RUTHFULLY YOURS

Since Bensoussan rejected “any idea of destiny or essentialization,” the judges denied any possibility that he could “be accused of having aroused or wished to arouse a feeling of hostility or rejection against a group of people [Muslims]”.

The Islamist CCIF said it would appeal the decision.

It is becoming more and more difficult in France to hide the fact that hate speech and anti-Semitic statements are coming mainly not from non-Muslims, but from French Muslims.

March 7, 2017, the 17th Chamber of the Tribunal Correctionel of Paris acquitted Georges Bensoussan, a Jewish Moroccan-born historian, of any “incitement of racial hatred” (“provocation à la haine raciale”).

On January 25, 2017, all of France’s “anti-racist” organizations — even the Jewish International League against Racism and Anti-Semitism (LICRA) — joined the Islamist Collective Against Islamophobia (CCIF) in court against Bensoussan. He was prosecuted for remarks he made in October 2015, during a debate on radio station France Culture about anti-Semitism among French Arabs. Benoussan said:

“An Algerian sociologist, Smaïn Laacher, with great courage, just said in a documentary aired on Channel 3: It is a shame to deny this taboo, namely that in the Arab families in France, and everyone knows it but nobody wants to say it, anti-Semitism is sucked with mother’s milk.”

The Islamist CCIF send the quote to the public prosecutor, who opened a case against Bensoussan. The charge was simple: “mother’s milk” was not a metaphor for cultural anti-Semitism transmitted through education, but a genetic and “essentialist” accusation. “Mother’s milk”, they claimed, means: “all Arabs are anti-Semitic” — in other words, that Bensoussan supposedly a racist.

The decision of the court to acquit of Bensoussan is a key moment for freedom of speech in France in general, and for the freedom to speak about Muslim anti-Semitism in France.

Skirting the issue by Roger Franklin

Ah, the joys of living in Melbourne, where the constant quest to cement the City on the Yarra’s reputation as ‘the world’s most liveable city’ invokes an exquisite sensitivity to the needs and yearnings of all our many demographic categories and sub-categories. Hence the new pedestrian ‘walk’ signs featuring the silhouette of a women striding boldly into traffic. Apparently, or so one gathers, legions of baffled ladies have been stranded on the kerb, unable to cross the street because they did not relate to the outline of a male pedestrian that formerly directed their footsteps.

Now that this shockingly sexist presumption has been remedied, what next next? In a word, trouble.

Consider the plight of transsexuals, who have been instructed by the Safe Schools curriculum to explore gender fluidity to the point where it may soon be necessary to re-name tuck shops, lest they be mistaken for centres of guidance in the art of genital obscuratanism. Where are the transsexual traffic signs, eh? No doubt they will be introduced in the near future, as the quest for social justice is a never-ending crusade.

And Presbyterians, what of their cultural needs? Surely we could adopt signs urging pedestrians to walk but never dance.

On Southbank, where the local ABC office makes its home, we will need to introduce walk signs that are not green but red. At the corner of Collins and Spencer streets, where the un-subbed Age is headquartered, the signs will need to say ‘WLAK’.

Clearly, the expense of meeting the needs and preferences of pedestrians of all varieties will be a costly exercise, so what to do?

Here is a modest proposal that advocates of multiculturalism, feminists and tokenists of all stripes are bound to endorse, as it will further encourage the cultural enrichment on which they are so keen. Atop this post is a pedestrian-crossing sign from Qatar that would be perfect for Melbourne.

Muslims will recognise one of their own and be happy. Women will construe the long robe as a dress and be no less satisfied. The figure’s short hair will please lesbians of the butch variety and, for that matter, short-back-and-sides crossdressers. What we will have is a simple, cost-effective palliative for the grievances of one and all.

ISIS Warns of ‘Lack of Manliness’ in Marriage in Relationship Advice Column By Bridget Johnson
https://pjmedia.com/homeland-security/2017/03/08/isis-warns-of-lack-of-manliness-in-marriage-in-relationship-advice-column/

The latest issue of ISIS’ Rumiyah magazine, which in the past has included how-to articles on terror tactics and calls to attack Western sites, wades into relationship advice with a new article warning husbands and wives against talking about their marriage behind their spouse’s back.

“Some spouses – be they men or women – are not careful when it comes to exposing their homes to gossip and idle talk. We often find husbands talking about the problems that happen between them and their wives in both private and public gatherings, and also find that wives do so as well. Each of them might mention the other, in the latter’s absence, with displeasing terms,” states the article titled “The Flesh of Your Spouse Is Poisonous.”

“Backbiting is a disease of the tongue that only incurs ruin and loss,” argues the terror group, adding that neither spouse “is allowed to backbite the other – even when one is right concerning his claims.”

The ISIS advice heaps particular scorn upon women backbiting “their husband and their co-wife” and wistfully noted “if some of them were to only limit themselves to listening!”

“When one woman complains against her husband, some of her friends react with incitement and provocation. Worse still, some women even guide their sister to the court and explain the procedure for divorce,” the terror group continued.

“…The same applies regarding one’s co-wife. Many women do not refrain from speaking ill of their co-wives. Instead, among them is she who would go as far as to insult her co-wife and curse her in her absence due to excessive jealousy. This happens during a meeting of women or in the presence of the husband, who often has no clue as to what he can do! Should he fight off the hostility of this sharp-tongued woman against himself or against his absent wife? Indeed, Allah’s help must be sought!”