Posts filed under ‘Tony Greenstein’

Either Gilad is 70 or Tony is a fool

Oh dear, ploughing through this tedious nonsense is no fun at all. So, I’m doing it slowly, and now I’m taking a break to see what Tony has to say in his published piece.

Heres my summary:

1) Mary wrote a story. Mary always gets it wrong. I’m going to put it right.

2) I have impeccable credibility as an anti-zionist Jew, and I am happy to diss Israel.

3) Gilad is a bad, bad man and I am going to prove that by giving lots of out of context quotes, and wildly misrepesenting his writings.

4) Using these tactics, I am going to libel Gilad and Mary as anti-semites, whilst baffling people by admitting that my tactics are not new.

5)  I am also going to kick up a big fuss at Indymedia, because they have no idea how to run an effective site. I am going to demand that they censor Atzmon and then I am going to call my article “There are no gatekeepers”, so that there is no doubt that I do not understand the term gatekeeping.

6) Next I will show that I am better for Palestine than Atzmon and Rizzo.

7) I will end by saying that Atzmon is entitled to express his opinions (which I have already said I am trying to censor), ” but not “in the name of the Palestinians” erm like I myself do.

Thats it – start to end in 7 easy steps.

Hurrah for that!

According to ‘our Tone’:

Even the very term gatekeeper is derived from Atzmon’s assertion that Jews are holding back support for the Palestinians.”

Those who have done any media studies will no doubt be amazed that Gilad managed to invent the term ‘gatekeeping’ some 16 years before he was born, when he was apparently using the alias Kurt Lewin.

“In human communication, in particular, in journalism, gatekeeping is the process through which ideas and information are filtered for publication. The internal decision making process of relaying or withholding information from the media to the masses.”

Thats what I thought it meant till Tone told us what it really meant.

In fact, when I saw Tone’s DEMAND for CENSORSHIP, I thought he was ‘gatekeeping’! Now I find that it wasn’t like that at all. Gilad doesn’t look 70 and I have to say, Tone makes him sound a lot more omniscient than I would have expected.

Tone boasts how he saw off the ‘anti-semitism libel’ used against those who lobbied for the academic boycott, by speaking out as a Jew. Of course, this would only actually work if people believed that Jews could not be anti-semities, and yet, Tone is devoting a large part of his life to asserting that Jews CAN be anti-semitic. Tone is shooting himself in the foot here. He complains, “according to Gilad Atzmon this was just another example of how it is ‘Jews and only Jews who engage in racially orientated peace campaigning

Now, I’ve looked at the article with that quote, which our Tone so kindly linked to, and his name isn’t in it. So, he links to something that doesn’t back up his claim. Either he thinks thats Atzmon directed the quote at him, or his link is duff.

Here’s a bit more of the quoted article:

During my years in Europe I have come across groups of people who call themselves ‘Jews for Peace’, ‘Jews for Justice in Palestine’, ‘Jews for this’ and ‘Jews for that’. I have recently heard about ‘Jews for Boycott of Israeli Goods’. Occasionally I end up asking myself what stands at the core of this racially orientated separatist peace-loving endeavour. I may as well admit that though I have come across many German peace activists, I have never come across an Aryan Palestinian Solidarity group or even Caucasian Anti-War campaigners. It is somehow Jews and only Jews who engage in racially orientated peace campaigning.

Now, maybe Tone knows of an ‘Aryan Palestinian Solidarity group’ or a ‘Caucasian Anti-War campaign’ and chose not to mention it, or maybe there isn’t one. Maybe there aren’t groups that Tone can point to, in order to  dispute Atzmon’s claim? Maybe one day Tone will help us to sort it out. But, to be really honest, I’m not holding my breath. I don’t think that he has an understanding of Atzmon’s article, let alone a devastating critique of it. But, if there is a devastating critique, someone would surely do us all a service by putting it to us, rather than demanding the banishment of the author. Cos now that Tony’s pointed us to the article, we’ve read it and we have to make sense of it.

And, when Atzmon writes this in the same article:

While observant Jews can easily list more than a few positive qualities they identify with, they for instance follow Judaism, they practice Jewish laws, they follow the Talmud, they follow Kosher dietary restrictions, etc., emancipated secular Jews have very little to offer in terms of positive characteristics to identify with. Once you ask a secular Jew what makes him into a Jew you may hear the following: “I am not a Christian nor am I a Muslim.” OK then, but what is it that makes you into a Jew in particular? You see, he may say, “I am not exactly an American, French or British. I am somehow different.” In fact, emancipated Jews would find it hard to list any positive quality that may identify them as Jews. As it seems, emancipated Jews are identified by negation. They are made of the very many things they are not.

we have to stop and think, is this true? Now instead of Tone and his mates assuring us that Atzmon is wrong, and that there are plenty of positive qualities associated with being a secular Jew, there seems to be a big resounding silence. I can’t imagine what a secular Jew might feel makes up her identity, butI do know that as an atheist, I don’t align myself with any racially orientated peace campaigning – and nor do I imagine that I might ever join a group of ‘ex-christians against the war’ or even ‘christians against the war’. Atheism doesn’t seem to draw me to other atheists particularly. I don’t define myself by the religion I was baptised into and then rejected. That isn’t necessarily to say it hasn’t affected my whole way of thinking though, maybe it has.

Now, I’ve hung around discussion of the whole Israel/Palestine issue for many years. And, along with all the strawmen arguments, and deafening roars of “anti-semite” and “holocaust denier’, this is one of the issues that keeps cropping up. Its clearly an issue that Gilad is trying to make sense of . Perhaps if someone pointed out to him that are many positive qualities associated with being a secular Jew he would understand, and refine his thought accordingly. A sort of process of dialectics if you like. It might help some of us to us understand why so many secular Jews accept that Jewish people have a right to someone elses land.

We do know that religion is used to justify the dispossession – that the bible apparently says God gave the land to the Jewish people. We also understand that christian-zionists believe the same thing. But how do secular Jews justify what is a real problem, the practical horrors of taking that land forcibly? I still have no idea. We also know that there are religious Jews who do not believe that the dispossession of the Palestinians is justified in their holy book. And likewise, we know that there are secular Jews who do not think that zionism is right. Despite all the claims that we harbour anti-semitic beliefs, often unwittingly, it seems to me that most on the left do understand that there are many differences amongst Jews, that they are not all some kind of mono-thought clique.

There is no doubt in my mind that the so-called left has to learn to deal with the ‘anti-semitic libel’, as well as the fact that there are real anti-semites out there. But we see time and time again that different people see anti-semitism in different places. We see that there is no easy way of dealing with the claim, because the accuser is always so certain that they are right and there is no need for discussion, that we are incapable of understanding the issues. If we do not jump when the accusation is made, then very quickly we have our anti-racist practices brought into question.

That is the worst type of gatekeeping, when censorship is DEMANDED, and any delay to think about it is immediately seen as a sign of anti-semitism. “Hypocrites, why not get rid of your anti-racist guidelines, they are meaningless” is clearly designed to put pressure on the editors, and to affect the outcome. Joining in the discussion and convincing people through rational debate would seem to me to be a much healthier form of gatekeeping. It would help move it all along, and educate these stupid fools who don’t understand in the process.

TONY GREENSTEIN IS A GATEKEEPER!

And, until he allows  us some rational debate, we are still faced with the choice of either being anti-semites ourselves, or with joining in with the lynch-mob mentality that Mr. Greenstein likes to pursue so rigorously.

I’d like to make my own mind up in an arena which is respectful, and understanding.

THE GATEKEEPERS APPEAR TO WANT THAT TO BE IMPOSSIBLE.

PS – having said that – a reasonable debate seems to be happening here

At comment #34 Stephen Marks, who clearly doesn’t have a lot of fondness for Atzmon makes some good points.

Why does Greenstein perpetually engage in this discussion, whilst demanding that Indymedia does not even refer to it? Why does he link to the alleged ‘anti-semitic’ texts all over the web, if his real concern is that anti-semitism is useful to the zionists? Shouldn’t he just shut-up and let us work it out for ourselves?

In Atzmon’s words:

my views are receiving more and more attention, by the way, a lot thanks to Greenstein… and guess what, he is doing it all for free.

Shukran Comrade Greenstein

Tone will keep pressuring us until we do what he wants. 

In the meantime,his mate will slag us off whatever we do.*sigh*

November 20, 2007 at 7:45 pm 15 comments

On list response to off list email

A post from someone in response to an offlist email from Tony Greenstein – full email in comments – sadly truncated – but Greenstein’s full off list email is there.

Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 00:19:06 -0800 (PST)
From: Mick Fuzz mickfuzz@rocketmail.com
To: tony greenstein tonygreenstein@yahoo.com>, imc-uk-features@lists.indymedia.org
Reply-to: Middle column features for Indymedia UK imc-uk-features@lists.indymedia.org
Subject: Re: [Imc-uk-features] To defend or not to defend supporters of white supremacism and anti-Semitism

Tony, I’m not really happy with the way this is going.
The personal is political and I’m really not
comfortable with the way you’re acting here. It just
seems a bit too full on.

I don’t think it’s appropriate to browse the archives
of the imc-uk-features list and send emails to people
personally.

However as I’m sure you have got experience of, If you
keep kicking the anthill then it will eventually wake
up the sleepy ones in there and they’ll come out and
wonder what is going on.

And although I’m not happy about the way you are doing
it, I can say after reading through the articles that
I think Atzmon’s post should be hidden.

I’ve written this thought to be fed into the
imc-uk-features list. It’s not really a direct reply
to you Tony, so please don’t email me personally, I
think it’s probably best if you keep co-respondence to
the indymedia lists to avoid annoying people.

I reckon that it’s a very difficult and often
thankless task doing the indymedia administration. As
someone that doesn’t spend a lot of time doing it, I
would like to thank those that do.

cya
mick

November 19, 2007 at 1:22 pm 1 comment

Lets smear it for the boys now

Another email on the CC list. Again the strawman that I have defended Shamir, along with the smear that I must be an Ulster Loyalist cos I didn’t bother to refute Elf’s ridiculous abuse. I didn’t deny being a ‘piece of shit’ either, so I can guess what that means – entire email in comments – ftp

Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 19:56:52 -0800 (PST)
From: tony greenstein <tonygreenstein@yahoo.com>
To: freethepeeps@aktivix.org

Cc: roland@rantam.net, ‘Moshe Machover’ <moshe.machover@kcl.ac.uk>, ‘deborah maccoby’ <deborahmaccoby@hotmail.com>, ‘charlie pottins’ <charlespottins@aol.com>, ‘Diana Neslen’ <d.neslen@dsl.pipex.com>, ‘David Rosenberg’ <davros58@yahoo.co.uk>, ‘MARK ELF’ <markelf@btinternet.com>, ‘Michael Karlmanovitch’ <michael@paydaynet.org>, ‘sofia mcleoad’ <sofiahmacleod@blueyonder.co.uk>, Steve Cohen <raysteve@cohen70.freeserve.co.uk>, ‘tony greenstein’ <tonygreenstein@yahoo.com>

Subject: Re: “Personal abuse is entirely Atzmons forte.”

What I find interesting is that ftp hasn’t denied Mark’s suggestion that he is an Ulster Loyalist. Now I know that I’d be pretty quick off the mark denying such an accusation. But no doubt ftp considers it a badge of pride.

And speaking of badges of pride, another one is ftp’s admission of knowing Israel Shamir, the advocate of alliances with white supremacists who argues that Auschwitz was an ‘internment camp’. Yet that doesn’t stop ftp defending him too. Despite pretending that he was just an innocent moderator unaware of what the issues were (asking e.g. for a definition of anti-Semitism) it is clear that ftp is extremely well aware of the politics of Atzmon and his supporters.

November 19, 2007 at 1:04 pm 4 comments

‘you stand for defending racism’

[Imc-uk-features] Anti-Semitism is not the way to support the Palestinians – why Indymedia needs to take a stance

tony greenstein tonygreenstein at yahoo.com
Sat Nov 10 18:08:05 PST 2007

Ftp says ‘I stand for justice for Palestinians. I stand against bullying.’
  No ftp you stand for defending racism. What Mark Elf writes to you is his own concern. At least he does it in his own name. I accept no responsibility for the fact that some people feel angry at your defence of Atzmon. Like the Daily Mail and others of that ilk, who present their racism and attacks on asylum seekers as being a defence of free speech, you portray your defence of Atzmon and now Israel Shamir as one of standing up to bullying, free speech etc.

Racism, by its very nature, targeting people because of some inborn, genetic quality, is a denial of free speech and ultimately the right to life. But like the Melanie Philips of this world you believe the freedom to be a racist is the most important one and that it would be wrong to prevent Gilad Atzmon targeting Jews who support the Palestinians (because they are his major targets).

Ftp is right though to compare the criticisms of Atzmon with those of his and Atzmon’s friend Gilad Atzmon. As Atzmon put it in an e-mail to me, Israel Shamir is ‘a unique and advanced thinker’. Since some people have called for a discussion then maybe one should look at what Shamir actually believes and writes and see if he was indeed, as ftp suggests, another victim of a cruel witch-hunt.

In an article ‘Who needs Holocaust’, in the days when Atzmon was relatively sane Shamir wrote:
‘Gilad reiterated: It was the RAF that repeatedly dismissed the necessity of bombing Auschwitz.
Another go of Zionist propaganda. The camp was an internment facility, attended by the Red Cross (as opposed to the US internment centre in Guantanamo). If it were bombed, the internees would die – or as a result of the bombing, or due to starvation for the supplies would not arrive. Indeed, would Gilad advise to bomb Guantanamo? This idea of “bombing Auschwitz” makes sense only if one accepts the vision of “industrial extermination factory”, and it was formed only well after the war.’
http://www.israelshamir.net/English/Who_Needs.htm

There is no doubt that Shamir is a holocaust denier. Auschwitz was ‘an internment facility’ not an ‘industrial extermination factory.’ In fact he is far worse than that. One of the key proponents of the academic boycott, Sue Blackwell, criticised Shamir for his racist views. He responded by posting personal details about her to Martin Webster, someone who was one of the key figures in post-war British fascism and a founder of the National Front.
Israel Shamir, who ftp believes is another victim of the Atzmon style witchhunt, is also explicit in calling for an alliance with the white supremacist right. Ftp is clearly well aware of this. Maybe he defends the following views too?

http://www.israelshamir.net/English/antiSemit.htm
‘For as long as Richard Perle sits in the Pentagon, Elie Wiesel brandishes his Nobel Prize, Mort Zuckerman owns the USA Today, Gusinsky bosses over Russian TV, Soros commands multi-billions of funds and Dershowitz teaches at Harvard, we need the voices of Duke, Sobran, Raimondo, Buchanan, Mahler, Griffin and of other anti-bourgeois nationalists. If we accept their exclusion from discourse, Jewish bigotry will be tolerated while anti-Jewish bigotry is removed. Then, the middle ground for Joe Public will be ‘a little bit of Jewish bigotry’, or ‘Zionism lite’, in the words of my dear friend Bob Green.’

In other words in order to combat Jewish racists we need anti-Semitic racists such as David Duke, the ex KKK leader and Nick Griffin. Problem is that BNP leader Griffin today says he is anti-Muslim and pro-Zionist! And that is exactly where this nonsense of fighting racism with racism leads. As to freedom of speech, maybe ftp should tell that to the victims of Duke’s comrades.

But if ftp is consistent then the Moderators of Indymedia should also invite Israel Shamir to contribute a guest article, and while they are at it, perhaps Mahler of the German NPD and David Duke, to say nothing of Nick Griffin and Pat Buchanan (Nixon’s old chief of staff).
  Mind, Shamir is also on record as defending Avigdor Liebermann, Israel’s deputy Prime Minister, leader of the openly transfer party, Yisrael Beitenu because he is a Russian! Maybe ftp would like to invite Liebermann to also contribute an opinion piece to Indymedia (which normally excludes opinion pieces but since it has opened its pages to Atzmon why not other racists too?).

Shamir writes: ‘Even less substantiated is Makdisi’s weird claim that YB is a “racist party” and for them, “non-Jews are not welcome”. As a matter of fact, the YB is the least Jewish nationalist party in the Knesset outside the Arab block, as it is the party of the Russian, heavily non-Jewish community in Israel. ‘
http://www.israelshamir.net/English/Oops.htm

Clearly ftp is well aware of the background to Atzmon and his politics. He has also clearly read his articles which, for some strange reason, target Jewish anti-Zionists and cite Zionists like Ber Borochov to justify his views of Jews who don’t live in Israel. To be blunt he is not only anti-Semitic but a Zionist too.

But ftp saysIt worries the shit out of me that Indymedia might just give them their first taste of blood in this new kill.’ as if Atzmon is a fox being run to ground. Racists are in the habit of presenting themselves as the victims. The right-wing press does that all the time and that is what ftp is doing on Indymedia and it would appear that his fellow moderators are happy to go along with this. The question I would ask is why not scrap the guidelines re discrimination? They are clearly observed now in the breach and one person, who has formed links with racists, is prepared to use a ‘block’ to keep it that way. Ftp has got into bed with racists and the question is whether his fellow moderators are happy to allow Indymedia to be run by someone with sympathies if not worse with racists? There was a time when those with radical inclinations fought racism, not worried about if racists were excluded. It’s not as if they don’t have enough media outlets in the world.
In defence of the accusation that Atzmon is more concerned with his own ego than the Palestinians, ftp says of me that:

‘He castigates Atzmon for not backing the boycott. And it wasn’t long ago that we had Indymedia’s resident zionist, gehrig calling us anti-semitic because we carried articles supporting the boycott. The boycott according to gehrig is anti-semitic because it affects Jews disproportionally. Not Israelis mind, Jews.’

Precisely. It is true that Zionists accuse supporters of the Boycott of Israel of being anti-Semitic. What more idiotic way can there be of meeting this accusation than to adopt genuinely anti-Semitic beliefs as one’s own? Of course Zionists label supporters of the Palestinians as anti-Semitic. It is an accusation that has little credence today, certainly in my own trade union UNISON, which at its last conference supported the boycott. But Atzmon is determined to prove Zionists like gehrig right by demonstrating that being a supporter of the Palestinians means being anti-Semitic. And then Atzmon ‘proves’ he’s not an anti-Semite by opposing the boycott!! Well that is where anti-Semitism leads. To support for Zionism.

I shall repeat my proposal again. If Atzmon, contrary to the usual norms, is allowed to post an opinion piece on Indymedia, why have I been refused the same rights? Or is it the position that the rights of racists are superior to those of anti-racists?

Tony Greenstein

_______________________________________________________
Response:

you portray your defence of Atzmon and now Israel Shamir as one of standing up to bullying, free speech etc.

I don’t recall defending Shamir. I recall saying I met him before his banishment.  I don’t think I’ve even touched on what he says.

Racism, by its very nature, targeting people because of some inborn, genetic quality, is a denial of free speech and ultimately the right to life. 

Yes, thats what I think racism is too. I don’t see that in the article.  It all seems to be smoke and mirrors with Mr. Greenstein

But like the Melanie Philips of this world you believe the freedom to be a racist is the most important one and that it would be wrong to prevent Gilad Atzmon targeting Jews who support the Palestinians (because they are his major targets).

He isn’t targetting an inborn, genetic quality though, he’s targetting a behaviour, which he says can be changed. Me and Melanie in the same line, never thought I’d see the day….

Greenstein, having introduced the strawman that I defend Shamir’s views, goes on to quote Shamir. Its outside of my remit – but I don’t think he understands what Shamir means in the second quote – shutting down one extreme, whilst leaving the other to sprout its extremities ad naseum does skew the debate. I am not responsible for Atzmon’s thoughts, and Atzmon is not responsible for Shamir’s thoughts. I am against guilt by association.

But if ftp is consistent then the Moderators of Indymedia should also invite Israel Shamir to contribute a guest article, and while they are at it, perhaps Mahler of the German NPD and David Duke, to say nothing of Nick Griffin and Pat Buchanan (Nixon’s old chief of staff).

Another misunderstanding of the open publishing concept then. Nobody invited Atzmon to post, and Atzmon didn’t post the article. Nobody invites any individual to post – but anyone is free to post. The mods then have to deal with posts which breach guidelines. When there is disagreement about whether a post breaches the guidelines, then they have to use consensus decision making to sort it out.

I shall repeat my proposal again. If Atzmon, contrary to the usual norms, is allowed to post an opinion piece on Indymedia, why have I been refused the same rights? Or is it the position that the rights of racists are superior to those of anti-racists?

I’ll say it again. Nobody prevents Greenstein from posting an opinion piece. However if it breaches the guidelines, it is liable to hiding. The hidden Greensteins were complaints about moderation, not news or critical analysis for the newswire.

November 19, 2007 at 12:52 pm Leave a comment

A letter from America

[Imc-uk-features] From Lenni Brenner re Gilad Atzmon

BrennerL21 at aol.com BrennerL21 at aol.com
Sat Nov 10 12:27:38 PST 2007

11 10 07
To: Indymedia
From: Lenni Brenner

Hi Comrades,

Tony Greenstein has alerted me to the fact that Indymedia has run material by
Gilad Atzmon. I second Tony’s demand that Indymedia stop printing Atzmon’s
material.

Atzmon, an Israeli who broke with Zionism, now calls himself an ex-Jew.
Indeed he devotes much of his writing to denouncing leftist anti-Zionist Jews.
Worse yet, he denounces us because we fight both Zionists and anti-Semites.

In a 3/3/07 CounterPunch article, “From Esther to AIPAC,”

He cites “Marc Ellis… Adi Ofir… Lenni Brenner… Shraga Elam…
Finkelstein,” who write on the holocaust. He insists that

“Though they may be critical of different aspects of the exploitation of the
Holocaust, they all accept the validity of the Nazi Judeocide and its
mainstream interpretations and implications. Most of the scholars, if not all of them,
do not challenge the Zionist narrative, namely Nazi Judeocide…. not a
single Holocaust religion scholar dares engage in a dialogue with the so-called
‘deniers’ to discuss their vision of the events or any other revisionist
scholarship.”

Does Indymedia believe that we should “dialogue with the so-called ‘deniers’
to discuss their vision of the events or any other revisionist scholarship”?
Should Indymedia “dialogue” with David Irving?

As with everyone else on the Brit left, I’m sure you are concerned about the
fact that the British National Party has won some local municipality seats.
You know them. Monday they are Nazis, Tuesday they are anti-Muslim, Wednesday
its back to hating Jews, Thursday is for kicking Paki ass, etc. Therefore no
one, repeat, no one in Britain, atheist leftist, Christian, Jew, Muslim, who
genuinely wants to build a united front in the streets against the BNP wants any
part of “dialogue” with holocaust deniers, who are nothing more than
intellectual fronts for neo-Nazism.

Jews are like anyone else. Atzmon isn’t the 1st to freak out and he won’t be
the last. Back in the 50s, I was hospitalized with an infected liver. Across
from me was an elderly Jew. He was quite until his family visited him. He would
greet them with a Nazi salute and a hearty “Heil Hitler!” They didn’t know
what set him off, but something offended him and this was his way of punishing
them. Similarly, when Israelis break with Zionism, some go over to leftism,
others convert to Islam or Christianity and some, as with Atzmon, develop their
own mad form of fanaticism.

I am best known for my book, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators, which
exposed Zionist collaboration with Hitler and Mussolini. It received favorable
reviews from publications as different as the London Times and Moscow’s Izvestia.
I work in a field with other serious scholars, Zionist, anti-Zionist, Jew and
gentile. Whatever our differences, we are of 1 mind when it comes to holocaust
deniers/revisionists: We have nothing to discuss with Nazis, holocaust
deniers or ex-Jewish crackpots who want us to discuss anything with such vermin.

No mincing words, no evasions, no hypocrisy. You have read Atzmon calling for
such a mad dialogue. Do you agree with us? Yes or no? Are you ready to
totally disentangle yourselves from him? Yes or no?

For 1 democratic, secular bi-national Palestine/Israel in a socialist world,

Lenni

BrennerL21 at aol.com
http://www.smithbowen.net/linfame/brenner

November 19, 2007 at 12:21 pm Leave a comment

Steve Cohen on the Indymedia list

Now Steve Cohen sends the email he sent me to the Indymedia list. Note that the subject line has been changed from “the anti semitism of indymedia”, to ” anti semitism”. Theres a big time gap between the 2 posts. Why did he not send it directly to the list in the first place? Why wait till the next day, and until after he has received it back in his inbox via the CC list which he was added to? – ftp

Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 10:03:08 -0000
From: steve cohen
To: imc-uk-features@lists.indymedia.org
Cc: “Greenstein, Tony”
Reply-to: Middle column features for Indymedia UK
Subject: [Imc-uk-features] anti semitism

As a hitherto supporter of Indymedia I am writing in total support of Tony Greenstein’s attribution of anti-Semitism
Some political positions are so clear that they require no reflection to asceratain their meaning. Nazism is one such position. What you have published is another. To talk of “Judaic world view” (ie attributing to all Jews the same view – the conspiracy theory) and refering to the “unpopularity” of Jews in Nazified Europe (a form of holocaust minimisation which virtually coincides with denial) as well as “their holocaust”( the holocaust was perpetrated ON Jews – and others. The perpetrators were the Nazis)…all this is clear,unarguable anti-Semitism. Just as “kill the Yids” is clear,unarguable,anti-Semitism. But yet you claim a) it is open to interpretation b) even if it were anti-Semitic you need a “consensus” as to what to do if anything – a somewhat unique position on fighting racism c) in the meantime you feel quite prepared to print this junk (which incidenetally in identifying anti-Semitism with Palestinian liberation puts you in antagonism to all progressive Palestinian thought). Of course you can continue to use your energy going down this obnoxious path. Or else you can print an apology. steve cohen

November 19, 2007 at 11:26 am Leave a comment

Forwarding the Elf emails to the CCs

Here I make a mistake, and quote the same email twice. Email in its entirety in comments – ftp

Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 08:55:33 +0000
From: freethepeeps@aktivix.org
To: freethepeeps@aktivix.org
Cc: roland@rantam.net, ‘Moshe Machover’ moshe.machover@kcl.ac., ‘deborah maccoby’ deborahmaccoby@hotmail.com, ‘charlie pottins’ <charlespottins@aol.com, ‘Diana Neslen’ d.neslen@dsl.pipex.com, ‘David Rosenberg’ davros58@yahoo.co.uk, ‘MARK ELF’ markelf@btinternet.com, ‘Michael Karlmanovitch’ michael@paydaynet.org, ‘sofia mcleoad’;sofiahmacleod@blueyonder.co.uk, Steve Cohen raysteve@cohen70.freeserve.co.uk, ‘tony greenstein’ tonygreenstein@yahoo.com
Subject: “Personal abuse is entirely Atzmon’s forte.”

Two more from Mark – I reckon that’s one Greenstein thesis thats been
disproved.
He was quick with the abuse – I’ll publish where and when I like. I don’t jump
when told.

November 19, 2007 at 11:14 am 1 comment

Older Posts


Calendar

August 2017
M T W T F S S
« Nov    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

Posts by Month

Posts by Category