On July 6th this year, a particularly unpleasant Zionist activist who goes by the name of Mikey Mikey aka Michael Ezra posted a comment on David Aaronovitch’s Times-on-line blog asserting that Tony Greenstein spent his time ‘harassing Jews’ and for the past 30 years had been intimidating Jewish students at NUS Conference.
What made this clearly actionable is that the blog is moderated and could therefore only have been put up with Aaronovitch’s approval. After much huffing and puffing by The Times, who trawled through a barrel of allegations courtesy of the Union of Jewish Students, whose speciality is defaming those who disagree with them, including allegations that even I hadn’t heard of before, they agreed to settle. Their barrister Richard Rampton QC, of David Irving fame, couldn’t make his mind up from the one letter I received from him, whether or not The Times had a defence! What was the defamation alleged he asked. Thanks to a friendly socialist academic lawyer from Oxford University, I produced a concise answer – anti-Semitism! And breach of section 3 of the Race Relations Act, i.e. a criminal offence.
Some people may think it is an attack on free speech to issue libel actions and in general I agree. However accusing people who are not anti-Semites of being anti-Semitic, is a tactic which we see employed in the USA in particular, to destroy free speech. People like Tony Judt, Norman Finkelstein, Joseph Massad, Professors Walt and Mersheimer and even Desmond Tutu and Jimmy Carter have felt the lash of this particularly vicious allegations and smear. In Britain it has been used to try and prevent anti-Zionists like myself and Roland Rance from speaking on campuses. That is why I felt the need to bring a defamation action.
The rationale behind the posting is of some interest. Mr Ezra defended his decision to make the posting in a letter The Times sent me of 6th August:
“I was a student myself in the period X-Y and I can assure you that when I heard Greenstein speak, I felt very intimidated - and yes I was a Jewish student. In fact my current fascination with collecting information about Tony Greenstein and trying to deconstruct all of his arguments, psychologists might put down to getting some revenge for the stress he caused me with his pamphlets and speeches as a student.”
Well I’m not a psychologist and don’t have much time for psycho-babble. But it would seem that the very act of political debate and argument, if it upsets someone’s settled views, is an act of ‘intimidation’ and from there to violence.
The Mikeys of this world claim that views which are ‘offensive’ are best not be heard because they fear the reality of what they believe in being laid bare. It is one of the problems of the ‘diversity’ agenda and identity politics that even the most reactionary identity, founded upon the oppression of another, is held to be equally valid, regardless of the content of that view. It was because of the ‘offence’ he may cause that even Desmond Tutu was banned from The University of St. Thomas in Minnesota. It’s Vice President Doug Hess stated that “We never made a judgment that he is anti-Semitic. We have not made that judgment. We have only been told by members of the Jewish community that his words have been hurtful,”
One wonders whether a speaker whose words is ‘hurtful’ to the torturers of Guantanamo might also be banned from certain US campuses.
That is why I sought to set the record straight publicly.
Tony Greenstein
http://timesonline.typepad.com/david_aaronovitch/2007/11/tony-greenstein.html
Some people may think it is an attack on free speech to issue libel actions and in general I agree. However accusing people who are not anti-Semites of being anti-Semitic, is a tactic which we see employed in the USA in particular, to destroy free speech. People like Tony Judt, Norman Finkelstein, Joseph Massad, Professors Walt and Mersheimer and even Desmond Tutu and Jimmy Carter have felt the lash of this particularly vicious allegations and smear. In Britain it has been used to try and prevent anti-Zionists like myself and Roland Rance from speaking on campuses. That is why I felt the need to bring a defamation action.
The rationale behind the posting is of some interest. Mr Ezra defended his decision to make the posting in a letter The Times sent me of 6th August:
“I was a student myself in the period X-Y and I can assure you that when I heard Greenstein speak, I felt very intimidated - and yes I was a Jewish student. In fact my current fascination with collecting information about Tony Greenstein and trying to deconstruct all of his arguments, psychologists might put down to getting some revenge for the stress he caused me with his pamphlets and speeches as a student.”
Well I’m not a psychologist and don’t have much time for psycho-babble. But it would seem that the very act of political debate and argument, if it upsets someone’s settled views, is an act of ‘intimidation’ and from there to violence.
The Mikeys of this world claim that views which are ‘offensive’ are best not be heard because they fear the reality of what they believe in being laid bare. It is one of the problems of the ‘diversity’ agenda and identity politics that even the most reactionary identity, founded upon the oppression of another, is held to be equally valid, regardless of the content of that view. It was because of the ‘offence’ he may cause that even Desmond Tutu was banned from The University of St. Thomas in Minnesota. It’s Vice President Doug Hess stated that “We never made a judgment that he is anti-Semitic. We have not made that judgment. We have only been told by members of the Jewish community that his words have been hurtful,”
One wonders whether a speaker whose words is ‘hurtful’ to the torturers of Guantanamo might also be banned from certain US campuses.
That is why I sought to set the record straight publicly.
Tony Greenstein
http://timesonline.typepad.com/david_aaronovitch/2007/11/tony-greenstein.html 
e-mail:
Comments
Hide the following 43 comments
Tony Greenstein - an authoritarian censor and Islamophobe?
02.12.2007 09:30
"The Mikeys of this world claim that views which are ‘offensive’ are best not be heard because they fear the reality of what they believe in being laid bare."
So, as it goes, do the Greensteins of this world. The sheer arrogance of this man posting this up here,on a site where he has issued calls for his mates to interfere with the Indymedia decision making process, by baying for the complete banishment of Gilad Atzmon from these boards is breathtaking.
While I'm not suprised that Aaronovitch's lawyers paid £1000 to a charity to shut the very boring and unpleasant voice of Mr. Greenstein up, it is a sign of his own delusions that he chooses to, at this stage, make this post.
Heres him demanding that 'views which are offensive’ are best not heard', where he demands that articles are not only hidden, but DELETED from the server. Furthermore, he has his mates picking off members on the features list and writing to them off list.
Tony Greenstein wrote:
"Re: Saying NO to the Hunters of Goliath
>
>
> I have been forwarded the post below from Moshe Machover. Moshe is an absolutely solid
> Israeli Jewish anti-Zionist. I agree with every word. I have posted. I really think the article should be taken down.
>
> I've corresponded with Dave Parks who gave me this e-mail address. He said that you usually 'hide' rather than erase articles but I would ask that you make an exception in this case. The article justifies the holocaust by suggesting that it was the victims of the Nazis who brought the catastrophe on themselves because of their unpopularity. This is not merely factually incorrect (Ian Kershaw's 'Hitler Myth' and 'Popular Dissent and Opinion in the Third Reich' show this is not so in Germany) but racist. "
Tony Greenstein wrote:
"Yes I have said that the accusation of ‘anti-Semitism’ is used to defame and intimidate anti-Zionists and supporters of the Palestinians. However it is also the case that on occasion an accusation of anti-Semitism is actually true. I accept that one of the consequences of Zionists labelling their opponents as ‘anti-Semitic’ is, unfortunately, to drain the term of much of its meaning, but that is no excuse for you to give up on trying to make a clear distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism.
You state that ‘I think that it would be a bad move on our part to automatically take your side on this matter. It is better in the long run, for all of us, if the kneejerk response to calls of anti-semitism is relaced with an informed decision.’ At no time have I asked you to take ‘my’ side in this matter or make an uninformed decision nor to make a ‘knee jerk’ response. You have after all had two weeks to make a decision, but by your own admission ‘it isn't going to be a quick process.’ It is clear that you are incapable of making such a decision since you clearly do not understand anti-Semitism or, more generally, racism even when it stares you in the face."
Tony Greenstein wrote:
"A couple of weeks ago I posted a request to Indymedia, which prides itself on being a counter-culture/ anarchist media outlet in Britain and world wide, to take down or hide an overtly anti-Semitic, indeed nakedly racist and chauvinist article by Gilad Atzmon, the jazz player. Not only did Indymedia fail to reply to my request, but a letter purportedly sent to me was in fact sent to the anti-Semitic PeacePalestine site. "
Tony Greenstein wrote:
"But I would also ask that rather than keep Atzmon's stuff up, and I would suggest all his contributions on these lines (I was not aware he'd posted so much before) that they are taken down pending a decision one way or another because Indymedia, which is a valuable resource, should not sully its own reputation with this stuff."
Tony Greenstein wrote:
"The most absurd argument for keeping a racist and anti-Semitic article posted is that Atzmon’s ‘ultimate concern is one of justice for the Palestinians.’ I doubt it because leaping to the defence of holocaust deniers in Deir yassin Remembered, which is what the PSC debate earlier this year was about, doesn’t seem to have a great deal to do with justice for the Palestinians. But even were it true and Atzmons’ main concern was for justice for the Palestines, does that mean that any racist nonsense should therefore be allowed? The idea that you support justice for the Palestinians by becoming a racist or supporting racism is a strange logic. I’m surprised that Chris buys into this nonsense."
Tony Greenstein wrote:
"The reason why I, and others who are anti-Zionist, oppose Indymedia being a forum for anti-Semitic nonsense is not that it will affect Jews in Britain or elsewhere. It won’t. Anti-Semitism is a marginal prejudice, not a form of state racism. My reason for opposing it is that there is nothing that the supporters of the Israeli state would like more than to be able to tar their opponents with the accusation of anti-Semitism. Without anti-Semitism there would have been no Zionism. And if anti-Semitism did grow again, then the Palestinians would be the first to suffer as Israel received a new influx of potential settlers."
You can read more about the loveliness and 'anti-racism' of this authoritarian man at:
Background on his camapign against Atzmon here:
The absurdity of this situation is incredible!
Here's some of Mr. Greenstien's declarations on the electoral choice of the Palestinians.
"Yes Hamas has been forced to confront its own idiocy. They have begun to realise that the only beneficiaries of the suicide bomb are Sharon & Peres. It’s a pity that the Palestinian people have had to pay the price. It is just a pity that Islamic Jihad has managed to learn nothing, as witness its suicide bomb this week. They killed 5 Israelis but far more Palestinians with that bomb. But in their terms it is understandable. The world is divided into Islam and non-Islam. Therefore take out a few of the latter. They have no class politics, they don’t understand the meaning of reaching out to those on the other side, because they have nothing in common. For all their faults, the PFLP and DFLP understood very well that Palestinian socialists and communists had to make alliances with socialists, workers and others world-wide who oppose imperialism. Instead all Hamas can do is to glorify such absurd forgeries as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which her friends Israel Shamir/Eisen/Atzmon have taken such a shine too. Because that is the reality. Hamas’s ideology is a pale reflection of that of the Zionists. The Zionists say they wage their war in the name of religion, so Hamas puts up a mirror to the Zionist utterances, but does it in the name of Islam. Funnily enough the Zionists, being separatists, also did the same. The anti-Semites said Jews didn’t belong where they lived and the Zionists agreed that Jews didn’t belong in the Diasporah. All they insisted on was that Jews leave for Palestine, otherwise there was complete ideological agreement with the anti-Semites. Hamas too agree on the fundamentals with Zionism, they merely disagree on the outcome.”
I think the idiots of Hamas (because they mouth anti-Semitism, they don’t understand it) may indeed have attracted the votes of Palestinians because of the corruption of Fatah and their ability to attract enough funds to run social programmes, but I don’t for one minute believe that ideologically or politically most Palestinians are filled with the same racist nonsense as most Zionists. If I hated the Palestinians I wouldn’t be an anti-Zionist.”
“That the position of the Palestinians is that desperate and that insecure that they have turned to a group which can only offer a replacement of one form of oppression with another. Hamas is politically incapable of constructing any sort of political programme which can win support from abroad, let alone within the Israeli working class itself.”
"I make a sharp distinction between Hamas and Hezbollah and Atzmon’s anti-Semitism in any case. Hamas and Hezbollah reflect anti-Semitism, and that is a product of political backwardness. They are not anti-Semitic organisations but reacting to the oppression that they and the Palestinians/Lebanese have experienced at the hands of the Israeli state, which claims it is acting on behalf of Jewish people. If Israeli soldiers demolish someone’s home, kill their children etc. all in the name of ‘the Jews’ as the IDF does, then it isn’t surprising that the victims will take them at face value. Just as people referred to the Nazis as ‘the Germans’. It is certainly a sign of political backwardness, not surprising in political Islam, that they then borrow European anti-Semitic documents like the Protocols to justify and rationalise their oppression. But they are not anti-Semitic, because they quite simply are not organisations whose goal is the destruction of Jewish people or their oppression."
Cultural supremacism and racism of the worst kind.
If he had his way, Indymedia would be turned into a forum for his own odious views alone - anyone who has a different view of the situation would be deleted so that Indymedia readers had no idea what they say.
Greenstein would dictate what we can and cannot hear.
Maybe thats the kind of "harrassment" and "intimidation" that Mikey was talking about.
ftp
Don't Stop 'Til You Get Enough
02.12.2007 11:11
Is it that you disagree in the appraisal that the people on the receiving end of IDF atrocities and Israeli policy will understandably sometimes have "antisemitic" views given that Israel projects itself as a Jewish state acting in the interest of Jews? Just as Britain and the rest pumped out a mountain of anti-German racism during both wars?
I put the word in parentheses since Greenstein seems to be saying he doesn't view such a position to be true antisemitism. Are you then arguing that the lipservice is real antisemitism? Or perhaps that people being brutalised by Israel are uniformly above such a thing?
Is it that you think that despite having public support Hamas and Hezbollah are reviled by the most influential of world "players"?
Is it that you think that assessing suicide bombers as counterproductive equals "Islamophobia"? Surely, not, since that would be suggesting that the reason people blow themselves up in the region is for the love of Allah and not out of the most extreme desperation at their situation. I'm sure the happy middle eastern exploding Muslim isn't a stereotype you would wish to endorse, so please clarify.
Although as Greenstein can understand local antisemitism I can also understand why an Israeli would be predisposed to such stereotypes. Fear breeds racism and scared people will often act irrationally.
The situation is a magnet to extremists on both sides of the fence.
Michael Joseph Jakobsohn
"political backwardness"
02.12.2007 11:31
He seems to think that he has a right to sit in a country which is one of Israel's closest friends, and to criticise the Palestinian political choice, when it is they that have to deal with daily oppression that Israel metes out with the help of the US + UK.
He appears to think that he has a right to criticise the choices that Palestinians have made, and he has the gall to believe that he knows better than them how they should deal with the political choices that they are confronted with.
That is the nub of his racism - his assumption that as a white westerner he has the right to behave in this manner, and to use those terms, and that he knows better than them what is best for them.
At the same time, he crows about the Times paying out petty cash to shut him up, whilst he is engaged in a long running and unpleasant camapign to get Gilad Atzmon banned from everywhere, using exactly the same "harrassment" and "intimidation" that he was accused of by Mikey.
If you can't see it I can't help any further - I do think there are others who use the newswire who will understand the islamaphobia of the man.
.
ftp
Homepage:
http://"political backwardness"
Beat it!
02.12.2007 12:29
I think the voting choices of the USA have proven to be totally moronic, as with the UK, France, Germany etc. Does that make me a racist or simply critical?
Holding a critical opinion alone doesn't equate racism/Islamophobia.
If he were to state that Palestine couldn't move forward because they were bunch of backward Arabs/Muslims, you may have a case. But thus far all you have presented is a critique in strategy that as it stands could be deemed arrogant at worst.
Seems like you are guilty of your own charge: you equate any criticism of Palestine as being racism.
Michael Joseph Jakobsohn
Michael Joseph Jakobsohn
02.12.2007 12:48
So, tell that to the censor himself.
You and I don't seem to be on the same planet.
"Criticising Palestine"? I'm pretty sure it was the political choice of the Palestinians....
geddit.
Anyway - you don't agree with what I say - thats fine. I have better things to do with my time than play games with you.
ftp
Black or White
02.12.2007 13:09
So, basically you are saying that white people are not allowed an opinion. Which is quite plainly racist. To suppose that a person's opinion is validated by the colour of their skin is elementary racism. It presupposes inherent genetic inequality. Which is the kernel of all racism.
Now pardon me if I'm wrong in my assumption that Greenstein is of Yiddish descent as his name suggests. How much of a Westerner can a Yid be? Does that make Afro-Americans somehow less Afro or more American? Does it make the Welsh more British than the English?
I've never met the bloke, so I can't use the Rassengesetz to judge how Aryan he is or isn't.
Perhaps if we could have a colour full face and profile shot we could get our calipers out and measure his complexion.
Michael Joseph Jakobsohn
Thank you
02.12.2007 13:31
"I make a sharp distinction between Hamas and Hezbollah and Atzmon’s anti-Semitism in any case. Hamas and Hezbollah reflect anti-Semitism, and that is a product of political backwardness. They are not anti-Semitic organisations but reacting to the oppression that they and the Palestinians/Lebanese have experienced at the hands of the Israeli state, which claims it is acting on behalf of Jewish people. If Israeli soldiers demolish someone’s home, kill their children etc. all in the name of ‘the Jews’ as the IDF does, then it isn’t surprising that the victims will take them at face value. Just as people referred to the Nazis as ‘the Germans’. It is certainly a sign of political backwardness, not surprising in political Islam, that they then borrow European anti-Semitic documents like the Protocols to justify and rationalise their oppression. But they are not anti-Semitic, because they quite simply are not organisations whose goal is the destruction of Jewish people or their oppression.""
ftp
Could someone give a quick summary of what's going on here?
02.12.2007 13:37
Confused
Tony's views on what the Palestinians themselves think
02.12.2007 13:48
“…the illiterates of Hamas”, “…political illiterates.” “Hamas is an organisation, sponsored originally by the Israeli State as a counterweight to the secular PLO. It became Frankenstein's monster, just as Bin Laden & co. were US proteges.”
"Hamas may be full of physicians for all I know, but politically they are a reflection of the Zionist, no more. The fact that they can come out with all sorts of anti-Semitic stuff, including support for the Protocols, demonstrates that. They are the best enemy Israel could have and it matters not a jot whether they have support in the Palestinian street. It is unfortunate that it is the corruption in Fateh which has led to a growth in support for Hamas.”
my comment (as if Tony knows that the reason Hamas has grown was just about corruption issues. This indeed is political naïveté).
"Hamas is an Islamic group. Its charitable work depends on subventions from Kuwait, the Saudis and other reactionary governments.”
my comment (as if we didn’t know that all young political movements, especially the international ones Tony is so fond of, are helped by an international current. That they are only helped by reactionary govts, - if this is indeed the case – is not really their fault. No one can earmark money to Hamas. The EU and the US made sure of that. Could be a case of making necessity virtue). And, what follows is a litany of things that could have been written by Abe Foxman of the ADL himself. Demonise Hamas. Demonise those who have voted for them. This is the recipe, and it’s amazing such an “astute” political animal as Tony Greenstein hasn’t arrived at this illumination. I suppose the thought never occurred to him. Blame suicide bombing on Hamas, check! Equate political Islam with reactionary regimes and terrorist groups, check! If that doesn’t work, equate them with secret services, check! Declare that should Islamic people have a political majority, it spells the end of Jews, check! Should this group have popular support, it will invariably fail because it is incapable of having a program for its own people, ie, it’s bad for its own too, check!
“Their tactic of suicide bombing has played straight into Sharon's hands and has weakened the Palestinians immeasurably.”
“Of course political Islam is reactionary but who was it who supported the Mujahideen in Afghanistan and helped create the Taliban and al-Qaida but the United States? And wasn’t it Israel’s secret service, Shin Bet, in their efforts to undermine secular nationalism who helped create Hamas? Inconvenient facts are easily forgotten"
“Quite why does Mary think I would oppose a Jewish State, which of course is a State for repressing those who are not Jews and giving privileges to those who are Jews, and then support an Islamic State? Why should I detest and oppose the mass murder of Palestinians by the Zionist State, their dispossession and reduction to guests (at best) in their own country and then give support to a movement which would willingly do the same to others if it had half the chance?”
“That the position of the Palestinians is that desperate and that insecure that they have turned to a group which can only offer a replacement of one form of oppression with another. Hamas is politically incapable of constructing any sort of political programme which can win support from abroad, let alone within the Israeli working class itself.”
“Religion and State = Tyranny, be it an Israeli or indeed a Saudi tyranny. The difference between the Saudis & Iranians and the Zionists is that the former oppress their own people whilst the latter oppress the non-Jew.”
And when I asked Tony why he would not be decent, act like a real democratic human being and respect that the Palestinians have not overthrown their oppressors, but have given in to the wonderful voting system we decided for them, and in spite of all efforts to make it limited in scope and effectiveness, they voted for the guys the Israelis don’t like, he said,
“Respecting a choice is meaningless pap. Should I respect the German who voted for Hitler or the Israeli who voted for Sharon or the American who voted for Bush or, let us say, the Italian who voted for Berlusconi? I might pity, detest or even hate those who make such stupid choices, but respect never. I support the Palestinians because they are the direct victims of Zionist terror and ethnic cleansing, not because they have made terrible, if understandable, decisions.”
BINGO! Hamas = Hitler. Greenstein must be the Ghost writer for AIPAC and the ADL. It's all there, Islamophobia, demonisation, blame and pity for the poor Palestinians, victims of their own ignorance.
I think this should show us the Islamophobic credentials of TG. Among his censorship and gatekeeping duties, he is the protector of secular values in Palestine, no matter what the Palestinians might actually want themselves. This is terrible.
thecutter
e-mail:
humdrum2@libero.it
Homepage:
http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com
The Man in the Mirror
02.12.2007 14:52
Is nobody at all at IMC UK extremely disturbed by this reasoning?
What colour do you have to be to have an opinion on Palestine? Do the Spanish rank higher than the Swedish? The Dutch lower than the Turks?
Do you have to dress as Hitler and kill a Jew to be regarded as an antisemite here? Because promoting the notion of a Jewish Conspiracy, denying the Holocaust and telling Jews they are not allowed to comment on Palestine seem not enough.
The last point seems to echo the typical Jewbaiter (biology ignorant) line of "Jews are European mongrels..." but that could just be me reading too much into it.
I can understand why someone wants to get off the IMC UK bus, if that's the kind of person they have to sit next to.
Michael Joseph Jakobsohn
First you missed the actual racism ....
02.12.2007 15:25
Greenstein, you will remember, believes that he is tasked with the important job of ruling who may and may not speak for the Palestinian solidarity movement. And yet he has the most stomach-churningly racist paternalistic and condescending attitude towards Palestinians. So, who is he speaking for when he demands the exile of voices from Indymedia and other forums? On whose behalf is he using tactics of"harrassment" and "intimidation"?
If you want to label me a "self hating white westerner" feel free to go ahead. It worries me not one jot.
The fact remains that I have experience of Palestinians as rational, politically informed human beings who are quite capable of determining how to use their votes to secure representation from the people that they believe best address their political concerns and needs.
Now, as I pointed out, I'm too busy to play games with you.
ftp
Opinions on Palestinian politics
02.12.2007 15:38
You want a UK censor to tell you what to do in the UK, your business. He has no right to do that with Palestinians, and they are on to him. This is getting exposed day by day, and as much as he claims he is doing good things for them (brags about it, actually) the evidence of his own ideas of superiority and disdain for others shines through always.
thecutter
Homepage:
http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com
Opinions on Palestinian politics
02.12.2007 15:42
You want a UK censor to tell you what to do in the UK, your business. He has no right to do that with Palestinians, and they are on to him. This is getting exposed day by day, and as much as he claims he is doing good things for them (brags about it, actually) the evidence of his own ideas of superiority and disdain for others shines through always.
thecutter
Homepage:
http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com
Peace, Propaganda, and the Promised Land
02.12.2007 16:02
His purpose here is to disrupt any discussion which proves Zionists do what their opposition says they do.
Peace, Propaganda, and the Promised Land
freedocumentaries.org/film.php?id=169
Media Education Foundation
Bad
02.12.2007 16:19
And therefore the hypocrisy of this statement will be lost on you:
"And yet he has the most stomach-churningly racist paternalistic and condescending attitude towards Palestinians."
A white deciding for the Palestinians who has the right to comment on them on the basis of race?
"On whose behalf is he using tactics of "harrassment" and "intimidation"? "
Is that a conspiracy/ hidden agenda theory forming?
This wasn't a game. It was a form of protest and a matter of principle. Racism should be challenged.
Michael Joseph Jakobsohn
MJJ
02.12.2007 17:55
I'm for one am sick of it, and would really like the site to be used for reports on emancipatory protests, actions and events that you can't read up on on the websites of the far Right!
x
name
Greenstein and his Jewish friends of the Palestine (JAZ)
02.12.2007 18:32
Have you heard about David Abrahms, Lord Levy? Does the the name Jon Mendelsohn ring a bell?
Just go out and buy the Observer, you will learn about the “The Labour Friends of Israel”
By then you may be able to learn about Greenstein and his Jewish friends of the Palestine are exactly the same
It is all about Jewish lobbying.
Baby
Weak Trolls
02.12.2007 18:32
His purpose here is to disrupt any discussion which proves Zionists do what their opposition says they do.
Peace, Propaganda, and the Promised Land
Typical
Last one.
02.12.2007 20:18
"His purpose here is to disrupt any discussion which proves Zionists do what their opposition says they do. "
Must be sad being a racist. The constant frustration of never seeing your notional enemies get the "natural justice" they "deserve". But I suppose the never having to think too deeply makes up for it.
Anyone who can read will have spotted I have no love for Israel. I have also no interest in promoting anything Jewish... except perhaps the excellent bagel bakery in Brick Lane. If you are in the market for religion then that's your private matter. I don't even believe in God let alone a Jewish one.
You may argue right or wrong that Palestine could do without friends like Greenstein. I don't know because I know little of him. But what is indeed certain is that they can do well without a bunch of twisted racists for friends too!
Hope your antisemitism doesn't give you a bleeding ulcer. It certainly won't give you brain ache.
Michael Joseph Jakobsohn
The name with no brain
02.12.2007 20:54
Anyway, name clearly needs to see a shrink urgently. Seeing things that don't exist is a treatable illness.
Dr. Doolittle
Greenstein has a criminal record
03.12.2007 00:43
Tony Greenstein
Tony, why don't you set the record straight publicly, regarding some of the more serious allegations against you? Being charged by 'Mikey' for upsetting some Jewish students 30 years ago is hardly worth getting hot under the collar about, is it? In fact, your reaction with the lawyers was a smokescreen, wasn't it, a diversionary tactic, to draw the attention of the public away from some of the other activities in which you were involved at the time, namely credit card fraud and shoplifting. And you were convicted for both of those crimes. Records of the court cases are available on the internet. Why not set the record straight, and make them available on this site, Greenstein? People would love to know how impeccably honest you really are, Tony, and what a pillar of society, that we should all be looking up to!
The truth is this Greenstein is a petty criminal who would do well to keep his mouth closed altogether.
knuckles
e-mail:
knuckles@gmail.com
knuckles
03.12.2007 09:42
But anyway Knuckles, what do you think? Is in/validating someone by the colour of their skin racism?
If not, we need a policy here where everyone has to declare their ethnicity so we can know who to listen to, who to ignore, who is obliged to listen to whom. You know, a proper racial pecking order. We could have armbands for meetings! And we shout think about dividing the site up so every group has their "own space"... and "boubaries"... so they know where they are (not) welcome. Then we should think about how much resource each groups needs and who is "suitable" for what responsibilities.
Rheumatoid Arthritis
reply
03.12.2007 11:22
Maybe do an action against the Jewish world domination and write about it?
name
The Palestinian struggle belongs to the Palestinians.
03.12.2007 11:24
"Cultural supremacy is the projection of one’s own values as superior to those of others. It is
connected to the European Enlightenment and the justifications for colonisation. In this sense, it refers to the projection of a local (European) epistemology as universal, unmarked and neutral, which resulted in the creation of ‘myths of modernity’, which dictate that the modern civilisation is the most developed culture and has an obligation to civilise, uplift, educate and develop the lesser (barbarian) cultures (Mignolo, 2000). The notion of cultural supremacy has numerous effects on relationships, the worth attributed to individuals, knowledge and power, the distribution of resources and wealth, and ideas about the origins of the problems, responsibilities and the ways to go about solving them.
A very common effect of cultural supremacy in the context of DE (development education) is the drive for a ‘civilising mission’ of the North ‘educating’ the South in an attempt to solve their problems – to ‘sort them out’. This strategy is often linked to the idea of ‘making a difference out there’ and conflated with global citizenship in some mainstream educational practices that are often categorised as DE (e.g. school links and fund-raising campaigns). The assumption behind this drive is that the ‘problem’ of developing countries is only based on a ‘lack’ of attributes that the North possesses (e.g. education, democracy, scientific knowledge, technology, a more civilised culture, history, universally ‘correct’ values, etc…) and that the North is responsible for the South in the same way that it was believed that the white men had the burden of civilising non-white peoples in colonial times.
In the same way that, in the period of colonisation, a local (European) set of assumptions of
reality and of European supremacy was violently imposed on other people as universal (Bhabha 1994, Mignolo 2000, Biccum 2002), from a PostColonial theory perspective it can be argued that Northern people (those who can and do act globally) may become ‘global citizens’ by projecting their local (interests, desires and ideas of reality and knowledge) as everyone else’s global (Dobson, 2005), repeating the epistemic violence of colonialism.
Cultural supremacy is based on the premise that one has achieved a better, more developed or universal way of seeing and being and prompts patronising and paternalistic attitudes towards the South and Southern peoples, as well as a foreclosure - or necessary denial - of the colonial past and of causal responsibility or obligations towards the South. This ‘foreclosure’ is related to the idea that, in our uneven ‘interdependence’, the North is also part of the problem. Without this understanding the argument for global citizenship is left to rest on notions of compassion, charity or a notion of ‘common humanity’ or ‘interdependence’ that do not necessarily address issues of power, inequalities and injustice, as a notion of seamless linear progress and development is adopted and ‘Northern’ ways of seeing, being and doing are projected the yardstick for the measurement of all humanity (Shiva, 2004)."
To portray oneself as having a crucial role in the Palestine solidarity movement whilst having gross disrespect for Palestinians, is clearly hypocrisy. If commentators want to be shocked by racism, and can't see it in Greenstein's utterances, but go on to blow up my statement until it is unrecognisable, I have no time for their position.
In fact I find it easy to dismiss them as trolls.
Had Greenstein not promoted himself as being a key player in the Palestine solidarity movement in this country, such criticism would not be necessary or valid.
ftp
Name
03.12.2007 11:52
When was that then?
'Emanciptory actions' with a a closed mind and without any context or analysis - it gets worse by the minute.
Dr. Doolittle
Indymedia moderator FTP throws in his lot with the anti-Semites
03.12.2007 17:14
Apparently I am now an 'Islamaphobe'. Strange that I put my neck on the line to support the Muslim Public Affairs Committee - UK when they were under attack for 'anti-Semitism' when one of their members, Asghar Bukhari, foolishly and without knowing what he was doing (as he admits) sent a small donation to David Irving's fighting fund some years ago. I defended them because I welcome sinners who repent on the road to Damascus. What I don't forgive is those who echo the Zionists and try to hold all Jews responsible for the war crimes of Israel.
Michael Jakobsohn has already pointed out the ludicrous nature of my supposed 'Islamaphobic' criticism of Hamas. If anyone wants to see what I've written then they can go to
'Of course, Hamas in its charter speaks of the notorious forgery, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, without every understanding them or the context in which they were written.10 No doubt they rail on occasions against ‘the Jews’. Inhabitants of the Warsaw Ghetto used to talk of ‘the Latvians’, not Latvian fascists. When Israeli soldiers come to beat and shoot them and demolish their homes, all in the name of the ‘Jewish state’, is it any wonder that they will curse the Jews?'
and in response to a letter criticising this I reply that:
‘I do not accept that Hamas is an anti-semitic organisation. What is clear is that in response to the horrific atrocities, including a starvation siege, against the Palestinians, they have taken on board the claims of the Israeli military that what they do is in the name of ‘the Jews’ and responded accordingly. Clearly this is a concept that Smith finds difficult to understand. If someone were to shoot his children/parents, etc in front of his eyes in the name of ‘the Jews’, chances are that he might become equally ‘anti-semitic’.
...
I have no problem with condemning the recitation, without any understanding, by Hamas and Hezbollah of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. However, these are meaningless in practice and are simply borrowed without understanding. I prefer to condemn actual racism and actual genocide rather than tilting at windmills.’
This should be clear, even for FTP and his anti-Semitic friends Mary Rizzo & Gilad Atzmon ('knuckles').
Of course I criticise Hamas's politics but I also support the right of the Palestinians to vote for whom they want. The siege of Gaza and the sanctions upon it as a result of this vote is outrageous and if ftp, Rizzo et al want to exploit that for their own purposes fine. I do think it is a great pity that an Islamic political group should be the majority choice of Palestinians, many of whom are not Muslims. The reasons for this are complex, including the corruption of the secular Fateh, the fact that Hamas was virtually the creation of the Israeli Shin Bet (secret police) as a counterweight in the 1980's to secular Palestinian groups etc.
What the issue really is about is the fact that Indymedia's moderators seem quite happy for an open anti-Semite, Gilad Atzmon, who talks about 'Judaic worldviews' 'gatekeepers' (i.e. Jews in the Palestine solidarity movement) Jewish conspiracies etc. is allowed to post to a site which is supposed to be about the liberation of humanity. Racism and liberation are incompatible but the muddleheads who run the site don't seem to be able to get their heads round that one.
I'm not even going to bother answering Mary Rizzo ('the cutter'). Her site is an anti-Semitic sewer with people like Paul Eisen posting that the evidence against the gas chambers is 'not good' before telling us that the evidence against is far more substantial. This is someone that Gilad Atzmon has stuck his neck out to defend.
It is not surprising that 'knuckles' (one of Atzmon's many pseudonyms) seems to think that alleged past convictions for property offences somehow outweigh his and his friends racism and anti-Semitism. However given the choice between shoplifting and stealing the music of Palestinians I know which I would choose.
I wrote over a month ago to Indymedia asking they take down Atzmon's article 'Hunters of Goliath' which states that Israelis should learn from the fate of Jews in Europe, who were also 'unpopular'. This ignoramus believes that it was the Jews' 'unpopularity' that led to their extermination. And the gays and gypsies? Was their oppression also due to unpopularity? And Muslims in Britain today. Is racism against them justified by their demonisation and consequent 'unpopularity'? And what about the Palestinians? Is their oppression due to their 'unpopularity'? Most people would understand that racism occurs because of things like colonialism, which then seeks to justify what they do to the indigenous people through racism and demonisation. In other words 'unpopularity' is the symptom not the cause.
However, much as they mourn, I think it's a cause for celebration that Aaronovitch and the Murdoch Times were forced to apologise and pay a small some for the benefit of Palestinian education on the West Bank. Clearly the anti-Semites think otherwise!
Tony Greenstein
Tony Greenstein
e-mail:
tonygreenstein@yahoo.com
Irony Not Lost
03.12.2007 18:13
Troll Intent To Distract
Erm
03.12.2007 18:37
"It is no surprise that 'free the peeps', a moderator for Indymedia, who has threatened to block the removal of Atzmon's anti-Semitic nonsense from Indymedia, is so supportive of war-monger David Aaronovitch."
You really should get some reading lessons Mr. Greenstein.
My support for Aaronvitch is in your mad deluded head. I think he's about as unpleasant as you, which is VERY!
Greenstein wrote:
"What the issue really is about is the fact that Indymedia's moderators seem quite happy for an open anti-Semite, Gilad Atzmon, who talks about 'Judaic worldviews' 'gatekeepers' (i.e. Jews in the Palestine solidarity movement) Jewish conspiracies etc. is allowed to post to a site which is supposed to be about the liberation of humanity. Racism and liberation are incompatible but the muddleheads who run the site don't seem to be able to get their heads round that one."
No, the fact of the matter is, not everyone sees it your way. Have you ever stopped to wonder if the SWP had a point? It'll be interesting if gehrig agrees with you and says the article is racist for the reasons you do, because then he will be showing that he himself is a racist! Gatekeeping is a term invented long before Atzmon was born, or even you, and it refers to the process whereby news is managed. Demanding deletion of an article is indeed gatekeeping. Your inability to understand that 2 sentences follow each other for a reason, means that you cannot get your head around the fact that religious teaching does in fact aim to instill a worldview. Same kind of comprehension as reading that I support Aaronovitch. I do however think that you do "harrass" and "intimidate".
As to racism and liberation being incompatible, your condescending and patronising declaration of the Palestinian's electoral choice as "politically backwards" means you're incompatible with liberation. But then someone who sets out to get his own way by "bullying" and "harrassment" isn't really showing a great understanding of liberation either.
gehrig wrote:
"Yes, folks, ftp, the guy who obliterated the thread about Gilad Atzmon's antisemitism by hiding *forty* comments in a row"
You're clutching at straws now gehrig. Because, besides the fact that they were guideline breaching posts - including my own, it wasn't me that hid them.
gehrig wrote:
"It's really very simple, folks. There is never, ever, ever any antisemitism on this board, even when there blatantly is, and if you say otherwise, well, ftp will hid your posts and regurgitate scrambled Atzmon at you while Mary Rizzo ("thecutter") coos appreciatively (and, sooner or later, Jordan Thornton comes through for another Adventures in Capitalization post)."
Funny you should mention that, because despite the fact that you are Indymedia's resident lecturer on anti-semitism, you completely failed to identify any anti-semitism in the article that the deluded, semi-literate Mr. Greenstein complains of. Even more, you then decided to show where members of the kollektive identified any anti-semitism in the article, and proved that none had. People can check your handy link to see it for themselves.
Now, why don't you help Greenie and the ban-minded members of the kollektive out by pointing to where the anti-semitism is in "saying NO to the hunters of Goliath" ? Perhaps you could tell us if you are able to understand where Greenie got his crazy jumbled up understanding of the article from.... and if you agree that that is what the article says, and that it is anti-semitic. Then we can compare it to your statements that ethnic cleansing was "not a mistake", and the Palestinians bear at least some responsibility for their own oppression. And don't things get a wee bit messy at that point?!
I think you owe to yourself to sort this one out. Can you see anti-semitism in the article or not? I'm just giong to keep asking you, because the more you stall, the more you help my case.
Hoo boy, when the zionist and anti-zionist hunters join together in pursuit of their quarry we can be sure of lots of excitement. The rah-rah opponent of the academic boycott along with the rah-rah champion of the academic boycott riding shotgun together. It'd make a great photo!
ftp
the usual disingenuous dodge from ftp
03.12.2007 19:38
Perhaps they were under the influence of a Zionist mind control array?
In other words, maybe your stamping your precious little feet about how I'm not bothering to tell you in florid, clinical detail about why Atzmon's an antisemite is coming across as a disingenuous dodge, since Atzmon's antisemitism was self-evident to the rest of your crew, and that you're pretty obviously refusing to see what's right in front of you?
@%<
gehrig
you mean like this?
03.12.2007 19:46
You mean like this:
Oh, sorry. The rabble aren't meant to see that.
@%<
gehrig
gehrig
03.12.2007 19:56
You on the other hand like witing 2 5000 word essays on how IMCistas can spot anti-semitism, and yet when you are asked to do what you teach others to do, you start smearing Atzmon with everything except the contents of the article that you say is anti-semitic.
Go on, make me look like a fool - tell everyone where the anti-semitism is in "saying NO to the hunters of Goliath".
If anyone is dodging, it is you. I've asked you this several times over the last two days. You're helping me out here, and I'm sure you don't want to do that. Steve Cohen, author of "Thats funny, you don't look anti-semitic" says that there is "is clear,unarguable anti-Semitism" in the article. He says its as clear as "Kill the yids". Why can't you point to it?
ftp
Ahhhh, poor ftp
03.12.2007 20:50
It's not that I can't -- as you've pointed out, I can do it up in style when I choose to. And I may go ahead and do it at some point.
What I'm finding more interesting at the moment, however, is seeing just how deep your denial goes. That is, are you truly as blind to antisemitism as you appear, or is it just a front that you think is somehow helpful to the Palestinian people for you to maintain?
In the meantime, go ahead and pound the table some more about how the Zionist conspiracy to silence Atzmon -- oh, wait, that's your own darn Kollektive, isn't it.
@%<
gehrig
Greenstein the thief clutching at straws
03.12.2007 21:06
1. Once again, knuckles is not Atzmon, a fact which the indy mediators can easily verify from IP numbers.We do not even inhabit the same continent.
2. So you admit you are a shoplifter and credit card fraudster (euphemistically termed 'property offences'.) In other words, a dishonest person, a THIEF, but we should pay homage to your judgement of others?
3. Are you accusing Atzmon of stealing the music of the Palestinians? Be more specific please and come up with the evidence.
knuckles
e-mail:
knuckles@gmail.com
gehrig - this is just boring now
03.12.2007 21:42
Good. Well, until you do I have no particular interest in discussing anything with you.
If you want to carry on, lets use the uc-imc lists.
ftp
FTP Fluffs It Again
03.12.2007 21:52
>>My support for Aaronvitch is in your mad deluded head. I think he's about as unpleasant as you, which is VERY!
No, ftp is right. Not everyone sees it my way. Anti-semites and racists don't, for sure. But calling anti-Zionist Jews 'gatekeepers' because they object to anti-Semitism at the fringes of the PS movement (& Atzmon is definitely fringe) and then comparing them to Germans who criticised Churchill (who was a racist incidentally) because the former were clearly outsiders, is anti-Semitic. Or are Jews outsiders as the Zionists, Atzmon and FTP maintain.
Yes all religions purport to have a world view, but Atzmon was using the bible to illustrate his political views that there is a Judaic worldview, Jewish interests, Jewish tribal instincts and all the rest of his anti-Semitic crap.
>>No, the fact of the matter is, not everyone sees it your way. Have you ever stopped to wonder if the SWP had a point? It'll be interesting if gehrig agrees with you and says the article is racist for the reasons you do, because then he will be showing that he himself is a racist! Gatekeeping is a term invented long before Atzmon was born, or even you, and it refers to the process whereby news is managed. Demanding deletion of an article is indeed gatekeeping. Your inability to understand that 2 sentences follow each other for a reason, means that you cannot get your head around the fact that religious teaching does in fact aim to instill a worldview. Same kind of comprehension as reading that I support Aaronovitch. I do however think that you do "harrass" and "intimidate".
The person who is being patronising etc. is Peeps. Since when is it condescending etc. to criticise the politics of Hamas or anyone else the Palestinians choose? I have always worked with the Marxist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine who had a very clear understanding of racism, including anti-Semitism and the Democratic Front for the liberation of Palestine and the Palestine Communist Party. Peeps and his anti-Semitic friends prefer to bow down in wonder at Hamas. If Peeps had been around a little longer he would know that in the early 1980's Shin Bet, the Israeli secret police, did their best to help create Hamas as a counterweight to secular Palestinians. They released Sheikh Yassin, their leader from prison and many other fundamentalist prisoners, they supported the creation of an Islamic University in Gaza, the only such on in the Occupied Territories and they of course repressed secular Palestinian organisations. It's called divide and rule and Peeps is a sucker for it.
The Palestinians have the absolute right to vote for who they want, though in practice they voted for Hamas because it wasn't the corrupt Fateh not because they endorse the idea of an Islamic state.
>>As to racism and liberation being incompatible, your condescending and patronising declaration of the Palestinian's electoral choice as "politically backwards" means you're incompatible with liberation. But then someone who sets out to get his own way by "bullying" and "harrassment" isn't really showing a great understanding of liberation either.
So ftp's fellow moderators have hidden his own comments!! Sounds like the lunatics have taken over the asylum and ftp is still peeping.
>You're clutching at straws now gehrig. Because, besides the fact that they were guideline breaching posts - including my own, it wasn't me that hid them.
The anti-Semitism in the article is blatant. How about:
'They in fact follow a Biblical lesson. Within the Judaic worldview, history and ethics are often reduced into a banal single binary opposition principle. For instance, the deadly battle between the ‘righteous’ David and the ‘evil’ Goliath personalises the struggle between the
‘good’ Israelites and the ‘bad’ Philistines. Though the Biblical specific tale could be understood in a mere literary terms, the similarities to the Israelite
of our time are rather concerning.... yet, the
Jewish state and the sons of Israel are at least as unpopular in the Middle East
as their grandparents were in Europe just six decades ago. Seemingly, it is the
personification of WW2 and the Holocaust that blinded the Israelis and their
supporters from internalising the real meaning of the conditions and the events
that led towards their destruction in the first place. ... Jewish tribalism and the atrocious inhuman ...
The Holocaust was caused by the 'unpopularity' of the Jews, just like the gays and Gypsies in fact! Racial persecution is caused by unpopularity not because minorities are targetted or scapegoated. Likewise it is clear that for Atzmona 'judaic worldview' is not to do with a religious outlook. He says quite clearly 'the similarities to the Israelite of our time...' It is clear to all except Peeps. And of course the ritual mention of 'Jewish tribalism'. If Peeps can't see it it is because he has now assimilated the racism of Atzmon & co.
Yes I and others supported the academic boycott. But ALL those who support it reject people like Atzmon. Peeps who represents nothing bar a few semi-anarchists who've lost their way, believes anti-Semitism is the way to combat Zionism whereas in fact it gave birth to Zionism.
Tony Greenstein
tony greenstein
e-mail:
tonygreenstein@yahoo.com
Zionism irrelevant within... this context!
04.12.2007 00:15
I almost feel like dressing up in a fur coat and yarmulka just watch him hyperventilate.
Just maybe he's just not bothered reading anything but the posters' names. Welcome to Indymedia UK- Not a racists haven, honest!
"Oy!", titter.
____
Irony Not Lost
03.12.2007 19:13
It's ironic that in attempting to Distract from the topic, the Troll(s) actually reinforce the premise.
Troll Intent To Distract
MJJ
Ooooh, now you've done it.
04.12.2007 00:51
Any minute now he'll start calling you "Gehrig the Plant" and say "aha! I knew it was you!"
@%<
gehrig
It's not libel to call you a thief, is it, Tony?
04.12.2007 02:24
And why is it that the thought of an 'Islamic society' gives Tony such heebie-jeebies? Could it be that in a country like Saudi Arabia he would have had both of his hands amputated by now for STEALING other people's property?
knuckles
e-mail:
knuckles@gmail.com
ALL in caps as well.
04.12.2007 08:58
"Yes I and others supported the academic boycott. But ALL those who support it reject people like Atzmon. Peeps who represents nothing bar a few semi-anarchists who've lost their way, believes anti-Semitism is the way to combat Zionism whereas in fact it gave birth to Zionism."
All is a lot of people. A totality. Just to start, why not check out Redress:
where they put as his bio: Gilad Atzmon is an Israeli-born musician, writer and anti-racism campaigner.
Or why not see what the Christisons think:
Or perhaps the many Palestinians and people running sites with Middle East content (well, I don't think you move in many Palestinian circles) Palestine Chronicle, Amin, Uruknet, Islam Online, or how about Dissident Voice, Tlaxcala, Rebelion, Counterpunch, Axis of Logic, The People's Voice, ICH, etc. can be considered in ALL?
Absolutist thinking is always wrong, especially when using statistics to convince.
BTW, Ftp is anti-Semitic (just as I am in your view) because we disagree with you! This is like your buddy and NON supporter of Boycott Shraga Elam writing to me that Atzmon is anti-semitic because he was rude to him in an email! This is carrying the weight of millenia on one's shoulders, and believe me, it is as foolish as it looks.
Hey, I'm pleased Aaronovitch gave money to BZU. But it has nothing to do with support of you, Greenstein. You engage in ad hominems and bullying on a constant basis, and it seems that this is how you feel justice is delivered.
thecutter
Homepage:
http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com
"Comin for to carry me home"
04.12.2007 10:24
I take it you have never even watched Perry Mason. Simply saying something is not a prosecutable offense. To be awarded libel/defamation damages a plaintiff would have to demonstrate that the accused had widely disseminated a false accusation/assertion that would damage their reputation. Libel/defamation is a very public matter.
Don't you think that Sharia amputation is something of a generalisation? I don't know the statistics but I wouldn't be confident in asserting that amputation is common to the majority of muslim countries.
I'd also be very careful of advancing the idea that Saudi is representative of Islam. It's something the far right, the government and the media are doing currently, to promote racist stereotypes.
It's not that far off a rich and successful version of the Taliban. Which isn't surprising since Saudi poured a lot of money into promoting Wahabbism and martial Jihad into Afghanisatn, Pakistan and the rest of the Stans.
Gehring
Well even if you put a sat phone up Jordan's backside he'd be no easier to spot. He broadcasts who he is from his nigh on autistic approach to language- the clinical meaning of the word; based on observations of autistic people I have interacted with. He uses a limited cluster of phrases and buzzwords and a tendency to either use a crib of sentences to cut and paste or he has 100% retention of the stock phrases. Oh and the capitals... and the 'Jews'... and the 'neofascists'... and the 'Plants'... and the 'Mossad'.
There is actually a way of backtracing IP addresses from a server that doesn't log TCP/IP. A log is just a list. The machine still uses TCP/IP to function- it has to.
I won't go into any detail because it's not exactly legal... without a court order.
The "irony" that was missed on Jordan is that the article isn't actually about Zionism and no-one here is actually arguing for Israel. The arguemnt is about antisemitism and like a gift from Satan's bowl down plops Jordan accusing the Jews of Zionsim...
FTP
What do you make of that FTP? Is it good that you didn't hide his contribution? Do you think letting racist remarks stand helps the case that this site has no "Jewish Problem"? Or don't you think that tarring all Jews with the same brush is racist?
"Against all racism!"
You?
MJJ
MJJ, try to read before you go blah-blah!
04.12.2007 10:48
Try to read more carefully. When I say Tony may have a fear of Sharia amputation due to his thieving history, this does not indicate promotion of Sharia law.
MJJ: To be awarded libel/defamation damages a plaintiff would have to demonstrate that the accused had widely disseminated a false accusation/assertion that would damage their reputation.
Yes, the point is it's not a false accusation. Greenstein' 'reputation' was cemented by these convictions.
knuckles
e-mail:
knuckles@gmail.com
Baffled
04.12.2007 11:48
The libel observation was in relation to you asserting that Greenstein had someone done just for saying something he didn't like. I was pointing out that legally that wouldn't be at all normal. Libel is more than a matter of just people not liking other people's remark.
MJJ
Interview: Atzmon on Indymedia
05.12.2007 13:25
knuckles
e-mail:
knuckles@gmail.com