For the first time, Arabic countries like UAE and Bahrain hold Holocaust Memorial ceremonies

For this year's Holocaust Memorial Day, a most important and significant occurance is how Arabic/Islamic countries like UAE and Bahrain are holding local ceremonies:

Holocaust Remembrance ceremonies were held Wednesday in the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, to coincide with the official ceremony in Israel — the first time such events have been held in an Arab state.

The local Jewish communities organized the ceremonies in the two countries, which last year signed normalization agreements with Israel.

“A historic first event to mark the memory of the Holocaust,” the Foreign Ministry said in a statement. “Israeli and Emirati activists lit six candles in memory of the six million who perished, and are now standing against extremism. We will not forget.”

Images of the events shared on social media showed dozens of people participated.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu mentioned the UAE event during his speech at Israel’s official ceremony in Jerusalem.

Speaking of Israel’s normalization agreements with the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan, Netanyahu said “there is a tremendous change in the Arab world” and noted the Holocaust remembrance ceremony being held in Dubai.

“Who would have believed?” he said.

The ceremony in Dubai included a delegation of Jewish and Arab Israelis, Channel 12 reported. Several dozen social media influencers in the Gulf were to join them and organizers said they hoped they would pass on the stories of survival and remembrance.

One vital question that matters is whether these countries will acknowledge the role played by Islam in the Holocaust, including Jerusalem-based mufti Haj Amin Husseini's role. For now, the ceremonies being held are definitely an important start.

Yair Lapid vacations on Holocaust Memorial Day

Something the MSM is deliberately ignoring, it would seem. Leftist Lapid goes overseas at a time like this:

MK Yair Lapid, chairman of the Yesh Atid party and candidate for prime minister, on Wednesday night flew to the US for vacation.

Wednesday night marked the beginning of Israel's Holocaust Remembrance Day, which continues until Thursday evening.

As a result of his flight, Lapid, the son of Holocaust survivor Tommy Lapid, was absent from the official Holocaust memorial ceremonies at both the Knesset and Yad Vashem.

His spokesman told Arutz Sheva: "Be strong, he's coming back for Independence Day."

He should be ashamed of himself, as should his spokesman. There were people on social media who found this offensive too:

"The State of Israel is dealing with existential challenges and a challenging post-coronavirus period, and what does Yair Lapid do? He travels to the US. The audacity of a 'leader,'" wrote Dr. Haim Misgav.

One person tweeted: "I read this last night and I couldn't believe it. On the eve of Holocaust Remembrance Day, Yair Lapid flies off to vacation? Especially because of his family history, I can't believe it."

Another tweeted: "I understand that the memorial day for the Holocaust isn't important. For some reason I have the feeling that if this were [Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin] Netanyahu, we would see an offensive and insulting campaign about this disrespect."

Lapid gets away with this because of his politics. Absolutely repellent. It proves he's simply not qualified for being a premier.

A French city with only one Jew left is under Islamic siege

Giulio Meotti's written about the sad case of the French city of Trappes, which is now suffering from Islamic sharia:

They call it the "bunker"- a few windows, all screened, a flag on the roof. "It looks like a foreign embassy in a hostile country". In July 2013, following a police check on a veiled woman, 400 residents stormed the building. The siege lasted several hours and required, from the police, 700 stun grenades and tear gas. A helicopter was mobilized.“It looked like a war scene,” a policeman said at the time.

The attacks have continued since then. The latest dates back to Saturday 27 March. Eight mortar rounds with fireworks hit the front of the building.

What building? It is the police station of Trappes, a French town of 35,000 inhabitants, at the center of a long investigation by the weekly Valeurs Actuelles.

The "brigades" go around the city. Those so called are the followers of the Islamic fundamentalist movement Tabligh who, all dressed in white, enforce the religious prescriptions on the inhabitants. Sharia law, Islamic law. They intervene against those who drink, against a lightly veiled woman ...

Hostility becomes palpable and very visible on certain occasions, such as September 11, 2001, the day of the attacks on the World Trade Center. A policeman recalls this chilling scene: “I was driving a scooter in the city center of Trappes. The residents cheered and shouted for joy ”.

Even if this is only one part of the city, it's still a terrible tragedy it's come to this, and many Jewish residents have long left. The way things are going now is definitely poisonous for the country as a whole.

Sudan's government votes to annul anti-Israel boycott

It looks like there may be good news in Sudan, as the government is repealing their 63-year-old law forbidding ties with Israel:

Sudan's Cabinet voted on Tuesday to repeal a 1958 law that forbade diplomatic and business relations with Israel, it said in a statement, the latest development in relations between the two countries.

The move needs the approval of a joint meeting of Sudan's sovereign council and Cabinet, which serves as Sudan's interim legislative body, to come into effect, the Cabinet said.

While Sudan's civilian authorities have maintained that the decision to initiate relations with Israel would be left to the yet-to-be-formed transitional parliament, Tuesday's vote is seen as a step that could pave the way for official visits and further diplomatic ties.

So it appears they're following through with what was arranged when Donald Trump was POTUS, and making a more official agreement with Israel after all these years. And that's very thankful news indeed.

Why I can't feel sorry to see the social justice advocates turn against Geoff Johns

Geoff Johns is a very divisive figure. He's also one of the reasons I stopped reading superhero comics in the mid-2000s, because of the jarring violence he put into his scripts. In all that time, he went on to become a showrunner for TV adaptations of the DC cast members he'd written stories for in the past 2 decades. A most decidedly undeserved career, if you ask me, and as I've noted in past years, he is a leftist himself, little different from other such ideologues in the field. Now, it would seem that, following allegations made by Ray Fisher last year that Johns caused a lot of trouble for him on the set of the Justice League film when he was more involved, the chickens have come home to roost. Let's take a look at this current item from the Hollywood Reporter (via Indiewire), where Fisher goes on with what are admittedly questionable allegations, mainly because of the following:

Fisher was raised by a single mother and his grandmother in Lawnside, New Jersey — a community that he notes was the first self-governing Black municipality north of the Mason-Dixon Line. He says he felt a new sense of urgency to speak out when the pandemic hit and the Black Lives Matter protesters took to the streets.

To Fisher, who had few screen credits, playing the half-man, half-machine Cyborg — the first Black superhero in the DC film universe — was both a huge career break and a major responsibility. (Justice League was released in 2017, the year before Marvel broke ground with Black Panther.) He was mindful that the film was overseen almost entirely by white executives and filmmakers.

While Fisher has dropped details and named names, outsiders have struggled to understand: How did Whedon incur his anger? Did Fisher really decline to participate in an investigation that was launched in response to his own complaints, as Warners claimed in September? Was Fisher fighting a righteous battle or a quixotic one when he set out on a path that appears to have cost him a place in the DC film universe?

The allegations made by Fisher, IIRC, were that Johns was one of Joss Whedon's enablers (reportedly, Gal Gadot also had problems with Whedon, and according to this report, even some Buffy performers accused him of harassment). And in that sense, yes, he could've been, or at least, did nothing to get Whedon to cut out any irrational behavior on his part. That said, it's irritating to think Fisher's raising this whole subject based on BLM, since, as any realistic coverage makes clear they're a movement built on some of the most reprehensible ideologies around, not the least being antisemitism, acceptance of Islam, and even LGBT ideology (which, as noted before, is still considered anathema to the Religion of Peace), and if Fisher accepts BLM in any way, he's only making it difficult to give him backing. Yet that's not saying I care what's happening to Johns' reputation now, if the very same PC crowd he was more or less a part of is throwing him under the bus. Still, the following is interesting:

Multiple sources tell THR that the show's creators were passionate about doing some nontraditional casting and that Regé-Jean Page, who would go on to become a breakout star of Bridgerton, had auditioned for the role of Superman's grandfather. But Johns, who was overseeing the project, said Superman could not have a Black grandfather. The creators also wanted to make one superhero character, Adam Strange, gay or bisexual. But sources say Johns vetoed the idea.

"Geoff celebrates and supports LGTBQ characters, including Batwoman, who in 2006 was re-introduced as LGBTQ in a comic-book series co-written by Johns," says Johns' rep in an email. Johns also pitched Warners on developing a television show around the first LGBTQ lead DC superhero television series, he adds. As for the role of Superman's grandfather, the rep says Johns believed fans expected the character to look like a young Henry Cavill.

Why specifically Cavill, but not a dark-haired white guy who could be 6'3 in height? Granted, it would've been embarrassingly bad if Adam Strange were changed to suit a LGBT agenda - quite possibly at Alanna's expense - for the sake of these politicized TV shows and films now in store, especially after Tom King put out such a horror story co-starring the 2nd Mr. Terrific, and that's an act of potential race-slighting nobody in the MSM thinks to consider. But let's also consider Johns was one of the DC contributors who supported the retcon to Roy Thomas' creation, Obsidian/Todd Rice from Infinity Inc, who'd been changed to homosexual as far back as the mid-90s, and did Johns ever do anything to prevent such agenda exploitation, or reverse it? Nope, nor did he ever try to keep James Robinson from shoving Alan Scott into a similar situation. Oh, and lest we forget, Johns was a co-writer of Countdown to Infinite Crisis, the 2005 crossover-precursor that saw white Ted Kord violently murdered by abruptly changed to baddie Max Lord, all so they could clear a path for putting in a diverse replacement as Blue Beetle, the Mexican-American character Jaime Reyes. If they hadn't resorted to such extreme methods, I'm sure there'd be a lot less objections to having a character of different race take over the role. Instead, under the pseudo-guidance of Dan DiDio, they treated the white originators of the roles and their co-stars like crap on their way out. And they wonder why the comics lost so much of their audience over 15 years ago?

If Johns' approach to live action films and TV differed in any way from his comics writing, there is a possible explanation to that: commercialism, and the apparent belief among people of his ilk that nobody in the wider public could give a crappy damn about the comics proper. That was one of the reasons why David Goyer's live action contributions to Superman a decade ago may have differed from what he was doing in the comics, making Supes forfeit US citizenship. Back then, the entertainment industry was still considerate to some extent of whether the wider public appreciated patriotism, a situation that's drastically changed now. And yet, not only has Johns has been involved with almost every live action adaptation to come out of WB, many of these productions do involve left-wing politics, and SJW themes. He was an executive producer on the Birds of Prey movie, as well as being a co-writer for Wonder Woman 1984, both films which build on current liberal ideologies that're pretty noxious. This being more recent, you could probably argue that in the past, there was a time when Johns wasn't quite that sold on SJW themes in commercial filmdom, yet here we are years later, and now he certainly is, if his recent efforts say something. His listings on the IMDB indicate he's part of the production staff for the upcoming Green Lantern show on HBO Max, and if it follows through with the plans to depict Alan Scott as homosexual, what does that say about his own positions? One sure thing, whether he's still writing comics on a regular basis, he's not doing anything to repair a bad situation getting worse there with social justice themes.

Since we're on the topic, here's a related interview with Johns from Arab-American News about the comic he's writing at Image titled Geiger, which says the following:

Set in a post-apocalyptic U.S., where a nuclear attack has left the continent’s surface unlivable and has pushed life underground, the comic’s release this week is fitting for the grave realities of a global pandemic.

But the main character, Tariq Geiger, is also half-Arab, like Johns. In fact, this is the second time Johns has penned an Arab comic book character. He had previously written an Arab American from Dearborn, Simon Baz, into DC’s Green Lantern canon. Dearborn is no stranger to Arab American heroes in comics, of course, with other notable works from author Saladin Ahmed.

First, let's be clear: an Arabic protagonist is fine. It's the applied religious/ideological beliefs that aren't, namely, Islam, and that's what the Baz character goes by, which unsurprisingly goes unmentioned here. However, there are hints where Geiger's going towards the end:

“When I was at the Arab American Museum (in Dearborn) back in 2012, kids were so excited to see an Arab American character in Green Lantern,” Johns said. “I’ve spent my career trying to diversify the comic book universe and introduce new characters from all sorts of backgrounds in different ways.”

Johns contributions adding new identities to the series Shazam made their way to the screen as well. Geiger, like Simon Baz in Green Lantern, is also unwittingly sent down his path through careless and cruel acts of people acting on stereotypes about Arabs.

Strange, don't they mean Islamists? Because that's pretty much what the GL stories where Baz first appeared seemed to emphasize, and that's why Johns' lurch to something more politically blatant than when he first began his career is so disturbing. He himself may not be an adherent to the Religion of Peace, but he sure seems pretty sympathetic to it. To the point where he cannot spotlight an Arab character who's a non-Muslim/Judeo-Christian adherent, or just simply secular. If he wanted to diversify the universe he's working with, he missed a huge opportunity with Arab characters as well, and something tells me he won't take it now. Heck, if he wants to diversify comicdom, how come no Armenian characters who could serve as a nod to Mannix? How come no Slovakian protagonists either? Such a hypocrite. If Geiger serves as a propaganda vehicle for the Religion of Peace, I won't be wasting money on it. No surprise they're sugarcoating Ahmed's terrible conduct either.

And now, Johns is being shunned by the very SJWs who lauded his agenda-driven tale with Simon Baz a decade earlier. Based on all the harm I feel he brought to the comics industry, that's why I find it hard to feel sorry he's now becoming persona non grata with PC leftists he's been pandering to in Hollywood. I have no idea how valid Fisher's allegations against Johns are, but this is pretty much a case of leftists turning one against the other, and Johns is the next leftist in line on the receiving end of their liberal ideological rants over live action adaptations those outside the industry proper likely won't bother to view on TV and in theaters anyway.

Some info about left-wing novelist Dorit Rabinyan

I'd been taking a look at some information about the left-wing novelist Dorit Rabinyan, whose book "All the Rivers" was the subject of controversy several years ago, because it was said to promote intermarriage between Jewess and palestinian, and the now embarrassingly bad Naftali Bennett, as education minister, initially barred it from classrooms. I found a New York Times item about it, predictably wallowing in a lot of leftism, and it says the following:

The couple find that their similarities and differences are very complicated. Liat, a high-minded, educated woman of the left, sees the only solution as two states, fair but in the end separate. Hilmi thinks there is no dividing the two people on the same land. (This argument, of course, has only intensified.)

One problem with the article itself, if not the novel, is that - you guessed it - there's no mention of Islam here, and whether that's the elephant in the room being ignored. Another, mentioned above, is that the female protagonist of the book is a leftist who upholds the two-state solution propaganda that's absolutely ruined discourse even more than LGBT indoctrination. And just look how they imply a leftist is the "educated" one. I'm betting they'll say the only good type of religious Judaist is one of an extremist Haredi clan like Satmar. Disgusting. That the Hilmi character ostensibly doesn't think there should be division is no alleviation if leftism is ultimately the viewpoint driving the tale. However, the article does have something amazing to tell about what happened after the education ministry eased up on its initial position:

The ministry backed off slightly, allowing some teachers to use the novel in classrooms. What Ms. Rabinyan found disturbed her: It was the students, amid the nation’s palpable drift to the right, who did not want to read the book, which had generally been popular.

“Nowadays kids in Israel and in Palestine are so swept up with this wave of nationalism, exploitative of their instincts,” she said. “The kids themselves rejected the book. They said: ‘It’s a lefty book. I don’t want to read it.’”

If Rabinyan really did say "in Palestine", that certainly confirms what kind of person she is, who clearly despises the Judean/Samarian part of her own country, and may see nothing wrong with the Religion of Peace. Simultaneously, you could wonder if she believes "palestinians" shouldn't be shunning her book's vision, if they are.

I also took a look at this UK Guardian article about Hassan Hourani, the paramour whom the Hilmi character is based on, and it says:

The depressing weather broke me on June 10. It was still raining. I booked myself a plane ticket and told you that in another five days I was going back to Israel. You asked enviously: "You're going home?" I trembled, as usual, when we spoke that word. I do not know which of us started it, when it happened that we stopped saying "Israel" or "Palestine". We simply said home, but we meant the same place. Through your messianic gaze, it was always one place. In my eyes, from a distance of thousands of kilometers, it was the conflict ripping these two places apart that made them, paradoxically, one. From that distance, Abu Mazen seemed to be a brave new leader and Ariel Sharon was quoted as saying, "An end to the occupation." The renewal of talks towards negotiations joined rumours of a rare spring that was sweeping the region after a blessed winter and I, filled with hope and with a physical need for the warmth of the sun, wanted to go home.

So more of the Israel-invalidating propaganda of a palestinian state, I see. And if memory serves, "Abu Mazen" is a nickname for Mahmoud Abbas, the same one who was involved in funding the terrorist attack in Munich. If Rabinyan's got an accepting view of such a monster, that's the real issue with her politics, not intermarriage.

I guess the elephant in the room is whether stories like these take positions viewing Islam as legitimate, including at Israel's expense. On the other hand, I will say that, if Bennett really didn't read the novel from front to back, that was incredibly dumb, and undermines positions I doubt he still has. That said, this review in the Forward reveals a most eyebrow raising detail about the characterization in the book:

“All The Rivers” is an impassioned record of what Liati, the narrator, calls “these mad and beautiful days,” her intense love affair with a talented stranger whom she, a veteran of the Israel Defense Forces, has been conditioned to regard as hostile, or at least treyf. Hilmi has, in fact, spent four months in an Israeli prison for painting anti-Zionist graffiti on a wall in Hebron. The effort to keep their taboo relationship secret from friends and family puts a strain on the couple, as does the fact that Hilmi favors a single binational state and Liati a two-state solution. However, eros overcomes wariness, at least for their November-to-May romance. The realization that on May 20 Liati will return alone to her Jewish life in Tel Aviv concentrates their liaison. “How can you love with a deadline,” a friend asks, “with a stopwatch running?”

Anti-Zionist grafitti?!? Well that's saying something. Basically, the novel must take a position on the word Zionist without even knowing its exact meaning, making it out to sound like it means evil conquestor, not patriotism/nationalism. Also note how this is an affair between a Jewish woman and an Arab man, not a Jewish man and Arab woman, which basically means Rabinyan is playing things pathetically safe. Something tells me you wouldn't see people like this writing a story about a lesbian affair between Jew/Arab either. If anything, Rabinyan is cheap and pathetic in the symbolism this ends up embodying. Of course, Bennett also showed weakness by failing to make clear the specific problem with the book is that it may normalize relations between a Muslim man and a non-Muslim woman.

And actress Gal Gadot's production company, most sadly enough, decided to cash in on this propaganda by adapting it. If the production does go ahead, it'll remain to be seen just how far to the left it'd lean in its vision, one that excuses Islam - which should be the real reason for concern - in its quest to push a propaganda vision. This kind of news is what soured me on Gadot as a country representative, realizing she's apparently a leftist, her army service notwithstanding. I'm sure there's some irony in that, but there you have it when it comes to those who're now in Hollywood.