Footer Pages

goebbels controlling radio broadcast

Edelweiss, Mondoweiss RIP

goebbels controlling radio broadcast

 

Changes to the Mondoweiss comment policy

As written by Philip Weiss and Adam Horowitz on October 24, 2012
and deciphered by etominusipi’s 7th-generation Quantum Neural Net

Several times in the life of this site, we’ve revised the comments policy so as to progressively cut back on spontaneity and freedom of expression. We’re about to do so again, and this time in spades! — no more fiddling about on the periphery. As a result of a far-reaching shift in our underlying game plan we shall be moving the goal-posts onto another, and hopefully altogether more level and even, playing field.
Whereas in the past we have published comments on the basis of whether they abide by certain public and clearly stated ground rules, our new policy will involve heavy editorial censorship of the content of comments. Yes, that is a purely subjective test, if you want to cavil, but we have no other choice if we are to obey the directive we have received from you-know-where.
Obviously this new line can most easily be put into place by representing it as a result of the recent cleverly orchestrated furore whipped up over purportedly anti-semitic comments posted from the Free Gaza Movement Twitter account. That incident has served as the bridgehead for a carefully timed putsch within the leadership of the movement for Palestinian human rights. Given how many of our sayan comrades have now been successfully infiltrated into the broader movement, this e-Naqba announced that now is the time to show our hand – we wish, finally, oy veh!, to give up all the crocodile tears and hand-wringing over the sufferings of Palestinians, who, in a final analysis, have only themselves to blame. They were the wrong people in the wrong place at the wrong time. Their proximity to Greater Israel is a geographical accident. If there have been fatalities and maimed children let us also remember the road-death toll. Far more people die as a result of road traffic accidents than through the actions of the IDF. Accidents, by their very nature, are not always pleasant. There are likely to be casualties. But at least the Palestinians have been awarded a global Victim Status that is the envy of many of us here on the Mondoweiss editorial board. And still they complain! Some people goyim seem to possess neither manners nor any sense of gratitude.
What we shall now focus on is to discuss Israeli policy in the context of Jewish history and Jewish identity, and do so in an inoffensively uncritical manner. Clearly a lot of people, including many in our community, do not want to have these conversations about the Naqba and its continuing consequences and regard them now to be quite unnecessary if our real goal is to serve as an ideological support for the indefinite continuation of the permanent low-grade Middle East conflict which serves Israeli interests in so many ways. So we simply will not tolerate criticism of Israel or of Jews, any Jews, any more. We are sick and tired of serving as a platform for this type of discussion. Although we have long ago been very careful with main posts, the truth about the Naqba has shown itself to possess an ugly habit of rearing its head in the comment section, and we just don’t see this as productive any more. From here on in, the Mondoweiss comment section will no longer serve as a forum which tolerates any statement of uncomfortable facts about Jewish power or about Zionism as the driving factor in Israeli and US policy in the Middle East.

We are making this change because such discussions often show Israel to be a toxic, racist, society, and this scares off those who might otherwise be drawn to the issues this site concerns itself with. Obviously some of our own posts have broached issues of Jewish identity; and we will continue to publish carefully vetted critiques of Jewish identity construction and generous analyses of the Jewish political establishment—what Tony Judt praised as the most powerful Jewish community since the days of the pre-Khazarian Roman Empire. But we’re going to sharply curtail commenters’ freedom to address Palestinian suffering and oppression as having anything to do with Israel or with Jews. Likewise we shall implement zero tolerance towards any poster who, explicitly, or even (by selection of words) implicitly, seems to us to oppose in any manner whatsoever the unquestionable axiom that all forms of collective Jewish community-building are very positive. What is good for the Jews is good for humanity and if people won’t recognise this obvious truth it’s about time we rubbed a few goyish faces in the excrement pour encourager les autres.

We believe passionately in free speech and expect that these censored or excommunicated commenters will find some white suprematist hate site where they can continue their blatantly anti-semitic so-called conversations. In any case we really don’t give a shit! We don’t want free speech here; it interferes too much with our work. And as we’ve said, we’ve been given our orders. In matters concerning pipers and tunes, it’s crucially important to understand very precisely the role-differentiation between players and payers, and to recognise our own unique place in this ancient bierarchy.

In addition to censorship and proscription, we will be redoubling our effort to implement our current comments policy in as restrictive a manner as possible. That means no serious disagreement with the editors, and no trolling, except for those whom we are informed have been sent here to develop skills in the more advanced levels of hasbara disinformation and forum disruption. We want the comment section to be a constructive addition to our ongoing and successful hasbara training program. Serious discussions, or attempts to articulate unpleasant truths about Israel, the treasonous role of dual Israeli-US citizens, 911 truth etc. etc. etc., can only serve to undermine that aim.

What’s allowed? What’s not? We’re going to have an extremely tight screen on comments, almost as if they’re letters to the the Guardian, deciding ourselves which are near enough to the new Mondoweiss directive on community values to be posted. In doing this we realize that we’ll inevitably lose most, perhaps all, of the really perceptive and insightful comments on Mondoweiss, and we understand this change will lead to the elimination of meaningful debate and any useful and open-minded exchange of opinions. We regard this as a loss, but we don’t see any way around it. They are feeling rattled in Herzliya HQ, and the time has come to kick ass. As Chaim Weizmann advised: when the goyim are hot on your scent, it’s time to re-read your Goebbels.

As I have often remarked, even an urbane and highly intellectual American Jew is not so big that he can’t shed a few crocodile tears when the occasion calls for a sentimental display of emotion. And Adam agrees fully with me on this. We have both greatly valued the previous comments section. We’ve all learned a lot from commenters here about how some of the more articulate goyim view our implementation of the program layed down long ago and formulated in the forged Protocols . Indeed several of the commenters have taken the shabat goy oath, and become contributors. Annie Robbins wouldn’t be an assistant here had it not been for the comment section, and we will, in one rather convoluted sense, regret to lose the insight, knowledge and passion that many of the commenters who used to post here feel about the issues we used to cover. We are not such fools that we can’t see that this change will lead to highlighting the dullest part and most intellectually tame contributions to our comment section, while eliminating the best it had to offer.

We are proud of this site because we think it has a vital and historic role to play in reforming American policy. Clearly the rich comment section is not incidental to that role, but a major part of the life of the site. Please help by kow-towing to this ludicrous and blatant change of policy and trying to be more ‘thoughtful’ in your remarks.

Otherwise you can piss right off.

Orders are orders.

74 Responses to Edelweiss, Mondoweiss RIP

  1. Lasse Wilhelmson October 25, 2012 at 6:17 pm #

    To make it easy, I suggest deLib only permit “Jewish self-haters” to take part in the discussion. There are two reasons for this. First, they are extremely few, and second “Jewish self-hate” is just a station on the way to humanity.

    To be serious, I am really getting sick of the Jews in the Palestinian solidarity movement, and especially the marxist “anti-Zionists”.

    Since I left marxism and do not any longer identify myself as a Jew, I have started to feel sorry for these people because they behave in a way that makes humans with integrity dislike them.

    But above that I am even more disturbed about the Palestinians who every time they comment on an article I write, first feel they have to tell me that they do not object to Jews per se …

    http://www.deliberation.info/arabnyheter-interviews-lasse-wilhelmson/

  2. Lasse Wilhelmson October 25, 2012 at 6:48 pm #

    Sorry, I forgot about the philo-semites among the intellectuals, to whom the Jewish marxist “anti-Zionists” are the heroes. When will they become aware that they promote hatred towards Jews?

  3. David Holden October 25, 2012 at 8:33 pm #

    …just a station on the way to humanity…

    that’s pretty well true for all of us at every stage of our lives.

    i find it useful to regard certain normative ethical concepts, for example humanity and sanity, as unattainable ideals – by analogy with important scientific abstractions concerning the physical world like perfect vacuum, ideal gas, absolute zero or point charge.

    unattainable does not mean unapproachable. the sequence 0,1,2,3,4,…. approaches infinity, but will never get there. a large number is every bit as finite as a smaller number.

    from my own inadequate reading of the teaching attributed to ‘Jesus’, our selves are the only things that it is kosher for us to hate.

    John 12:24-26 (King James Version)

    24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.

    25 He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.

    26 If any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall also my servant be: if any man serve ‘me’, him will ‘my Father’ ‘honour’.

    needless to say, such texts are easier to misunderstand and misapply than to understand and put into action.

    but at the risk of offending our resident atheist faction, i will briefly state that in my current understanding when ‘Jesus’ says me that means the Way, the Truth and the Life and my Father means the masculine aspect of the Divinity which creates, sustains and eventually dissolves the kinds of materiality (universes) which we encounter here and, indeed, into the midst of which we are ‘incarnated’ (literally ‘embodied’)- just as the Word (the Logos, the Cosmic order, the essence of Creation) was made flesh

    there is much that is lovably human in Jewish tradition, and much that is deeply spiritual. but it is for the most part almost completely masked by the carapace formed by the misguided indoctrination of chosen-ness. this is not actually so exceptional. it is only the recent material success of the Jewish tribe that makes it seem so to some people.

    to oversimplify:

    a gentile ‘Christian’ who puts on their Sunday best clothes to go to church, sing a few hymns, mumble a few prayers etc generally does it, however they might protest against such a realistic description, either as a convenient, and perhaps soothing, social habit, as an inculcated obsession, or to be seen of men. likewise the average Muslim is imbued with a ghastly religiously indoctrinated sense of self-righteousness and superiority to non-Muslims that is only increased with the number of prostrations made.

    but, as Jesus also said “Let the dead bury their dead.” and after that timely interment we may be less subject to the temptation to speak ill of them.

  4. David Holden October 25, 2012 at 9:05 pm #

    btw Lasse, i just read the interview in ‘Arab News’ – it’s an admirably concise summary of your personal journey.

    i have also had my brushes with left deviationism, but as a rather confused individual the particular trappings of the various thought-systems i have experimented with are of no particular significance (except for their educational value) since at all times i lacked the mental clarity which might have given me some less than totally subjective view of what, in fact, i was doing.

    as a personal aside – this is a very silly question, but i feel drawn to ask it – have you ever met Ryszard Kapuscinski?

    • Jonathon Blakeley October 25, 2012 at 9:16 pm #

      Nope never heard of the guy.
      but,
      I have always considered myself
      as a bohemian deviant,
      in search of the active ingredient.
      :-)

    • Lasse Wilhelmson October 26, 2012 at 2:08 pm #

      No David, I never met or read him. Why do you ask?

      • David Holden October 26, 2012 at 4:30 pm #

        it was just off the cuff, maybe i felt some resemblance of style. he is a Polish journalist, very widely travelled, who seems to combine thoughtful reportage with a sane, humanistic outlook. actually i know little about him. a London friend who moved to Poznan sent me a short book of Kapuscinski’s travelogues Lapidarium V to help me improve my rather slight reading knowledge of Polish.
        until now i have never looked up any information about him on the www. it seems he died a few years ago, making his bio dates (1932-2007).

        riszard kapuscinski

        it is curious that something about his writing reminded me of Herodotus, as i now see he published a book just before he died called (Svensk): På resa med Herodotos.

        some people accuse him of untruthfulness, though this seems to be a misunderstanding of his literary intentions

        He has been voted the greatest journalist of the 20th century. In an unparalleled career, Ryszard Kapuściński transformed the humble job of reporting into a literary art, chronicling the wars, coups and bloody revolutions that shook Africa and Latin America in the 1960s and 70s.

        But a new book claims that the legendary Polish journalist, who died three years ago aged 74, repeatedly crossed the boundary between reportage and fiction-writing – or, to put it less politely, made stuff up.

        In a 600-page biography of the writer published in Poland yesterday, Artur Domoslawski says Kapuściński often strayed from the strict rules of “Anglo-Saxon journalism”. He was often inaccurate with details, claiming to have witnessed events he was not present at. On other occasions, Kapuściński invented images to suit his story, departing from reality in the interests of a superior aesthetic truth, Domoslawski claims.

        Domoslawski told the Guardian: “Sometimes the literary idea conquered him. In one passage, for example, he writes that the fish in Lake Victoria in Uganda had grown big from feasting on people killed by Idi Amin. It’s a colourful and terrifying metaphor. In fact, the fish got larger after eating smaller fish from the Nile.”

        he was quite a keen ‘young communist after WWII’ – his view shifted after 1956, though i think he retained his party card. i am drawn to him, but have not worked on the Polish much as yet. here is a quote from him, about Algiers and what he identifies as two distinct strains of Islamic sensibility:

        …I began to see Algiers as one of the most fascinating and dramatic places on earth. In the small space of this beautiful but congested city intersected two great conflicts of the contemporary world. The first was the one between Christianity and Islam (expressed here in the clash between colonizing France and colonized Algeria). The second, which acquired a sharpness of focus immediately after the independence and departure of the French, was a conflict at the very heart of Islam, between its open, dialectical — I would even say “Mediterranean” — current and its other, inward-looking one, born of a sense of uncertainty and confusion vis-à-vis the contemporary world, guided by fundamentalists who take advantage of modern technology and organizational principles yet at the same time deem the defense of faith and custom against modernity as the condition of their own existence, their sole identity.

        […] In Algiers one speaks simply of the existence of two varieties of Islam — one, which is called the Islam of the desert, and a second, which is defined as the Islam of the river (or of the sea). The first is the religion practiced by warlike nomadic tribes struggling to survive in one of the world’s most hostile environments, the Sahara. The second Islam is the faith of merchants, itinerant peddlers, people of the road and of the bazaar, for whom openness, compromise, and exchange are not only beneficial to trade, but necessary to life itself.”
        Travels with Herodotus

        hope you didn’t mind me asking such an odd question ;-)

        • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 26, 2012 at 4:35 pm #

          Curzio Malaparte and Gregor von Rezzori belong to the same genre.
          Malaparte was all the rage in his time but now it’s hard to find people who have even heard of him. Well, not in Illinois at least….

  5. Jonathon Blakeley October 25, 2012 at 9:07 pm #

    Brilliantly funny, I am loving your Quantum Neural Net translations.

  6. Jay Knott October 26, 2012 at 3:42 am #

    I commented on Mondoweiss – http://tinyurl.com/8wb2gb5 – but when I added “The real question is why was white apartheid abolished, but Jews are still allowed it, in other words, why are Jews treated as special by Western societies?”, they disallowed it. Silly me. I should know better by now.

    Atzmon said Philip Weiss is honest, because he claims he opposes Zionism because it’s against Jewish interests – http://tinyurl.com/44vnv6u – but this always sounded unlikely. The Greta Berlin saga shows the Mondoweiss people are like the rest of the J-left; they are not part of the solution.

    • David Holden October 26, 2012 at 1:50 pm #

      well that’s just the kind of question that they are now disallowing by policy.

      my impression – and it was only this, as i haven’t visited the site very frequently – was that Philip Weiss is/was a ‘cultural’ Jew but not one of Gilad Atzmon’s category III Jews (if i remember the nomenclature correctly).

      that’s why i (obliquely) raised the question of what has changed. there are various possibilities.

      1. W has changed through trauma – e.g. some family member’s bad experience, perhaps his mother was insulted in a restaurant by a Palestinian man. or his mistress who was strongly anti-zionist has left him for an enemy of Israel.

      2. W has got older and this new tack is his personal way of becoming more conservative.

      3. W hasn’t changed. this is just a new phase of a pre-planned strategy, and the more liberal past of the blog was merely a set-up.

      4. W has been brainwashed in some way, e.g. he has just acquired a zionist mistress who won’t let him have sex unless he first kisses her signed photograph of Bibi.

      5. W has been bribed. Satan has taken him to a high place and offered him goodies, and unlike the gospel story, he has caved in.

      6. W has been threatened. e.g. he has some dark secret, and the Mossad are now using it to turn him into a loyal sayan.

      7. some combination of any of the hypothesis-categories 1-6

      big changes require a definite causality. for me personally the change of mistress idea seems to be in pole position in this particular case, which is a type 1+2+4 hypothesis. but this is a mere guess

      • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 26, 2012 at 4:30 pm #

        #8
        No zionist dominatrix, no restaurant trauma and , more important, NO CHANGE.
        Philozion Weiss has always admitted his true allegiance, per his interview with Gilad Atzmon in which he said:
        “I believe all people act out of self-interest. And Jews who define themselves at some level as Jews — like myself for instance — are concerned with a Jewish self-interest. Which in my case is: an end to Zionism.”

        He may have acceded to the interview not out of respect for GA’s stature in the discourse but, on the contrary, because he felt smugly sure he could best him with his “candor.”
        He has put up with atzmonoidal comments on Jewish identity politics while he felt they were inconsequential. Now that that the Goyische riffraff has been emboldened to become uppity he has simply decided it is imprudent to continue giving them a forum on his site. The time has come to circle the wagons, as the zionist settlers in the Far West used to say

        • Deadbeat October 26, 2012 at 8:13 pm #

          What Weiss did in his interview with Atzmon is admit to his JEWISHNESS using Atzmon vernacular. The real problem is that these “progressive” and pseudo-Left Jews is running this semantic meme of Zionism vs. Judaism when Zionism IS the outgrowth of Judaism.

          Aztmon makes clear that he doesn’t analyze Judaism the religion and I think that is a huge hole missing in his analysis. Folks on the Christian Right on the other hand makes the analysis of Judaism the religion revealing its dark underpinnings. These dark underpinnings is probably why the “Left” has a disdain for religion altogether thus deliberately maintaining religious ignorance amongst its followers.

          Therefore the argument of “Zionism vs Judaism” is rhetorical and being used by Leftist Jews and a pretense of solidarity with anti-Zionist in order to infiltrate and weaken their movement and discourse.

          Jews are “Jews” who as Weiss say are looking out for “their” interests and increasingly people are coming to he understanding that Jewish interests means supremacy, global domination, and the protocols of Zion.

          To express that fact my posting are now banned from Information Clearing House thus MondoWeiss isn’t the only one.

          • fool me once... October 26, 2012 at 8:53 pm #

            @DB
            “Therefore the argument of “Zionism vs Judaism” is rhetorical and being used by Leftist Jews and a pretense of solidarity with anti-Zionist in order to infiltrate and weaken their movement and discourse.”
            Where does that leave Naturai Karta? The “Zionism vs Judaism” is a foundation block of NK. They are well respected by goy anti-zionists but if as you say “Jews are “Jews”…
            Am I reading you right?

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 26, 2012 at 8:58 pm #

            Naturai Karta are respected by goy anti-zionists, I think, because they consider Israel illegitimate on the basis of Torah’s prescription “wait until Messiah comes.” Nevertheless they are supremacists to the core.

          • fool me once... October 26, 2012 at 10:20 pm #

            @AT
            Bringing in the NPD aspect, would you say the agreeable, pacifying presentation of the NT is a manipulative manifestation of a dominant NPD tribal trait, since, as you so coldly put it;
            “Nevertheless they are supremacists to the core.”
            That’s a sobering thought/reality.
            .
            NPD
            “People who are overly narcissistic commonly feel rejected, humiliated and threatened when criticised. To protect themselves from these dangers, they often react with disdain, rage, and/or defiance to any slight criticism, real or imagined.[16] To avoid such situations, some narcissistic people withdraw socially and may feign modesty or humility.”
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 27, 2012 at 12:06 am #

            No, fmo, I don’t believe the NKs are manipulative. I think they are honest believers. Their peaceful attitude is not meant to deceive. It is as sincere as that of the friendly but a bit standoffish guy sitting in the train station without fretting, patiently, quietly confident that HIS train will come, maybe tomorrow, maybe in a year.
            Until they decide that the Messiah has come (false alarms were only given by the Lubavitch gang so far) they want no truck with Israel and decry the zionist sin of Jewish hubris in creating it.
            What will they do on the joyous day? Peaceful as they are in the waiting room, I don’t trust anyone to whom g-d has spoken and informed that the divine task of enlightening and leading the dumb semi-animals falls– a heavy but sacred burden–on his tribe.

          • fool me once... October 27, 2012 at 1:47 am #

            “…quietly confident that HIS train will come, maybe tomorrow, maybe in a year”…
            to take him to the place
            he covets from afar
            hopes spring eternal
            on Yom Kippur
            the model of patience
            bundle in hand
            on a fantastical journey
            like sandal shod sand
            grain by grain daily
            replenishing the form
            with peaceful humility
            forsaken forlorn
            sincere though not trusted
            he bides his time
            no sad camp songs for him
            to the end of the line
            last stop will be a station
            like christ’s in the tomb
            a chosen ones resurrection
            in a surrogate womb

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 27, 2012 at 2:05 am #

            Beautiful.
            Except for the uncalled for reference to the One who was not a prophet, much less a Messiah and only caused trouble.
            But I like the image in the last two lines too much to lose it. Hey, let’s keep it

          • fool me once... October 27, 2012 at 2:37 am #

            @AT
            Thanks and fyi the “station” was a reference to the catholic ritual of the 14th “Station of the Cross” where JC lain in the tomb, awaits his resurrection. A tenuous link to the A.Pope reference further up. All in good jest :D
            Also a bit of punc may have helped clarify the “chosen one’s” identity, not christ but the NK commuter.

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 27, 2012 at 2:51 am #

            Noted and appreciated but I was worried about, you know, jewish sensitivities

          • Deadbeat October 27, 2012 at 2:57 am #

            @fmo

            What I am saying is that important tenets of Judaism appears to have basis in supremacist ideology and hatred of Christianity’s calls for brotherhood.

            Therefore those who choose to identify themselves as “Jewish” or practice Judaism cannot divorce themselves that foundation. Either they accept the idea of supremacy or they reject it. Thus, as Ariadna points out, the Naturi Karta while critical of Zionism, embraces supremacy.

            This is the kind of information that I’ve uncovered, unfortunately as Ariadna points out, from the Christian Right.

            Why isn’t the Left, claiming to stand on the side of justice, rejecting Judaism? Clearly this is a rhetorical question as we know much of the Left is controlled and operated by Jews. As Jay Knott shows the duplicity of the Left’s stand against White Supremacy while concealing and deflecting anything regarding Jewish Supremacy. This is rather ironic as racism towards blacks originates in the Talmud.

            These aforementioned conclusions, I believe, are why my commentaries are now banned on ICH. As I began to question the veracity of the Left (and lets face it, Noam Chomsky an avowed Zionist is presented as the Left’s intellectual leader) I started to read and listen to the anti-Zionist right for more information — and got plenty.

            I believe we are now at the point where humanity has to question the very basis and ideology of Judaism itself. These supremacist teaching are being handed down from generation to generation and is now the greatest threat to humanity.

            To come to the conclusion that the problem is inherent to Judaism and to openly express that is why Mondoweiss and ICH while pretending open discourse find such radical perspectives intolerable.

          • fool me once... October 27, 2012 at 11:56 am #

            @DB
            Thank you for the explanatory and illuminating reply. I found these interesting though sometimes jarring clips, on a different take of judaism. They’re about 15mins each but worth a watch;
            http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xtfjls_israeli-finds-out-he-is-not-a-true-jew-according-to-the-holy-scriptures_news?search_algo=2
            .
            http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xpgfj3_pt-2-so-called-jewish-rats-finds-out-they-re-not-the-real-jews_news
            On the second clip the front man at 16.25mins, judging by the look on his brothers faces, ain’t got consensus on “his personal little thing”.

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 26, 2012 at 8:54 pm #

            I agree with you for the most part.

            “Aztmon makes clear that he doesn’t analyze Judaism the religion and I think that is a huge hole missing in his analysis.”
            1. Yes and no.
            GA SAYS he is not criticizing Judaism or Jews as Jews.
            But criticizing “Jewish identity politics”–including the well-known example of biblical Queen Esther–patron saint of Jewish subversion and lobbying– and many other such instances amounts to sparing from criticism only Jews who do not self-identify as Jews except as an occasional role playing hobby.

            “Folks on the Christian Right on the other hand makes the analysis of Judaism the religion revealing its dark underpinnings.”

            2. I tend to think that it is both useful and unfortunate that it is only the Christian right that breaks this taboo. It is useful that someone does but the last thing the much needed exposure of ZPC/JP needs is an isolated strafing from another fragmentary self-interest group, instead of a concerted, sustained and general front against it.
            Folks on the “left” can take their inspiration from Shahak who did all that from the left.

            3. I am stunned to hear that ICH has banned you, which explains why I have not seen your comments there lately. I hope you will continue to post here.

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 27, 2012 at 2:06 am #

            With the confusing concatenation of comments I feel I need to clarify that the comment above was addressed to deadbeat

          • Deadbeat October 27, 2012 at 3:12 am #

            Thank you for your remarks Ariadna. They are always enlightening.

          • David Holden October 26, 2012 at 9:14 pm #

            a comment from marcus on ICH today (on article by D.Lindorff):

            My comment critical of Lindorf’s “conspiracy theory” bashing & his own hypocritical China bashing & fearmongering was censored.

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 26, 2012 at 9:56 pm #

            Neglectful on Tom’s part not to have also censored the comment complaining of censorship

          • David Holden October 26, 2012 at 11:01 pm #

            yes it’s that kind of sloppiness that makes me sometimes inclined to question people’s commitment…

            however maybe that’s uncharitable.

            then again, maybe i’m just being a naive aspie as usual. not being a regular visitor to ICH i have at present no assessment of marcus’ credentials, or of the trustworthiness either of ICH or of its modus operandi in moderating or censoring comments.

            an outlandish hypothesis

            so one possibility, although it seems outlandish of me even to think of this, is that marcus did not submit the previous comment which he claims was censored.

            this could be due to an innocent mistake – he wrote a comment, but forgot to press the button. in this case both marcus and ICH come out without blame, though marcus has revealed himself as careless and prone to paranoia.

            a different possibility is that he wrote this comment knowing full well that he did not submit the comment referred to, whether or not he agrees with his precis of it in the comment we do possess.

            in this case ICH comes out again as sloppy, but the sloppiness would be of precisely the opposite kind to that which you inferred. and we then have the further puzzle of what marcus’ motive might be.

            the treatment of this depends on whether marcus is acting on his own, or in collusion with one or more others – which does not rule out the further possibility that one of the colludees is Tom himself. a degenerate case (in the mathematical sense only) of this formulation would occur if in fact marcus is simply an alter ego of Tom. here the interest would devolve to the question of whether Tom knows of his alternative marcus persona, or whether, like the hero of Stevenson’s justly celebrated case-study, the two personae were essentially separate entities alternating in their control of the body which in the merely legal sense we all agree belongs to Tom.

            my QNN is champing at the bit on this one. it has generated several gigabytes of text already, but in present circumstances my own organization lacks the necessary staff and resources to pursue the matter further.

            the whole sorry affair suggests one thing: that comments should not be censored. if they are unwelcome they could be put in a special punitive area of the website, but still accessible to readers who wished, for whatever reason, to examine them. after all, for any visitor to a site, it might be very informative to examine what comments were thus unfavorably regarded by the management.

            i hope, if deLiberation is forced one day to go down this road, that this suggestion will be seriously debated by the Board (whoever they might be)

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 27, 2012 at 12:30 am #

            “that comments should not be censored. if they are unwelcome they could be put in a special punitive area of the website, but still accessible to readers who wished, for whatever reason, to examine them. ”

            This took my breath away. You don’t seem to realize the genius of your own idea. You are the man who invented the wheel and, rolling it on the ground says: ‘I have no idea if this will serve any useful purpose but I am tossing it down the road anyway.’

            Extraordinary! Yes and yes and yes! I am so excited I am probably incapable of making typos, which will make this less intelligible to those used to my style of writing, but bear with me.
            1. Set aside a site– IPP — reserved for unwelcome speech, ideas and opinions so vile and unPC that they only qualify as Intellectual and Political Pornography.
            2. Direct all sites to drain their censored comments into this vat of foulness.
            3. Promote it and sell advertising, but only advertising compatible with its content (e.g., David Irving books).
            4. Turn the site into a publicly traded commodity and sell shares.
            It’s a win-win-win

          • demize October 28, 2012 at 4:45 am #

            This is an excellent idea.

          • Somoe October 27, 2012 at 10:23 am #

            As you know, it has been necessary to delete comments from time to time, something I don’t like doing, although the KA incident changed my mind on that – This really is an excellent suggestion, DH! Thank you.

          • fool me once... October 27, 2012 at 12:28 pm #

            @Somoe
            On the Icke site there is a forum that is only accessible to those who log in, called the Rant Room, where threads of a certain content end up. When discussions descend into slagging matches they are despatched to the RR. The problem is that when the zionazi posters want to censor particular topics, they work in teams doing what who_me said, and spam the thread with shitty comments thus creating a thread eviction to a place out of view. Something to bare in mind.

          • Jonathon Blakeley October 27, 2012 at 1:04 pm #

            I am just going to create a new category of post called – rejected_comments.
            Periodically I will dump all the “rejected comments” in there and post them out.
            The post will be marked so that the search engines do not index those comment excretions.
            People will however be allowed to view and comment upon the rejected comments, and if need be a rejected comment could be reveresed after a period of time. After 1 month, if no appeals are made, the internal comments referenced in the post will be deleted.

          • David Holden October 28, 2012 at 10:00 am #

            i’m glad you like it. a sort of quarantine. what struck me is basically an information theory point.

            it is one thing to ‘censor’ a comment by removing it from a thread into a quarantine area. it is another to completely erase from the record both the comment AND the fact that it had been submitted.

            the comment should remain accessible, because that is the most transparent procedure. by examining the quarantined comments, an experienced investigator could piece together the de facto censorship policy, rather than meekly accept the declared de jure policy.

            a persistent troll could be rewarded by giving it its own thread in the quarantine.

            Ariadna’s commercial idea re IPP seems to have a lot of mileage in it. maybe a revenue stream from a premium plus membership category for deLiberation readers who want to access the hard-core quarantine material.

          • David Holden October 28, 2012 at 1:34 pm #

            Roy, this geezer birt lines etc. has some kind of grudge. he calls you an AS.

            why not offer him a thread on deLib “Why i hate X”, on condition that he doesn’t post anywhere else. and that we will check each post to estimate the likely percentage software generated.

            some of the troll software goes back quite a while and hasn’t aged well. they tinker with it, but they haven’t found any way of incorporating a non-algorithmic highly distributed parallel-processor model – their still grappling with OOP. a lot of it was written in pre-war COBOL.

            allowing one thread might eventually generate a valuable source of data for future hate-researchers.

          • Deadbeat October 27, 2012 at 3:11 am #

            The censorship on ICH is not surprise especially when these left-wing “icons” are criticized. The Marxist Richard Wolff has been engaging in a type of China bashing as well blaming WalMart for the jobs being shipped to China. In fact WalMart is being propped up by the Left as the Billionaires to hate. Never any mention of the Trillionaires Rothchilds. Funny that Stiglitz who worked at the World Bank illustrates inequality by blaming the Walton family and not the Rothchilds.

            There are certain writers on ICH that are sacred such as William Blum, John Pilger, Uri Avnery and now Lindoff can be added to the list.

            After reading the Left, for years engage in blaming the USA for all of its “imperial” adventures NOT ONCE does it mentioned that United Fruit was own by Jew Samuel Zemurray and that Zemurray bribed Latin American nations to vote for the 1948 Palestine partition plan.

            It is when you identify these kinds of selective omissions that will eventually get you kicked off of ICH.

          • demize October 28, 2012 at 4:40 am #

            So good to see you here @Deadbeat

        • David Holden October 26, 2012 at 8:32 pm #

          Ariadna, your #8 hypothesis does come under category #3 if you stretch it a bit and read the small print. however the quote is interesting since the phrase self-interest is used in what superficially appear to be two different senses –

          (i) (‘naked’) self-interest
          (ii) Jewish self-interest.

          the Mondo also makes it clear that he can have his own brand of Jewish self-interest which is different from that of another Jew’s (e.g., specifically, a zionist Jew’s) Jewish self-interest.

          to resolve his dilemma i can only suggest that for Mondo whilst a zionist’s self-interest an sich is, as it says on the packet, the triumph of zionism, a zionist’s true Jewish self-interest concurs with Mondo’s anti-zionist Jewish self-interest in requiring zionism to be wiped from the kitchen-surface of history.

          is the Mondo confused here? or is he attempting to bamboozle Gilad Atzmon by overloading his identity-circuitry with this hydraean concept of self-interest?

          unfortunately in view of the new editorial dispensation there is no point attempting to post this question on Mondoweiss.

          perhaps i could send him s personal e-mail?

          (picture taken just before dominatrix session, which perked him up considerably, according to a usually reliable sauce)

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 26, 2012 at 9:01 pm #

            You are right. I overlooked #3.
            Nevertheless I don’t ascribe strategical pre-planning to his “coming out.” That is not to say that flexibility in reacting to changed conditions is anything to sneeze at.
            I’ll let you keep the dominatrix in the picture since you are keen to give it to him.

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 26, 2012 at 9:02 pm #

            I said “it” instead of “her” by mistake but perhaps I should have said him/her/it.

          • David Holden October 26, 2012 at 11:16 pm #

            “Nevertheless I don’t ascribe strategical pre-planning to his “coming out.”

            yes, i was aware of that flaw in my claim, hence my nervous invocation of the non-existent small print.

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 27, 2012 at 12:07 am #

            :-) :-) :-)

          • Jonathon Blakeley October 27, 2012 at 12:24 am #

            @Dave
            I like the way you are inserting images adds nicely to the comment thread. + Superb Image, all in all another fascinating thread..

            @ all
            I thought the Mondoweiss new comment policy was a wonderful piece of double speak. One the one hand pushing free speech and appearing liberal whilst on the other hand censoring and restricting.

            It is difficult running free style comments no doubt, and it requires a certain amount of co-operation. But Free speech means listening to people that you don’t necessarily agree with, and in doing so we often learn quite a lot in the process.

            Everybody should be up for criticism as long as it is done with good taste and panache.

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 27, 2012 at 12:33 am #

            Excellent observations in paragraphs 2-4.
            I abstain from commenting on #1 because I am recovering and don’t wish to suffer a relapse.

      • demize October 28, 2012 at 4:38 am #

        My view is that they are funded by the Nation foundation http://d.pr/i/CtmB you may come to you own conclusions, they have been tacking more mainstream ever since they were bestowed the original grant. Also I dont think justice for Palestine is the primary motivator. Then there is the narcissism that is common among a certain segment of the population. By far the most interesting and enlightening discussions there were those related to Jewish identity and its nexus with Zionism and American culture. Since that is now verbotten I see no reason to read them hence forth, they will be the Mother Jones of Anti-Zionism taking a good game and endorsing Obama.

    • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 26, 2012 at 4:42 pm #

      It breaks my heart when you do this, jay, standing in front of the ticket window, waving an expired membership card and pleading, ” But I used to be a member. Surely you can let me in, ask the administrator, they know me, I used to write letters complaining about the footlights. Standing room ticket at least?”

      • Jay Knott October 27, 2012 at 9:24 pm #

        “Breaks my heart”. You’ll be glad to know I’ve broken off with Annie. I really mean it this time.

        • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 27, 2012 at 9:45 pm #

          No matter what, or some reason I think I will always feel a little protective of you, jay.
          In that spirit I urge you to get off this post. Get off it and don’t look back.
          There are some nasty videos here where they dismiss the Boys with Backpack Conspiracy theory 2 (BBC2), not to be confused with the Boys with Boxcutters Conspiracy theory 1 (BBC1), which they also mock. It may upset you and push you into another graph frenzy.

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 27, 2012 at 9:47 pm #

            PS Don’t set foot on Bloody Corruption either

          • Jay Knott October 27, 2012 at 9:52 pm #

            “There are some nasty videos here where they dismiss the Boys with Backpack Conspiracy”. I’ve seen enough of these videos. I’ve read some of the books, and been to a few meetings on the subject. Because it’s a cult, you can’t be convinced that, after carefully looking at numerous alternative theories about September 11th, I simply haven’t found them convincing. And that’s why you have to resort to psychology to explain my failure to be convinced.

          • Jay Knott October 27, 2012 at 9:57 pm #

            “In that spirit I urge you to get off this post”. Stop diverting this thread into proselytizing your favorite ‘theory’.

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 27, 2012 at 11:26 pm #

            “diverting?”
            You must be confusing me with your mate Weiss who announced 9/11 is henceforth a taboo topic in comments on his site.

          • David Holden October 28, 2012 at 9:02 am #

            this squabble would be unseemly if conducted on either of the Judaeo-Christian shabbatim. Ariadna, you tease Jay with mentioning less-than-ten-more-than-eight-slash-more-than-ten-less-than-twelve. you know his phobia…his nightmares…yes, you are trying to protect him. i can see that. it is noble in you to make that attempt. but is not sometimes the cure worse than the disease, the antidote deadlier than the venom, the protection massively more damaging than the threat had ever been? the very mention of less-than-ten-more-than-eight-slash-more-than-ten-less-than-twelve in Jay’s presence is like waving a red rag in front of an angry bull. hence my careful circumlocution. i want to signal to Jay that it’s OK with me. same goes for less-than-eight-more-than-six-more-than-six-less-than-eight. i can see why Jay would have been able to form his view on that without even examining any evidence, simply because of the easily-recognised conspiratorial nature of those who oppose the British Government’s version of events.

            you must admit that Jay’s methodology is efficient. you don’t accept the government line. but you accept that those who say they don’t believe a word of it are conspiracy theorists.

            since conspiracy theorists are always wrong, by definition, then every single word (by a simple reversal of the universal quantifier under a negation symbol* which is a very handy feature of hyperlogic) in the government account must be true.

            so you arrive at the assertion that the government is right after all, but in a much more informed and epistemologically elegant manner.

            * ¬ (pron. knott)

          • Jay Knott October 29, 2012 at 5:01 am #

            “Smoking is bad for your health” is the government line. According to David’s methodology, it must be false.
            Ariadna and David have both got it wrong about ‘frenzy’. My article about antifa/Zio harassment – http://tinyurl.com/9jssftd – isn’t about 9/11, but because it mentions my lack of belief in the ‘theory’, it drove truthers into a frenzy. Truthers are easily provoked if you casually admit you are an unbeliever.

            “My mate Weiss”. No, he’s not my mate. I dismissed Mondoweiss months ago – http://tinyurl.com/9vrcdpo

    • demize October 28, 2012 at 4:11 am #

      If you read later in that article you will see Weiss becomes more hostile and obtuse. When Atzmon presses him to be intellectually consistent Weiss replies that “consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds. He refuses, I believe is unable to square that circle,and retreats into balderdash. This is a place where demons live so to speak.

      • David Holden October 28, 2012 at 8:47 am #

        it’s too good a phrase to have been a spontaneous PW-speech-act. checking this hunch, google comes up with:

        NUMBER: 6279
        AUTHOR: Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882)
        QUOTATION: A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.

        il s’accuse?

  7. Blake October 26, 2012 at 6:09 pm #

    There is one thing I like about MW and that is they don’t allow Nakba denial posts (Same goes for Holocaust denial too though).

    • demize October 28, 2012 at 4:22 am #

      I think you are incorrect. While someone there might have said this I have seen in four years or so of monitoring and commenting there that there where numerous Nakba deniers as well as outright Judeo supremacists tolerated. There is quite a difference in the de jure as opposed to de facto posting policy there in relation to what is tolerated. I mean @Richard Witty may have couched his supremacism in liberal verbiage, it was transparent to everyone who cared to see it. If the analogous behavior were continually perpetrated by someone I think the poster would have been banned much sooner than Witty.

  8. Ariadna Theokopoulos October 27, 2012 at 2:49 am #

    Here Weiss appears both knowledgeable and sincere:

    • David Holden October 28, 2012 at 9:18 am #

      sometimes your archive skills astonish me, Ariadna.

      “i have this fantasy, …this idea that gay men share the same…sex drive,…similar,…you know, they’re more alike…”

      btw perhaps quiet congratulations are in order as you have mastered the wordpress art of embedding Mr Mondo in a comment on a post by someone else. this little bit of html is liberating. and despite your teasing,your compassionate side would be happy to learn that i have only very recently overcome a potent personal mental block (PPMB or potaf-tomenvlo) against html that has maintained itself through over two decades of staunch resistance on the technophobic barricades.

      • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 28, 2012 at 3:58 pm #

        Smugness disguised as humility (even you had problems with embedding!) and condescending praise may soothe others but it only ruffles my feathers.
        Speaking of feathers, Jay (who does not need anyone ELSE to protect and defend him and for whom I speak also) and I have no intention of taking up residence in the metaphorical “family tree” to which you refer in a comment on the post Blind Man Tasered, as others appear to have been fooled by you into doing, only to be given ornithological names by you and receive the same kind of supercilious praise.

        Speaking of references to comments on other posts, Edgar Lee Masters’ Spoon River Anthology comes to mind, in which epitaphs on all the stones refer to epitaphs on other stones, creating an organic whole that ties together individual characters into a community.
        deLib may go in that direction — I hope –with comments on one posts referring to others on other posts, creating a multidimensional dialog, well, polilog.

        It is equally possible that this comment will appear incomprehensible even to me upon re-reading once the spring allergy season is over here and the soporific effect of anti-allergic medication disappears.

        • fool me once... October 28, 2012 at 5:32 pm #

          @AT
          “I have no intention of taking up residence in the metaphorical “family tree” to which you refer in a comment on the post Blind Man Tasered”
          Wow! Is that what DH was meaning in that BMT comment? I thought he literally meant what he could see out of his window in the back yard. Thank f… you’re here to decipher! ;)
          Nice one David, now it’s been explained that was a good metaphor. You should Tweet it :D .
          So who’s who?
          “3 crows (a family unit)
          1 squirrel (grey)
          1 moorhen
          1 sparrow
          1 robin
          5 jays (a family unit)
          several itinerant cole tits – intermittent visits
          1 pheasant
          despite a sign warning them to keep out, magpies repeatedly invade the sacred grove. they are tolerated up to a point.”
          Are the cole tits, H questioners? (David Cole)
          The 5 jays, 911 schmucks?
          The magpies, ha ha I’m getting it now, they’re the er… well, let the story metaphorically explain;
          http://www.thefinancialfairytales.com/magpie/
          btw AT can’t be the grey squirrel even though she does have a large collection of “trophy nuts” hanging off her branch, as she appears to be a rare red.
          http://blog.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/squirrels.jpg

          • Ariadna Theokopoulos October 28, 2012 at 5:54 pm #

            “I thought he literally meant what he could see out of his window in the back yard”

            It’s both: now metaphorical wave, now solid corpuscle. He used the model of the one in his backyard to create the metaphorical one.
            Note: none of the 5 “jay” is jay and I am definitely not there.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: