Sunday, 8 August 2010

WRH links to my comments elsewhere

WRH links to an article at a blog which turns out to be a response to one of my previous comments about Rivero VS Jones and anti-semitism generally. Lucky me!

The author seems open to comments, though they are moderated and don't appear until having passed. The author completely misrepresents my point, either accidentally or with malice. Who knows which?

I found the blog also just posted a full AFP/Willis Carto article penned by Chuck Baldwin. It also has an apparent welter of critical articles on Israel in its archives. "We're not anti-semitic.......but......"

Rivero did respond, and put up the first published reply. Hopefully another chance to raise some issues with Rivero infront of his own audience. ;)

The blog is called "No More Censorship .com" It has moderated comments. lol/.

Here's the 2 comments so far, and my posts which are (atm) awaiting moderation.
Michael Rivero:
August 8, 2010 at 7:01 pm

Dismissing criticism of Israel as anti-Semitic is like dismissing criticism of the Nazis as anti-Germanic. “Hitler didn’t do anything wrong; you just HATE THE GERMAN PEOPLE!”
August 8, 2010 at 7:30 pm

As long as people use the word “Jew” instead of “Zionist” you will be giving them the weapon to fight you with, once you use the word Zionist then they will have nothing to fight you with.
Nim Chimpsky:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
August 8, 2010 at 9:07 pm

I’m grateful for the opportunity to respond. Thank you. So few people are prepared to address their critics.
Your post re anti-semitism is built from “IF”.


If anti-semitism is “something that isn’t anti-semitism” then anti-semitism isn’t anti-semitic.


But what about *real* anti-semitism? If anti-semitism is defined by any of the earlier definitions, or your efforts here, then *real* anti-semitism doesn’t exist. You’ve renamed it out of existence. Just like lung cancer ceases to be lung cancer when you change the definitions. Lung cancer can become…..a cough instead. So, no patient has lung cancer, they have a cough. Will they get better in a few days though? Redefining the word (anti-semitism) to mean something else completely is completely disingenuous – an underhanded rhetorical trick.

Just keep it simple, and recognise anti-semitism is a hatred of jews and all things jewish. And it *exists*.

Do you recognise *genuine* anti-semitism exists? Are you capable of recognising it? Can you provide some examples of *what real anti-semitism actually is* — so that the reader might judge if you are capable of recognising the real thing? Because if you can’t, then what is your opinion on the subject worth?

I’d also like to put those questions to Mr Rivero – does anti-semitism exist, cn you show us you can recognise genuine anti-semitism? In lieu of which readers can discard the silly protests about ‘anti-semitism’ being ‘all criticism of Israel’.

Criticism of Israel is fine. And it is “ever so allowed”. Look around? There’s plenty of it. Every turn we are faced with CRISIS and LOOK AT WHAT THEY’RE DOING NOW! Yet still people mutter how “they own the press” and “control politics” and everything else.

Criticism of Israel becomes anti-semitic when the criticism is unwarranted. When Israel becomes an obsession. When other states do the same without arousing similar comment and fury. When it’s viewed unfairly. When it blurs the lines of the targets of its attack. When it crosses from attacks on Israel to attacks on Jewish religion, ethnicity, etc. It’s pretty simple, really, though on the margins it gets trickier, of course.

Criticism of Israel or jews is also anti-semitic when its done by anti-semites, Nazis, fascists. Such people use criticism of Israel as a front to expound their sick agenda. They hide their hatred of jews behind the protective shield of claims about “we’re only criticising Israel”. In such ways, the far-right and the anti-semites exploit peoples’ good intentions and insinuate themselves into discourse otherwise denied them.

Neo-nazis “only criticise Israel” too…..right?

I mean, how do you tell the difference? And so how do you know who is really feeding you all this anti-Israeli stuff? It would be stupid to imagine the far-right weren’t doing this. And they are – there are long threads at Stromfront providing the means to implement such a strategy.

[BTW There are interesting connections between Nazism and Arab Ultranationalism and its production of luminaries like Yasser Arafat, the Grand Mufti, The MuslimBrotherhood, Hamas, Osama Bin Laden etc. This holds true even today, where the US far-right elicits connections with Islam.]

People like Mr Rivero are not simply “criticising Israel”. Mr Rivero indulges in the crudest Holocaust denial, feeding his readers swathes of thoroughly discredited far-right rubbish. Without ever putting his audience in touch with the real facts, even as a counter to the claims he carries (which all emanate from the American and European far-right. It’s nazism dressed-up as scholarship. It’s a con – like so much else that passes as “just criticising Israel”.)

Mr Rivero for example also hosts articles by the late Curt Maynard, a violent racist. Mr Rivero promoted Curt Maynard extenisvely, evenm hosting him on his radio show. Never did Rivero raise the issues of race, which around Curt Maynard can only be considered as “carefully avoiding the topic”.

Go and look at Curt Maynard’s writings? He’s “only criticising Israel”, huh? Rubbish. Maynard was violent, and a racist. HE was something of a celebrity amongst his Stormfront and Vanguard News Network friends – the Holocaust deniers, fascists and thugs. These are all National Socialist (ie Nazi) connections – and Rivero is familiar with them all. Rivero promotes them. But he never tells you the dear reader that these are genuine fascists. Instead, Rivero will promote some far-right propagandist claiming Israel is fascist. Funny – Israel’s supposed fascism is a dreadful thing, apparently, but the genuine fascism of Rivero’s friends is fine – it doesn’t get any critical comment. But it does get Rivero’s support, his publicity, an audience, dissemination and protection under the aegis of “we’re only criticising Israel”.

So, whilst Mr Rivero criticises the supposed fascism of Israel, he is silent on the genuine fascism of his friends, his colleagues, the work he promotes. Under such circumstances, Rivero’s criticism is certainly anti-semitic……as he criticises Israel for being “Nazi” whilst promoting Nazis and Nazism himself.

Would Mr Rivero deny he knew Curt Maynard was such a racist? Would he deny he knew Curt was cushty with Stormfront, VNN et al?

Likewise, does Mr Rivero dent he knows who John deNugent is? Deny he failed to inform his audience of John de Nugent’s far-right positions and history? Does Rivero deny he heavily promotes Willis Carto, and his various propganda organs? Does Rivero deny Willis Carto is considered “N America’s leading anti-semite”? That Carto sponsors Holocaust denial conferences, and invites the leading lights of N American and European fascism? Such as the former Einsatzgruppen Officer (involved in the holocaust which Rivero denies ever happened)?

With such a profile as Rivero’s, all this faux outrage about being considered “anti-semitic” is a joke. Likewise, efforts to redefine the term so as to exclude jew-hate are fabulously cynical.

The far-right is playing public opinion with this “we’re only criticising Israel” lark.

Criticise Israel all you like? But don’t pretend that anti-semitism doesn’t exist. Don’t stoop to redefining the meaning simply to exzclude one’s self. Don’t pretend Nazis and jew-haters aren’t using peoples’ good intentions and piggybacking their (unpopular and disgusting) Nazism onto progressive and well intentioned liberalism.

Until there’s some evidence that writers can spot genuine anti-semitism, and that they take a strong position against it and act accordingly, then all this blather and whining about “false” accusations of anti-semitism should be ignored for the tripe it so obviously is.

I’d like to continue the conversation. It’s rare I am allowed to do so in such circles – I am usually prevented from posting, by these self-same people whom claim “the jews control the media” etc. So I appreciate your apparent wish to do so. I’m quite capable of remaining civil, as you can see? At worst – we might completely disagree? No big deal? So let’s continue?

Nim Chimpsky:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
August 8, 2010 at 9:25 pm

OP: I received a comment this evening which states that I and anyone who disagrees with Israel and it’s policies are anti-Semitic.

I did not say that. At all. You should look at the reasons why you think that is what I said. I did not say that. That is not my point, at all.

Further, in another article here, you have republished a whole article by AFP (AmericanFreePress).

AFP is Willis Carto propaganda organ – Willis Carto is N AMerica’s leading anti-semite, according to some. Hardly a way to prove your credentials in an argument over whether your site is anti-semitic or not.

Why do you promote fascist propaganda behind a website called “nomorecensorship”? Do you think fascists maintain free speech and oppose censorship more than liberalism? (or whatever you think the USA’s political system currently is)?

You are just more of the same: promoting fascism from behind a banner of liberalism?

Do you not know whom Willis Carto is? Go see?

Nim Chimpsky:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
August 8, 2010 at 10:08 pm

Can you give me a reason why you have 6 entries for Israel in your list of topics, but none for USA, none for Islam, none for Terrorism, none for Imperialism, none for fascism, none for nazism, none for racism, none for anti-semitism, none for feminism, none for socialism, none for …..?

Your agenda – you can have whatever topics you like.

But your interests still speak. SO, why all these entries for Israel? Presumably you have never reported a story which features genuine anti-semitism, yet there are 6 categories on Israel alone. But none for Turkey. None for Sri Lanka. None for Sudan, Chechenya, Tibet, China, Russia, EU, S America, Africa, Nagorny Karabak……nothing. But 6 for Israel.

Your topics exclude an awful lot, but are especially exhaustive about only…..Israel…and other items on the agenda of the far-right.

Might I ask you to explain this apparent…..obsession?
We'll see if the comments get published, and if there's any response from the author, Rivero or unknown others.....? I'm hopeful - how can "" seriously prevent such posts being published? Of course they could censor it and it would expose their name as cant. We'll see....


socrates said...

This is what you do best, TLNL. This is very impressive. I'm in the middle of your big post at the link. I give the website kudos for not censoring you. Have you taken a good look at his website? I haven't and am not sure I have the time. I do like how you have hit the ball into Rivero's court. I totally understand what you're saying. Rivero hosts Holocaust denial, Maynard, and many other crap links. He is fixated on Israel. I like how you are not defending Israel's actions against Palestinians. To me this is all about neonazis gumming up the democratic works. I agree that it is very difficult to see much difference between Rivero and Stormfront. Perhaps this is why Jones had to let Rivero go. The only thing missing from WRH is a Heil Hitler banner at the top of the website.

Ah ok, you point out that this blogger is hosting Wills Carto. I'm going back and forth reading between this entry and that blog you link to. So far you're showing amazing composure and the ability to make clear points as a gentleman willing to play fair in debate. Good show, lad. This is the TLNL I find fasacinating to watch in real time. p:>

The dude has published your posts. Give him a chance and see how it plays out. Maybe he'll play fair also, or maybe he'll go the Big Dan-Agent99 route.

Damn, the guy just repeated his simplistic views. He acknowledged you have critiqued his Carto source. He explained well why he is interested in Israel, but he seems to have dodged your exact questions. Maybe he is leaving those for Rivero to answer, especially concerning Curt Maynard?

Wow, someone then posted that as long as the Joooos continue to control the world, being called an anti-semite is a badge of honour. The blog owner thanked him. TLNL, it looks like you are on some idiot website, and this guy is not going to answer your question. He is like you said either ignorant or playing dumb.

What a disappointment. He's ignoring you. The guy is clearly a neonazi, conspiracy theory freak, and you appear to be wasting your time. You tried.

So basically Rivero and people like this are part and parcel of Stormfront. That is clear. That is why it appears Jones had to cut the cord from such scum.

the_last_name_left said...

Thank you kindly, sir. ;)

Y, the dude has avoided the issues. At least he published it, and it's still up at WRH, so maybe someone might see it and wonder.....

oh well - gotta try, I suppose. :D

Martin Firestein said...

I would've given up on this guy the minute I saw him link to American Free Press.

the_last_name_left said...

I hadn't noticed AFP at first. I guess I was taken in by the faux open attitude, the "anti-censorship" claims etc. Just like one is supposed to be taken in by it.

These people must know what they're doing. If not, mental illness must be a possibility.

The dude at NMC - did you read his life-story? He had to learn that 'everyone's just the same'....that the racism he'd been taught was a crock, etc etc. Army dude too. Suddenly he's so astute and insightful he needs a blog to lecture others on setting the world to rights.


I mean, it's really important for the world that ex-grunt racists setup websites and repeat ad infinitum the same old shit found at the websites they link to, right? Repeat to fade.......why? why do they bother? what do they think it achieves? All these places just post other peoples' articles, and repeat the same dreary old "dem jooos, dem joos, dem....joo joos"

And here's a thing - have any of these "troofer/racist/nazi" places ever offered any sort of solution to the problems?

They never offer any sort of solution?

OK - sometimes they'll say Israel should withdraw to the green line, 67 borders, UN borders, whatever. But that's it, and it's hardly something you won't find elsewhere in even mainstream discussion. It isn't anything new.

Aside from that, what do they ever offer?

I've asked again and again what people expect to do about supposed "undue jewish influence", for eample. Nobody offers anything. I know why, too - because to do anything they would need the Nuremburg laws and a chart depicting the racial definition of "jew". They'd need the Nazi Civil Service laws preventing jews from working in it etc.

The point of finding a solution - which people avoid - forces the issue - the bureaucracy and demands of law would require recognition of everyone's race - so as to discern jews. It's a move into racism - law based on race - rac-ism. Not just an endorsement of racial prejudice, but a whole system founded on race : rac-ism. I think most Westerners would instinctively reject any such suggestion nowadays. Sure, the West isn't free from racial prejudice at all, but it surely doesn't support racism as a central social doctrine. No way.

So that's why these (crypto-nazi) kooks can never offer any solution to their problems with Jews - they know it will effectively expose them as the racists they are but which they deny. So instead they just keep complaining, and whining "we're only criticising Israel".

One positive thing is the low level of intellect displayed by all these haters. I'm sure some are much smarter than I, but as a movement there's a real absence of any intellectual drive. It's vacuous - repeated memes rather than analysis - repetition of lies - distortions etc. Nothing new. Nothing ever. Two leaders of this Troof movement - Jones and Rivero - hardly intellectual powerhouses? God - their world is so dreary....they twist facts, redefine words at will, assume what they like.....and just keep regurgitating it. Hoping for critical mass, or something? What future do they want? How are they going to get it? What will it take? This just doesn't appear - in public, at least?

It's thin gruel, isn't it?

Martin Firestein said...

Saying "if semitic means X, then I'm anti-semitic" is faulty logic because:

1. it presumes that whatever beliefs the Israelis have towards the Palestinians, or however they act towards them (militarily or otherwise):

a. they all feel that way
b. every Jew (even those not in Israel feel that way)

which I don't believe is possible. I mean, I don't know how many Jews there are in the world, but I find it ridiculous to believe we ALL feel the exact same way about any particular issue.

2. being "semitic" has nothing to do with actions. Semites are a race/ethnicity/followers of a religion. Since when does it make any sense to link (confuse) the two?

the_last_name_left said...

yep - ridiculous on both counts, Mr Firestein.

Good name that, I think - Martin Firestein. You'll go places with a name like that, I have no doubt. ;)

These attempts at defining semitism, in some effort to change the sense of the term anti-semitism are pathetic. and outrageous, truth be told. I really do think it's an example of Orwellian newspeak.

Don't they know that what they are doing is dishonest? I'm sure some of them do, and some don't.

I can't imagine how I'd feel if everywhere I read "jew" I instead would see the word "welsh". it'd be pretty astonishing, and extremely disturbing.

And then to see people redefine what anti-welshness meant, simply so as to exclude anti-welshness from the definition? I'd be thinking the world had gone utterly mad. But on they go......oblivious to their apparent madness. lol. I laugh, though I know it's serious. It's just so preposterous, I can't but help laugh.

And people not only swallow it they set out to promote it - making websites, videos, online communities, alternative news outlets, everything. I don't like madness, I find it really quite disturbing. That's the internet though, hey? :D

the_last_name_left said...

the thing of jews as race and/or religion leads to a lot of confusion. it's a sort of duality which people have trouble dealing with, and to be fair, it does make for complexity.

it cuts both ways - the complexity can be exploited, like any ambiguity. By all parties?

I try to keep BEAJ in mind, and Trotsky, or Einstein, or whatever. Quite possible to be an atheist jew. And quite possible to convert to judaism as a religion too. If I wanted to convert, and did, I'd be "a jew"? My children would be? At least to some degree, and surely if the mother was jewish? Just like being Scottish? Or like being Islamic? And both at the same time. So it is complex, and that complexity/ambivalence is exploited, I suppose.

I don't understand why people care about it so much. Why does it matter to them? Because it's about the "other"? something exotic and unknown? threatening somhow? because it gives them avenues to express their anti-social impulses? their racial angst and suspicion? their fury at dispossession and inequality? does anti-semitism legitimise these things somehow? All of it and more, I suppose. odd.