By Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor
I finally got America’s queen of Islamophobia, Pam Geller, to shut up.
Geller had been exchanging long-winded emails with Michael Korn, a Jewish convert to Christianity, and I was on their cc list. She endlessly blathered, spewing mendacious generalities about how “Islamic law forbids criticism of Islam, Quran, Muhammad” and that the word Islamophobia “is used to intimidate people into thinking there is something wrong with opposing jihad terror.”
When Korn didn’t swallow her BS, Geller signed off saying “I will never surrender…I have survived multiple assassination attempts because of this cartoon.”
I answered her:
Glad to hear the cartoon saved you from assassins, Pam ; – )
Seriously, though, the difference between the Christian/Muslim and the Jewish (and Kosher Secularist) position is simple:
Universal monotheists (Christians and Muslims) generally agree with the American 1st Amendment position: All serious arguments with social value are protected. But blasphemy, obscenity, pornography, libel, and incitement are not.
Kosher secularists (especially Sabbatean-Frankists like Macron), unlike universal monotheists, want to censor calm, dispassionate historians. Anyone who disagrees with their Holy Holocaust dogma, no matter how kindly and calmly and factually and academically, will have their lives ruined and possibly go to prison.
Yet these same kosher secularists want to protect blasphemy, obscenity, pornography, libel, and incitement against religious figures and believers.
Transcript of the above video from my Press TV interview today:
Instagram apparently has now unblocked the Supreme Leader of Iran’s account after having blocked it due to the Supreme Leader speaking out about the censorship controversy in France.
It’s ironic, of course, that social media would be censoring people who speak out about a censorship controversy. But that’s where we are now in the Zionist-occupied West. You’re not even allowed to raise the topic of being censored. If you are censored and then you complain about being censored on a sensitive topic, they will censor your complaint, and nobody will ever even hear that you’ve been censored or what your argument is about it.
And this, in particular, seems to be the case with anybody who asks why it is that in a country like France, the leadership, namely Macron, seems to believe that it’s freedom of expression when you obscenely or pornographically incite violence by blaspheming and slandering and libeling a revered religious figure, in this case, the Prophet Muhammad, peace upon him. But it’s okay to imprison people and ruin their lives if they very calmly and compassionately and in a scholarly and academic manner question some of the victors’ history of World War Two.
Even raising this issue gets people censored. And it just happened to the Supreme Leader. And of course this is one reason that Press TV and other Iranian outlets, among many other world outlets, have been censored throughout social media. The entire social media is either owned or dominated by Zionists, as is the mainstream corporate media.
They don’t want anybody raising this gross contradiction in public. And the fact is that the reason that they won’t let you talk about this, just like the reason they won’t let you talk about World War Two victors’ history, is that the victors always write the history of every war and they always lie and they always exaggerate the crimes of their enemies and downplay their own crimes.
So the revisionists will probably win the argument. Those of us who’ve actually done some reading on the pros and cons of the World War II revisionist case—almost everybody who actually sits down and reads the books—ends up realizing that the revisionists are probably right about at least some of their claims. And that’s the reason we’re not allowed to talk about it. Because if this were debated freely and openly in a scholarly manner the revisionists would win, and the fundamentalist religion of Holocaust worship would disappear.
So, in France, we’ve got a censorship campaign censoring people who argue in a scholarly manner, but they protect “freedom of speech”—la liberté—of the people who blaspheme and use obscenity, pornography, libel, and incitement.
Now, this is exactly the opposite of the American First Amendment position. Here in the United States, we have a very well-developed jurisprudence of free speech under our First Amendment. And that jurisprudence has largely concluded that all serious arguments with social value are protected, but there are exceptions, including blasphemy, pornography, libel, and incitement.
The Zionists have managed to roll back some of that, and now some say that Zionist Supreme Court decisions have made pornography a protected category of speech. This is disgusting and insane. Blasphemy, obscenity, pornography, libel, and incitement are not protected speech and never will be. But apparently, in the Zionist world, those kinds of speech are the ones that you protect, while thoughtful academic scholarly speech investigating victors’ history and finding that it’s wrong deserves censorship. And the people, the scholars, and the historians who engage in that speech are routinely physically attacked, hospitalized, thrown in prison, their lives are ruined, all their books are suppressed. That’s freedom in the West today.
Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror.
He also has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS, and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications.
Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin; where he ran for Congress in 2008. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, author, and talk radio host.