when the Iranians displayed their anti-Semitic hate literature, like their copy of Protocols of the Elders of Zion and other Nazi-like books, did it give the fair's founders a little thrill of excitement, a reminder of the good old days? You know, when the Germans and the Moslems were openly on the same page and all.
Check out this web site:
http://www.zombietime.com/frankfurt_anti-semitism/
You should be totally ashamed of yourselves. Shame on you.
SP
I'm always amused at the way some folks dismiss the powerful affect the media, books, and music can have on people.
There is ongoing controversy whether Rap music has any negative effect on our youth. One only has to look at young white kids trying their damnedest to look/act like gangstas, "sag" and talk like they're from the "hood."
WTF?
How can a three minute song have any real influence on a kid? Well, what about the power of a 30 second commercial has on an adult that's shown over and over again?
Watch out for the children of the Korn. Or is it Ko'orn?
The zombietime page given above ends:
"If you would like to send a letter of complaint concerning the anti-Semitic material displayed and sold by Iran at the 2005 Frankfurt Book Fair, send one to
the main offices of the Frankfurt Book Fair
or to
Anne Qureshi, the Fair's public relations officer."
I suspect Ms Qureshi would be enchanted by the appearance of anti-semitic material at the Frankfurt fair and I see little point in complaining to her or imagining that she will be ashamed.
Antisemitic stuff like "mein Kampf" "the Elders of Zion" are banned in Germany. If you publicly deny that the holocaust happened you have a very good chance to end up in jail.
I don't know whether the Germans have the strictest laws in Europe in this regard, it is likely. You may say this is anti-democratic and against the principles of freedom of speech etc. but this is the law.
If these Iranians in the Frankfurt book fair violate these laws by selling books that deny the Shoa and vilify Jews or "infidels" then they are breaking the law and if you can get the German Police to move on them that stuff will be taken off the shelves and at the very least they will be fined.
Has anyone launched a formal complaint?
"Awwww. Shall I throw out my piggy bank? How about if I put a hijab on my pig?"
Kemaste, you are too kind, and don't think I'm unappreciative. I know you think it's helpful to hijab your piggie-bank but I urge you, if ever I'm in the 'hood, to burqah that babe.
"I never called for censorship or "burning [b]ooks.""
No, I was making a rhetorical point. On the bright side, I get to fix a glaring tyop.
.
"Kemaste - I agree. Books are very powerful, hence it is a fine line between freedom of the press and censorship." thirdtimelucky.
Books are powerful, that's the whole point of them.
Chaz MarteL 732 and Dr. Pepper make similar points, and they're worth making, even if they make my cold blood boil!
My point is that the Koran or no Koran, these Muslims would find something to justify their violence, and I suggested a roll of toilet paper would do it if they had the right orator to make them happy with it. We've likely all read the Koran, and I think most of us agree that it's a load of crap. It's not special in any way. If it weren't for a billion of so idiots who try to memorize it it'd be forgotten in a few weeks. My point, and a pretty one at that, if not as pretty as Kemate's hijabed piggie-bank, is that if not the Koran, then they'd turn to Mein Kampf or a roll of toilet paper. It's not the book, I argue, but the person, not even the literate person but the person who wants to believe, and the book is an idol to worship, a talisman, a magic thing. It could be the sacred toilet paper roll.
Some people object to the words themselves, as if they have a special power. Well, obviously that's the point of writing, to convey the power of words, and some books do it well; others don't and are even more successful for reasons of hitting on a well of emotion that has nothing to do with the words themselves, as we witness in the Koran. Shakespeare's plays are well written, powerful to some of us, and yet, as I made reference to without explaining, his plays are sometimes, in this part of the world, banned for racist content. It has nothing to do with the text but with the attitude of the readers manipulated by demagogues and ideologues for their own purposes. If they fail to ban King Lear for ageism, Merchant of Venice for racism, and the sonnets for promoting premarital sex, they go on to something else. They don't try to ban the books for the content of the books but because the idea of banning the books appeals to them, censors at heart.
I suspect that no book is banned because it's powerfully written, but because it makes no sense, that the sense has to be added after the fact, and that if that's the case, then the best books will remain in the hands of those who love literature for its own sake rather than for its propaganda value, and that only stupid books that don't speak to the reader will ever have the impact we fear from powerful words. Who ever killed anyone over Ecclesiastes? It's beautiful. It makes sense. It's not like the Koran that's boring and ugly and stupid, and that if one wants to make anything of other than what it is one must abandon anything in the book to make it so. The point isn't to ban the Koran or Mein Kampf or the Protocols because they are powerful or that they have an effect on readers: the point is that the three books in question are so badly written and so boring and so stupid that they could only appeal to people of the same qualities, and that could be written of any badly written book or even a roll of toilet paper.
It's not books that have a bad effect on people, not even racist, hate-mongering drivel such as the Koran. It's not the knowledge they convey that causes the problems, though that's not absolute if we look at bomb-making manuals in the hands of criminals. But in itself, no book is going to turn a good person into a homicide bomber, and banning a book won't prevent him if his family and friends and theatre company tell him it's a great thing to do so. They could get the same message from the stars. From space ships. From Gabriel. It's not the knowledge that books convery that causes the problem, it's the lack of knowledge peope have.
If people read the Protocols and then if they read the history of Russia, of Okhrana, of Bakunin, of serfdom, of the Byzantine Church, then things make sense. Not just to Russians but to us. Then we don't want to ban the Portocols. We want to read more to know more about our world and our lives. The problem is when all we hear, not read, all we hear is one version of the Truth. As Martin Amis writes in a lousy book: "If you give a man power over another, eventually his thoughts will turn to torture." Honestly, people can be rotten all of themselves with no help from books. But one book, and only one kind of book, that is dangerous. I suspect that given the chance there would be Shakespearean terrorists justifying their deeds on the basis of MacBeth if all there were is Shakespeare to be found. But those would be people who don't read much, people who live not for the text but for the emotive power of the words spoken, recited, shouted angrily. With the right crowd one could whip up a mob with a telephone book.
Goebbles made an art of lying. Look at the Boss in Mark Twain's Connecticut Yankee to see what happened in Germany: The boss told the truth of a coming eclipse, and because he said it would happen soon, the crowd lost interest, it wasn't dramatic. The soothsayer claimed the world would end in a hundred years, and the crowd went nuts because they can't disprove it. Then the eclipse came. People said it was a lucky guess. If one tells a lie, then people will believe it if it's outrageous and stupid like the Koran. If one tells a tale like an idiot, full of sound and fury, then some will think about it, savour it, and feel sorrow and pity, fear and trembling, perhaps catharsis. but no sensitive reader is going to kill anyone to avenge Duncan. If MacBeth is all there is and if a Scotsman is angry at the English, then that would be the book to read if one is already in the mood for blood. But it wouldn't be nearly as sucsessful as a pulp tract that didn't make any sense at all. There one would have to put in the meaning oneself.
As far as banning the protocols from the German book fair, our original draw here, I'm inclined to argue against it. My summary is that any book will do if there's a context for hate to use it. It could be the Turner Diaries. Children could read hate literature and be affected by it. I read Sherlock Holmes novels and short stories, and I hated Mormons. Then, as an adult I met some, and I'll keep my opinions to myself.
Banning books won't ever ban bad ideas. People come up with them all the time, and most never read anything. It's not the book, regardless of how evil it is, that turns people into crazed killers. That's just the icon. The Turner, as it were, is the irrationality behind the actor. Teach a person irrationality and you can tell him anything. Even if we could rid the world of the Koran as I type, the irrationality would remain, and people would find some other book to build their hatreds around, form a religion around, and build mosques to recite it in.
To conclude again, this time with an aside, I recall the Canticle for Leibowitz. Yes, and Flowers for Algernon.
As always, I'll check next day for late posts, and I'll respond to the best of my temper.
I dont know how many reading this have actually read 'The protocals of the Elders of Zion', but if you have you will probably agree that it is a long drawn out piece of crap. Boring as all get out. Repeticious to an agonising degree. I dont think it is a fraud. No one would go to all that trouble to create a perverse joke. It is more like the writings of an insane lunartic. A normal person trying to create a fraud, could not sustain pretended insanity long enough to write all that stuff. In other words, I think the author meant every word of what he wrote, but the author was nuts...Modern mudlims and some others love to believe that the Protocals are a guide to official Israeli policy, or that it reflects Jewish thought today, but alas, thats not what they are. They are the ravings of a mad man, or men. If it is a fraud, it is probably an Islamic trick to make Jews look bad.
If you have not read the Protocals, dont. It's an excercise in self abuse...
Books dont 'cause' violence, 'people' do.
Thats a 'yes' and a 'no'. People dont need a book to be violent. But to those predisposed to violence, books can show the way...as an example, "The Anarchist Cookbook". There you can find directions on how to make bombs out of tennis balls and other goodies. These books do nothing in themselves, but their contents are enabling. The Quran is no exception, in fact it is a better and more glaring example than the Cookbook. The Quran enables jihad, but only willing people will respond.
The Koran has done more damage than any book in world history.
There are some reasons for this. First and foremost is that the Koran intends to do damage. Just read it.
But what really makes the Koran so dangerous is that its readers regard it to be the literal word of God.
The Koran and other Islamic scriptures must be banned immediately. Take the How-to-Hate Manuals away from the billion or so morons gullible enough to believe that a God could say such things, and the Pod People will slowly come back to life!
Duh Swami's opinion of the author of The Protocals:
"It is more like the writings of an insane lunartic."
"I think the author meant every word of what he wrote, but the author was nuts..."
"They are the ravings of a mad man, or men."
Wow, that's the same profile of the author of another book that's not very popular around here. Could Mo have been moonlighting??
Anyway,thanks for the heads up on the book Duh Swami. It was on the list but I'll scratch it.
"UK blogger Colin Meade"
Now that's a rugby name if there ever was one. The "Unsmiling Giant" was certainly one of the best locks to ever play the game.
For history of the Protocols book read:
Warrant for Genocide by Norman Cohn
Came from a Czarist agent, present day Arab anti-semitism was and is shared by many Christians in a sordid cross fertilization...
Nariz:
It appears that you missed the point: the books on display were not the Quoran or other Muslim holy texts, but the Protocols of Zion, etc., and the Germans have themselves banned books that promote racial hatred, such as Mein Kampf and The Protocols. They are also currently prosecuting Ernst Zundel for his Holocaust denial-related activities. The French have banned Hezbullah's satellite TV broadcasting facility for the same reason.
The concept that freedom of speech and thought allows anything to be disseminated is incorrect. There are limits on speech and what you can write about identifiable persons. To suggest there are no constraints is to talk about "licence" and not "freedom" as A.S. Neill, the founder of the "free school movement" put it in a book he wrote to distance himself from the idiots who claimed to be his followers.
William...it might be interesting for you to thumb through a copy of the Protocols, just to see what the noise is all about. I wouldn't bother actually 'reading it', but a quick look is ok. Just dont spend any money on it. Maybe the library. William Cooper, in this book 'Behold a Pale Horse', included the entire Protocols...have a good day...
Antisemitism thrives and feeds on the Holocaust revisionism of European writers such as Faurisson, financed by the arab world.
Anti zionism thrives and feeds on the revisionism of Israel's history authored by academics such as Edward Said financed by the arab world.
The lies and distortions propagated are firmly part of anti western Jihad , readily accepted by dishonest woolly minded left wingers.
The acceptance by westerners of this hate propaganda directed at Jews is a form of appeasement of islamists. it has been going on for centuries in the top echelons of christian chuches in the vain hope of averting the massacre of their flocks in the Muslim world.
An example only last week in egypt shows what happened to the minute remaining coptic population when they dare even to complain about their treatment at the hands of their muslim masters. had the Coptic had the moral corruption to blame the Jews for this play, they might have escaped punishment.
When European leftist appeasers accept all the lies and distortions they not only degrade themselves to the level of slaves but seriously endanger their own future.
Only when Europe shouts from the roof tops that israel has a right to exist and lends its support to its right of self defence, will it reclaim some dignity and rise from the depths of its dishonour. it will then deal a serious blow to the islamofascists who wish to consume it . This will mark the turning of the tide of Islamic invasion as surely as the efforts of Charles martel so many years ago.
Books dont 'cause' violence, 'people' do.
books creat ideology and indoctrinate people.
Wars are fought against ideology (religious or political) not people.
QED Books are certainly a main cause of war.
The toxic potential of books should not be underestimated. When something appears in print, especially between bound covers, it acquires in the minds of too many people the authority that a slogan scrawled on a wall by an anonymous thug never will, just as possessing any kind of academic degree will do for "authorities" no matter how unrelated their actual education or spurious the ideas they put forth.
The presence of Muslims in our secularized lands has placed a magnifying glass on our notions of "free press" "freedom of speech" and "freedom of religion." I find the discussion here very interesting ...
Our carefully constructed mechanisms of weights and counterweights works best when everyone basically agrees on the ground rules, and is willing to submit their ideas to the marketplace for approval/disapproval.
Now enter a constituency (Muslims) which consider everything embodied in this secular system as anathema to their beliefs -- Un-Islamic -- how often we hear the phrase...
What happens when such a group enters, and systematicall sets about using those very institutions and secular systems to undermine, and eventually REPLACE those systems and institutions with ones of their own -- Muslim institutions -- NONE of which will tolerate the secular laws of man as we have constituted them...
We have no experience with this kind of sedition and cultural corrosion -- In fact, the Muslim arrives here and is able to use these very systems of rights and protections as weapons against those very rights and protections... They freely admit that their prime goal is to worship Allah, and to promote Islam, and they freely admit that they are only are interested in the fostering of these rights and protections to the extent that they PROMOTE Islam and the furtherance of Islam... We are coming to understand that as Islam grows, menacing pressures on all other beliefs and systems increases as this inimical Islamic sector of society works to corrode and destroy our secular freedoms and legal systems only to replace them with their own Islamic laws...
What do we do about the notion of "freedom of religion" when it protects a form of religion that strives to destroy all other forms of religion, and maintains the idea that "unbelief" is punishable by slavery and death?
What do we do about the notion of "free speech" when it protects a sector of society which wants to quell all forms of speech which don't extoll their ideology of Islam? What to do when this sector of society is hard-wired to reject EVERYTHING that doesn't emanate from, or comport with their belief system of Islam?
What do we do about the notion of "freedom of assembly" and "freedom of association" when it protects gatherings in Mosques and in private Muslim homes where discussions about our annihilation are happening at this very moment?
What do we do about these precious notions and rights when they protect and empower a constituency bent on their destruction...? Is it the correct question? Do we alter and abridge these precious rights, the legacy of a thousand years of sacrifice and strife in order to accommodate this seditious constituency who would corrode and destroy this selfsame legacy? Do we modify these rights to bend to the demands of this corrosive and destructive constituency in the vain hope that they will be appeased, or that our actions will somehow magically mollify their intentions against us?
Perhaps it's time to consider expelling those who wish to undermine, corrode, and destroy our precious rights...
It used to have a name -- sedition -- treason -- Words which have passed from common usage as being "draconian" -- words and ideas from a bygone era.
But with much of this constituency still dependent on contriubutions from foreign enemy powers and potentates -- the Muslim populations in the West are GUILTY of SEDITION and TREASON by their words and actions...
Their intent is CLEAR. Their language is CLEAR. Their actions are CLEAR. When will we begin to believe the Muslims mean what they say when they call for our annihilation?
I forgo to add...
Furthermore, as evidenced in this article, the epicenter of the Shia movement in Islam, Iran, is a grotesque antithesis of Western secularism and pluralism. If one can paint with a somewhat broad brush -- if this barbarian theocracy is the apotheosis of what the Shi'ite branch of Islam envisions as their ultimate form of government, then why is there any ambivalence on ANY westerner's part regarding how unsuitable Shi'ite Islam is as a belief system -- It is clearly a horrific malevolent belief system... Why would we EVER permit adherents to this fascist abomination of Shi'ite Islam into our midst??? Why would we permit this nazi into our homeland, and then embrace and protect them with our hard fought freedoms --
They are ENEMIES!
Then we have the apotheosis of the Sunni Branch of Islam -- more examples here of its vile revolting nature -- We see Saudi Arabia, the epicenter of Sunni Islam, and the epicenter of ALL branches of global Islam through dint of Mekkah and Medina, this barbarity -- this atrocity -- this celebration of human degradation, incompetence, and slovenliness -- this nightmare incarnate of Sunni Islam -- The Saudis also gave us the Taliban -- gave us Usama Bin Laden -- are funding Zarqawi in Iraq -- Hamas in Lebanon, UBL and Zawarhri in Pakistan , and tens of thousands of terror promulgating hatred spewing mosques around the world -- and hundreds of thousands of Wahhabi madrassas churning out ignorant little hate filled killing machine stormtroopers -- Nightmares all -- horrors all -- true ABOMINATIONS....
THEY are ENEMIES --
"The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their view to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views which can be uncomfortable if you're one of those facts."— Dr. Who - Face of Evil
Wow 3rd Time lucky, you have a reading comprehension problem, second only to your psychological neurosis and fear of women :)
I have absolutely no hatred of books. In fact it seems that if there is a hatred of books, it is yours, not mine. Since you blame so called Social Darwinism books for feminism.
On second thought your apparent opinion of women is very much the same as Muslims, and I do think you would find yourself contented living in Iran.
You do have so much in common with the Muslims.
This comment is ridiculous 3rd time loser.
Ahem, no we are not equal, and most certainly you aren't my equal, not morally, not intellectually, not physically. you have a tall ladder to climb to reach my standards.
However there are many many women, who are stronger, taller, brighter, more capable and able than the majority of men, and there are many men who are weaker, smaller and more stupid than the majority of women.
You see humans come in all size and shapes and capabilities, and one size does not fit all, except in the minds of social communists like Muslims and dolts like you.
No I didn't miss anything at all, I know and understand everything that you said, and more besides. My comments were more in the nature of a response to other posters, and were made with the purpose of trying to motivate some thought and reflection, almost impossible in an environment where the participants are reactionary and Knee jerk.
Did I say so above, if not let me say it now. The old saying "Be careful of what you wish for, you might get it" is correct.
The Hate speech laws enacted in Germany, Canada and Britain and Italy, were designed to protect Jews and other minorities from calumny, infamy, false and baseless charges and to smear the reputation of whole classes of people. Now those laws have been co opted and expanded to protect Muslims from even honest exposition of their ideology and it's consequences.
And by the way, you are correct that there are limits to what you can write about IDENTIFIABLE persons, but that statement is not relevant to this discussion (it is handled by libel laws), this discussion is about publishing blanket accusations and charges against whole classes or groups of peoples, and if by that you mean that these are "protected classes of identifiable persons" (e.g. Jews) then that definition is, and has been easily expanded to include Muslims.
A conundrum has been created, a Gorgon's knot tied.
'Ahem, no we are not equal, and most certainly you aren't my equal, not morally, not intellectually, not physically. you have a tall ladder to climb to reach my standards.'~ nariz
Sig Heil.
Huh? -- A "Gorgon's knot" WTF is that?
Do you mean a Gordian knot, numbskull?
And he'll cut it with Medusa's sword.
Most of the comments above with to the point and interesting, thought-provoking, and worth considering more. I'll keep on it rather than write off the top of my head again now.
Nariz:
The difficulty that the people claiming protection from Islamophobia face in seeking the protection under laws that would parallel Holocaust denial is that truth is a defence against defamation. Check out the Islamophobia Watch site sometime. It's practically a parody of itself, getting all jiggly because Dolly Parton is unwitting enough to champion the cause of the former pop singer who used to be known as Cat Stevens and getting all bent out of shape over news items like the following. Most of the items posted and editorial commentary, if not all, appear to be the contributions of Bob Pitt. (all that follows was copied from the site.)
Joan Smith defends modernity against Muslims
"I haven't opposed religious reactionaries all my life to suddenly go soft on people who argue that calling for a ban on 'adulteresses' being stoned to death is a bit too radical for Islam at the moment (yes, I do mean Tariq Ramadan)." Joan Smith takes up the refrain we hear endlessly from Nick Cohen, Harry's Place et al that the Left have abandoned their principles by allying with Muslims in opposition to US imperialism. "It's time they took an honest look at where they may be heading and I don't just mean the restoration of the Caliphate."
Tribune, 14 October 2005
Personally, I think the Islamophobic self-styled defenders of secularism and rationalism should take an honest look at where they are heading – and I do mean (cf. Gay and Lesbian Humanist) into a de facto racist bloc with the likes of the BNP.
Posted on Friday, October 14, 2005 by Bob Pitt in Liberal, UK, Tariq Ramadan | Comments Off