Controversy!
Jordan, a loyal reader, gave us an idea for yet another shirt. This shirt is a direct attack on the media and how unbalanced it is. It’s sure to make you think – and if it offends you, then you do not get the right message.

For the laaaadies:



Make a powerful statement and look very hot at the same time.
Much more in our store.

Join the Conversation
I like them.
Somehow this sends the message that murdering people for fun is the wrong Islam and shooting human shields is the wrong Judaism.
I agree with both statements, but I do not see them as equal.
It doesn’t take into account the crimes of those who make use of human shields, and it doesn’t take into account that the terrorists obviously believe that human shields are a useful defence against Israelis.
I don’t see how the victims in Sudan are guilty of any war crime comparable to using human shields. That’s the difference.
While I see it as positive that hundreds of thousands of victims of terror in the name of Islam (NOT Islamic terror) are finally acknowledged, I will probably never understand why the crime of using human shields is constantly being overlooked.
If you use human shields, you are responsible for what happens to these civilians. Not Israel, YOU.
International law considers the use of human shields to protect targets a war crime. The Fourth Geneva Convention forbids the use of any civilian as a shield: “The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.” (Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, August 12, 1949, 6 U.S.T. 3516, 75 U.N.T.S. 287, art. 28).
I do not see a special exemption here, like “except, naturally, if the attacker is Jewish”.
The guilty in Sudan had another choice. Israel does not, unless she wants to risk a terrorist victory.
Anyone who tells me that shooting human shields is wrong will also have to explain the alternative. I will not risk death for a principle I don’t believe in, thank you very much.
“The Palestinian practice of using women and children as human shields was seen in Beit Hanoun (2006) when used by Hamas terrorists to aid their escape. A crowd of women gathered outside a mosque after an appeal by the local radio for women to come and act as human shields to help Palestinian gunmen flee an Israeli siege on the mosque where they were hiding. The armed men escaped dressed in women’s clothes.”
From Wikipedia.
I am sorry, but I cannot wear a T-shirt that claims that the ONLY way Israel has to defend Jewish lives, BECAUSE of these strategies, is morally the same as genocide.
Okay, so that is the conclusion you came up with, but clarify something for me – In what way would any of these shirts be considered “offensive?” Directly. As in, wearing it might actually be a problem.
Uhm. Very nice shirts… but the last one is reduntant. There are maybe a thousand Jews or so that actually WANT to kill Arabs – the Kahanists. They are outlawed in Israel.
It’s kind of like having the same picture and the words “THIS is not my JAINISM”
It’s not about actually wanting to kill them, it’s about doing it anyways.
The shirt is going to be offensive to staunch Israeli or IDF supporters. We are not insulting Israel – in fact we are defending it, hence the “not in my name.” We did this with Israeli peace activists in mind.
If you don’t like it, don’t buy it. It’s really that simple.