Support Wisconsin’s public employees…and democrat senators!
From Credo Action
 |
Thank the Wisconsin 14Democratic state senators in Wisconsin have been forced to flee the state to stop Gov. Walker’s radical attack on nurses, teachers and public employees. Now, Gov. Walker has ordered state police to hunt them down. Show solidarity with the 14 Wisconsin state senators by giving them your support. |
modernityblog said,
March 1, 2011 at 9:26 pm
[Off topic].
Comrades, I have to admit it, you were right about Julian Assange.
I was wrong!
jim denham said,
March 2, 2011 at 12:11 am
It takes a big person to admit to such a mistake (such admissions especially rare, it seems, on the web) – all credit to you, Mod!
skidmarx said,
March 2, 2011 at 2:31 pm
Glenn Greenwald has a much more reasoned take on the Assange/Hislop dispute.
modernityblog said,
March 2, 2011 at 2:52 pm
Assange’s association with Shamir is damning enough.
Or are we going to be told that Israel Shamir is merely another “Anti-Zionist”? Well?
Attitudes towards Shamir are a litmus test, Assange and Wikileaks failed it completely.
They couldn’t even use Google to determine Shamir’s views before being associated with him.
Either they can’t use Google or they were not too troubled by Shamir’s views (until it became public).
modernityblog said,
March 3, 2011 at 2:34 am
You’ll probably like my latest:
http://modernityblog.wordpress.com/2011/03/03/bbcs-panorama-julian-assange-and-israel-shamir/
skidmarx said,
March 3, 2011 at 11:09 am
Of course if someone isn’t a supporter of Shamir, modernity is happy to lie about it:
Skidmarx would? As he’s denied most other things:…
4) Counterpunch’s continual slip into antisemitism and their push of Israel Shamir, the Far Rightist.
skidmarx said,
March 3, 2011 at 11:11 am
Despite my comment here that Shamir was indefensible.
modernityblog said,
March 3, 2011 at 3:17 pm
Again, a pity that Skidmarx can’t utilise his expensive Oxbridge education.
What I wrote:
I wrote that Skidmarx is weak on ATZMON not Shamir, that’s my primary point.
http://brockley.blogspot.com/2011/02/so-time-has-come-not-to-renew.html
But let’s not forget the every changing Skidmarx (one minute tactically opposing it, then later steaming in)
From indefensible to not impressed, within the blink of an eye.
modernityblog said,
March 3, 2011 at 3:18 pm
I’d recommend Sharizers read Bob’s threads and you will see Skidmarx in *constant* denial over anti-Jewish racism.
http://brockley.blogspot.com/2011/01/why-is-counterpunch-vile.html?showComment=1296146145824#c4251942721253014868
skidmarx said,
March 3, 2011 at 5:01 pm
I’d be glad for them to read that thread to see you avoiding the subject of the post.
From indefensible to not impressed,
What a pile of shit your mounding up to defend your lie. Iwasn’t impressed because Shamir would seem to be indefensible. Did you get any education at all, and should we be impressed with your constant references to mine? I mean, what are you trying to achieve by that? Is there some point you’re scoring, something I should be embarrassed by? You’re an idiot.
The rest of your case is more or less carefully worded bullshit. I’ve never had anything nice to say about Gilad Atzmon, but don’t happen to share your worldview in which he is constantly an important figure because the SWP can be constantly vilified for ever having anything to do with him, and anyone who does condemn him and them and shrilly as you is a racist. Seven Jewish Children I don’t know much about not having seen it, though of course the same rule applies that anyone who doesn’t share your view is a racist, though the most I can really say is that your charge that it must be racist because it has the word “Jewish” in the title, and a play called “Seven Muslim Children” would be automatically objectionable, is horseshit.
I think on the same thread you link to is my comment on Weir’s supposed “nasty racism”, I think I can happily stand by that.
Modernity is in constant denial about his dishonesty and hypocrisy.
modernityblog said,
March 3, 2011 at 5:38 pm
I am sure that Skidmarx’s condescending middle-class tone worked when he was in Oxbridge but it doesn’t work with the working-class.
His inability to engage with the question of why Counterpunch publishes a stream of antisemitic filth is noticeable.
It doesn’t occur to him to ask questions, or tried to form a conclusion from the evidence.
His inability to directly address these questions and others lead you to wonder why he expend so much energy denying the bleeding obvious.
For example, on the topic of Seven Jewish children,
1)initially he said he hadn’t seen it
2) then when provided with a link to the text of the play and even a video, he tries a different tack.
3) in the end he abdicates intellectually on the topic of anti-Jewish racism.
He can’t even decide if a play which negatively portrays one ethnic minority, and only one in a detrimental light could even be *considered* to be racist, that is the level of his wilful ignorance.
skidmarx said,
March 4, 2011 at 12:04 pm
)initially he said he hadn’t seen it
I still haven’t seen it. That hasn’t changed.
But let’s not let modernity wriggle away from the lie here.
Here’s what modernity said:
Skidmarx would? As he’s denied most other things:…
4) Counterpunch’s push of Israel Shamir, the Far Rightist.
and here’s what I said:
Some of the things Counterpunch does may be indefensible (the first couple of things Weinberg mentioned among them)
And what were those first couple of things?
Excuse me, running “journalism” by the Holocaust-denier (and apparent collaborationist with the Lukashenko dictatorship) Israel Shamir is not vile? Making a cause celebre of fellow Holocaust denier Ernst Zundel is not vile?
So let’s run through this slowly so that modernity can follow. I say that Counterpunch running articles by Israel Shamir is indefensible. Modernity says that I have denied Counterpunch’s push of Israel Shamir. To say so once may be an unfortunate misstatement, to repeat it when it is so obviously untrue is a lie. It doesn’t matter whether it was your primary focus, it’s still a lie. It doesn’t matter if I haven’t engaged with your agenda on Counterpunch (actually I questioned all the allegations against Counterpunch except on Shamir and Zundel, and you simply refused to discuss them, so that’s another gross misstatement), it’s still a lie.
One might wonder why he expend so much energy denying the bleeding obvious.Perhaps its because his whole internet methodology is based on twisting the words of others in the hope they mean what he wants them to mean, yet refuses ever to allow any probe of his own views in like manner, because he is a petty little control freak who thinks he knows what everyone is “really” saying and can determine the political agenda. Sadly delusional man who can’t stand up and admit that this accusation about Shamir is a whopper of a falsehood.
modernityblog said,
March 4, 2011 at 12:14 pm
Forgetting all the rest of skidmarx’s stupidity, reading his inane comments I can now understand why he has difficulty with searching out Seven Jewish children, even after I have provided a link to him.
so here again:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/video/2009/apr/25/seven-jewish-children-caryl-churchill
This is the link to Seven Jewish children, please click on it, view it and give us your opinion, if you can.
Alternatively, ask someone who knows how to use a computer to show you what to do.
Once more, click on the link and view Seven Jewish children.
modernityblog said,
March 4, 2011 at 12:28 pm
This another link:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/2009/feb/26/caryl-churchill-seven-jewish-children-play-gaza
And the complete text:
skidmarx said,
March 4, 2011 at 12:38 pm
still a liar
modernityblog said,
March 4, 2011 at 1:04 pm
So having watched the Seven Jewish Children, and read the text, will Skidmarx tell us if he thinks it is a play with a negative message about one ethnic minority?
skidmarx said,
March 4, 2011 at 4:59 pm
Comments 11,12,and 14 In which modernity seriously believes he’s changed the subject away from his lie about Israel Shamir
In some ways it’s a wondrous thing to observe. Having already pointed out to him that he was nakedly avoiding the subject, what does he do? Change the subject. Brilliant. Where any ordinary person might have gone “Yeah, it’s a fair cop, when I accused you of being a supporter of Israel Shamir it simply wasn’t true, now can I just apologise and move on”, modernity the master magician of malevolence goes almost for the full “I’ve got my fingers in my ears and I can’t hear you”, with only the briefest Forgetting all the rest of skidmarx’s stupidity to remind us that he’s been exposed as a liar, before he scuttles away to pretend like it never happened and he can set the agenda again.
A display of dimwittedness not really addressed to impress, as all we have to do is simply ask the question again, and he is back to stage one in Project Denial again. Why don’t you acknowledge that accusing me of being a supporter of Israel Shamir is a lie?
If you’re having trouble reading, here again in bold:
Why don’t you acknowledge that accusing me of being a supporter of Israel Shamir is a lie?
modernity said,
March 7, 2011 at 12:17 pm
“Why don’t you acknowledge that accusing me of being a supporter of Israel Shamir is a lie?”
Your reading skills still poor??
I have never said you are a supporter of Israel Shamir, I have made the point that you excused Counterpunch’s racism, and that Counterpunch pushes Shamir.
Different things, see?
Again, as I appreciate you were in the SWP and need things explaining ad nauseam.
If I wanted to accuse you of being weak on Israel Shamir up I would say “you are weak on Shamir” or ” you excuse Shamir’s racism”
But I didn’t
You are weak on Seven Jewish children,
You are weak on Gilad Atzmon
You can’t see the connection with Alison Wear and her racism.
You can’t understand Counterpunches’s motives.
That IS what I am saying.
But I haven’t seen you being particularly weak on Israel Shamir, otherwise I would say.
I am direct.
For the third time, Skidmarx, you are weak on Alison Weir’s racism, Counterpunch in general and you can’t see the problem with the play, Seven Jewish children.
I hope that explains my views sufficiently, if you like me to clarify please let me know, I fully appreciate that repetition and rote are qualities that you obviously emulate.
Finally, Skidmarx having read Seven Jewish children, do you acknowledge its racist content?
skidmarx said,
March 7, 2011 at 4:48 pm
I have never said you are a supporter of Israel Shamir, I have made the point that you excused Counterpunch’s racism, and that Counterpunch pushes Shamir
And what you actually said was:
he’s denied most other things:… Counterpunch’s continual slip into antisemitism and their push of Israel Shamir, the Far Rightist.
And what I actually said was:
Some of the things Counterpunch does may be indefensible (the first couple of things Weinberg mentioned among them)
To which your response was not, I’m sorry I was wrong to accuse you of defending Counterpunch’s association with Shamir, but to continue to accuse you of doing so.
For the third time, Skidmarx, you are weak on Alison Weir’s racism, Counterpunch in general and you can’t see the problem with the play, Seven Jewish children.
Again, you never provided any argument over Weir, you refused repeated invitation to discuss what was wrong with the rest of Weinberg’s rant against Counterpunch, and I still haven’t read the play. Why don’t you put a stop to your lies?