Think before you link
Harry’s Place has been shut down by the service provider evidently because of a post that was put up about a UCU activist (Jenna Delich) linking to a David Duke site, which she thought was a good place to find factual material on Israel and Jews. She sent this useful information round via a UCU mailing list. Some of the UCU activists took exception to, well, not to Jenna Delich’s ideas of research but that Harry’s Place had pointed this out, and now a complaint has been made to the service provider (presumably about possible defamation) and the site has been shut down.
The material on this affair has been put up on a temporary site here.
Note to self and others:- if you do inadvertently link to a neo-Nazi site or any other dodgy site for information and this is pointed out to you, apologise and say that you are totally mortified. In fact, it would be excellent if you felt totally mortified. Then the whole business will go away. But don’t sound huffy and annoyed like Jenna Delich – how were you supposed to know what a neo-Nazi site looks like? (Same thing applies if you produce leaflets talking about the Holocaust and omit to mention its main and best known victims. See comments to post here).
Also, if you have been found out, don’t resort to defamation laws or apply pressure through service providers. Many bloggers might dislike the site you are attacking, but there is some solidarity among bloggers – first of all they came for Harry’s Place, next they came for me – and they will flash this story around the blogosphere. From there it may be taken up by the mainstream media and you will look very bad trying to shut up critics, and especially bad if you are a union for academics.
More information on how to detect a neo-Nazi site here.
Shiraz Socialist 
modernityblog said,
August 26, 2008 at 9:51 pm
thanks for that plug 🙂
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 26, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Love the equation between the SWP’s anti-fascist contact sheet, and the stupid act of Delich in linking to Duke’s site.
No, Delich should not sue. She should apologise for such idiocy. For once Modernity’s ‘guide’ has much to recommend it.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
Delich should not sue Harry’s Place. Its the SWP who should sue. Even the equation/amalgam between the two cases on the top of this post is libellous. Unfortunately, being the purists they are, they won’t. But if they did, HP (and Shiraz) would be well fucked and would have no defence.
modernityblog said,
August 26, 2008 at 10:23 pm
Wally wrote:
“Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.”
then we are so alike? I even agreed with a few of your points in the “The AWL, Israel and Iran”, funny old world 🙂
Rosie B said,
August 26, 2008 at 10:41 pm
The “equation/”amalgam” is two very bad cock-ups made over the last fortnight or so by activists and how nobody said something like, “This is absolutely mortifying. It’s a terrible mistake to make.”
John A said,
August 26, 2008 at 10:53 pm
“In fact, it would be excellent if you felt totally mortified.”
I don’t know about you, but I have in the past felt mortified and repented for linking to sites which only Will Rubbish claims are fascist.
News on Harry’s Place - 26 August 2008 « ModernityBlog said,
August 26, 2008 at 11:34 pm
[…] Update 6: Luke warm support from 10 percent. Rosie at Shiraz Socialist reminds everyone to “Think before you link”. […]
charliethechulo said,
August 26, 2008 at 11:54 pm
“It’s the SWP who should sue…if they did, HP (and Shiraz) would be well fucked and would have no defence.” (see#2, above)…
What the fuck is Wally Wanker on about?
We Will Not Be Intimidated said,
August 26, 2008 at 11:59 pm
http://www.engageonline.org.uk/blog/article.php?id=2064
Bennett said,
August 27, 2008 at 12:02 am
Delich did a “John Wight”
http://www.engageonline.org.uk/blog/article.php?id=1627
Jim Denham said,
August 27, 2008 at 2:11 am
I am confident that I speak for all of us at Shiraz Socialist when I say that, whatever our disagreements with Harry’s Place, we stand with them 100 per cent over this matter.
modernityblog said,
August 27, 2008 at 2:38 am
Let’s hope the rest of the Left read up on the issues, see the implications and support HP, they could be next.
I have covered the points in several posts, which explain most of the issues.
Renegade Eye said,
August 27, 2008 at 6:38 am
I posted in support of HP.
Voltaire's Priest said,
August 27, 2008 at 7:28 am
Wally thinks we’d have no defence if the SWP sued us for being nasty to them, Jim. I didn’t realise one had to be nice under the law, but there we go…
Rosie B said,
August 27, 2008 at 8:09 am
Good piece here:- http://sedgemore.com/2008/08/ucu-activists-muzzle-critical-bloggers/
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 27, 2008 at 9:05 am
False accusations of anti-semitism are actionable.
Actually, you people could have been sued 100 times over for this if people had been inclined to do so, and you would not have a defence.
There is not one iota of evidence that the SWP is anti-semitic and if this were put before a libel jury, you and HP would be crucified.
Any fair-minded juror would simply note the fact that even the ‘cocked up’ contact sheet was a piece of anti-fascist propaganda – from an organisation with a record of campaigning against fascists going back decades. That’s all they would need to know to conclude that ‘anti-semitic’ allegation was libellous.
The SWP probably will not sue for reasons of left-wing purism. More’s the pity.
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 27, 2008 at 9:40 am
It’s also entirely understandable that the UCU, a bona-fide trade union, should regard Harry’s Place, and people who post material on it about the internal affairs of the union, with hostility.
Harry’s Place is indeed a hate site. Unfortunately, so is David Duke’s website, an even worse one. Which is why this Delich woman is wrong and so mindbogglingly stupid in this particular case to make an issue of this over her error in posting links to his site.
That doesn’t change the fact that HP Sauce (or Little Green Soccerballs as many call it) is a hate site with a racist, and indeed an anti-union, agenda. The UCU are right about that.
Andrew Coates said,
August 27, 2008 at 10:35 am
I would say stand in soldarity with Harry’s Place on this: a clear case if ever there was one.
Am just waiting to see someone sue them for a certain recent ‘guest post’ on organic gardening that recommended to readers ingesting herbal simples of Waterdropwort, Henbane and Belladonna.
BobFromBrockley said,
August 27, 2008 at 11:16 am
Wally’s comments are mind-boggling. First, the SWP and its allies in UCU, in fighting for an Israel boycott, made a huge point of the fact that Engage was using legal opinions from Lord Lestor, the originator of Britain’s anti-racist laws, to “muzzle” the pro-boycotters. (This was certainly the line of the SWPers in my branch.) Now, they have reversed the position, and Wally is calling for the SWP to sue over this.
Second, “Harry’s Place is indeed a hate site. Unfortunately, so is David Duke’s website, an even worse one.” What? HP might support some causes you find unsavoury, but if you put them on the same continuum – as a “hate site” – with that of the former leader of the KKK, you have no functioning moral compass, and have no understanding of the basics of anti-fascism.
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 27, 2008 at 11:37 am
“HP might support some causes you find unsavoury, but if you put them on the same continuum – as a “hate site” – with that of the former leader of the KKK, you have no functioning moral compass, and have no understanding of the basics of anti-fascism.”
Well, I regard anti-Muslim hatred today as just as threatening as old-style Jew hatred in the past, and ‘Little Green Soccerballs’ has played its role in stoking that. The treatment of the Palestinians by Israel may not be outright genocide, but it points in that direction in terms of open racism and collective punishment. Boycotts of a state that does that are legitmate no matter what the dominant ethnic group may be. To call the call for a boycott of Israel anti-semitic is a libel. Sooner or later, that will be tested in front of a jury.
sackcloth and ashes said,
August 27, 2008 at 11:39 am
‘Harry’s Place is indeed a hate site’.
Yes. Everyone on there hates racists, religious bigots, totalitarian nutjobs of the far left and far right, and all those who excuse them.
If you want an apology for that, then you can go forth and multiply, you bell-end.
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 27, 2008 at 12:01 pm
“Everyone on there hates racists”
If only;-)
Alan Laurence said,
August 27, 2008 at 12:25 pm
www might be right: a jury might not convict anti-semites. We live in a racist world.
Rosie B said,
August 27, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Jenna Delich has now been suspended from the UCU activists list. See here:-
http://www.engageonline.org.uk/blog/article.php?id=2065
modernityblog said,
August 27, 2008 at 2:55 pm
I thank everyone for their support, and wonder doesn’t this issue really show how politics have changed in the last 20 to 30 years?
years back, no one, but no one would have even remotely tried to cloud this issue, when it comes to linking to David Dukes’ web site, except nowadays a few do
they appear to be the usual suspects? funny that? I am sure it is pure coincident? oh right.
I shall be updating events as they unfold at http://modernityblog.wordpress.com/2008/08/26/news-on-harrys-place-26-august-2008/
BobFromBrockley said,
August 27, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Anti-Muslim hatred today is indeed as just as threatening as old-style Jew hatred in the past. That does not mean that Jew-hatred has gone away: synagogues continue to be attacked, graveyards desecrated, and Jews on the streets assaulted.
It is also true that some commenters at HP are guilty of anti-Muslim hatred, but I don’t think any actual post could be accused of this. Similarly, there’s plenty of Jew-haters commenting at Comment is Free and Lenin’s Tomb, and even a few who comment here on Shiraz. Does that make these sites hate sites? Of course not. What a disgusting suggestion.
“To call the call for a boycott of Israel anti-semitic is a libel. Sooner or later, that will be tested in front of a jury.” What a degeneration of the anti-fascist cause, that the racist fringe of the anti-Zionist movement resorts to the bourgeois courts to attack the anti-boycotters.
So sue me, Mr Cushman « Max Dunbar said,
August 27, 2008 at 4:30 pm
[…] Ignoblus, El Nuevo Pantano, Renegade Eye, Mushkush, Ten Percent, Socialist Unity, Sarah Franco, Rosie Bell, Ben Cohen, Darren Redstar and Unitalian. I’m sure there will be many more – feel free to let […]
modernityblog said,
August 27, 2008 at 5:22 pm
HP is back on-line, I would like to thank everyone for their support.
runia said,
August 28, 2008 at 7:53 am
A pedantic point I know but it doesn’t make sense to call Harry’s Place Little Green Soccerballs.
If you think it is the UK version of Little Green Footballs it should be called Little Green American Footballs.
Little Green Soccerballs would be a translation the other way round.
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 28, 2008 at 9:57 am
“Similarly, there’s plenty of Jew-haters commenting at Comment is Free and Lenin’s Tomb, and even a few who comment here on Shiraz.”
Rubbish. Unless you are talking about the phoney accusations that pass for ‘anti-semitism’ here and at HP. Given I was accused, without a single scrap of evidence, of being a holocaust denier, by Modernity, I know how to take that.
“What a degeneration of the anti-fascist cause, that the racist fringe of the anti-Zionist movement resorts to the bourgeois courts to attack the anti-boycotters.”
Since false accusations of racism have been levelled at those in favour of such a boycott, and laws against discrimination have been mendaciously misused to intimidate people into overturning democratically decided trade union decisions, then it is only fitting that these phoney ‘anti-semitism’ accusations should be fully tested in court. Its only a matter of time before this happens. What’s wrong, afraid that a jury would see through the libels about ‘anti-semitism’? Afraid you would be hoist on your own petard. You bet you are!!!
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 28, 2008 at 10:00 am
“Little Green Soccerballs would be a translation the other way round.”
Indeed. And what’s wrong with that? Isn’t your logic here a bit ‘Anti-American’? (joke)
modernityblog said,
August 28, 2008 at 1:03 pm
call HP what you will
it ain’t going any where soon, despite the nonsense talked on SU blog (fair play to Andy N & Phil BC) or the cranks on Lenin’s Tomb
I don’t find it too surprising that those hung up on the existence of Jews are those so active to muddy the water over these issues.
they might want to read my simple guide:
for UCU Activists and others – How To Avoid Re-posting from Neo-Nazi, Ku Klux Klan or White Power Web Sites.
it is free!
sackcloth and ashes said,
August 28, 2008 at 5:46 pm
Just for the record, if we’re talking about racism (and anti-Semitism in particular), who marches under banners saying ‘We are all Hezbollah’, and who marches alongside people who chant ‘Khaibar, Khaibar, O Jew! The Army of Mohamed is coming for you’?
I don’t do it. Mod doesn’t do it. Jim Denham doesn’t do it. But the SWP do.
Oh, and Wally Wanker, you might notice if you visit HP that racists like Alcuin do pop up, not to mention Catholic Fundamentalists like John Pabluski, in the comments.
They invariably get bollocked for their bigotry. Perhaps that might be an example for real leftists to follow.
We also had to deal with a serial poster with multiple sock-puppets – ‘L’Universal’, ‘Jack the Bear’, ‘Matt O’Halloran’, ‘Albion4Ever’ – and he/she/it got the same treatment.
HP is not flawless, but it works on a principle that racism is to be fought, not accommodated. Maybe you might want to take notice of that.
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 29, 2008 at 1:16 am
“HP is not flawless, but it works on a principle that racism is to be fought, not accommodated. Maybe you might want to take notice of that.”
Funniest bit of tripe I’ve heard for ages.
The ‘treatment’ racists get at HP is the feather duster treatment. Those who object too vehemently to their racism, however, get banned.
And what’s a few angry chants when the IDF is around to massacre Arabs, eh? Listen to the ghouls and blood-crazed racists at HP cheer hrn that happens – you can almost set your watch by them!!!
Voltaire's Priest said,
August 29, 2008 at 6:29 am
“A few angry chants”? Is that what you’d call “Khaibar, Khaibar, O Jew, the Army of Muhammad is coming for you”?!
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 29, 2008 at 8:53 am
Compared to the actions of the IDF in Sabra and Chatila, to give one example, that’s all it is.
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 29, 2008 at 9:08 am
Or the two separate massacres at Qana. Or Jenin. Or many more. Why don’t the scum at HP Sauce get as angry about those actual events than about the vengeful responses they provoke?
There was more weeping at HP Sauce over Ariel Sharon’s stroke than there was over all the atrocities of the IDF in the Lebanon war.
To ask the question is to answer it.
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 29, 2008 at 9:39 am
And how is that chant worse than the Biblical evocation of Joshua, the battle of Jericho, and the Hebrew subjugation of the Caananites that provides both the religious and secular justification for the re-conquest of ‘Eretz Israel’ by the Jewish people? That is, the military expression of the ‘Promised Land’ myth.
Go and read the book of Joshua, and how the inhabitants of Jericho were slaughtered down to the last man, woman and child. With the blessing of Yahweh. Of course, you don’t have to believe this is historically accurate – though there may be some fragment of truth in it somewhere. But it’s how Israel derives its legitimacy in the eyes of its supporters. Even the secular Zionists basically derive their claim to Eretz Israel from these scriptures.
How surprising that some on the recieving end should search their scriptures for something similar – effectively saying “we can do that too” (in their own minds at least). In the real world, they have no chance.
You can’t condemn that, can you? That would involve condemning the entire project of political Zionism, that is founded on reactionary fundamentalist ideology and derives its whole claim to any form of legitimacy from this source. Even when it claims to be secular it does this.
This is in fact the textbook definition of Islamophobia. The significance of Muslim religiously-expressed anger is massively exaggerated, while the vastly more materially powerful fundamentalism that is the primary cause of this is ignored and whitewashed.
modernityblog said,
August 29, 2008 at 12:27 pm
“And how is that chant worse than the Biblical evocation of Joshua, the battle of Jericho,…”
it is a really poor state of affairs when “anti-imperialists” (and he’d have you believe that he’s some form of anti-racist/socialist) like Willy start apologising for anti-Jewish racism
where will it end?
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 29, 2008 at 12:54 pm
So it’s anti-Jewish racism to mention the Battle of Jericho and all the baggage that goes with it?!!!
Pathetic. This stuff is also a key part of the scriptural basis for Christian Zionism, those Christian fundamentalists who believe that the ‘return’ of the Jews to the ‘Holy Land’ heralds Armagheddon and second coming of their Lord. They also believe that this will be the one ‘last chance’ for Jews to embrace Christ, otherwise they will all go to hell.
Its a key element of the scriptural basis for US Christian fundamentalist fanatics like Tom DeLay and Richard Armey to call for the expulsion of Palestinians from the occupied terroritories, to make way for this cataclysmic event.
And its also the kind of belief that Baruch Goldstein was acting upon when he walked into a mosque in Hebron in 1994 and massacred the worshippers there. Its the scriptural-ideological basis of the most extreme Jewish settler organisations, the ones who want to expel all Arabs from the whole of historic Palestine.
And Modernity says that to criticise this ideology is ‘anti-semitism’!!! Actually, that myth is part of the ideology of some real anti-semites, Christian fundamentalist scumbags who really do hate Jews and believe them enemies of their god.
Modernity is a bit dim, isn’t he? He doesn’t know his arse from his elbow where either anti-semitism or Islamophobia is concerned.
That’s why, when he’s confronted with questions he can’t refute, he makes up phoney accusations as he goes along, including fraudulent accusations of Holocaust denial against me. Thereby, of course, trivialising the Holocaust – the very thing he denounces others for.
Go and stand in the corner and put on the dunce’s cap!
modernityblog said,
August 29, 2008 at 1:02 pm
I wonder if Willy is on the UCU activist list? 🙂
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 29, 2008 at 1:09 pm
And of course, we know about his alleged penchant for underage sex.
Rosie B said,
August 29, 2008 at 6:32 pm
What ungrateful sods some people are! You point out that one of their activists has an extremely poor grasp of recent European history and/or can’t proof read and thus casts discredit on their project and all they do is moan at you. You point out that one of their activists is extraordinarily ignorant about how to research a subject and they get huffy and try to shut you up forcibly. Modernity even offers them a free guide on how to avoid this in future (put up the PayPal for that Mod!) and gets the most grudging thanks you can imagine.
In the corporate world, some spokesperson would have said, all right, we hold up our hands, we have no excuse to give, we have tightened up our procedures, everyone has been retrained and nothing like this will ever happen again. Looking forward, can we move on?
PR courses all round, I think.
Rosie B said,
August 29, 2008 at 6:40 pm
“And of course, we know about his alleged penchant for underage sex.”
Is that about you Mod? Well, I’m pretty impressed. Are you only 15 or even 14? I’ve heard of people being intellectually precocious, but that really takes the biscuit! You’re a total prodigy!
modernityblog said,
August 29, 2008 at 7:39 pm
ahh Rosie, Paypal, you say ?
I am not a money grubbing type of bloke, I think knowledge should be free!
but the above and the wider issue does highlight a few points:
1) that people can consider themselves political activists without understanding anti-Jewish racism or who key figures on the Extreme Right are?
2) that some misguided folks think of themselves as on the Left, even when they’ll happily defend or obfuscate anti-Jewish racism
3) the stigma of anti-Jewish racism hasn’t impeded its take-up in the mainstream
Clearly, this is part and parcel of the decline of the Left, the rise of the Far Right, the proliferation and crossover of their ideas, and the paltry state of antifascist activism.
I’m not terribly surprised that those people so active to confuse the issues here are those who demonstrate some form of antagonism towards the existence of Jews. I think such attitudes go hand in hand.
Do I think that these individuals actively hate Jews? probably not.
I suspect that many of them just hate everyone, Jews included, a form of Universalist misanthropy.
And they certainly don’t like being reminded of what pleasant company they keep: the David Dukes of the world, John Tyndall, Colin Jordan and Irving.
Maybe they haven’t fully gone over, but that’s part of their trajectory.
They are part of the Jew hating fringe of the fringe and should be reminded of it constantly.
However, I do wish they’d sit down and re-think their views, stop before it gets too late.
Voltaire's Priest said,
August 29, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Compared to the actions of the IDF in Sabra and Chatila, to give one example, that’s all it is.
Eh? You do know the difference between “IDF” and “Jew”, right?
sackcloth and ashes said,
August 29, 2008 at 9:27 pm
Bearing in mind also that while the IDF’s role in Sabra and Chatila was a disgrace, the actual killing of Palestinians was done by fellow Arabs.
Bearing in mind also the fact that Sabra and Chatila caused outrage in Israel, with many Jews accusing Ariel Sharon (justly) of being an accessory to murder.
WallyWanker also sets up more than a few straw men by claiming that racists get the ‘feather duster’ treatment (an outright lie which a consultation of any thread would reveal), and that everyone on the site is somehow as demented an anti-Arab as the most rabid of West Bank settlers (which can be disproved, for example, by a simple search on site).
WallyWanker is such a lying hound that it’s pretty obvious the man is a swuppie, and is not in the slightest bit interested in representing his adversaries’ views honestly. The difference on Israel-Palestine lies between those who support a two-state solution which gives Israelis security and Palestinians a state (i.e. the position of those who run HP, and the majority of those who comment), and those who support Hamas and a mythical ‘one-state’ solution, despite the fact that the Hamas Covenant (and the rejectionist cause with its Iranian and Syrian backers) calls for a peace based on genocide and ethnic cleansing, not on justice.
I make no apologies for favouring a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian feud which doesn’t involve the destruction and dispossession of Israel’s Jews – 1 million of whom are the descendants of those who were driven out of their homes in Arab countries from the 1940s onwards. I make no apologies for supporting a peace deal based on the 1967 borders, with an independent, sovereign Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. This is where I stand. Father John accused me of being on the ‘far right’ for this, which is a bit rich, given the subject of this thread.
The fact is that Palestine’s so-called friends hate Jews more than they love Palestinians. They are also (from the side-lines, without risking anything themselves) ready to fight to the last Palestinian. Their position is a sham, and Ms Delich’s misadventures with hate-sites shows how fake their leftists credentials are, particularly when they’re reduced to looking at Biblical scripture to justify their willingness to march with those who openly announce their intention to destroy all Jews.
Incidentally, why do leftists take an instant dislike to the SWP?
Because it saves time.
Voltaire's Priest said,
August 29, 2008 at 10:06 pm
Yup.
modernityblog said,
August 29, 2008 at 10:18 pm
the filth on Lenin’s Tomb has to be seen to be believed
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 30, 2008 at 10:42 am
“Bearing in mind also that while the IDF’s role in Sabra and Chatila was a disgrace, the actual killing of Palestinians was done by fellow Arabs.”
That alone shows that Sackcloth is an apologist for Sharon’s mass murders
“I only held the torch so my friend could see to stick the knife in. I am innocent of killing this man m’lord”
The IDF fired numerous flares up above the camps of Sabra Shatila for the whole of that night, so that the Falangists – real fascists whose forebears actually supported Hitler – could see to carry out their massacre. That makes the IDF participants in a division of labour.
” it’s pretty obvious the man is a swuppie”
Oh dear, wrong again. Can’t refute something? Stick a comforting label on it instead.
“Eh? You do know the difference between “IDF” and “Jew”, right?”
You’re directing this complaint to the wrong address. If the IDF, and Israel in generally, stopped claiming to represent all Jews, then perhaps those they bomb, kill, main, torture and imprison (and their relatives) wouldn’t get that idea.
Nothing to say to refute my contention that political Zionism(s) (of both Jewish and Christian varieties) are themselves deadly forms of political-religious fundamentalism and far more dangerous than the responses they provoke among their victims. It is just too damned obvious when you bother to look into it in depth. Obviously you lot can’t even begin to refute this politically. Just innuendos about how I hate Jews – which are on the same level as inventing accusations about someone having sex with young boys. Feeble.
Voltaire's Priest said,
August 30, 2008 at 10:57 am
No, the chant which you think is no more than someone blowing off a bit of steam, is “Khaibar, Khaibar o Jew”, not “Khaibar, Khaibar o Israeli soldier” or even “o Israeli”. Or perhaps you hadn’t noticed? I wouldn’t want to be uncharitable after all, even if I do think you’re quite thick.
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 30, 2008 at 11:57 am
As I said, tell it to the Israeli regime. They claim to speak for all Jews. Many people in the Middle East tend to take them at their word.
As for ‘thick’, you’ve obviously got a turd between your ears, not a brain.
voltairespriest said,
August 30, 2008 at 12:12 pm
You see, comebacks like that are not likely to change my (or anyone else’s) impression. You been saving that one up since you were three or what?
So, let’s do a little thought experiment. If I claim to speak for all people with glasses and I do something dreadful to someone, does that then justify someone else in a country halfway across the world calling for a divine army to exact vengeance against all people who wear glasses?
The fact that you can’t see how it’s, you know, anti-Jewish to call for an army to attack JEWS (not the IDF, not Israelis) is the reason I think you’re a little deficient on the grey matter front.
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 30, 2008 at 12:42 pm
‘Mohammad’ has no more divisions than the Pope has. Presumably it not anti-Jewish to attack, bomb and masscre people while claiming to speak in the name of all Jews. I think it is anti-Jewish.
I think by that token you, who refuse to condemn this, are also acting as an anti-Jewish provocateur. Just as Modernity acts as a very junior understudy to David Irving when he pulls accusations of anti-Semitism and holocaust-denial out of thin air, thereby trivialising that terrible crime and turning it into a mere vulgar term of abuse.
By the way, who says I have any interest in changing your mind? I’m not sure you have much of a mind to change. I write for others’ benefit, not particularly yours. However, if you want to trade abuse, I can match you blow for blow and it could get very nasty. Why don’t you stick to politics and cut out the Tourette’s ticks?
voltairespriest said,
August 30, 2008 at 12:55 pm
“Refuse to condemn” what exactly? I don’t myink you actually have the faintest idea what my views are on Israel-Palestine.
And as for abuse, you’re the one getting all hysterical. My impression that you’re a bit thick is based on your endless, ludicrously over-the-top, posturing and doctrinaire comments on this site, which never actually demonstrate any attempt to grasp what is being said to you. An example is your refusal to admit the difference between “Jew” and “IDF”. Therefore it is hardly as though what I said was groundless.
As happens I don’t have Tourette’s Syndrome but even if I did, it is not a condition which makes you abusive. The “ticks” are involuntary and can take the form of movements or sounds as well as words. The sufferer can often find them deeply distressing, precisely because they are not targeted in the manner of abuse.
Just so you’ll know in future.
Rosie B said,
August 30, 2008 at 1:34 pm
” I write for others’ benefit,.”
Anyone who has benefitted from WWIII’s contribution here, please add a comment.
Wally Wibblywellies said,
August 31, 2008 at 11:58 am
“I don’t have Tourette’s Syndrome but even if I did, it is not a condition which makes you abusive”
Obviously Voltaire doesn’t understand what a metaphor is. Talk about thick.
Nuff said.
charliethechulo said,
August 31, 2008 at 7:03 pm
We tolerate the comments of an overt, obvious, anti-Semite like Willywankers…why? As an educational excecise, in how to spot a lil’ ol’ Jew-hater masquerading as a pro-Palestinian leftist.
voltairespriest said,
August 31, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Wally;
And Tourettes would be a metaphor for…? I don’t think I’m the one who doesn’t get it.
Is it that you think “Jew” is a metaphor for “IDF”? Perhaps that’s the source of your misunderstanding, or am I crediting you with too much intelligence (and too little malice)?
Veirway said,
October 7, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Подскажите шооблончег под WordPress 2.6.2, чтобы был похож на ваш shirazsocialist.wordpress.com.
Заранее благодарю)