Published in ESA No
55 - Winter 2014
WE have learned recently that the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo
was in financial difficulties and down on its luck before the tragic events that took away a number of its
cartoonists. This indicates it was not as popular as the European media has been making out. Far from being a noble and upstanding
defender of free speech, it was quite the opposite. It was very hostile to those deemed to be “anti-Semitic”.
sacked an 80 year old cartoonist, Maurice Sinet, in 2009 after he was put on trial for “anti-Semitism”,
worded officially as “inciting racial hatred”. If he were on trial for offending Islam, he would have been carried
around the offices of the magazine and toasted as a great “satirist”. But there are no laws to protect Islam.
Only the Jews are sacrosanct.
After the Paris March for Unity, the French state gave the magazine a million euro,
then there were the sponsorships from various newspapers, including from some in Britain. A massive number of the latest ‘Mohammed’
issue were printed, the same kind of cover that inspired a previous violent response. Sales were brisk, as they say, but they
failed to learn the obvious lesson which had little to do with free speech.
Charlie Hebdo is basking in the sun of an early glowing summer
of publicity but it will not be long before it faces its own winter of discontent and sales drop away again. It was about
to close before the gunmen arrived at the offices.
It claims it knocks everyone, including Jews, but this was not case in
the past. The French people know this and had largely turned their backs on the publication.
used the pen name of Siné. He wrote articles as well as contributing cartoons when employed by Charlie
Hebdo but he crossed a red line when he commented on the marriage of Jean Sarkozy, son of a French
president, to a Jewish heiress. He wrote (in French) that if Jean Sarkozy planned to convert to Judaism, as was rumoured,
“He’ll go a long way in life, that little lad”. Personally, I find that highly amusing but from another
section all hell broke loose.
Meddling Jewish journalist, Claude Askolovitch, went on the attack with accusations
of “anti-Semitism” whereupon the editor of Charlie Hebdo demanded that Maurice Sinet get down on his knees and
apologise to the Jews. Philippe Val, the editor, was to sack Sinet for an “anti-Semitic” cartoon along with an
article after Sinet told him he would prefer to “cut off his own balls” than write a letter of apology.
So Maurice Sinet
(the cartoonist Siné) was to be taken to court for “anti-Semitism” over his Sarkozy cartoon. It was a civil
case brought by Ligue Internationale Contre le Racisme et l'Antisémitisme that rebounded
with Maurice responding with a separate case of slander. This led to further litigation between Maurice Sinet and his former
employer Charlie Hebno for wrongful dismissal. In 2010, Maurice was awarded 40,000 euro
for wrongful dismissal, with editor Philippe Val later resigning from Charlie Hebno and
Maurice founding his own publication Sine Hebno (see right).
Even the inevitable
death threats from the Jewish Defence League did not deter the courageous octogenarian
cartoonist including the online threat, "Twenty centimetres of stainless steel in the gut, that should teach the bastard
to stop and think." The usual response from rabid Zionist Jews, you could say. Death threats were not new to me, either.
This is a different
story to my own experience with Jews objecting to my cartoons. In 1981, I was tried at Snaresbrook Crown Court in East London
for “counselling and procuring, aiding and abetting the publication and distribution of material likely to incite racial
hatred” ... namely a publication called The Stormer. Note the phrase “likely”,
which more or less precluded the necessity of proof. The complaint came from the Board of Deputies of British Jews.
I pleaded not guilty
on some very sound grounds. I did, indeed, draw all the cartoon strips for the entire four page comic but I neither published
nor distributed it. I left the original drawings with a man called Jimmy Styles in East London who then took them to the late
Tony Hancock, a printer on the South Coast. I had heard the police had raided Jimmy Styles’ carpet shop in Roman Road
and pulled up the floor boards looking for the originals and negatives for printing. I was kept in the dark about this until
I read about its distribution, from the South of England all the way up to Dundee, in a tabloid newspaper.
The man who supplied
and drove the transport for distribution was Ray Hill who, it turned out later, was a mole and agent provocateur for the Zionist
group Searchlight, which poses as an anti-fascist outfit but, in reality, serves the Zionist
entity. He was working for them at that time. As such, Searchlight bears huge responsibility
for the distribution of a publication that was originally created as a simple private experiment in bad taste. By the standards
of material in the United States, where free expression is enshrined in the US Constitution, it was feeble stuff.
academic, Victor Navasky, wrote in his book The Art of Controversy - Political Cartoons and Their Enduring
Power, in a chapter on me, " The Israel-watcher in me acknowledges that he got Begin's activities as
a member of the Stern Gang right but feels that Edwards undercuts his own observation by the hatefulness of the message implicit
in his visual language. The citizen in me finds his ideas repugnant, yet the sociologist in me wonders why
the authorities find his work, which itself is a caricature of conventional bigotry, sufficiently threatening to earn him
Victor Navasky disapproves of me as a person but his liberal inclinations
find appreciation in the idea that freedom of expression must cover all aspects of the art of caricature and cartoons no matter
how offensive they may be to some. Surely it is the very essence of caricature, that exaggerates, stereotypes and reveals
perhaps the darker side of humankind, that should be free of all censure, artistic limitation and should be given full rein
in order to experience its full potential. This should include experiments in bad taste. The liberal aspect of my nature demands
have recently appeared on Iran’s English-speaking PressTV news channel, giving my
views on the treatment of BBC reporter Tim Willcox who attended the Paris March of Unity. There, Willcox interviewed the granddaughter
of a Holocaust survivor who was going on about how the Jews are the target. He interjected with, “The Palestinians have
also suffered by Jewish hands”. Again, the full force of Jewish intolerance is felt and they fell on Willcox demanding
their pound of flesh. This was intolerable, they said, mentioning the Palestinians is an anti-Semitic act, don’t you
know? Israel had been maligned by this deviating from the Zionist narrative. Then Prime Minister Netanyahu gate-crashed the
proceedings even when told he was not welcome, pushing his way to the first column of marchers, up with the best of them,
waving like mad when all others showed a more solemn demeanour. This was your proverbial “pushy Jew” of legend
showing them who is boss. The rest of the world cringed at this vulgar behaviour.
Back to Willcox, this is the BBC whose
editor of the Middle East news desk sent a memo to all its journalists reminding them they should always give a pro-Israel
slant in their news reporting. Its anti-Palestinian propaganda is supplied, of course, by the Israeli military.
The editor of the Middle
East new desk is Raffi Berg. Another, a former Head of Policy was a member of the Labour Friends of Israel and swore that
only an Israeli-friendly agenda would be permitted at the BBC.
I pointed out these aspects of the BBC’s policy
when interviewed on PressTV, along with my own experience of being denied freedom of expression
when jailed for twelve months in a British prison. My main point was that just about any group can be lampooned, ostracised,
ridiculed, insulted or simply have the piss taken, except one ... that’s right, the Jews.
I recall an article
in a copy of ACTION in the early 1960s. A passage in it said something like this: “There is only one thing more absurd
than the idea that the Jews are responsible for all the evil on this earth and that is the idea the Jews can do no wrong and
There are people who do subscribe to one of either of those viewpoints and they would both be wrong.
Hebdo incident brought out all these people, the great and the good, the ordinary people and those without
any stake in society. The sloganising began immediately and the loudest was FREE SPEECH! The March of Unity was to be about
free speech and the world would join together in order to celebrate it. What a load of rubbish.
When Jews stop regarding
themselves as above criticism and their view as sacrosanct; when this nonsense about the mildest form of criticism regarding
Israel and its Jewish population being ‘anti-Semitic’ is exposed for the sham it all is, then we all may be on
the path towards a kind of freedom. The evil, I claim, is Zionism. It is the root cause of so much trouble in the world today,
especially in the Middle East. When the United States frees itself from the grip of the Jewish lobby and stops siding with
Israel at the UN then there is hope, my friends. Until then, the suffering goes on while the world does nothing.
copyright©2015 Robert Edwards