U.S. ARAB Professor who blogs at ‘What would Mohamed Do?’, Passes off Holocaust picture of murdered Jews as ‘dead Palestinian Arabs’

April 16, 2013
From Will at THE OTHER NEWS:

U.S. ARAB Professor who blogs at ‘What would Mohamed’, Passes of Holocaust picture of murdered Jews as ‘dead Palestinian Arabs’.

HT: TundraTabloids.

Special thanks to This Ongoing War and Elder of Ziyon for linking, who notes that:

In fact, this photo is of the Mittelbau-Dora concentration camp, part of the Buchenwald complex, and the dead bodies were victims of a Royal Air Force bombing raid in April 1945.
UPDATE II: Safi changes the picture and leaves this as an explanation:
An earlier version of this article had incorrectly used a Google image that was not associated with the Deir Yessin atrocity. That mistake has been corrected, and I apologize about the mistake. I have replaced that image with one from http://palestinesolidarityproject.org/2012/04/09/remembering-the-deir-yassin-massacre/.
After reading Vlad’s piece on the BDS movement copying PETA’s despicable use of the Holocaust in their promotion of animal rights, I began digging into the websites where these holocaust pictures were being misused, I came across the blog post (screen shot below) of Professor Omid Safi, of contemporary Islamic thought at University of North Carolina, hosted at Religious News Service (RNS). Safi is according to his Wikipedia page: Professor Safi is recognized as a leader of the progressive Muslim debate.
Also, don’t you think that the title of the blog itself ”What would Muhammad do?” in connection with the picture is somewhat…..ironic?

So my question is, does the RNS website owners approve of professor Omid Safi’s use of murdered Jews in the Holocaust, as Arab Palestinians, in order to smear the Jewish state of a false massacre?
The other question we should be asking here is, what wouldn’t this Arab professor do in order to smear the state of Israel?
His actions are not an anomaly, the websites associated with the misuse of this picture are anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian websites.
NOTE: For a real understanding of what happened at Deir Yassin, here’s a couple of videos explaining the incident, and also showing Arabs admitting that it wasn’t a massacre, and in their own words. Read Myths and Facts report on it as well. Read and see the full story here.

Deir Yassin Massacre actually had me convinced was real when I first started interacting online with people. The Wikipedia post has improved a little, but it still slants along the lines that it was real.


Did the “News of the World” Phone Hacks Violate U.S. Criminal Law?

July 13, 2011
James Murdoch.
James Murdoch

…Computer Fraud and Abuse Act extends to computers outside the United States in most circumstances. Here’s the key statutory language: the term “protected computer” means a computer . . . which is used in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or communication, including a computer located outside the United States that is used in a manner that affects interstate or foreign commerce or communication of the United States;
Update: The Guardian reports that former NOTW editor Andy Coulson, who was forced to resign as Prime Minister David Cameron’s spokesman when the scandal deepened in January, has been told he will be arrested on Friday.

Faced with a rapidly snowballing phone-hacking scandal, parent company News Corp. has announced that it will shutter its News of the World newspaper, a longtime cash cow and Britain’s top-selling Sunday newspaper. James Murdoch, head of the News International division that includes the company’s U.K. papers, told staff that recently revealed actions by the paper — including the hacking of phones of murder victims and the families of deceased soldiers — were “inhuman.”
The closing of the 168-year-old paper comes as News Corp. is seeking a politically loaded approval from government regulators over its purchase of the remainder of U.K. satellite broadcaster BSkyB.


Ben Curtis alludes that fake MSM photos were the Neo Cons fault

January 5, 2010

so it’s the perception that caused you to exploit the viewer with posed and digitally edited photographs? a Fool Born Every Minute:


BEN CURTIS: Maybe it always was. I myself get all my news from the Internet — primarily the AP wire. I don’t watch much TV, I don’t have access to a wide range of English language papers, so I get most of my news from the Internet. Now, when you get news from the Internet, and especially if you’re getting it from blogs, you can really fine-tune the range of opinions that you receive on a daily basis, and you can fine-tune it to just those opinions that conform to your opinion.
so it’s OK for Ben to use the internet to communicate with his radical element, but he is threatened by those Neo-Con blogs

BEN CURTIS: And when you understand how people who work for the media work and the difficulties they have there is a lot of mundane reasons why things happen — light, dust, cameras, trying to compress everything into one image. If the public understood more about the process, then perhaps there’d be less suspicion of it, although I suspect that’s probably not the case.

but when people do try to understand the process (like on blogs) then you are suspect of that? don’t you think that statement is a bit arrogant Ben? Assuming that it isn’t your fault that your media is abused in the media it is presented in, it is irresponsible and exploitative to not present the context or to make motions to clarify. Ben would have his audience believe the photographer has no intent in taking a picture of a toy in the scene of destruction. Then why was the technique used repeatedly?


It’s important to understand that there is not just a single fraudulent Reuters photograph, nor even only one kind of fraudulent photograph. There are in fact dozens of photographs whose authenticity has been questioned, and they fall into four distinct categories.

The four types of photographic fraud perpetrated by Reuters photographers and editors are:



1. Digitally manipulating images after the photographs have been taken.


2. Photographing scenes staged by Hezbollah and presenting the images as if they were of authentic spontaneous news events.

3. Photographers themselves staging scenes or moving objects, and presenting photos of the set-ups as if they were naturally occurring.

4. Giving false or misleading captions to otherwise real photos that were taken at a different time or place.

via zombietime.com

Ben Curtis alludes that fake MSM photos were the Neo Cons fault

January 5, 2010

so it’s the perception that caused you to exploit the viewer with posed and digitally edited photographs? a Fool Born Every Minute:


BEN CURTIS: Maybe it always was. I myself get all my news from the Internet — primarily the AP wire. I don’t watch much TV, I don’t have access to a wide range of English language papers, so I get most of my news from the Internet. Now, when you get news from the Internet, and especially if you’re getting it from blogs, you can really fine-tune the range of opinions that you receive on a daily basis, and you can fine-tune it to just those opinions that conform to your opinion.
so it’s OK for Ben to use the internet to communicate with his radical element, but he is threatened by those Neo-Con blogs

BEN CURTIS: And when you understand how people who work for the media work and the difficulties they have there is a lot of mundane reasons why things happen — light, dust, cameras, trying to compress everything into one image. If the public understood more about the process, then perhaps there’d be less suspicion of it, although I suspect that’s probably not the case.

but when people do try to understand the process (like on blogs) then you are suspect of that? don’t you think that statement is a bit arrogant Ben? Assuming that it isn’t your fault that your media is abused in the media it is presented in, it is irresponsible and exploitative to not present the context or to make motions to clarify. Ben would have his audience believe the photographer has no intent in taking a picture of a toy in the scene of destruction. Then why was the technique used repeatedly?


It’s important to understand that there is not just a single fraudulent Reuters photograph, nor even only one kind of fraudulent photograph. There are in fact dozens of photographs whose authenticity has been questioned, and they fall into four distinct categories.

The four types of photographic fraud perpetrated by Reuters photographers and editors are:



1. Digitally manipulating images after the photographs have been taken.


2. Photographing scenes staged by Hezbollah and presenting the images as if they were of authentic spontaneous news events.

3. Photographers themselves staging scenes or moving objects, and presenting photos of the set-ups as if they were naturally occurring.

4. Giving false or misleading captions to otherwise real photos that were taken at a different time or place.

via zombietime.com