Over the years it has become more and more obvious that much of the major media is very selective in its reporting of news of the Jewish community and Israel.
Chances are that your local TV, radio, newspaper doesn’t report what we do.
We are not aligned with any group, government, or religious body.
Our only commitment is to report Jewish news that you will not read in the mainstream media.
We welcome your comments.
Blazing cat fur, a well-known Canadian blog, has been sued for providing a link!!
The man who brought the suit, Richard Warman, apparently is quite fond of suing anyone who disagrees with him, according to the link below which we urge you to click.
Amazing.
Please educate yourself and read the entire story.
For the attention of “Cindy,” the Mossad agent who seduced the atomic spy, Mordechai Vanunu: a new Halachic study has established that it is a mitzvah to have sex with a terrorist for operational purposes. The new study establishes guidelines on this issue. For example, if the agent is a married woman, “it would be best for her husband to divorce her before, and after the act he will be entitled to take her back.”
The title of the study is “Illicit Sex for the Sake of National Security,” and it appears in the new edition of Tehumin, an annual publication of Halachic studies on issues that pertain to the interface between religion and modernity — Kashrut, the army, the economy and so forth. The periodical is published by the Tzomet Institute in the Etzion Bloc, and which is identified with the Religious Zionist movement. The article was written by Rabbi Ari Shvat, a teacher of Jewish studies. Rabbi Shvat published in this case a guidebook, so to speak, for the woman Mossad agent who serves as a seductress and is forced to sleep with dangerous terrorists either in order to obtain vital information or to bring about their capture. This is known in professional jargon as setting a “honey trap,” and it was used in the Vanunu case as well as, according to foreign reports, in the assassination of the terrorist Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai last January.
Rabbi Shvat addressed in his study past instances of Jewish seductresses, such as Queen Esther (who slept with Ahasueras, the king of Persia, in order to help the Jews) and Yael, the wife of Hever, (who tradition suggests slept with the enemy chief of staff, Sisra, in order to tire him and to cut off his head). It turns out that a fierce debate raged in the Gemara about such significant questions. The conclusion drawn by the Gemara was that if having sex with a gentile is crucial for advancing an important national purpose, it is even to be considered a mitzvah to do so.
“Of course, one ought to prefer an unmarried agent for a honey trap mission,” wrote Rabbi Shvat, “but if it is necessary to use a married woman it would be best… were her husband to divorce her with a get, and after the act he would be entitled to bring her back.” In order to help the couple avoid the discomfiture of having to go to the rabbinate each time, Rabbi Shvat has authorized the couple to be divorced in writing so that the matter does not become public. If the couple doesn’t have an opportunity to divorce prior to his wife leaving on the mission, her husband is obliged to divorce her after the fact since, according to Halacha, she betrayed him, even if it was for the sake of an important national mission.
Any woman who is thinking about applying for the job needs to take into account that she won’t be able to marry a Cohen, but the author of the study seems to realize that that isn’t what is going prevent women from enlisting into the Mossad ranks or, as the article put it: “Naturally, a job of that sort could be given to a woman who in any event is licentious in her ways.”
In conclusion, Rabbi Shvat wrote: “Not only is it permissible but the sages raise that action of devotion to the top of the pyramid of Halachic priorities as the most important mitzvah of all.”
The director of Tzomet and the chief editor of Tehumin, Rabbi Yisrael Rosen, praised the new study as daring and important. “Despite the fact that women employees of the Mossad are probably not going to come consult with a rabbi, it is an important connection that requires courage to make.”
Here is the transcript of what David Brooks, conservative pundit, and Shields, a liberal commentator and journalist, said on PBS News Hour:
JUDY WOODRUFF: Thirty seconds left. The firing of Juan Williams, the analyst, by National Public Radio: the meaning of it and what is the fallout going to be?
MARK SHIELDS: Well, Juan Williams is a former colleague of mine on the Washington Post editorial page and a friend for 30 years. And I think that NPR made a serious mistake. He is an analyst. And he wasn’t a correspondent. And I think they did it in a terrible way, by telephone call, without a personal chance to explain himself. And, you know, I think it has given the right wing a tremendous opening to attack NPR, which I hate to see happen, because I think it is a valuable public institution.
DAVID BROOKS: Yes. I work at NPR somewhat. And I’m friends with Juan. I’m friends with the people who fired him.
But I think they did it in a bad way. I agree with Mark. I think what he said was perfectly within the bounds of debate. And the damaging thing to me is, NPR has really worked hard over the past 10, 20 years to become a straight-down-the-middle network. I’m not sure they always were decades ago. But now they really are.
And now, because of this unfortunate episode, they begin to get some ideological baggage again. And that is damaging.
Apparently, NPR has now realized that Americans will not stand for its one-sided coverage of news.
There is a red line which one cannot cross without some backlash. Firing Juan Williams for saying what he thought, on another station, brought them to their knees.
Juan was asked what he thought and he gave his opinion.
His statement was very simple.
He said that he feels uncomfortable when he sees women clothed in Muslim garb, designed to prevent anyone from seeing them. That is his opinion. He worked at NPR to provide his personal commentary.
He also mentioned that he sees a relationship between jihad, mentioned only in the Koran as an Islamic precept, and Islam.
Nothing noteworthy here.
NPR’s response was to fire him.
When it was called on this their president, Vivian Schiller, said that maybe the matter had been poorly handled. She then remarked, that Williams should keep his beliefs to meetings with ” his psychiatrist.”
And they are calling Williams unbalanced?
The Washington Post, was one of thousands of newspapers around the country to detail the backlash.
NPR was shocked at the backlash. Here is what their ombudsman wrote on her blog:
Thursday was a day like none I’ve experienced since coming to NPR in October 2007. Office phone lines rang non-stop like an alarm bell with no off button. We’ve received more than 8,000 emails, a record with nothing a close second.
At noon, the deluge of email crashed NPR’s “Contact Us” form on the web site.
The overwhelming majority are angry, furious, outraged. They want NPR to hire him back immediately. If NPR doesn’t, they want all public funding of public radio to stop. They promise to never donate again. They are as mad as hell, and want everyone to know it. It was daunting to answer the phone and hear so much unrestrained anger.
Even NPR’s own staff expressed exasperation at the decision during a meeting Friday with NPR’s president, Vivian Schiller. Several of those who attended said Schiller told employees that she regretted how she handled the episode.
Staffers said that at the Friday meeting, Schiller apologized again for telling an audience in Atlanta on Thursday that Williams should have kept his comments about Muslims between “himself and his psychiatrist.”
Maybe she should be the one to get fired?
“There wasn’t anger” among NPR employees at the meeting, “but I did get a sense of despair and disappointment,” said one NPR journalist, who asked not to be named because employees are not authorized to speak on the record about the matter. “I got the impression that [management] felt they had acted rashly and without deliberation. When [Schiller] made the psychiatrist crack, it just made matters much, much worse.”
Williams commented: “I’ve always thought the right wing were ones that were inflexible and intolerant and now I’m coming to realize that the orthodoxy at NPR, its representing the left.”
Coming just before a national election which looks as though NPR will suffer at the polls, indirectly, the entire affair just hammered home how irrelevant NPR is becoming in American life.
It is the radio equivalent of The Daily Worker, the Communist paper, totally out of synch with the American psyche.
An NPR spokeswoman, Dana Davis Rehm, said there will be a review but it won’t second-guess the decision itself, but would focus on how it was carried out. NPR president,Schiller,declined to comment.
Meanwhile, Congress will consider whether to suspend funding for all public broadcasting.
Several Republicans have mentioned that the timing of the firing of Williams is the perfect gift for even more anti-NPR voting at the polls.
A large GOP win will be seen as evidence that the American people refuse to pay NPR’s propaganda bills.
We call on all of our readers to contact your congressperson and your local affiliate radio stations that carry NPR.
Let them know that you will not allow your money to be spent on such propaganda especially in a time of national economic distress.
The affiliates are especially vulnerable.
They are NPR’s local voice.
Cut the connection by leaning on your local affiliate.
Organize meet ups, make sure local listeners tell the stations, no more NPR.
Let them know why you will not donate.
Let them know that when renewal time comes with the FCC, you will complain that they are abusing their non-profit status.
The public airwaves are strictly licensed. If you complain, as I have against WAMU-FM, Washington, DC, for carrying NPR and abusing its public broadcasting status, then you will hit NPR where it really is vulnerable.
Contact the Federal Communications Commission. Complain against your local NPR affiliate. Let the affiliate know that you have done so.
NPR fired Juan Williams, one of its senior news analysts, after he made comments opposing jihad and linking it with Muslims on the Fox News Channel.
NPR said in a statement that it gave Mr. Williams notice of his termination on 20 October.
The move came after Mr. Williams, who is also a Fox News political analyst, appeared on the “The O’Reilly Factor” on Monday. On the show, the host, Bill O’Reilly, asked him to respond to the notion that the United States was facing a “Muslim dilemma.” Mr. O’Reilly said, “The cold truth is that in the world today jihad, aided and abetted by some Muslim nations, is the biggest threat on the planet.”
Mr. Williams said he concurred with Mr. O’Reilly.
He continued: “I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot. You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”
Mr. Williams also made reference to the Pakistani immigrant who pleaded guilty this month to trying to plant a car bomb in Times Square. “He said the war with Muslims, America’s war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don’t think there’s any way to get away from these facts,” Mr. Williams said.
NPR said in its statement that the remarks “were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR.”
——-
NPR, which claims to be a non-profit, unaligned network in the public interest, regularly features Islamic-oriented newscasts, opinion pieces and dysinformation broadcasts. It masquerades as objective. However, it’s objectivity does not extend to Islam and the enemies of Israel or the West.
It delights in broadcasting the suffering of the Palestinians while remaining silent or condemnatory on Jews. Ironically, many of its top broadcasters are self-hating Jews.
It daily mentions its “sponsors” in detail while denying it does advertising. It is consistently on the left when it comes to its opinions.
NPR does not deserve your support. Let your local non-profit stations know your opinions. WAMU in Washington, DC is conducting its regular fund-raising drive. Deny them the money they seek as long as they broadcast NPR.
We call on our readers to separate NPR from its affiliate stations.
If necessary, shut down the affiliates. Turn them into other stations that are no longer broadcasting propaganda.
NPR is nothing without its affiliates.
Over 50 Muslim states. One Jewish homeland.
The following is an op-ed which Israel’s Ambassador to the US, Michael Oren, published in the NY Times. Because of its importance, we are reprinting it in its entirety.
NEARLY 63 years after the United Nations recognized the right of the Jewish people to independence in their homeland — and more than 62 years since Israel’s creation — the Palestinians are still denying the Jewish nature of the state. “Israel can name itself whatever it wants,” said the Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas, while, according to the newspaper Haaretz, his chief negotiator, Saeb Erekat, said that the Palestinian Authority will never recognize Israel as the Jewish state. Back in 1948, opposition to the legitimacy of a Jewish state ignited a war. Today it threatens peace.
Mr. Abbas and Mr. Erekat were responding to the call by the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, for the Palestinians to recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, enabling his government to consider extending the moratorium on West Bank construction. “Such a step by the Palestinian Authority would be a confidence-building measure,” Mr. Netanyahu explained, noting that Israel was not demanding recognition as a prerequisite for direct talks. It would “open a new horizon of hope as well as trust among broad parts of the Israeli public.”
Why should it matter whether the Palestinians or any other people recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people? Indeed, Israel never sought similar acknowledgment in its peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan. Some analysts have suggested that Mr. Netanyahu is merely making a tactical demand that will block any chance for the peace they claim he does not really want.
Affirmation of Israel’s Jewishness, however, is the very foundation of peace, its DNA. Just as Israel recognizes the existence of a Palestinian people with an inalienable right to self-determination in its homeland, so, too, must the Palestinians accede to the Jewish people’s 3,000-year connection toour homeland and our right to sovereignty there. This mutual acceptance is essential if both peoples are to live side by side in two states in genuine and lasting peace.
So why won’t the Palestinians reciprocate? After all, the Jewish right to statehood is a tenet of international law. The Balfour Declaration of 1917called for the creation of “a national home for the Jewish people” in the land then known as Palestine and, in 1922, the League of Nations cited the “historical connection of the Jewish people” to that country as “the grounds for reconstituting their national home.” In 1947, the United Nations authorized the establishment of “an independent Jewish state,” and recently, while addressing the General Assembly, President Obama proclaimed Israel as “the historic homeland of the Jewish people.” Why, then, can’t the Palestinians simply say “Israel is the Jewish state”?
The reason, perhaps, is that so much of Palestinian identity as a people has coalesced around denying that same status to Jews. “I will not allow it to be written of me that I have … confirmed the existence of the so-called Temple beneath the Mount,” Yasir Arafat told President Bill Clinton in 2000.
For Palestinians, recognizing Israel as a Jewish state also means accepting that the millions of them residing in Arab countries would be resettled within a future Palestinian state and not within Israel, which their numbers would transform into a Palestinian state in all but name. Reconciling with the Jewish state means that the two-state solution is not a two-stage solution leading, as many Palestinians hope, to Israel’s dissolution.
Which is precisely why Israelis seek the basic reassurance that the Palestinian Authority is ready to accept our state — to accept us. Israelis need to know that further concessions would not render us more vulnerable to terrorism and susceptible to unending demands. Though recognition of Israel as the Jewish state would not shield us from further assaults or pressure, it would prove that the Palestinians are serious about peace.
The core of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been the refusal to recognize Jews as a people, indigenous to the region and endowed with the right to self-government. Criticism of Israeli policies often serves to obscure this fact, and peace continues to elude us. By urging the Palestinians to recognize us as their permanent and legitimate neighbors, Prime Minister Netanyahu is pointing the way out of the current impasse: he is identifying the only path to co-existence.
Thanks to National Public Radio magazine for the following:
A new issue of the online magazine Inspire — from the Yemeni group al-Qaida of the Arabian Peninsula — has some alarming advice for would-be terrorists: Open fire on lunch-hour crowds in Washington, D.C., to “knock out a few government employees.”
After making a splash with the first issue of Inspire, an English-language magazine that grooms readers to become radical jihadists, al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula released a second edition this week, complete with essays by Anwar al-Awlaki, suggestions about bombing Washington, D.C., restaurants and tips for using your pickup truck to “mow down the enemies of God.” In the magazine’s introduction, the editors celebrate “recent U.S. assessments” that have designated AQAP “one of the most dangerous branches of al-Qaeda,” and tell readers that they can expect more to come: “[Y]ou haven’t seen anything yet.” Inspire is believed to be spearheaded by Samir Khan, a 24-year-old former North Carolina resident who attracted attention in 2003 by running one of the Internet’s most popular—and radical—al Qaida sites. After Charlotte’s Muslim community staged an intervention, Khan boarded a flight to Yemen, and six months later, the first issue of Inspirewas published. In the October issue, Khan is credited with an essay titled “I Am Proud to be a Traitor to America,” in which he lambastes the U.S. for “kill[ing] millions of Muslims around the world” and “get[ting] away with it wearing a tuxedo.” Counterterror experts worry that the magazine’s Western-friendly attitude—it features articles like “Make a Bomb in the Kitchen of Your Mom,”—”will appeal to kids who have never really been very interested in violent jihad before,” one official tells NPR. “The magazine seems to make it fun and accessible. It used to be to get into this you needed to speak Arabic. Now you don’t—English subtitles, English translations of extremist videos, that’s the norm now.”
Oh, no. Tolerance is only a one way street.
In a speech before the Council on Foreign Relations, Imam Rauf, the head of the Ground Zero mosque, said that he is a reasonable man and that he would never, ever think for one second of being insensitive.
“Everything is on the table,” he said with relation to the mosque location.
He added that the mosque is not hallowed ground.
Here is my response:
Inside Cordoba House, the name of the new mosque, is part of one of the planes that flew into the WTC.
Cordoba House is named after the city in Spain, Cordoba, where the victorious Muslims destroyed the largest church and built a very large mosque which still stands. According to Muslim law, no mosque may ever be removed from its site.
The 13 story Cordoba House mosque will tower over Ground Zero, which, along with the site of the mosque and the plane there, is hallowed ground. This site is a deliberate choice on the part of those who want a symbol of Islam overlooking the site of a mass grave of 3,000 New Yorkers who were murdered in the name of Islam.
The Arabic word Islam translates into English as “submission”.
Recently, one of the last bastions of moderate Islam, Turkey, fell to the extremists who have now taken over the entire religion. A referendum was passed which gives the ruling Islamic Party power over picking the judiciary. The Islamist immediately announced that Muslim law, sharia, will be imposed on Turkey, a previously secular state. Women are now wearing the veil in Turkey just as they now are in Gaza, which before Hamas , the Islamists ,took power, was largely secular.
There is no going back to a secular life once sharia is imposed.
The imam is playing a game with us until he and his cronies get what they want, our submission to their demands.
If you want us to show respect, Imam Rauf, try showing some yourself first. You are a guest in this country. Act like one and don’t push us around.
You may just find that we will push back.
The orthodox rabbis in Teaneck, NJ who have pushed the local newspaper, the NJ Jewish Standard, to refuse to carry Jewish same-sex union announcements, have, with one exception, refused to allow their names to be known.
As the NY Times wrote in its recent article on this matter, “Neither the Orthodox rabbis contacted nor the newspaper responded to phone calls. And on the streets of Teaneck, businesspeople preferred to speak anonymously, rather than risk offending. Still, there was widespread speculation that the economic clout of the Orthodox gave them outsize influence.”
Now, however, they have emerged with a statement which was leaked by The Jewish Channel (TV).
As publicized by Failed Messiah , a major online journal of investigative reporting on the Orthodox Jewish community, this statement is noteworthy both for its condemnation of the exposure of the rabbis, who were caught with their pants down as well as for their excessive denial of any wrong doing while at the same time affirming that they are innocents whose only crime was that they are too devout to be involved in such bitul Torah ( waste of time when you could be learning Torah) as terrorizing their local Jewish newspaper.
Here are some choice nuggets taken from the statement .
Following Jewish traditional exegesis, we have inserted commentary as appropriate. All bold type is used to highlight certain language used by the rabbis and is not to be found in the original statement.
To our great consternation,
[hence the phrase, ” pain and consternation“, used in the NJ Jewish Standard statement disavowing future same-sex union pieces which Rebecca Boroson, the editor of the paper allegedly was forced to sign. ]
the local Orthodox rabbinate, comprising the RCBC (Rabbinical Council of Bergen County), has become and continues to be the target of much venom presently being spewed, especially on the aforementioned blogs, based on the presumption that the rabbis played a major, and indeed bullying and arm-twisting role in the Jewish Standard’s decision making process. As a result of many erroneous assumptions, unsubstantiated claims and baseless fabrications, the rabbis of our community have been vilified in the most insulting, defamatory and obnoxious of terms.
[ One of the aforementioned blogs was the NY Times which included language in a previously referenced article discussing the allegations of extortion and financial pressure on the newspaper]
The following open statement is directed to our congregations in an attempt to accurately present the facts and set the record straight.
In the days following the appearance of this marriage announcement, a number of RCBC rabbis spoke with each other either in person, on the phone or through email. There was never, as suggested in one report, any special rabbinical meeting convened to deal with this matter. The reactions among the rabbis varied. Some stated that they had been approached by numerous congregants who were very upset by what they saw in the paper; others said that only a few in their synagogue seemed to care. Some held that the RCBC should send some kind of response to the newspaper, either orally or in writing; others contended than in as much as this paper does not conform, and does not claim to conform, to Orthodox standards – they do, after all, advertise non-Kosher food establishments and announce communal events which take place on Shabbat – this is not an RCBC problem. In light of the lack of any consensus, and in light of the fact that all this was taking place in the middle of the holiday of Sukkot, when the minds of most rabbis are understandably focused elsewhere, it was decided that any official RCBC reaction would wait until a full discussion could take place at our next regularly scheduled meeting, already planned for the week after Yom Tov.
[ No official meeting took place but it was decided via informal discussion among the various rabbis that any official RCBC reaction would wait. But none of these unofficial discussions count except that they resulted in a group decision.]
One single RCBC rabbi, who has been consulted by the Jewish Standard on a number of occasions in the past about issues relating to the religious sensibilities of the Orthodox community, did go, with the approval of the RCBC leadership, though not representing the RCBC,
[ Come on, guys, you can’t have it both ways]
to meet with the executive staff of the Jewish Standard. The meeting was characterized by calm, civility and mutual respect. The rabbi communicated that there were a significant number of Orthodox Jews who felt that the Standard had crossed a line by publishing this wedding announcement, and that if the leaders of the paper are concerned about the opinions of these members of our community, they should reconsider their position on this matter for the future.
[ As in, we respectfully advise you that you have crossed a line and in publishing this announcement – it was a union, not a wedding – to do as you are told or there will be consequences. Sorry, we cannot discuss the consequences now because our minds are understandably focused elsewhere, on our spiritual duties.]
– At no time did this rabbi or any other RCBC rabbi express any threat whatsoever, financial or otherwise, to the newspaper.
[ Such as, “you have crossed a line”; if you are concerned about our opinions, don’t publish what we tell you not to publish. Read the report in that tiny blog, The NY Times, for what everyone is discussing.]
– At no time did anyone representing the RCBC ever contact any proprietor of a food establishment under RCBC Kashruth supervision regarding anything to do with this matter or with the Jewish Standard.
[ No one officially “representing RCBC” but unofficially things kind of get known, even though, as mentioned earlier it is via email, phone, conversation, innuendo,etc. Come on, we weren’t born yesterday.]
– At no time did anyone representing the RCBC advocate any kind of boycott of the newspaper or force, urge, encourage, coax or cajole anybody else to do so.
[The magic words throughout this statement are no one officially representing the RCBC. These same rabbis to this day refuse to put their names on paper and even identify themselves in the media. They simply will not take responsibility for the mess they have created.]
Any reports, allegations or accusations implying the contrary are outright lies. They remain outright lies regardless of how loudly they are proclaimed or how often they are repeated.
It is a source of embarrassment to the greater Jewish community
[ Their homophobia is also a source of embarrassment for the entire world. One wonders,what greater Jewish community are they referring to? How would they know what the greater Jewish community thinks, given that they represent at best a tiny portion of the smallest minority within the Jewish community, the orthodox community. Certainly most Modern Orthodox and even many of the rabbis quoted earlier in your statement have no problem with the announcement.]
that there are various Jewish blog sites, claiming that they accurately report on the Jewish world in general, or cover the Orthodox world in particular, or something of the like, who seem, at least in this case, to have felt no need to display any sense of professionalism, journalistic integrity or even common courtesy. Any one of these values would dictate that all relevant facts should be thoroughly checked and rechecked before launching a nasty verbal attack on others, but that clearly did not happen here.
[Tell it to the NY Times which specifically mentions the speculation of rabbinical economic clout. Tell it to the NJ Jewish News which also addresses this reality. ]
Instead, the sites fed off of one another, built on the uncorroborated posts of others hiding behind the anonymity of a screen name and “protected” themselves by inserting words like “allegedly” and “supposedly” every once in a while. And so the Orthodox rabbis of Bergen County have this past week been labeled thugs, Ayatollahas, Mafiosos, Taliban and who knows what else. All, of course, in the name of tolerance, decency and sensitivity to the feelings of others, and all based on falsehood.
[Actually, all in the name of providing the Jewish community with the news of what is actually happening. That is our mission.]
——
All of this follows on the recent homophobic attacks on several gay men in New York City which the NY Police Department describes as the worst anti-gay hate crime in the history of the city. Just a few weeks ago Tyler Clementi committed suicide not too far from Teaneck, NJ because of homophobic harassment by fellow students who have since been arrested. NJ is vigorous in enforcing hate crimes. The rabbis have been notably silent on such matters. They are too busy attempting to change policy at their local newspaper.
NJ Jewish Standard photo: " Teaneck Orthodox rabbis meet to promote inclusiveness."
People familiar with the situation in Teaneck, NJ, the home of the NJ Jewish Standard, caution that it is extremely unlikely that the publisher of the newspaper, James Janoff, will reverse his policy of refusing to publish same-sex union announcements.
After much deliberation, the newspaper ran the announcement — the first in its 79-year history for a same-sex marriage — in its Sept. 24 issue. Then, in its next issue, citing complaints from Orthodox rabbis and a “firestorm” that resulted, it issued an apology for the “pain and consternation” the announcement had caused members of the Orthodox community. It promised not to run similar announcements again
The publisher has been meeting with many rabbis to discuss the matter. On Thursday, 6 October, he met with a group of 35 Northern NJ rabbis. Conservative Rabbi David-Seth Kirshner of Temple Emanu-El in Closter organized Thursday’s meeting along with Rabbi Randall Mark of Wayne, president of the North Jersey Board of Rabbis. The gathering brought the paper’s leadership together with rabbis from the four main branches of Judaism – Conservative, Reform, Reconstructionist and Orthodox. While the Orthodox generally oppose to same-sex marriage, some rabbis from the other branches are supportive.
Kirshner said that during the meeting, James Janoff, the Standard’s publisher, did not reveal whether the paper would start publishing gay marriage notices again. In a statement on the Standard’s Web site earlier this week, Janoff conceded that the Teaneck-based paper “may have acted too quickly” when it decided not to publish such notices, “responding only to one segment of the community.”
As reported, the publisher stopped publishing the same-sex union announcements after local orthodox rabbis complained that they were were suffering from having to read such matters. They say that the newspaper is not following Jewish law in reporting these unions which are sanctioned by NJ law. Some observers have noted that the very same rabbis who are so upset about the one notice that was printed have never once complained about the regular notices for non-kosher restaurants or activities which violate the Jewish Sabbath which regularly appear in the paper. Apparently, their wrath is reserved for celebrations of commitment and love between same-sex couples.
“It is our hope that these meetings — such as the one held this morning at Temple Emanu-El in Closter — will be ongoing, leading to public discussions of the issue and enhancing respect among the many groups that coexist in our community,” Janoff said. “We are pleased with the candor and integrity of what we are hearing.”
He did not say whether the paper would reverse course again and start printing gay marriage notices.
“This is one where they almost couldn’t win,” said Andrew Silow-Carroll, editor in chief of The New Jersey Jewish News, which serves a much less Orthodox readership. Mr. Silow-Carroll said his publication ran its first same-sex wedding announcement in January and received no response. “The Orthodox community has huge economic clout,” he said. “If they put out the word that their members shouldn’t be reading or advertising, it could be crippling for a newspaper that size.
According to the NY Times, neither the Orthodox rabbis contacted nor the newspaper responded to phone calls. And on the streets of Teaneck, businesspeople preferred to speak anonymously, rather than risk offending. Still, there was widespread speculation that the economic clout of the Orthodox gave them outsize influence.
“This decision didn’t reflect the whole Jewish community,” said Rabbi Steven Sirbu, of Temple Emeth, a Reform congregation in Teaneck, where nearly all the other Jewish congregations are now Orthodox. “It looks like the newspaper was held hostage in some way by a small group of Orthodox leaders.”
Another rabbi, David Kirshner, of Temple Emanu-El, a Conservative congregation in Closter, said that while critics of the same-sex announcement couch their argument in terms of Scripture, the newspaper contains numerous elements that can be seen as impious — like ads for nonkosher restaurants.
“Make no mistake about it,” Rabbi Kirshner wrote in a public letter. “This is homophobia masquerading as religious piety. Pure and simple.”
“It’s time for the Jewish Standard to wake up and smell the chicken soup,” said Steven Goldstein, head of Garden State Equality and a Teaneck resident. Goldstein, whose engagement to his partner in 2002 was the very first such announcement ever printed by the New York Times, added: “The paper has thrown three movements of Judaism — Reform, Reconstructionist and Conservative — overboard in an effort to mollify some Orthodox.”
Mr. Goldstein who lives within sight of the newspaper’s offices in Teaneck says that he is still waiting for the publisher to contact him about this matter. He noted that he doesn’t expect the newspaper to resume its former policy of printing same-sex union announcements.
Andrew Silow-Carroll, writing in the NJ Jewish News, NJ’s other major Jewish newspaper, notes, “For example, some Orthodox readers and leaders tell me they can’t have our newspaper in their homes, or their schools, because of the subjects we treat as normative. Some are disappointed when we profile or merely report on a public figure whose own religious practice is obviously thin or non-existent, is intermarried, or whose accomplishments are in fields considered immodest (e.g., risque entertainment) or antithetical to their halachic values (e.g., the environmentalists who push an ”eco-kashrut” that is more organic than it is technically kosher).
Other subjects likely to give offense are the liberal movements’ more welcoming attitudes toward interfaith marriage, the Reform movement’s adoption of patrilineal descent, the ordination of gay rabbis, and gender egalitarianism. It’s not merely that some readers disagree with these positions — they see it as our responsibility as a Jewish newspaper to either ignore them or condemn them.
But there does come a point when, after respectfully hearing all sides of an issue, you have to make a decision, and someone is bound to feel disappointed that their position has not been adopted. And to the chagrin of the Orthodox, our commitment to pluralism leads us to treat as normative things that will offend them. ”
As the days pass and this story gets buried and eventually forgotten by the media, it seems likely that the publisher will make a decision based purely on business factors.
The orthodox are the only ones who have the clout to shut down his advertisers by removing kosher certification. Everyone knows this in Teaneck. Many observers believe that this implied threat is being used to get their way. The telling point was that the publisher specifically asked each non-orthodox rabbi if they would continue to read the paper if it decided to refuse to print the announcements. To date all of them said that they would.
What is a freedom of the press to the orthodox?
A joke when it doesn’t serve their own purposes.
In that, they reveal themselves to be little better than the Taliban or other fundamentalist bullies who use religion to disguise thuggery.
For complete articles quoted, go to:
http://www.northjersey.com/news/100700_Rabbis_discuss_Jewish_Standards_gay_marriage_notices.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/nyregion/07towns.html
http://njjewishnews.com/justASC/2010/10/07/the-times-weighs-in-on-the-same-sex-announcement-debate/
What a cute couple. Avi Smolen on right, Justin Rosen on left.
This interview and picture ( from Avi) were taken from New Voices, a national Jewish student newspaper, which we suggest you check out for further information. Ben Sales is the author of the article as well as the editor-in-chief of this publication.
http://www.newvoices.org/community?id=0029
Jewish newspapers often print controversial stories, but they don’t usually appear in the wedding section. On Sept. 24, however, Avi Smolen and Justin Rosen announced their upcoming marriage in the pages of the New Jersey Jewish Standard, causing a commotion among some of the paper’s large Orthodox readership.
A group of community Orthodox rabbis complained to the Standard in the wake of the same-sex announcement, causing the editors of the Standard to post a note Monday apologizing to the Orthodox community and declaring that it would no longer print same-sex announcements. After a whirlwind of subsequent pressure, however, from liberal Jewish readers and groups, the Standard retracted its original note in a later publisher’s note Tuesday night.
This discussion has erupted across the Jewish media, and the Standard has received harsh criticism. New Voices has already entered that fray, and today we go straight to the source. Below is an interview with Avi Smolen, one of the grooms who–according to the Jewish Standard–will be married in New York on Oct. 17.
NV: How did the two of you meet?
AS: We met over five years ago. We worked as camp counselors at Camp Ramah in Nyack, and we dated for over 4 years. Last year, just before Thanksgiving, we decided to take the next step. We’re getting married at North Shore Synagogue in Syosset, Long Island. It’s a Reform synagogue but we’re having a friend of ours who’s a Conservative rabbi do the ceremony.
NV: Why did you choose the Jewish Standard as the place to announce your wedding?
AS: My family is from Bergen County [in northern New Jersey] and we get the Jewish Standard every week. As part of the wedding process, we thought, “Where should we send our wedding announcement?” and we thought we’d send it there because it was a community Jewish paper. It wads the first time they’d received a same-sex wedding announcement. They published our announcement and we were thrilled. It was nice to be recognized.
NV: Were you expecting them to publish the announcement?
AS: I hadn’t given it much thought, that it would be a big deal that it was a same-sex announcement. I come from a community that’s very supportive. I have many Orthodox friends who are fully supportive of our relationship and coming to our wedding. We don’t hide who we are or our relationship.
When I heard that they were deliberating [over whether to print the announcement], I was glad that they decided to publish it. We urged our friends to send positive letters. Instead of seeing letters we saw the note from the editor.
NV: How did you feel about the initial editor’s note, which announced that there would be no more same-sex marriage announcements in the Standard?
AS: I was somewhat surprised because it was a pretty quick turnaround, to decide that ours would be the first and the last. It’s very hurtful because it marginalizes a group of people.
NV: How do you feel about the publisher’s note, which retracted the initial editors’ note?
AS: It was the right move to make. They obviously have paid attention to all of the attention they’ve been receiving for this decision. I hope that their conversations with members of the community are productive and that this will eventually lead to a change in their policy.
NV: What does this say about the power of those who protested the ban on same-sex announcements?
AS: The Standard’s reaction to all of the pressure speaks volumes about the support of the greater Jewish community for inclusion and pluralism. This is not just an issue for the gay community. This is an issue for people of all different backgrounds.
NV: What do you hope to see happen now?
AS: It would be fantastic if they realized that they’ve made a mistake and printed a mew letter saying they’ll publish all announcements. I don’t think that’s likely this week. I hope this generates dialogue about this issue and that in the future they come to a decision that comes to a recognition of the importance of these announcements from all segments of the community.
NV: How do you feel about the Orthodox community’s reaction to your announcement?
AS: I understand that they’re not in favor of same-sex marriage because of the halakhic difference. But one of the bodies of Orthodox rabbis published a paper on how important it is to welcome gay Jews into the community. This flies completely in the face of that paper.
There are plenty of Orthodox Jews who are happy to have their viewpoint, but that think there’s a right to publish ads about non-kosher restaurants in the community. They’re being given a bad name.
NV: Could this controversy end up helping the cause of gay rights?
AS: Any attention that this gets will raise people’s consciousness and has positive implications for inclusion.
NV: Has this changed your feelings about your place in the Jewish community?
AS: I’m not shaken by this in the least because I know that I have many Jewish friends. I was the president of my Hillel at Rutgers [University] and I feel very accepted in the Jewish community. This is an unfortunate instance of a minority of people trying to silence another group of people.
NV: How do you think this has reflected on the Jewish Standard?
AS: The whole issue has become a disaster for them. They wish now that they had formulated a stronger policy. They’ve received a lot of negative press in local, regional and national media and this portrays the paper as a less than inclusive paper and it doesn’t make them seem very welcoming.
I would hope that people don’t jump to conclusions and blame the newspaper. I think they made a mistake but are a generally good and pluralistic newspaper. The Jewish Standard will stay afloat with support from the greater community. They don’t need to toe the Orthodox line.
NV: Would you subscribe to the Jewish Standard if you lived in New Jersey?
AS: Yes.
——
We wish them both lots of nakhes, love and joy in their union.
What a great couple. You guys are a real inspiration in how a true mensch lives life and reacts to adversity.
Next year in Teaneck.
Our previous story detailed the decision by the NJ Jewish Standard to change its policy of printing announcements of local Jewish couples by specifically excluding same-sex unions authorized by New Jersey law.
After we published the story we were inundated by readers who clicked on the article and sent it to friends.
One person sent a comment which we posted following the story.
She is obviously very familiar with the situation at the newspaper and notes that the editor, Rebecca Kaplan Boroson, who signed the editorial announcement regarding the new policy took responsibility for a statement which, in fact, was not written by her. Apparently, she was forced to sign her name to a statement which did not reflect her personal views.
Furthermore, it was noted that this is a private newspaper and the employees must do as they are told or lose their jobs. The NJ Jewish Standard is dependent on its advertisers all of whom are very vulnerable to condemnation and boycott by the local rabbinical community and their supporters within the orthodox world of New Jersey. The newspaper is located in Teaneck, New Jersey which has a very large orthodox Jewish population many of whom advertise in the newspaper and read it.
The situation, as explained in the posted comment, is that members of the local orthodox community have threatened the newspaper with a financial boycott unless it follows their views on Jewish law. This includes refusing to publicize anything which positively reflects on gays and lesbians whom they believe are violating Jewish law.
The author of the comment explained that the staff of the newspaper, which includes one gay member, is afraid that if they do not follow the demands of the orthodox Jews who threatened them, they will no longer be able to earn a living and that the newspaper will be closed.
She ends her comment by offering a way out of the situation:
“Instead of vilifying the newspaper and withdrawing support from it, those opposed to this statement should make it clear that the newspaper’s rescinding this decision means they would *support* it by advertising and/or supporting its advertisers. With the threat of financial ruin removed from the equation, see what the Standard will do – remember what they did before this, before any pressure was brought to bear.”
This last line may reflect the original policy of accepting all wedding announcements from the Jewish community regardless of whether it was a heterosexual or homosexual couple. This was in keeping with the mission of the newspaper to accurately report the news of the entire Jewish community.
Click on comments to read the full comment following this article:
https://jewishdailyreport.wordpress.com/2010/10/04/nj-jewish-paper-bows-to-bigots/
Jewish Taliban intimidates NJ Jewish Standard and wins!
The New Jersey Jewish Standard, a Jewish community newspaper in Central NJ, has announced that it will no longer publish any ads celebrating unions of Jews who are gay or lesbian.
On September 24, 2010, a gay Jew and his partner joined other happy couples in letting the world know of their civil union. The NJ Jewish Standard printed the piece without comment. It was an announcement of their union and they and their families wanted to celebrate and let the community know about it. They are both observant Jews and well known in the community.
Such civil unions are the law of the land in many parts of America including New Jersey. According to Reform, Reconstructionist, Conservative and some modern orthodox rabbis, they are quite acceptable for Jews.
The editor of the New Jersey Jewish Standard, Rebecca Kaplan Boroson, wrote that many letters were received, some of them condemning the publication of this announcement, others supporting it. She said that she met with orthodox rabbis who said that they were offended and hurt by the announcement.
She wrote:
“A group of rabbis has reached out to us and conveyed the deep sensitivities within the traditional/Orthodox community to this issue. Our subsequent discussions with representatives from that community have made us aware that publication of the announcement caused pain and consternation, and we apologize for any pain we may have caused.”
Her solution was to ban all such announcements in the future.
Thanks, Ms. Boroson, for caving into the bigots in your community. I suppose that will not cause “pain and consternation” for the rest of us, right? After all, gay, lesbian and the majority of Jews other than the few bigots in your community lack feelings.
The New Jersey Jewish Standard has set a new standard for the lowest common denominator in Jewish journalism.
Your newspaper serves the Rutgers University community where freshman Tyler Clementi, a victim of the homophobia which you allowed to intimidate you, killed himself. It is shocking that you would publicly ally yourself and your newspaper with such hateful people.
What a delightful way to enter the new year, 5771.
Here is the offensive announcement which caused such “pain and consternation”:
Simchas | Engagement
Avichai David Smolen, son of Robert Smolen and Barbara Schneider of New Milford, and Justin Taylor Rosen, son of Keith and Elizabeth Rosen of Coram, N.Y., plan to be married next month by Rabbi Joshua Gruenberg at North Shore Synagogue in Syosset, N.Y.
Smolen, 23, is a development and communications associate at the Manhattan office of Keren Or, the Jerusalem Center for Blind Children with Multiple Disabilities. He received a bachelor’s degree in political science from Rutgers University and worked as a Faiths Act Fellow in Washington, D.C., a joint venture between the Tony Blair Faith Foundation and the Interfaith Youth Core. His father is the principal at the Gerrard Berman Day School Solomon Schechter of North Jersey in Oakland and his mother is a medical technologist and high school biology teacher in New Jersey.
Rosen, 24, is a master’s degree candidate in public administration at New York University’s Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service and at the Skirball Department of Hebrew & Judaic Studies for a master’s of arts in Jewish studies. He is a Wexner Fellow taking part in a leadership development program for emerging professionals in the Jewish community. He did his undergraduate work at List College, the joint program between Columbia University, where he received a bachelor’s degree in philosophy, and Jewish Theological Seminary, where he received a bachelor’s in Jewish thought. His mother is a teacher at Longwood High School and his father is a computer software programmer in New York.
Let the NJ Jewish Standard know your thoughts. I am sure that they would appreciate it.
http://www.jstandard.com/content/item/a_statement_from_the_jewish_standard/
UK left forcing Muslims into wearing veil.
Curiously the UK government has come out on the side of the extremist Muslims in the UK who are intimidating and forcing the more moderate members of their community to go whole hog, you should excuse the language, or be punished in the Name of Allah, the Merciful the whatever.
As the following article, stolen from jihadwatch.com, which I suggest everyone read on a regular basis, points out, the moderates, and they do exist, are trying to keep the nutcases from highjacking their religion.
Ironically, many liberal and left people believe that they are helping the Muslim community by defending the rights of the Islamists and those who are forcing their will on the more moderate members of their community. This is only making life harder for the many Muslims who do not want to follow the hard line position of the extremists in their midst.
The majority of Muslims that I know are law abiding, decent people. They fully understand that they need to respect others. I do not know what I would do if I were in their place but, for the most part, they are good Americans and respectful of others who are different. However, they dare not openly voice these sentiments for fear that the nut cases in their communities will hurt them and their families. They know that the media and what passes for our government will not protect them.
Sad.
—–
“It is a desert practice which belongs to another century and another world.”
The professional “moderate” Muslim Ed Husain said that.
If the media were quoting us, we’d be pilloried as “Islamophobes” (and somehow, “racist” as well). The OIC would accuse us of “incitement” and demand someone stop us.
“British schools where girls must wear the Islamic veil,” by David Barrett for theTelegraph, October 2 (thanks to Zulu):
Islamic schools have introduced uniform policies which force girls to wear the burka or a full headscarf and veil known as the niqab.
Moderate followers of Islam said yesterday that enforcement of the veil was a “dangerous precedent” and that children attending such schools were being “brainwashed”.
The Sunday Telegraph has established that three UK institutions have introduced a compulsory veil policy when girls are walking to or from school. They are:
* Madani Girls’ School in east London;
* Jamea Al Kauthar in Lancaster;
* Jameah Girls’ Academy in Leicester.
All three are independent, fee-paying, single-sex schools for girls aged 11 to 18. Critics warned that the spectacle of burka-clad pupils entering and leaving the schools at the start and end of the day could damage relations between Muslim and non-Muslim communities.
Ed Husain, co-director of Quilliam, the counter-extremist think-tank, said: “It is absurd that schools are enforcing this outdated ritual – one that which sends out a damaging message that Muslims do not want to fully partake in British society.
“Although it is not the government’s job to dictate how its citizens dress, it should nonetheless ensure that such schools are not bankrolled or subsidised by the British taxpayer.”
He added: “The enforcing of the niqab on young girls is not a mainstream Islamic practice – either in Britain or in most Muslim-majority countries.
“It is a desert practice which belongs to another century and another world.” […]
Philip Hollobone, the Tory MP who has attempted to bring in a Private Members’ Bill to ban wearing of the burka in public, also condemned the schools’ uniform policies.
“It is very sad in 21st century Britain that three schools are effectively forcing girls as young as 11 to hide their faces,” he said.
“How on earth are these young ladies going to grow up as part of a fully integrated society if they are made to regard themselves as objects at such a young age?”
Conservative councillors have accused Labour-controlled Tower Hamlets council of subsidising Madani Girls’ School by selling the school its current premises for £320,000 below market value. […]
Councillors were advised to allow the sale at a loss because the price had been agreed in 2004 when it represented a fair market value.
The deal had been delayed by four years because the school needed to raise funds, but council chiefs wanted to honour the originally-agreed figure.
However, council minutes from December 2008 show that Tim Archer, a Tory councillor, warned that “a council asset was being sold below market value and public money was being used to subsidise the purchase”.
He also suggested the school was in breach of the council’s inclusiveness policy.
Madani, which has 260 pupils, charges fees of £1,900 a year. Its website states: “All payments should be made in cash. We do not accept cheques.”
School uniform rules listed on the website have been deleted but an earlier version, seen by this newspaper, stated: “The present uniform conforms to the Islamic Code of dressing. Outside the school, this comprises of [sic] the black Burka and Niqab.”
The admission application form warns girls will be “appropriately punished” for failing to wear the correct uniform, and its website adds: “If parents are approached by the Education Department regarding their child’s education, they should not disclose any information without discussing it with the committee.”…
Why, something to hide?
Jon Stewart.
In his first reaction to the Rick Sanchez controversy, comedian Jon Stewart joked about the incident while hosting Comedy Central’s “Night of Too Many Stars” in New York on Saturday night.
In talking about how people should donate for autism education, Stewart said: “If you went on radio and said the Jews control the media…you may want to hold on to your money.”
But if Sanchez was right about the Jews, Stewart added, “All he has to do is apologize to us, and we’ll hire him back.”
CNN fired anchor Rick Sanchez on Friday after he called Jon Stewart a “bigot” on a radio program and implied that Jews control the media.
Rick Sanchez likes to talk.
As with all good things, there is a time to shut up.
Today he was fired from his job at CNN for calling Jon Stewart, the host of The Daily Show, ” a bigot”. The reason Stewart, who is Jewish and proud of it, is no good, he said, is because Jews rule CNN and all the networks.
Following a massive outpouring of condemnation, CNN fired Sanchez.
Now he has joined the ranks of the unemployed.
He reportedly has moved in with Helen Thomas until he finds a new job.
Maybe he can work for Al-Jazeera.
As he approaches the end of his life, Fidel Castro, the Cuban dictator, is doing some soul searching.
In an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg, a columnist for The Atlantic,which Castro requested, he emphasized his concerns about anti-Semitism.
Castro cut relations with Israel years ago. He calls Israel an US gendarme in the Middle East. However, he has always had Jewish friends and his government has been supportive of the Cuban Jewish community in general.
The penalty for leaving Islam is often death.
Dr. Dudley Woodberry, professor of Islamic Studies at Fuller, produced a study which is here presented in synopsis.
Woodberry, aware that throughout the world Muslims have been converting to Christianity, was curious about the reasons why—especially in countries where the cost of converting is so high.
To find the answer, he created a detailed questionnaire. Over a 16-year period, some 750 Muslims from 30 countries filled it out—and the results are eye-opening. The number one reason Muslim converts listed for their decision to follow Christ was the lifestyle of the Christians among them.
As Woodberry, Russell Shubin, and G. Marks write in Christianity Today, Muslim converts noted that “there was no gap between the moral profession and the practice of Christians” they knew. An Egyptian convert contrasted the love shown by Christians “with the unloving treatment of Muslim students and faculty he encountered at a university in Medina.” Other converts were impressed that “Christians treat women as equals” and enjoy loving marriages. And poor Muslims observed that “the expatriate Christian workers they knew had adopted, contrary to their expectations, a simple lifestyle.” They wore locally made clothes and abstained from pork and alcohol, so as not to offend Muslim neighbors.
Second, converts identified “the power of God in answered prayers and healing.” For instance, in North Africa, a Muslim family asked Christian neighbors to pray for a sick daughter; and then the girl recovered. Some converts “noted deliverance from demonic power as another reason they were attracted to Jesus.”
Converts also mentioned unhappiness with Islam itself, especially the Koran’s emphasis on God’s punishment and the uncertainty of salvation. By contrast, Woodberry notes, the biblical teaching that God loved us so much that “He sent His Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins” is deeply attractive to Muslims.
Converts are also attracted to “the love expressed through the life and teachings of Christ.” Ironically, Muslims first learn about Christ through the Koran, but then read the Gospels to find out more about Him.
Finally—and this is the key—“When Christ’s love transforms committed Christians into a loving community, many Muslims [identified] a desire to join such a fellowship.”
Welcome to the religion of peace and compassion.
This from jihadwatch.com, one of the most informative blogs around. Thanks to Robert Spencer.
—–
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) removes its policy of doing background checks on new Top Level Domain applicants after Muslims complain that the policy would “be seen by millions of Muslims and Arabs as racist, prejudicial and profiling.” Well, that’s very important. We don’t want millions of Muslims and Arabs to see us as racist and prejudiced. Better to be blown up in a jihad attack than that!
“Anti-terror rule dropped from new TLD guidebook,” by Kevin Murphy atDomainIncite.com, September 27 (thanks to Joseph):
ICANN will cut references to terrorism from its Draft Applicant Guidebook for new top-level domains, after criticism from some Arab stakeholders.
The ICANN board of directors decided on Saturday at its retreat in Trondheim that it will revise its policy of doing background checks on new TLD applicants:
The background check should be clarified to provide detail and specificity in response to comment. The specific reference to terrorism will be removed (and the background check criteria will be revised).
The reference to “terrorism” first showed up in DAGv4, the latest draft. It caused a bit of a stir, with at least two Arab community members harshly criticizing ICANN for its inclusion.
Khaled Fattal of the Multilingual Internet Group told ICANN it would “be seen by millions of Muslims and Arabs as racist, prejudicial and profiling” while Abdulaziz Al-Zoman of SaudiNIC observed that’s it’s not globally accepted “who is a terrorist and who is a freedom fighter”.
Certainly we would not want to inconvenience any real terrorists who use the net for their evil work.
What crap.
Meanwhile, Obama is pissed that Israel will not surrender what little territory it has to the enemies of civilization.
Mohammad raped a 9 year old and so will this child bride be Islamically raped.
Like the Roach Motel ad.
They come in but can never leave.
If Islam is so great, why are they so terrified when someone wants to leave?
SUPPRESSION OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM WIDESPREAD IN MUSLIM NATIONS
A few excerpts from the the International Religious Freedom Reports for 2009:
YEMEN
“…the General Election Committee has adopted a policy barring all non-Muslims from running for Parliament…”
AFGHANISTAN
“Citizens who convert from Islam to the Baha’i faith face risk of persecution, similar to that of Christian converts, up to and including the death penalty…”
JORDAN
“…the Government prohibits conversion from Islam…The Government freely allows conversion to Islam…”
ALGERIA
“Ordinance 06-03, which entered into effect in September 2006 and has been enforced since February 2008, limits the practice of non-Muslim religions…”
COMOROS
“Proselytizing for any religion except Islam is illegal…”
INDONESIA
“Article 156 of the Criminal Code makes spreading hatred, heresy, and blasphemy punishable by up to five years in prison. Although the law applies to all officially recognized religions, the few cases in which it has been enforced have almost always involved blasphemy and heresy against Islam…”
MOROCCO
“All citizens, including the normally immune Members of Parliament, may be prosecuted on charges of expressing opinions alleged to be injurious to Islam. The law prohibits the distribution of non-Muslim religious materials…”
“…Any attempt to induce a Muslim to convert is illegal… ”
“…A 2002 law restricting media freedom states that expression deemed critical of “Islam, the institution of the monarchy, or territorial integrity” is not permitted and may be punishable by imprisonment…”
———————————————
EGYPT
“In [January 2008] …the [Cairo Administrative] court wrote that principles of Islamic law forbid Muslims from converting away from Islam…”
“…The approval process for church construction continued to be hindered by lengthy delays, often measured in years,…”
“…the Government’s interpretation of Shari’a…dictates “no jurisdiction of a non-Muslim over a Muslim…”
“…the Government discriminates against non-Muslims…”
“…On December 13, 2008, airport security officials arrested a convert from Islam to Christianity…The convert subsequently told U.S. officials that state security officials raped her multiple times and subjected her to other physical and mental abuse…to pressure her to revert to Islam…”
“…A male convert from Islam to Christianity told U.S. officials that agents of State Security had detained him on multiple occasions over several years, including during the reporting period. The convert stated that authorities had subjected him to severe physical and mental abuse; he said the officers called him an apostate (murtadd), told him he was suffering as a result of his conversion, and pressured him to revert to Islam. The convert stated that during the reporting period state security officers beat his wife on the abdomen while she was pregnant, causing her to hemorrhage. He also showed officials scars purportedly inflicted by governmental interrogators in previous years, including long scars on his back and sides and numerous deep, circular scars on his shoulder, reportedly caused by state security officers holding burning cigarettes against his flesh for long periods of time….”
“…Muslim convert [to Christianity] Muhammad al-Higazy remained out of public view throughout the year, reportedly fearing for his personal security following public death threats he received from his family and societal elements when he sued the Government in 2007 to acknowledge his conversion by issuing him identity documents that list his religion as Christianity.”
“Maher Al-Gohary, another convert to Christianity who sued for the same right during the reporting period, also claims to live in hiding and has stated that he and his daughter have also received death threats.”
“A female convert to Christianity who reported that she was severely abused while in state security detention fled when she was released on bail pursuant to official allegations that she procured a counterfeit identity document listing her religion as Christianity. She remained in hiding at the end of the reporting period, fearing abuse from her family and government forces….”
“…As of the close of the reporting period, the Government had not prosecuted any of the Bedouin villagers who assaulted the Abu Fana [Christian] monastery in May 2008, and those who concurrently kidnapped, physically abused, and reportedly attempted forcefully to convert several [Christian] monks …”
———————————————-
PAKISTAN
“…Freedom of speech is constitutionally, ‘subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interest of the glory of Islam.’ …”
“…Law enforcement personnel abused religious minorities in custody. Security forces and other government agencies did not adequately prevent or address societal abuse against minorities. Discriminatory legislation and the Government’s failure to take action against societal forces hostile to those who practice a different religious belief fostered religious intolerance, acts of violence, and intimidation against religious minorities… ”
“…religious minorities are legally restricted from public display of certain religious images…”
“…The consequences for contravening the country’s blasphemy laws are death for defiling Islam or its prophets; life imprisonment for defiling, damaging, or desecrating the Qur’an; and 10 years’ imprisonment for insulting another’s religious feelings…”
“…Some individuals bring charges under these laws to settle personal scores or to intimidate vulnerable Muslims, sectarian opponents, and religious minorities… ”
“…The Ministry of Religious Affairs…has on its masthead a Qur’anic verse: ‘Islam is the only religion acceptable to God…’ ”
“…Authorities routinely used blasphemy laws to harass religious minorities and vulnerable Muslims and to settle personal scores or business rivalries… ”
“…Mobs occasionally attacked individuals accused of blasphemy and their families or their religious communities. When blasphemy and other religious cases were brought to court, extremists often packed the courtroom and made public threats against an acquittal. Religious extremists continued to threaten to kill those acquitted of blasphemy charges. High-profile accused persons often went into hiding or emigrated after acquittal…”
“…In September 2008 a former federal minister and host of a popular religious television show declared on air that killing Ahmadis was the ‘Islamic duty of devout Muslims;’ at least two Ahmadis were killed in Sindh within 48 hours of this declaration…At the end of the reporting period, the the government continued to stall investigation into the deaths…”
“…Violence against and harassment of Christians continued during the reporting period…”
“…In April 2009, at a district court in Nankana Sahib, Punjab, police cleared three men accused of raping a 13-year-old Christian girl despite eyewitness accounts and medical evidence… ”
“…A March 2009 attack on a church and the surrounding neighborhood in Sangu-Wali, a village in Gujranwala, Punjab, left a woman dead. The attack was believed to be prompted after a Christian filed a robbery complaint against a local Muslim who, along with his friends, indiscriminately preyed on the community…”
“…Hindus faced societal violence, often directed at temples, during the reporting period…”
———————————————
MAURITANIA
“The 1991 Constitution defines the country as an Islamic republic and recognizes Islam as the religion of its citizens and the state. The Government prohibits the printing and distribution of non-Islamic religious materials and proselytizing by non-Muslims…”
“…Shari’a provides legal principles upon which the law and legal procedures are based…”
“…NGOs must agree to refrain from proselytizing or otherwise promoting any religion other than Islam. …
“…In awarding an indemnity to the family of a woman who has been killed, the courts grant only half the amount that they would award for a man’s death. …”
———————————————
NIGERIA
“On June 17, 2009, there were clashes between Christians and Muslims north of Suleja, Niger State, after police released a man accused of stealing a cell phone from a Muslim man in the village of Gauraka. A local pastor reportedly spoke provocatively about the Muslim man who had reported the theft to police. Muslims responded by attacking Christians, resulting in the pastor’s death. Authorities responded to the spreading violence by closing schools and increasing security in the area…”
“On April 20, 2009, unverified reports claimed that Muslim rioters in Kano attacked Christians and burned cars in response to a Christian who allegedly wrote on a shop wall mocking the Prophet Muhammad…”
“On April 13, 2009, Muslims in Gwada, Niger State, reportedly burned down three churches, damaged property, and injured at least 20 Christians during an Easter procession. Press reports said riot police arrested 88 suspects. The violence spread to Minna, where Muslim youths allegedly injured five Christian youths, damaged several vehicles, and attempted to burn down the First Baptist Church. Police arrested approximately 20 suspects…”
“On February 20, 2009, a conflict over parking at a church in Bauchi before weekly Juma’at prayers at a nearby mosque sparked violence between Christians and Muslims. The violence, perpetrated principally by [Muslim] Hausa-Fulani “Sara Suka” groups (a Hausa term meaning those who slash and cut, referring to violent gangs of young men), resulted in at least 11 deaths, 100 persons injured, and 4,500 persons displaced. Rioters burned at least 200 properties, six churches, three mosques, and numerous vehicles; the Red Cross estimated that 85 percent of the damage was to Christian homes and businesses. The state government imposed a dusk-to-dawn curfew as military troops regained control of the city. Although police arrested several “Sara Suka” men following the violence, there were reports that virtually all were released at the behest of local politicians who occasionally employ them…”
“On August 31, 2008, Muslims reportedly burned Christ Apostolic Church in Ilorin, Kwara State, in protest over the church’s location 500 yards from a mosque. The church’s pastor reported that the arson followed June 2008 vandalism of the church’s sanctuary. In September the chief of police said the incident was under investigation…”
“On August 14, 2008, Muslims in Ilorin, Kwara State, allegedly killed at least three Christians and attacked others because they believed Christian prayers caused the death of a local Muslim leader. In September the chief of police said that the incident was under investigation.”
Muslim apatheid in action. Muslims only!!!!
The Muslims are in the habit of calling Israel racist because it defines itself as a Jewish state. However, it is OK for over 50 countries from Indonesia to Pakistan to Mauritania and many others to define themselves as officially Muslim. They see no contradiction in this.
Does Israel refuse entry to non-Jews?
Never.
Does the photo above, from Saudi Arabia, suggest anything except apartheid? The Muslims and their leftist goons call Israel an apartheid state. You will never find any such sign in Israel but you will find them all over the capitol of Islam, Saudi Arabia. Infidels forbidden entry. Get back to your own second-class dhimmi status section.
Just consider this item from the Arab News, a Saudi Arabian paper.
| MAKKAH, 21 May 2007 — A Sri Lankan Christian was arrested in the holy city of Makkah, which is off-limits to non-Muslims, by the Expatriates Monitoring Committee in Makkah.
The authorities were able to verify the identity of the man, who had claimed he had overstayed his Umrah visa, by running his details through a new fingerprints system. Nirosh Kamanda had arrived in Dammam to work as a lorry driver and had fled his sponsor to sell goods besides the Grand Mosque in Makkah. The man’s sponsor denied he knew where the man was working. He said, “He fled six months after coming to the Kingdom. I have no idea how he reached Makkah.” After his identity became known, the man admitted he was Christian and that he had come to Makkah to earn money. “I heard that Makkah is a safe place, where I could hide my identity,” he said. Col. Suhail Matrafi, head of the department in charge of Expatriates Affairs in Makkah, compiled a report about the case and presented it to Col. Ayid ibn Taghalib Al-Lukmani, the head of Makkah’s Passport Department. Al-Lukmani has ordered the man be sent to Jeddah. “The Grand Mosque and the holy city are forbidden to non-Muslims,” said Matrafi. “The new fingerprints system is very helpful and will help us a lot to discover the identity of a lot of criminals and overstayers,” he added. ——- Imagine the riots, outcry, violence that would occur if a Muslim were refused entry, as a Muslim, in any of our infidel lands? The Muslims in the infidel lands are accorded far more freedom than they could ever imagine in their beloved Muslim theocracies. Their response? They want us to join them in submitting to Allah [ Islam is the Arabic word for submission]. They want us to become those who submit to the iron will of the guardians of the Islamic mindfuck. Muslim is Arabic for one who submits. |
The new face of America?
This from NY Times, 23 Sept 2010:
Federal law requires employers to accommodate head scarves, also called hijabs, as well as prayer breaks and other practices based on sincere religious beliefs unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on the employer.
———-
It is now a federal law that if Muslims are not accommodated at work, the employer can be fined. The EEOC ( Equal Employment Opportunity Commission), funded by your taxes, enforces the law and fines the companies. Many companies from Abercrombie and Fitch, Disney and major meatpacking plants have paid out millions of dollars in fines just in 2009.
The agency says that the Muslim workers lodge the most complaints, more than racial complaints, sex discrimination, any other form.
The federal government is working overtime to sue the companies, it says.
——–
However, if you are a Jew who is not allowed to wear your prayer tassles ( tsitsit) out of your shirt, as is commanded by many rabbis, a Sikh who wears a turban as part of their religion, or an Amish man who wears a beard and distinct garments, forget it.
You will not be taken seriously.
The law is for a certain group and no one else.
So much for separation of church and state.
So much for our constitution.
So much for the America we knew and loved.
Robert Mackey, NY Times Arab apologist, once again has taken up the banner of those who would see Israel destroyed.
He is horrified that an Arab who attacked Israeli police was shot.
Here is my comment which the Times found off-topic and offensive (their stated reasons for not posting comments).
As long as the Arabs insist on attacking their Jewish neighbors there will be no peace.
For 2,000 years, after we were kicked out of our land, dispossessed by the Romans and many other civilizations that followed them and who occupied the Land of Israel, the land which the Torah documents as the Jewish homeland, the Jews have been powerless.
That is until 1948 and the establishment of the State of Israel.
That date marks the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in Israel.
It will be completed only when all the lands of the Bible which were stolen from us and occupied by others ( ie. Arabs, British, etc.) are under Jewish dominion.
These incidents such as described in your article are daily.
Why only focus on provoked Arab deaths?
Why not also recognize the many unprovoked Jewish deaths?
We are here to stay.
We are never leaving.
Long after the Palestinians are a footnote in history, the Jewish people will remain in the land of our fathers.
Deal with it.
Find something else to obsess on.
איך וויל אייך אלעמאן אנווינטשן א גמר חתימה טובה , א גרינגן תענית און א לעכטיגן יאר.
May all our Jewish readers have a good holiday, Yom Kippur. May you have an easy fast. May this coming year be good for all peoples, everywhere.
JDR
Violence in the name of Islam is OK; NY Times.
Recently I read an article in the NY Times in which the Pakistanis said that their violence against fellow Pakistanis by a mob was inhumane.
Here is the summary the newspaper presented:
Video showing the murder of two teenage brothers by a mob last month in the town of Sialkot has shocked Pakistanis and led to a debate about what the killings say about the state of civil society in the country.
Share your thoughts.
———
I shared my thoughts.
I asked in my comment why is it that they were so upset about a random act of violence by a mob in Pakistan but that daily violence against women, homosexuals, non-Muslims, those seeking to leave Islam under the pain of death, forcible conversion to Islam, jihad and other constant acts of violence in the name of Allah, the compassionate, the all-merciful, were not upsetting?
They printed my comment.
I received the following:
Thank you for participating on NYTimes.com. Your published submission can be found at this link: the link followed.
I went to the link and found the following:
This comment has been removed. Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
——
If you go to the link I was sent you will find that even the above was removed.
More and more I am finding that the media is going overboard to censor itself for fear of Muslim criticism.
When they burn a Bible we just roll over and go back to sleep.
When we just speak of burning a Koran ( why even do it when you can just recycle it for toilet paper?) they have mass riots all over the Muslim world.
They say that we are insensitive when we question their acts and words in the name of Allah. However, our sensitivity is never an issue for them.
We are witnessing a mass temper tantrum by the world’s most immature civilization.
Anger management doesn’t seem to be an option for our Muslim neighbors.
Here is the NY Times link I received. My comment, number 15, no longer is even visible since they just removed it.
Hartford Seminary sponsors Obama Muslim policy lecture.
Good to know that the Muslim bullies have had a setback in Connecticut.
The local city council head had announced that the council meetings would begin with a Muslim prayer from an imam. The purpose was to show how broad minded the locals are. Instead of no prayer or a Judeo-Christian prayer there would now be a Muslim prayer with quotes from the Book of Peace and Harmony, the Holy Quran.
After being indundated with complaints the council reversed course. Now the local CAIR ( Council for American-Islamic Relations) is crying discrimination.
—-
I regularly travel via Hartford on my way to another destination. For several years now all the cabbies who picked me up were Muslims. I regularly listened to them condemn America and, in one case, the Jews.
This particular cab driver told me that the Jews were taking over the world.
I didn’t tell him that I am Jewish.
Before I left the cab at the airport I told him to be careful. ” The Jews are crafty; they could be anywhere, even hiding in your cab, man!!”
He thanked me for the warning.
He agreed, gotta watch our for those Jews!!
One cabbie, a Jamaican Christian, told me that the airport provides the cabbies with a room for rest, relaxation and prayer. The Christians put up a cross and had a Bible there. The Muslims gradually took over the room and, finally, removed the Christian cross and Bible saying they found it offensive.
When the Christian cabbies protested, they were told to shut up and mind their own business.
The same cabbie told me that on 911, the Muslims celebrated their victory in New York and against the Great Satan.
Welcome to America.
Here is my comment on the article of Mr. Wright in which he writes that the Koran is a holy text deserving of respect.
=——
Nice try, Mr. Wright, but no cigar.
The Koran can not be sanitized. It is what it is; a book written in Saudi Arabia in the seventh century. It did not exist in book form in 632 when Mohammad, its purported author died.
The Koran supports stoning of those who transgress its laws, sharia. Indeed, this is going on today in much of the Muslim world. It demands the death of homosexuals and this, too, is now carried out. Infidels ( non-Muslims) are to be forced to accept it and Islam, which is the Arabic word for submission ( Muslim = one who submits), or face death.
Bernard Lewis, the premier Orientalist around, has extensively written on Islam and the Koran. He unequivocally states that Islam sees itself as a sole faith; no others are to be permitted. As many of us who are interested in this topic have found when doing our research, it is Islam that has declared war on the unbeliever.
Professor Lewis writes that this is a war of civilizations.
For America and the West, this is a new type of conflict.
That was why it was so difficult for President Bush and his administration to figure out how to accurately identify the perpetrators of 911 as a nation. There was no nation that attacked us on that day. We were attacked by a civilization using an ideology, Islam, as its banner and call to war.
Islam and the Koran do not accept the ecumenical vision that you and your colleagues at the NY Times embrace.
It wants us to accept sharia, Muslim law, or die.
If they get their way, and thanks to journalists like you they may, you will no longer be writing.
The American people and much of the Europeans are way ahead of our leaders and self-appointed authorities in getting what is happening.
Islam is Arabic for submission.
Charles Blow wrote a column in the 11 September issue of the NY Times in which he said that the mosque must be built near the 911 site as a lesson of our tolerance of Islam.
Here is my comment.
Nice sentiments, Mr. Blow, but I disagree with your opinion that having a mosque within sight of Ground Zero, the site of our NY Pearl Harbor, somehow furthers religious freedom.
The mosque is a symbol.
It is not a coincidence that it is being built near the place where 3,000 Americans were killed in the name of Islam.
It is not a coincidence that it is named Cordoba House, the name of the city in Spain where the Muslims tore down the largest church and built a mosque to show their domination of the infidel Christians.
Islam in Arabic means submission. They believe that everyone must submit to Islam. That is a central message of the Koran. That is why only this religion amongst all religions orders anyone who leaves it to be killed. That is why stoning is taking place in the name of Allah; not a single word of this book written in the seventh century may be questioned.
By anyone, Mr. Blow.
No one may question the Koran without being attacked. First we are to be warned. Then we are to be physically harmed. That is the way of submission.
This is an issue of sensitivity, not freedom of religion.
Daily we are hearing from Muslims that we, the ones who were attacked, are insensitive to their needs.
If they want us to be sensitive to their needs then we respectfully request them to be sensitive to our needs.
But they will never move this mosque.
That, too, is forbidden in Islam. Once a mosque has been established, even on paper, it is forbidden to move it.
This is an ideology that is as inflexible as any that has ever existed.
There is no room for questioning or disagreement.
It is either their way or no way.
Do not pollute Ground Zero with the shadow of those who committed this crime in the name of their ideology.
We are experiencing a clash of civilizations as the great scholar of Islam, Bernard Lewis, so eloquently explains it.
If we do not realize this, we will no longer have any of the ideals left to enjoy that you write about.
For me, Mr. Blow, that is a central lesson of 911.
——–
Come join thousands of your fellow citizens to demonstrate in front of the Ground Zero mosque site.
Let the world know your feelings on this monument to Islam two blocks from the 911 mass murder site.
New York City: Saturday, September 11, 3 pm. Park Place, between Church St. and West Broadway.
No signs will be permitted. Bring American flags only.
Today in his press conference, Obama, whose poll numbers are going down the toilet, who is discovering that the vast majority of Americans are opposed to a Muslim victory mosque at Ground Zero, and who is quaking with fear that angry Muslims, who hate us anyway, may go out in the streets ( since they are largely unemployed and sitting around smoking hookahs filled with hashish planted in Afghanistan and paid for with US aid) and say, oh, I don’t know…something naughty.
Mr. High and Mighty spoke as follows:
“We’ve got millions of Muslim Americans, our fellow citizens, in this country,” Mr. Obama said. “They’re going to school with our kids. They’re our neighbors. They’re our friends. They’re our co-workers. And when we start acting as if their religion is somehow offensive, what are we saying to them?”
What are we saying?
Apparently, Mr. President, you haven’t been listening.
We are saying that, yes, we do find Islam offensive when it kills us in the name of its wacko god.
Yes, we do find murdering of infidels (ie. us) offensive.
Yes, we do find genital mutilation, polygamy, stoning of people, and a whole host of other things that devout Muslims teach deeply offensive.
We find it offensive that anyone who attempts to leave this cult must hide to avoid being killed.
We find it offensive that you would rush to defend our enemies and evade your job as Commander in Chief of our nation.
And, come to think of it, we find you and your entire world view of appeasement and selling us down the river, deeply offensive.
Thanks for asking.
—–
Come to the rally on Saturday, 11 Sept., 3pm, to show our support for those killed in the name of Islam.
It will be held across the street from 51 Park Place, Ground Zero mosque, between Church St. and West Broadway.
No signs permitted. Only American flags allowed.
The media will be there to make us look like fools. Do not accommodate them.
—-
There will a rally two blocks from ours, people who support the Ground Zero mosque and its Imam. They also have a police permit for a rally.
Who are they?
According to the NY Times,
“The event is being organized by a number of left-wing, anti-war and pro- Muslim groups, including the International Action Center, which was founded by former United States attorney general Ramsey Clark, who has defended a number of prominent terrorists.”
What a bunch of losers.
Jewish Daily Report
Jewish Daily Report 