What Have Two Pictures in Common?

Our "Peace Now" comrades have taken a calculated step.

Probably to attract attention more than trying to convince anyone of the logic of their case, they plastered the top poster all over town. It reads: "Opponents of Annapolis - The Oppositionist Coalition to A Peace Agreement".

The lefty-progressive camp has been frustrated by the ability of the right-wing camp to succeed in graphic portrayals of messages. Just recently, they claimed that a poster put up by the Kahane remnants with President Shimon Peres with a kaffiyeh was incitement [see below]. That's so ridiculous but the mainstream media repeated it and sure enough for two or three days, the dictatorship of mindthought was back in place.

Why is it ridiculous? Does Peace Now/ACRI/Meretz/Gush Shalom et. al., think that a kaffiyeh, that distinctive Arab peasant headress that the Mufti El-Husseini made all city-dwelling Arabs in the 1936-39 period wear so that the terrorists from the hill-country could blend in with the population (talking about collective punishment, by the way), automatically is racist, defammatory and inciteful? If so, they should start a campaign to bring back the tarboosh. But otherwise, I think they should shut up and allow others the blessed democratic privilege of freedom of thought, freedom of speech and freedom of expression.

And if they think they are so 'clever' in their paralleling Lieberman and Ahmadinemajhad (or however one spells it), what would happen if someone would portray, say, Yossi Sarid and a...dog.

Why a dog? Well, both of them urinate on the side of the road like here:-

That would be silly and disrespectful and in bad taste, no? If so, why does Peace Now insist on publicizing the poster above?

And if they do insist on doing so, for peace's sake, stop crying about right-wing incitement.

=============

The Peres in a Keffiyeh Poster:-



Found at Israel Matzav