‘Real Housewives Of ISIS’ Comedy Sketch Produced By BBC Sparks Controversy

‘Constructing an image of Muslim women as oppressed and fond of terrorism at a time of widespread gendered Islamophobia is deeply sinister,’ wrote one British student who objected to the sketch.
By |
Be Sociable, Share!
  • Reddit
    • Google+

    Real Housewives of ISISLONDON — A comedy sketch putting the real victims of terrorism in the framework of the “Real Housewives” reality TV series has divided social media users and media analysts alike.

    Produced by the new BBC sketch comedy show “Revolting,” the short video appears as a trailer for a fictional TV program, “The Real Housewives Of ISIS.” The video has been viewed over 26 million times since it was posted on the BBC Two’s Facebook page on Jan. 3.

    Watch “The Real Housewives Of ISIS” from BBC Two:

    Similar to shows like “The Real Housewives Of Atlanta,” the sketch features a group of women gossiping and worrying about their fashion choices. Rather than high-end designer bags and alcohol-fueled drama, these “housewives” wear burkas and tell jokes about beheadings and slavery. The characters describe themselves as young British or Western women lured into marriage by Daesh (as Arabic acronym for the terrorist group commonly known in the West as ISIS or ISIL).

    In one sequence, one of the “housewives” shows off her new, explosive-laden suicide vest while two of the other women shoot a video for Instagram. “What do you think? Ahmed surprised me with it yesterday,” the character in the suicide vest asks.

    The sketch provoked a tide of intense backlash. Ofcom, the U.K.’s media regulatory agency, received 39 complaints about the sketch in the days immediately after the piece aired, according to The Times of London, and opposition to the video mounted on social media.

    However, reactions to the sketch haven’t been completely oppositional. On Wednesday, Ali Shahalom, a British Muslim comedian and social media star, defended the sketch as satire. He posted a statement on Twitter which read, in part:

    “This sketch ridicules online grooming and calls attention to an important topic. The whole point of satire is to expose stupidity. From what I’ve seen, it doesn’t offend religion. Satire like this highlights the absurdity of those that recruit and get recruited by ISIS.”

    Noting that the problem of Western women being groomed to join Daesh is a real one, Heydon Prowse and Jolyon Rubinstein, the show’s creators, addressed the sketch before it even aired, saying it targeted terrorists and online grooming for satire, not all Muslims. In a Dec. 31 interview with the U.K.’s i News, Prowse said:

    “It’s important not to pull your punches in satire. You have to be fearless or it undermines your credibility. You can’t go after David Cameron for five years like we did and not go after Islamic State.”

    While a number of media analysts have defended the sketch as satire and noted the importance of using humor to “make a very pointed critique,” others have expressed revulsion. Adam Garrie called the “Real Housewives” spoof “disgusting” in an op-ed published by The Duran, an online news and commentary site, on Jan. 4.

    Garrie suggested the sketch was especially damaging, given the BBC’s tendency to spread Western, pro-war propaganda about the Middle East and Syria rather than promote real journalism about conditions on the ground in the region. He added:

    “The sketch serves to normalise the most barbaric gang of savage monsters the world has seen in centuries and simultaneously makes light of the fact that vulnerable and uneducated women are susceptible to the perverse recruitment methods ISIS use online.”

    Watch “The Real Housewives of ISIS – Funny or Offensive?” from Fusion:

     

    Be Sociable, Share!

       

      Print This Story Print This Story
      You Might Also Like  
      ___________________________________________
      This entry was posted in Foreign Affairs, Front Page: Foreign Affairs, Inside Stories, News, Top Stories and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
      • Pingback: Commentary – the infamous Housewife of ISIS | Shafaqna English()

      • Pingback: 1.11.2017 Daily Links | Daily Links & News()

      • Progressive Republican

        It mocks the mockworthy.

        I’m good with that.

      • Pingback: 'Real Housewives Of ISIS' BBC Comedy Sketch Sparks Controversy - Mintpress News (blog) - OpenView HD()

      • alexis vanlee

        don,t really care what muslums think its funny and this century all religions a load of tosh, get over it, its all fabels which means your fighting over nothing.. you die then there,s nothing else,, shade

      • jussayin

        To Ms. Prowse and to Ms. Rubinstein, when will we see a similar satire about grooming Western Jewish women for “aliyah,” and corresponding Jewish terrorism perpetrated against non-Jews?

        • James Wherry

          When it actually happens.

      • Norm
        • tapatio

          THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF ARTICLES ON JEWISH PED0PHlLlA/CHILD P0RN/WHlTE SLAVERY, MOST WITH FELONY CHARGES FILED AND VALID EVIDENCE PRESENTED IN COURT AND THE MEDIA. JEWS MAKE UP 2% OF THE US POPULATION AND MANY TIMES THAT PERCENTAGE OF SXXUAL CRIME IN THIS COUNTRY.

          OF COURSE, IN NEW YORK, ANY JEW WHO CLAIMS TO BE A RABBI (pretty easy) CAN C0PULATE 0RALLY WITH A CHILD AT WILL. WE GENTILES CAN’T “CRITICIZE” (never prosecute) JEWS FOR THEIR “RITUALS” – EVEN WHEN THOSE “RITUALS” ARE FELONIES.

          IN ISRAEL, PED0PH!LlA IS “AGAINST THE LAW”…….NO JEW HAS EVERBEEN PROSECUTED FOR FOR RAPlNG KIDS – ESPECIALLY PALESTINIAN CHRISTIAN AND MUSLIM CHILDREN.

          Long list of Jewish Child M0lest0r Rabbis gets no media coverage and Jewish h0m0sXxual ped0ph!les are undisturbed.
          http://100777.com/node/463

          The Outcast
          After a Hasidic man exposed child abuse in his tight-knit Brooklyn community, he found himself the target of a criminal investigation.
          http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/11/10/outcast-3

          The ChiId-Rape Assembly Linehttp://www.vice.com/read/the-child-rape-assembly-line-0000141-v20n11

          Elijah Wood Just Exposed Hollywood’s Organized Ped0phll!a Ringhttp://thefreethoughtproject.com/elijah-wood-exposed-hollywoods-organized-pedophilia-ring/

          Ped0ph!lia ‘Rampant’ In Orthodox Judaism
          https://www.cwporter.com/kikerape.htm

          Exposing Hollywood Ped0ph!les
          http://www.aim.org/aim-column/exposing-hollywood-pedophiles/

          Abuse Scandal Plagues Hasidic Jews In Brooklyn
          http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99913807

          New York legalizes Ped0philia – Since Jews “Must Suck” on Baby Pen!ses
          https://www.facebook.com/policealertsUKnewsreportsUk/posts/775332155832856

          Orthodox Groups Under Fire From Within For Inaction On Defender Of Ped0ph!le
          http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/new-york-news/orthodox-groups-under-fire-within-inaction-defender-pedophile#KOvqdJGoY9PPPxjK.99

          THIS RABBI IS DOING EXACTLY WHAT IT APPEARS THAT HE’S DOING………..
          http://www.sickandwrongpodcast.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/1406641986927.cached.jpg

          A sampling from the Jews’ Talmud…………..

          Sanhedrin 55b . “A Jew may marry a three year old girl” (specifically, three years “and a day” old).

          Sanhedrin 54b . “A Jew may have sXx with a child as long as the child is less than nine years old.”

          Kethuboth 11b . <b."When a grown-up man has !nterc0urse with a little girl it is nothing."

          BECOME A “RABBI” AND YOU TOO CAN HAVE SXX WITH CHILDREN…………
          http://www.sickandwrongpodcast.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/1406641986927.cached.jpg

          • James Wherry

            You sure are into pedophilia, Tapitio. What first made you want to be a pedophile?

        • I often remember a visit to a Muslim couple from Jordan. While she sat on the sofa and gave instructions, he scuttled around in the kitchen and made the tea.

          • Norm
            • They didn’t have to tell me anything. I spent close to 50 years in mainstream media journalism. I am well aware of the issue of “honor killing” – not just in Jordan, but in much of the Middle East and South Asia.

              • Norm

                So you’re probably also aware of the inexcusable status of women, gays, and infidels in Muslim countries, as enshrined in Sharia Law. Correct?

                • That’s a loaded question, designed to elicit a condemnation of Islam – something that I, as an “infidel” who was treated with exceptional kindness in “Muslim countries”, won’t give you. You refer to “Sharia Law”. But surely, it is fiqh, rather than Sharia per se, that is the deciding factor. And what is a “Muslim country”? Syria, which the US is currently trying the destroy, is a secular state. Iraq, already “taken out” by the Empire, was a secular state. So was Libya. I’m no lawyer, but my understanding is that the law in such countries (and in Israel, too), has several “layers”. In other words, you might find a basis of religious principles, with colonial-era law and independent-state law superimposed. But whatever the situation is, it’s not amenable to reductionistic analysis. I suggest that, if you have an objection to a specific law in a specific country – a law that might, for example, treat “honor killing” with leniency – you take that matter up with a representative of the country concerned and also bring it to the attention of the various international human rights organizations.

                  • Norm

                    I’m quite sure you’re well-aware also of the disingenuous mendacity of your post, Alan, and of the horrendous abuse of human rights of women, gays, and non-Muslim residents in practically all Muslim countries whether or not you’ve visited there, who can hardly be expected to “take that matter up with a representative of the country concerned”.

                    • I’m simply pointing out that inchoate rage against Arabs/Muslims/Islam achieves nothing. You have to be focused, and work toward specific goals. One goal might be to have Saudi Arabia ejected from the UN Human Rights Council. Of course, residents of Saudi can’t do that. They might end up having their heads cut off. The pressure has to come from outside, and has to be brought to bear on the supporters of Saudi Arabia – principally the US. Another goal might be to put a stop to US “color revolutions” and other regime-change operations, which have actually worsened the status of women and gays in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. I’ve been around for a while. I know something about the relative freedoms that women enjoyed in some of these countries before the foreign interventions.

                      • Norm

                        If you’re referring to all those Soros-initiated ‘color revolutions’ that have plagued many countries in the last decades, and the Obama admin’s interventions stabbing our sovereign allies in the back, then you should definitely denounce progressivism and the globalist ‘new world order’ elements behind it. But don’t worry. Rest assured that Trump is going to change all that.

                        However, Islam’s treatment of women and minorities can’t be excused based on the above, and you obviously know it. Throughout the Islamic world it’s either iron-fist despotism or else a mix of total anarchy, chaos, and terror. Islam today is totally incompatible with the Western notions of democracy, freedom of expression, and human rights.

                        And regarding your valid concerns about the farce of the automatic-majority OIC in the UNHRC etc, well…

                        “As to the U.N., things will be different after Jan. 20th.” @realDonaldTrumpd

                        • I suggest you do some serious reading on the subject of Islam’s treatment of women and minorities. Below are two publications of The Islamic Foundation in Leicester, England. Al-Faruqi taught at the universities of Chicago and Syracuse, and was a professor in the Department of Religion at Temple University at the time of his death.

                          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/35f95d3916b06681bf44d1b573fee524ed0ebbc4771893cd632f6b1dce130e5c.jpg

                        • Norm

                          Thanks, Alan. You’re obviously extremely knowledgeable on this, after 50 years in it and all…

                          I wonder if you’ve had a chance to also look at the similar book: “A Gift for the Muslim Couple” by the prominent Islamic scholar Hazrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/126912/canada-muslim-book-sanctions-wife-beating-robert-spencer

                          It’s always remarkable to see how a modern leftist progressive ideology like yours again and again approves and endorses the practices of a medieval religion-of-peace™ ideology (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks/attacks.aspx?Yr=Last30 ) still being performed on a massive scale at this day and age all over the world, reminding us that perhaps those two ideologies are not that much different at their core values regarding the concepts of individual freedom and human rights.

                          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/52f07b4d34f946c55a73104126f7b63e31ba27a78bc603bb788e227be6eb0ba6.jpg

                        • Yes, I’m familiar with this type of material. Thanvi is actually a controversial figure, even in Islam. As you may know, he was declared an unbeliever by a total of 301 of his peers. He was a leader of the Deobandi movement – some say “cult” – that gave rise to the Taliban. In the field of dawah, it also gave rise to the Tablighi Jamaat – a missionary organization that I know well. (They used to come to my house and harangue me, in much the same way as Jehovah’s Witnesses do.) I have no time for such people, and I think my feelings are shared by most, if not all, genuine Muslim academics.

                        • Norm

                          Unfortunately for the untold millions of women, gays, and minorities oppressed by Islam, it’s the reality on the ground that matters. Not lofty words by academic scholars and/or attempts to whitewash it by Western progressives looking the other way – material you’re undoubtedly familiar with. Especially in light of the gruesome fate of Ismail Raji al-Faruqi and his family and the work of B. Aisha Lemu and her husband on Boko Haram – considering the two books you’ve recommended earlier.

                          “In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.” ~Anonymous

                        • Which “Western progressives” are “attempting to whitewash” Islamic State – the US creation that is the principal oppressor of women, gays, and minorities? Which “Western progressives” are “attempting to whitewash” Saudi Arabia – the US ally that finances Islamic State and oppresses its Shia minority (among other population groups)? And what, exactly, is the point you are trying to make in connection with the “gruesome fate of Ismail Raji al-Faruqi and his family”?

                        • Norm

                          Well, Alan, I’m sure that even an astute erudite like yourself would agree with me that ISIS is not that different from the Salafists in Gaza or Sinai.

                          Let me ask you, then: Which Western progressives are NOT attempting to whitewash the Salafists in Gaza?

                          Moreover, there are essentially no ideological differences to speak of among ALL of the various factions of both Sunnis and Shiites when it comes to the maltreatment of women, gays, and minorities, throughout the entire Islamic world. And the fact that most of these factions are constantly fighting each other to death, doesn’t in any way change the above reality.

                          So who are the Western progressives that DO attempt to whitewash it, you ask? Well, Judith Butler (of “Hamas/Hezbollah are progressive, are part of the global Left” fame…), Noam Chomsky, Code Pink, ‘Queers for Palestine’, the colonial imperialist monarchy of New Zealand (who has just lectured Israel about settlements…), and about 99% of professors in virtually all of Western academia, to name just a few…

                          As to the stabbing of al Faruqi, by an Afro-American Muslim who had been told that both Faruqi and his wife engaged in homosexual activities with Malaysian students at Temple University in violation of Muslim traditions, along with many other cases like Maksud Sadikov, Asad Shah, Juliano Mer-Khamis, and many other *former* ‘moderate Muslims’, well, just a drop in the bucket that should already teach you something about the not-so-subtle difference between your scholarly ‘moderate’ theory of Islam, and the harsh reality of practice on the ground.

                          See also, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEMHKO5MC6c

                        • Once again, you are postulating a monolithic Islam, in which differences between sects and individuals are minimized to the point of non-existence. But one thing that ISIS and the “Salafists in Gaza” (presumably Hamas) definitely do have in common is that both are the creations of others – ISIS by the Americans and their Saudi and Qatari allies, and Hamas by the Israelis. Both were seen – initially, at any rate – as useful to their sponsors. The Americans wanted a “Sunnistan” to break up the “arc of (Shia) resistance” to USraeli hegemony in the Middle East, while the Israelis wanted a counterweight to the PLO. (Remember the days when the PLO was the big bugaboo?) Unfortunately for their sponsors, both got a bit out of hand – ISIS when it started cutting off heads and perpetrating other atrocities; Hamas when, despite much US scheming, it won the Palestinian elections. Ouch! Democracy hurts when people vote the “wrong” way, doesn’t it?

                          The questions I asked above were specific. They concerned ISIS and Saudi Arabia. By introducing Hamas and Hezbollah, you are attempting to make me argue from your premise, which I don’t accept. I don’t agree that there is an “Islamic world” in which there are no significant differences between secular and theocratic states, and between states and religious/nationalist/terrorist organizations that, in some cases, are the declared enemies of those states. There are radical differences between Saudi Arabia and, for example, the secular state of Syria, where you will find, I think, that all the minorities, including the Christians, are supporters of the Government. Likewise, there are differences between Hezbollah and Hamas, both of which have, I agree, received some support from some Western intellectuals. I think that, in most cases, this support is qualified. But don’t ask me to argue for or against the presumed positions of others. The people concerned must speak for themselves. Where Hezbollah is concerned, however, I think two things are indisputable: (1) It would not have come into existence if Israel had not invaded Lebanon in 1982, and (2) If it had not come into existence, Israel would still be occupying Lebanon up to the Litani River.

                          I am not a supporter of the New Zealand Government, which recently declared its intention to train the so-called White Helmets – the PR arm of the terrorists in Syria. I am a supporter of the Syrian Government, but by no means a wholehearted one. I haven’t forgotten its record of torture and repression.

                          I asked about your “point” in raising the murder of Ismail Raji al-Faruqi simply to confirm that this does not have any bearing on the validity of the work I cited.

                          Re the above video: Numerous psychological tests have shown that people in that kind of situation will “run with the herd”. I know from personal experience (when, for example, I attended a Scientology lecture) that even waverers in an audience will agree with the most outrageous proposition if enough hands are confidently raised. I would like to remind those present at the above meeting that it is axiomatic in Islam that one should “cover the faults of others”, not run to the authorities – and definitely not take the law into one’s own hands. A person who takes the law into his own hands becomes a criminal himself.

                        • Norm

                          No. Hamas is in fact part of the Muslim Brotherhood, they are not exactly Salafi. Actually, in many respects the MB and Salafists are ideological opposites – the MB advocate taqiya-based stealth jihad against the West, masquerading as ‘moderates’ and biding their time relying on the overwhelming Muslim birth-rate advantage to lie about their true goal of a Global Caliphate while appealing to gullible Westerners with that charade of – in the words of Erdogan (another MB) – “Democracy is like a streetcar, when you arrive at your destination you step off”. In contrast, true Salafists despise the MB lies, regarding it as an affront to the legacy of Muhammad’s own practices of lightning-fast conquests through bloody subjugation casting terror into the hearts of the disbelievers, preferably by public beheadings (see Quran 8:12). Talk about postulating a monolithic view…. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/10/gaza-salafists-problem-hamas-islamic-state-isis

                          But despite the many different Islamic schools and branches, there’s no essential difference across ALL factions of Islam, within Sunnis and Shiites alike, regarding the maltreatment of women, gays, and non-Muslim minorities, when it comes to actual practices on the ground.

                          As to Syria, that’s another topic altogether. Most Muslims do not even consider the Alawites to be Muslims: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2016/05/alawite-sect-muslim-misconceptions.html Yusef al-Qaradawi has even called them: “worse infidels than Christians or Jews”. Just think about that….. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10094590/Muslim-Brotherhood-cleric-calls-for-Sunni-jihad-in-Syria.html

                        • Yes, I know that Hamas arose from the Muslim Brotherhood. But as there was a reference to Hamas in one of your earlier posts, I presumed that that was what you were talking about.

                          I, personally, can’t see that the term “Salafist” means much, in that any Muslim can, if he or she wishes, describe himself as such. Does any Muslim think he should NOT emulate the Prophet and his Companions? If we are talking about ISIS and its ilk, I would suggest that “takfiri” is a better term.

                          I don’t know what to make of al-Qaradawi. The “Telegraph” article you cite has him calling Christians “infidels”. Yet in a lecture given in 1997, he reportedly said, “I say about them, ‘Our Christian brothers’ and some people reject this from me and say how can I say that they are our Christian brothers? [Allaah says] “Verily the Believers are but a single brotherhood”. Yes, we are believers and they are believers from another angle”. Incidentally, the position of al-Faruqi is that Christians (and Jews) are not infidels: “The term ‘infidel’ is applied to a person who does not recognize God, not to the adherent of another religion who believes in God” (Page 93).

                          You dismiss this as mere “theory”, and point out that “actual practices on the ground” are different. But as I have pointed out, “practices on the ground” have deteriorated markedly as a direct result of US invasions of, and interventions in, so-called Muslim countries. Just look at Iraq. I was no supporter of Saddam – he was, after all, originally a CIA asset – but women had many more opportunities under his rule. And Christians, too, had a better deal. Tariq Aziz, the Iraqi Foreign Minister, was a Christian.

                          Also, let us not forget that, under the Yinon Plan, the entire Middle East was to be reconstituted on an ethnic/confessional basis, which virtually guaranteed that minorities, if they were not large enough to be allocated territory, would be eliminated. Some observers argue that this plan is now slowly being implemented.

                        • Norm
                        • Not really. Some years ago, while I was still working, I received a telephone call from Wellington. The caller identified himself as an official of FIANZ (the Federation of Islamic Associations of New Zealand). “We want you to write something against homosexuality,” he growled. I can’t remember what my reply was. I think I did my best to be both polite and totally non-committal. I didn’t tell him that, under no circumstances, would I ever do such a thing. As far as I am concerned, people can do/be whatever they like – provided they don’t make a nuisance of themselves. If any Muslim disagrees with me on this point, or on any other point, he is welcome to come to my house and talk things over with me in a civilized manner. I extended that invitation as far back as 1990; but to date, no one has responded.

                          Have you been to Turkey? A visit to the mausoleum of Rumi, in Konya, is instructive. In the entrance, there is an inscription, in several languages, that reads, “Everyone is welcome here – even the fire-worshiper.” That’s the kind of attitude I would like to see Muslims adopt. It’s not weak; it’s strong. And it’s much more persuasive than ranting and raving.

                        • Norm

                          “ranting and raving…”

                          Yet isn’t it you who is ranting and raving here about a supposed clandestine “Yinon Plan” that is somehow responsible, purportedly with nefarious US military backing, for the maltreatment of women, gays, and non-Muslim minorities by the otherwise “peaceful” and “tolerant” Sharia law…?

                          You know, one could have actually admired a call for reconciliation across the chasms of religion, differing cultural value systems, conflicting interests, and historical grievances, were it not for your blatant undertone of a priori justifying and defending the horrors of basic human rights violation in the name of a callous, medieval-style, exploitative political system masquerading as spirituality, under which hundreds of millions were, and still are, hideously oppressed.

                          I guess it’s not that difficult to sit in your comfortable recliner in New Zealand ten thousand miles away from the ME, and pontificate to “take that matter up with a representative of the country concerned” to the hapless countless of thousands of women and little girls raped by Assad’s Shabiha militia, or to the slew of gays hanged from cranes in Iran, or the few and far between Christians still left in Syria and Iraq, or the Yazidi sex-slaves – “possessed by the right hand” of ISIS jihadists flocking to the region from all corners of the globe according to Quran 33:50. Not to mention all the state-sanctioned mass FGM, forced child-marriage, and “honor”-killing practices rampant throughout the Muslim world.

                          So now you admit that to date, not a single Muslim has ever responded to your extended invitation as far back as 1990 to come to your house and talk things over with you in a civilized manner about any point of disagreement with you – except for one FIANZ official (!!!) who had wanted you to write something up as a professional reporter against homosexuality . . . to whom you never even considered recommending that he “do some serious reading on the subject of Islam’s treatment of women and minorities”….

                          Is there a lesson to be learned here, I wonder? Would you have done your best to be “both polite and totally non-committal” had it been a devout Christian instead, who told you they would rather someone else bake a wedding cake or issue marriage certificates to same-sex couples?

                        • My invitation is also extended to you. Let’s meet in Cairo, Egypt, next year – at either your hotel or mine.

                        • Norm

                          Will be delighted to, Alan.

                          How about in Jerusalem? Any hotel overlooking the new US Embassy, where we can also discuss the shredded Iran agreement and then enjoy a half-day guided tour of the biblical holy sites? All expenses on me.

                          Deal?

                        • TecumsehUnfaced

                          Do you really want a writer of Alan’s perspicacity writing about someone like you? I hope he takes your offer. Is it still on if the embassy remains in Tel Aviv and the Iran treaty is maintained?

                        • A visit to Jerusalem is something I have under serious consideration. After the conclusion of my “Islamic heritage” tour of Egypt, I could fly to Amman and take a one- or two-day trip to Al-Aqsa Mosque. But there are a lot of question marks over this proposition. For a start, I suspect I am on the Israelis’ enemies list. If I am, they might not let me in.

                        • Norm

                          Why would you be on the Israelis’ enemies list, Alan?

                          Are you affiliated with any designated terrorist organization? Are you on the US no-fly-list?

                        • TecumsehUnfaced

                          Thank you for an unusually calm, rational, and informative discussions with one of the hate-mongers working this site.

                        • One does one’s best. The ironical thing is that, in the final analysis, current events in the Middle East don’t have a great deal to do with religion. They have more to do with resources, pipelines, spheres of influence, and the maintenance of the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency.

                        • TecumsehUnfaced

                          Yes, I agree that religion has always been a tool of the godless and hypocritical.

                          The British were very largely the original sculptors of the current situation. I would be very interested in any evaluations of these two publications that you would care to share:

                          http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-world-order-the-founding-fathers/5445255

                          How Zionism helped create the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
                          http://jfjfp.com/?p=79503
                          http://jfjfp.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/wpid-ibn-saud-jpg.jpg
                          Abdel Aziz Ibn Saud with Sir Percy C0x

                          PS: You do better with that hate monger than I. You treated him very respectfully. I love to bait him.

                        • Norm

                          You certainly have a lot to learn from Alan.

                          For one, he hasn’t replied with copypasta material from virulent hate sites as you do.

                        • TecumsehUnfaced

                          You truth haters would consider Global Research and Jews for Justice for Palestine to be “virulent hate sites”, wouldn’t you?

                        • Norm
                        • TecumsehUnfaced

                          Not my fault that it fits you. It came out of an Internet search for “Norm devouring a Palestinian child”.

                        • Re the Global Research article: Yes, this is how the world works. “The received history of the First World War is a deliberately concocted lie.” Ditto the official narrative of 9/11 and the Global War on Terror. Incidentally, the local branch of the Anglo-Saxon elite, of which Truby King was a prominent member, used to meet at Olveston, a stately home in Dunedin that I have visited on two occasions.

                          Re the JFJFP/Mondoweiss article: I have been to Saudi Arabia, and been a guest at the Mina palace of the royal family. In such places, one sees lots of marble, enormous chandeliers and ornate Western furniture, but absolutely no Islamic art. Tells you something, doesn’t it?

      • Alaine

        Not funny. While the U.S and the British, etc. continue to dessimate the lives in the Middle East, they take time to make fun of them while spreading propaganda about the women trying to survive the onslaught. Sick!!! But not surprising, sociopaths love suffering, death and brutality and laughing at it is just par for the course.

      • James Wherry

        People today have no sense of humor or sarcasm.

        Steve Martin paid a wonderful tribute to the late Carrie Fisher, when he said “When I was a young man, Carrie Fisher was the most beautiful creature I had ever seen. She turned out to be witty and bright as well.” Martin was obviously poking fun at geeky, teenage boys who focus on beauty and s-x, but then learned about another Carrie Fisher who became a writer and an actress known for real depth in Hollywood.