[Imc-uk-features] 'Anti-semitism' and the Greenstein/Atzmon bunfight

[freethepeeps at aktivix.org]

Quoting yossarian <yossarian at aktivix.org>:

> 
> If your response is essentially "here's his proof!" and then reproducing
> his long list of Jews in key positions in the Bush administration, where
> does that leave us?  

Only of course, it isn't HIS long list of Jews - as he said at the beginning -
its from here:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/bushjews.html - the sites
raison d'etre is outlined here:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/about/index.shtml


> 
> I'd be happy to meet you for a beer in the next couple days if you want
> to talk about this stuff, I think it'd be more productive to talk in
> person than on the lists, mainly because I don't have the hours of
> emailing time and it'd be faster to just speak to each other,
> 


Essentially it is for the list to attempt to reach consensus on the call from
you and Startx for Atzmon to be banned from the site. I am against the move,
and I have made my reasons clear.

Quoting guidoreports at riseup.net:

> Much of the the stuff being banded around in this discussion could have
> been directly drawn from "Mind Benders" a book written by Nick Griffen a
> few years ago. Giving space to conspiracies about Jewish media control ect
> justs streangthens the position of the Zionist media lobby who shriek
> 'anti semite' at every given opportunity and also the far right who I am
> sure who love to publish some (out of context) quotes below and then
> accredit them to "Indymedia moderators discussion'.

I thought our raison d'etre was "a world based on freedom, cooperation, justice
and solidarity, and against environmental degradation, neoliberal exploitation,
racism and patriarchy", rather than the appeasement of 'the far right'.

As to the claim that Atzmon echoes Griffin, or conspiracists, the problem we
keep hitting seems to be one of posts that are considered to be 'anti-semitic
in their effect if not their intent', and this is a dangerous area to move
into, as is outlined in this article by Judith Butler
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v25/n16/butl02_.html. 

Blankfort is an anti-zionist who argues that the left's tendency to ignore the
power of the Israel lobby, is one of the reasons for the failure of the
anti-war movement -
http://www.sott.net/signs/editorials/signs_TheChomskyBlankfortPolemic.php - he
specifically rebuts Chomsky's line on the lobby. 

Perhaps it is doe to the awful gatekeeping around this issue, that the views of
progressives such as Blankfort are not more widely known.
> 
> It is my opinion that each article published on the site shoud be
> considered by its merits. If the author has a history of any form of
> racism or any other repressive banter then a blanket ban is appropriate.
> Perhaps people should be considering if the published article is 'original
> news' or just free advertising for theoretical non-news more suited to a
> disscussion forum of some kind?
> 
> G.
> 
I agree that articles should be decided on a case by case basis, unless the
author has a has a history of racism, but in this case, criticism has been of
the author and other stuff from other articles, rather than the piece which
certainly presents a unique perspective on the ramifications of the Lebanon
war.

Until the underlying issues are sorted out, we will keep ending up in this same
unremitting round of emails.

Peacepalestine, which often carries Atzmon articles has written about this
debate here:
http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2007/11/censorship-and-hiding-texts-big-and.html

best

ftp