[Imc-uk-features] Censorship of an anti-racist post - Articles opposing a holocaust denier are banned

[freethepeeps at aktivix.org]

Quoting tony greenstein <tonygreenstein at yahoo.com>:


>    
>   FTP, who has been all over the web defending Gilad Atzmon and Paul Eisen,
> has taken it upon himself to delete an article which explains how Atzmon has
> moved to a holocaust denial position.  Yet FTP has not hesitated to
> contribute to the Comments on the website where the article is posted.
>   http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=1559

The article was hidden as a repeat:
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-features/2008-January/0121-e4.html
and is inaccurate.
>   

It is basically these comments:
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/01/389744.html?c=on#c187980
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/01/389744.html?c=on#c187936

>  
>   Most of Atzmon's stuff on Indymedia is posted very widely on other sites,
> yet FTP, because he disagrees with it, has censored it.  Are the other
> moderators going to stand by and allow FTP to censor anti-racist posts which
> he disagrees with?  

It was hidden because it breached Indymedia guidelines. 

>   FTP used to complain about 'censorship'.  He is giving a good example of
> the far-right's real attitude to censorship.

Really? I'm far right now, am I? 


>    
>   The article sources everything.  See below

It doesn't actually, and it is riddled with inaccuracies. Most of it consists
of
2005 emails that have already been referred to by Greenstein many times - they
are certsinly not news. I could dissect the article paragraph by paragraph, but
then we're back to doing what was sought to be prevented, by the setting up of
the wiki.

If anyone wants me to list the inaccuracies, I will  - but major points are
that
the article completely fails to mention Atzmon's refutation, and links to
several holocaust denial sites. Is it a defence that the article is
"anti-racist"? Does that make the racist sites more palatable,  credible or
linkable? 

Greenstein writes:

"Whether or not Atzmon is correctly quoted is immaterial. Even if he is given
the benefit of a very considerable doubt, by his own words it is clear that he
has now become a fully fledged holocaust denier."

He then uses 3150 words, most of them not Atzmon's and does not show the words
that make it clear that Atzmon is a holocaust denier. 

As some of you are aware - Greenstein has portrayed me as an Aaronvitch loving,
Loyalist, anti-semitic zionist racist who is dominating the IMc moderators.

I don't see why this means that his inaccurate, misleading and rabid diatribes
should not be subject to the same guidelines as anyone else. 

I have now hidden the comments on the grounds that they too links to racist
sites


ftp