The “Innocence of Muslims” And The Hypocrisy of Non-Muslims

The spate of racist anti-Muslim/pro-Israel ads that have sprung up throughout New York’s subways have been widely condemned but permitted  on on the grounds of freedom of speech.  The ads which had previously appeared in San Francisco were taken out by the American Freedom Defense Initative (AFDI) who are spearheaded by notorious Islam-bashers Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller, who had personal contact with Morris Sadek, the Egyptian-Copt behind the “Innocence of Muslims” film.

However, “freedom of speech” for all it’s unquestionable merits has been abused by the gatekeepers to villify “the savage” and “support the civilized man”  – the Arab/Muslims semitic cousins.

Case in point being the contrast between the courts acceptance to display Spencer and Geller’s hate-filled message in the public transport system with an anti-Israel ads which were to appear in King County with the tagline “Israeli war crimes, your tax dollars at work”. The respective judges ruling on:

Anti-Islam Ad:

The judge, Paul A. Engelmayer of Federal District Court, ruled that the rejected ad was “not only protected speech — it is core political speech,”


Anti-Israel Ad:

The Court also determined that in light of the undisputed facts regarding the purpose of the forum and the factual basis for King County’s application of its policy in this case, King County’s decision to cancel the SeaMAC Ad was both reasonable and viewpoint-neutral.


Charlie Hebdo and The Sine Affair

The hypocrisy on display is undeniable though far from unique and not exclusive to the USA.  Another to pour fuel onto the flames of the already raging inferno of Islamic-Western tension was the French Magazine Charlie Hebdo who decided to run provocative cartoons of a turbaned, naked Mohammed.

The magazine defended it’s right to publish the caricatures on the grounds of “freedom”

He says nothing wrong has been done, and that his magazine has not infringed French law, as a publication has the right to use the freedom to run critical or satirical cartoons.


The French magazine clearly has the freedom and desire to insult Muslims yet the same “freedom” evidently didn’t apply when the criticism is focused on Jews.

Maurice Siné had been a contributor to Charlie Hebdo for  twenty years when in 2008 he published an “anti-semitic” comment in his satirical column suggesting that Jean Sarkozy, the son of the former French President was set to convert to Judaism prior to his marriage to his fiance; a Jewish heiress, to improve his career prospects.

Sine’s offending comments:

‘He’ll go a long way in life, this lad!’


Sine was then ordered to apologise by the magazine but he refused and was duly sacked.  The Guardian reported:

The piece was published without controversy – until several days later, when a radio presenter referred to it as anti-Semitic. The families of those concerned were said to be ‘sickened’. Val, who took the controversial decision to re-publish a Danish newspaper’s cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed two years ago in the name of freedom of the press, agreed that the piece was offensive and told its author to apologise.

Siné refused, saying he would rather ‘cut his own nuts off’ and was, more or less, fired. Cue outrage, argument, counter argument, argument. Was the original statement anti-Semitic? For Val, there was no doubt. Siné’s statements, he said last week, ‘could be interpreted as making a link between conversion to Judaism and social success’ and that they spread the old stereotype associating Jews and money.


Max Blumenthal, Death Threats and The Hypocrisy of Google.

Proving that Islam is not uniquely prone to violence Sine, 79, was targeted with death threats by the terrorist outfit the Jewish Defense League (JDL).  Who threatened:

20 centimeters of stainless steel in the stomach, it could well teach the bastard to stop and think.”


Another to receive death threats was Jewish journalist/filmmaker Max Blumenthal who received numerous death threats for being a “self-hating Jew” after producing a film critical of the attitudes of Israelis.

(You can watch the film here: Feeling The Hate In Jerusalem — The Censored Video from Max Blumenthal on Vimeo. )

Blumenthal’s film went the way of  The Palestinian Media Watch who had their account banned for “hatespeech”  while Blumenthal’s film was banned from Youtube due to “innapropriate content”.

And Google/Youtube’s response to the “hatespeech” and innapropriate content” contained in the Innocence of Muslims trailer?

They denied a White House request to take down the film – all in the name of “freedom” of course.


A final example of the hypocrisy at work is the original spark in 2006 of the Mohammed cartoons hysteria; that of the 12 cartoons published in Danish newspaper the Jyllands-Posten including the infamous image of Mohammed with a bomb in his turban.  They were the brainchild of editor Flemming Rose, a keen admirer of leading Islamophobe Daniel Pipes.

The newspaper again defended it’s decision to publish the highly offensive images to Muslims on the grounds of “freedom” yet the very same hypocrisy was exposed when it was revealed that in 2003 they refused to publish satirical cartoons of Jesus on the basis that they were offensive to Christians and later in 2006 they point-blank refused to publish satirical cartoon relating to the Holocaust.

Carlos Latuff’s Entry To The Iranian Holocaust Cartoon Competition

While freedom of speech  is an absolute requirement of every truly open, free and just society it is also a double-edged sword.  A sword that is only sharpened on one side to hack at Muslims while the other is intentionally left blunt.

2 responses to “The “Innocence of Muslims” And The Hypocrisy of Non-Muslims

  1. Kevin October 9, 2012 at 4:06 am


    You are 100% right. It is not just hypocrisy but our Judiciary is totally anarchist and corrupt. They will “find” anything–even if it never happened and refuse to find something that is 100% true–to suit their needs. Even lawyers openly refer to them as “result oriented” and some have even thought about referring to the US Judiciary as “criminals in robes.”

    The Jews (people who think they are Jews but are mainly Whites whose ancestors converted to Judaism in the Middle Ages) actually own and operate the Judiciary! It is openly known they can get any case fixed–in their favor.

    There is only one group in the USA with the money and power to bribe, blackmail, subjugate and control much of Judiciary–the Jewish lobby and its billionaire Oligarchs. There is no other lobby as powerful. They own and operate the Democratic party, which receives 50% of its campaign contribution from the “Jews”. (The Democratic party, in turn, pays them back 10-100 times as much money disguised as earmarks, grants and contracts.) They collectively have trillions of dollars and legal support of the sovereign nuclear state of Israel. They can easily get a Judge a fake Israeli passport and deposit several million dollars into his secret bank account in Israel, which has the world’s toughest bank secrecy laws and is the world capital of money laundering. These bribes are then funneled back to the Judges in the US through bogus corporations or charities. Mossad agents operate freely in the USA and have their tentacles in the FBI and can assassinate anyone with impunity. These and other factors enable the Jewish lobby and/or the Oligarchs to own and operate large chunks of the US Judiciary and our govt.

    It is believed that Judges pay the Oligarchs to get the job, and then they are kept under the noose for ever through blackmail or face prison, as reported here:

    That is why the international Jewish criminal, George Soros, whose suspected insider trading netted him millions of dollars, is walking around free.

    90% of Jewish white collar criminals are never prosecuted.

    A Jewish pedophile received a mere slap on the wrist.

    A Jewish girl who killed a Chinese man in a car accident while texting did not spend a day in prison.


  2. Chino October 16, 2012 at 2:10 pm

    You haven’t listed anything hypocritical in regards to the principle of free speech. In each case it was up to the authorities and editors what they would permit being published in their forum. Advertising space on buses is private space run for profit, they don’t have to put your message on there. In no case was actual speech banned, you can say what you want about Christians, Jews and Israel and reasonably expect to be unmolested by the law or private citizens for the most part. It’s not like you can’t buy a book by Noam Chomsky or Norman Finklestien because of some court order. Jyllands-Posten being selectively sensitive about Christians feelings has no bearing on free speech application, just them being inconsistent. If Jyllands-Posten criticized another paper for having christian satire and tried to have someone else censored then they would be hypocrites. Funnily enough the issue is offending people rather than trying to MURDER cartoonists in their own homes. Charlie Hebdo had their offices burnt for publishing cartoons, and they did it again after opening again, yet the real issue is calling out a comment based on prejudiced conspiracy. On the topic of Jews, they printed a cover with a Jew pushing Mohammad in a wheelchair and called them “untouchables” mockingly, not enough? Charlie Hebdo could print satirical cartoons of Torah figures if they wanted to, we have at least 50 years of films bashing Christians mythology, even a figure of Christ made of feces. Free speech isn’t some anti-Muslim tool, Innocence of Muslims is a 14 minute joke and extremely tame compared to what could be said and has already been said about Christianity.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: