Do both The JC and The Guardian censor blogs?

Rusbridger's days must be numbered. The advertisers are pulling out, thanks in no small part to CIFWatch.

I wonder what arguments The Guardian's supporters club will come up with to justify the censorship of comments on their blog. My guess is that they will ignore this JC post, pretending that they haven't seen it.

It is of course, about time, that those who beleive in The Freedom of Censorship defended it openly. But it might be a little too much to expect such honesty on their behalf?

Has anyone been censored by The JC for blogging posts and comments that are critical of Israel?

now we are in totally fantasy land... 'the Jewish chronicle is more morally superior to the Guardian'

can we look at the wider, larger picture, the Guardian publishes articles on various subjects, it reports on human rights violations by many nations including Israel. But not exclusively Israel, despite what some of you may claim on this blog. Alternatively, the Jewish Chronicle is critical of anything that is critical of Israel.

Plus Jonathan routinely calls for people to be publicly removed if he objects to their statements or reports them to CIF watch in a bid to discredit them... I think this blog has a way to go, in terms of engaging in debate before it can claim moral superiority. But nice try.

"Jonathan routinely calls for people to be publicly removed if he objects to their statements"

Evidence?

Or withdraw.

yes, I have - but it's no big deal, lots of blogs have moderators, as long as they are honest with this approach. Even on cif i think if enough people report a post as abuse then it gets flagged for removal, i have had lots of posts removed i think for this reason. Cifwatch on the other hand should be appauded for their posting policy, i've never had a post rejected or removed unlike Harry's Place with it's laughable statement of "Liberty, if it means anything, is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear". As long as HP doesn't object that is!

zair,
What did you write on The JC that was censored, because of its anti-israel content?

ibrows,
Have you been censored on the JC for anti-Israel comments? If so, what did you write?

Evidence?

Or withdraw.

2 hours, no response

Why am I not surprised...

Jonathan,

Be patient.

Ibrows is preparing his evidence.

Ibrows is going through back editions of The JC blog.

It is laborious and painstaking work. Some of the pages are tattered.

Off-topic, but here's something from Oz which should warm the cockles of all pro-Israel hearts. It's a letter from a well-known TV personality there to a staunchly pro-Israel Jewish federal MP. (Good on yer, John-Michael, we need more of your sort over here!).
Letter from John-Michael Howson

Tuesday May 25, 2010
Dear Michael,
As a supporter of the State of Israel and as someone who feels that we Gentiles can never do enough to make amends to the Jewish people I am appalled at the cynical action of the government in expelling an Israeli diplomat,
I know the prime minister has an agenda to get Australia a temporary seat on the Security Council (or maybe get himself elected Secretary-General) and to do so is prepared to jettison our support for Israel to curry favor with its enemies who, in the scheme of things, would also do us harm. However, while a reprimand may have been in order (together with an admission that Australia has agents who also use forged passports) the expelling was an extraordinary action.
Gordon Brown, in a desperate attempt to get himself out of the headlines, expelled an Israeli diplomat but niether the governments of France or Germay have reacted in a same way although it is claimed that forged French and German passports were used. Frankly, Michael, if I knew Israel needed a passport to rid the world of these people I would gladly give them mine.
In recent years I have been stunned and appalled at the vilification of Israel by people who propagandize for Israel's enemies. When I have defended Israel on radio I get calls usually from people, I'm sorry to say, who come from the Left, who take a virulent anti-Israel line and who often tinge their comments with anti-Semitic remarks. The number of anti-Israel stories broadcast by the ABC which, sometimes, come from the rigorous critics of Israel at the BBC is shocking because, as with so much with our national broadcaster, they have a line and they will bend the rules of debate and discussion to broadcast their agenda.
It saddens me when prominent Jews with a radical agenda also attack Israel. Perhaps, they think that appeasing the enemy will get them a special status. It reminds me of those pathetic creatures who served in the Blue Police thinking they would be spared. It's ironic to be a Christian arguing support for Israel against a radical person with a Jewish background supporting Hezbollah! What strange times we live in.
I remember when Bob Hawke shed tears over his commitment to Israel. I wonder what he thinks about this action by this government?

http://www.smh.com.au/national/australia-forges-passports-too-says-bisho...

Yvetta - Did you see this admission that Australia uses forged passports?

No, I hadn't seen that interview before, Jonathan - thanks for pointing it out. The Howard government, of which Julie Bishop used to be a member, was terrifically pro-Israel. I was glad to see her on form.

BD,

I can honestly say i have never been censored on the JC blog. But i have actually been censored on the guardian blog. I had direct quotes from Amnesty International's report on Israel's 'wanton destruction' during operation cast lead in Gaza repeatedly removed despite my constantly re-posting them, along with some Israeli soldiers quotes from 'breaking the silence'. I know you probably wont believe me but straight up its true. If you wish to look through the archive you will see all my comments removed from that discussion by the moderator.

Can't really be bothered to go through all of Jonathan's rantings, AS I HAVE A LIFE.

A couple of my recent favourites though include,

'Resign Alan Rusbridger

This lie is every but as disgusting as Tonge's call for an Inquiry into the blood libel allegations in Haiti

Go Now!'

and the classic one about comparing someone to a reptile, then claiming that would be cruel to the reptile (I paraphrase this one obviously). I don't think Jonathan can really disagree with my statement of trying to vilify, undermine and/or calling for the removal of content or people whose views he disagrees with. I bet i could find a few crackers, if i looked at his references to Ben White, or Avi Shlaim, Jonathan cook, Norman Finkelstein... the list is endless

Plus just checked on guardian blog and they have removed one of my comments made today. So that does tend to undermine your argument that the guardian simply removes any pro-Israel comments.

Notwe that Ibrows has not been able to come up with a single example of:

"Jonathan routinely calls for people to be publicly removed if he objects to their statements or reports them to CIF watch in a bid to discredit them... "

If you can't play the ball, play the man ... atta boy!

so you don't try to discredit those whose views you disagree with Jonathan? is what your claiming? What i am saying is why don't you simply debate people with different perspectives without attacking anyone who is critical of Israeli policies. check the evidence thats what i am saying, instead of vilifying anyone who is critical.

ibrows,

From your comments, I now conclude that

(1) The JC has not censored your comments.

(2) The Guardian sometimes censors your anti-Israel comments, although you cannot understand why.

(3) Jonathan Hoffman does not call actually call for people to be "publicly removed" from The JC blog.

(4) You beleive that Jonathan's call for Alan Rusbridger's resigantion is a reflection of Jonathan's contempt for freedom of expression.

(5) You object to Jonathan discrediting people whose views he disagrees with.

Referring to the above, I comment as follows...

(1) I suspected that this is true and it does show that The JC, unlike The Guardian, believes in freedom of expression.

(2) I am surprised, but still maintain that The Guardian is totally wrong to remove pro-Israel comments. It is a further indication that it does not believe in freedom of expression.

(3) You should apolologize to Jonathan for being inaccurate. You have provided no evidence that he is trying to censor people on The JC blog.

(4) Jonathan should, of course, be free to call for an editor's resignation. Rusbridger edits a newspaper. Jonathan doesn't. The balance of power is weighted heavily in Rusbridger's favour.

(5) Jonathan should be free to discredit people. They can always sue him if his attacks are defamatory.

you misrepresent what i said. Let me spell it out again.

On the one hand, you claim JC is beacon of free speech as it doesn't remove comments. You also claimed the guardian removes all pro-Israel statements, which is untrue, and as i said there is proof this in incorrect as i have had some of my comments removed that were critical of Israeli policies such as during operation cast lead.

On the other hand, Jonathan does and has called for the removal (not from JC blogs) from public positions of those whose views he disagrees with. I stand by this statement (such as the call for Alan Rusbridger's resigantion), he has also sought to ridicule those such as Ben White and others he disagrees with.

So it appears that you and Jonathan believe that freedom of expression is ok, as long as that expression doesnt oppose your view. How can you moan about your commments being removed on the guardian and then call for the removal of someone from a public position, simply as you disagree with their views.

double standards, does your version of free speech only count, if your the one trying to speak

So is Alan Rusbridger's freedom of expression not accepted?

3rd March, Jonathan you posted a link about Ben White, which has him pictured in a nazi hat, with the phrase beneath 'Ben comes to spit hatred and incite the killing of Jews'.

This is what i am talking about, did Ben White really say that? I am guessing that he did not, i think your link is just using extremist language to try and discredit his views which they dislike.

totally shocking

I am guessing its these sort of views that led to your comments being removed on the guardian

One: You have failed to prove this statement: "Jonathan routinely calls for people to be publicly removed if he objects to their statements or reports them to CIF watch in a bid to discredit them... "

I have not called for Rustbucket's 'removal'. Who is it that could 'remove' him?

I have called for him to resign because of his campaign of slurring and vilifying Israel, even to the extent of allowing patently false stories onto the front page (eg McGreal's on Monday).

Two: You have no idea whether I post on Guardian CIF

None of what you say can be taken at face value, it seems. You are a time waster.

Jonathan, i will address your points, but you again repeatedly ignore my question regarding Ben White and the extremist link you posted, which was highly offensive, and inaccurate unless you can prove that Ben White made the statements the link claims. You are endorsing these extremist views and trying to discredit Ben White by posting this right-wing nonsense link. This is one example of an instance that you sought to discredit an individual as you disagreed with his views.

You do also continually endorse CIFwatch attempts to discredit people. We both know, the vast majority of these people such as Ben White are not anti-semitic in their statements, but you merely dislike their views which are critical of Israel, this does not amount to anti-semitism.

So can you clarify do you stand by the views about Ben White expressed in your link. Just so we are clear?

ibrows you are mistaken
The Guardian loves you, it is littered with your illiterate anti-Israel 2-digit IQ postings, on the other hand any attempt by me to redress the balance with a pro-Israel post is immediateley declined, no sooner do I make the post then it is censored.
The Guardian is not interested in Journalism or reporting the news.
The Guardian is there to vilify Israel and write it's own version of the news, this is clearly evidenced by the rantings of "I am a Rustbucket" it's editor and the various anti-semitic hacks, Ben White etc, it uses to write it's material.
On the other hand the JC (for what it's worth), is so laid back to be bent over, to accommodate yours and all your other Guardianesque, nutty, left-wing open-toed sandal wearers who love to post their self-hatred, anti-Israel garbage on the "Jewish Chronicle" web site.
(I am sure good Psychiatrist would have and explanation for you and your friends behaviour).
Get A Life !!
and Face Up to It - Criticism of Israel IS ANTI-SEMITISM It might be couched in trendy, lefty, mumbo jumbo, jargonesque verbosity but it is still ANTI-SEMITISM.

criticism of Israel is NOT automatically anti-semitic. So is Israel beyond criticism is that what your saying? This is crazy. So i can critique British, or French policies but not the policies of Israel as that would automatically be anti-semitic? Is that what your saying? get real.

Jon if you adopt this position that any criticism = anti-semitism your also affirming the position of Finkelstein and others who argue this position has been used to render Israel above criticism and deflect opposition to its treatment of the Palestinians

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

". . . You declare, my friend, that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely 'anti-Zionist.' And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops, let it echo through the valleys of God's green earth: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews--this is God's own truth.

As far back as the 1960's intelligent people realised that crtiscism of Israel IS anti-semitism.
It is ONLY the self-hating, Guardian loving, left-wing, nutters, of Jewish origin with a 2 digit IQ - like Finkelstein, that think otherwise.

Ibrows,

With regard to Jonathan calling for Rusbridger's resigantion:

I reiterate... as an editor Rusbridger has immense power. Jonathan, on the other hand, is just a blogger (is he regularly censored by The Guardian?). There is, of course, a massive disparity in their respective power. As a result, it is quite reasonable for Jonathan to suggest that the editor should resign. If he believes that Rusbridger is an unprofessional editor who misleads his readers, then it could be well argued that Jonathan has a moral obligation to do so.

Jon check the dictionary, criticism of Israeli policies, is not the same as anti-semitism. By critiquing an Israeli policy i am not blaming all the Jews worldwide for one bad political policy conducted by the Israeli state. I am aware that these are totally separate issues, and the Jewish community as a whole is not responsible for Israeli state policies.

Jon do you think that the Israeli state is infallible then, and beyond criticism?

Blacklisted Dictator

So if its about power, then using your logic, i as a mere blogger can also critique Israeli state policies, in fact i have a moral obligation to do so, where i feel they are unjust and discriminatory.

When any state or state's policies become above critique we are headed towards dangerous authoritarian territory

What have you been smoking?

You fail to justify your allegation about me calling for people to be "publicly removed" and then try to divert the thread to Ben White!

Justify the allegation!

As for Ben White - a forensic demolition of the abomination which he calls a book is here:

http://blog.z-word.com/2009/07/lies-damn-lies-and-the-apartheid-analogy/

No Jonathan,

I said you wish to get people publicly removed whose views you disagree with, such as the editor Rusbridger. You can't legitimately dispute this. Plus i said you ridicule and seek to discredit those like Ben White you disagree with, by deeply dubious means such as posting links of Ben White to look like he is wearing a nazi hat with claims that he incites the 'killing of Jews'.

These statements are both FACT and supported by evidence on this blog. You do want the guardian editor removed, sacked, call it what you want and you have subjected Ben White to a savage attack and associated him with Hitler, as you personally don't like him and disagree with him. How much lower can you go than that. Its a disgrace.

Why and how is it acceptable to post that link and associate Ben White with Hitler, if someone posted that link with reference to you, simply because they disagreed with you, i am sure you would rightly find its outrageous.

Ibrows,
You write:
"So if its about power, then using your logic, i as a mere blogger can also critique Israeli state policies, in fact i have a moral obligation to do so, where i feel they are unjust and discriminatory.
When any state or state's policies become above critique we are headed towards dangerous authoritarian territory"

Is anyone stopping you posting comments on The JC blog? You have stated that they haven't. You will note, if you actually stop to think for one moment, that The JC is letting you write whatever you like.

Moreover if you feel that you have a moral obligation to critique Israel's policies, then you are quite justified to post your views on this blog.

However, we are quite justified to point out where your critique is wrong. In fact, we have a moral obligation to do so.

Ibrows

So you are not just a false accuser - you are a cheeerleader for Ben White, the man who said “I do not consider myself an anti-Semite, yet I can also understand why some are” and who tried to contextualise comments of Ahmadinejad suggesting Holocaust Denial.

You're a disgrace and not worth wasting any more time on.

Jonathan

haha, i am a false accuser. You are a complete joke. Posting links with people you oppose in a nazi hat. You must be proud that your blogging and reputation has reached such a low level that you have to resort to such low-life and underhand behaviour.

I am not Ben White's 'cheerleader'. I am merely using this as an example to reveal your method of trying to discredit people whose views you dislike/oppose. You asked for evidence, i am providing it.

Can you provide evidence of when Ben White said this supposed statement? i doubt it.

ibrows
This is Ben White, the man you "cheer-lead" for:-

Ben Whites book entitled “Israeli Apartheid: A Beginner’s Guide”. Jews for Justice for Palestinians and War on Want are both advocates for the book.
White’s use of doctored quotes and the inclusion of Roger Garaudy, the well-known Holocaust denier, as an apparently authoritative source on Israel and Zionism shows what White is all about

Ben White, British anti-Semite, claiming to be an authority on Israel and the Middle East, spoke at Columbia University on the evening of March 2, 2010. The stench of his lies and smug disdain for Israel was all that was heard (of course); nothing but his one sided hateful presentation of LIES hosted by Columbia during their vile "Israeli Apartheid Week". The students at Columbia heard only lies, lies and MORE lies from the mouth of Ben White, ANTI-SEMITE.

Ben White is a freelance writer and journalist and author of “Justice is Mission” and “Israeli Apartheid: A Beginner’s Guide” who now lives in the UK. White writes extensively about what he terms “Palestine/Israel” to the point of near obsession and is a regular contributor to ‘Comment is Free’ and the virulently anti-Israel ‘Electronic Intifada’.

An open supporter of the one-state solution, White regularly accuses Israel of ethnic cleansing, attributes the malicious slurs of colonisation, racism and apartheid to Israel, acts as an apologist for Islamist violence against the Jewish state, draws parallels between Nazi Germany and Zionism, has a problem with the police arresting those involved in plots to bomb synagogues, and has even gone as far as to flirt with Holocaust denial, or more accurately Holocaust revisionism.

For you to advocate open support for such an evil little racist tells us all that you have no place blogging and posting on the Jewish Chronicle web site - now go away and troll off back to the Guardian.

Jon we have already established your position, you claim someone is anti-semitic, simply if they are critical of Israeli policies. Your position is untenable and nonsense. Those who committed atrocities against Jews, (or advocate such atrocities) and are clearly anti-semitic, they are not in anyway the same as those who are critical of some Israeli state policies. Can you still really not see this!

ibrows
It is "Your position (that) is untenable and nonsense"
All normal Jews are by now so fed up "to the back teeth" with you endless stream of people purporting to be "Jewish", but just have a hate filled anti-Israel agenda and joining in the de-legitimnise Israel campaign so that "you feel accepted".
With the Ben Whites, George Galloways and "Uncle Tom" South Africans of this world we have enough to contend with without you anti-Jewish Jews - it really is about time you grew up, realised why Israel exists and thank your lucky stars that it does exist!

ibrows,
Do you criticize people who dub Israelis "Nazis"?

If you do, please provide me with links.

If you don't, why don't you?

BD, Who has made this statement about Israelis and Nazis?

No-one (least of all Jonathan) has been able to answer my initial question. Did Ben white make any of these supposed 'anti-semitic' points, if so can i have proof, references. Or is it, as i expect simply that he was critical of Israel and that Jonathan sought to discredit him through the Nazi link.

Jon has already confirmed his ridiculous position, that any criticism of the Israeli state policies, is automatically anti-semitic. I am hoping this sentiment is not widely accepted, would anyone else care to comment upon this?

ibrows
Three references for you, do you need more?
1. Ben White understands why some people are antisemites. In an article in Counterpunch entitled “Is It ‘Possible’ to Understand the Rise in ‘Anti-Semitism’?”, White stated that “I do not consider myself an anti-Semite, yet I can also understand why some are”. This after linking the rise of antisemitism with “the widespread bias and subservience to the Israeli cause in the Western media”. As observed by blogger, Seismic Shock, “White here jumps straight into transitional bog-standard antisemitic Protocols of the Elders of Zion language”.

2.Ben White flirts with Holocaust revisionism In an article entitled “History, Myths and All the News That’s Fit to Print”, White wrote a defense of Ahmadinejad’s Holocaust denial denying that Ahmadinejad engaged in Holocaust denial and contextualizing Ahmadinejad’s Holocaust denial.

3.Ben White includes an essay by a Holocaust denier in his ‘select bibliography’ in his book.

Why are you trying to defend Ben White on these pages?

Ibrows,
You write: "BD, Who has made this statement about Israelis and Nazis?"

Of course, many peole have made this comparison. In a June 2007 article "Slouching toward a Palestinian Holocaust", Richard Falk compared some Israeli policies with regard to the Palestinians to the Nazi Germany record of collective punishment.

nicely decontextualised Jon,

Ben White's article discusses the issue of the boundaries of criticism and antisemitism, before claiming that Israeli policies discrimination of Palestinians have created more hatred towards Jews (this is White's view). Then, and listen to this bit Jon its important, White makes a clear distinction, he states:

'I have just provided a by no means comprehensive list of reasons why "I can understand very well that some people are unpleasant towards Jews." I do not agree with them, but I can understand''.

White is saying, if this really needs spelling out, he understands there is a link between Israeli policies ill treatment of Palestinians and people being 'unpleasant towards Jews', but then he confirms, he does not agree with these people.

I am not trying to defend Ben White's particular views, this example was initially used simply to underline the use of slander and vilification that has sought to undermine his position, simply because it was disagreed with.

There is nothing anti-semitic in this article

BD

YOU HAVE TOTALLY LOST ME?

ibrows,
Do you criticize people who dub Israelis "Nazis"?

If you do, please provide me with links.

If you don't, why don't you?

Ibrows,

Do you agree with those (like Richard Falk) who argue that Israel's actions are analagous to those of The Nazis?

Blacklisted Dictator

the state of Israel clearly discriminates against the Palestinians in many forms and treats them as second class citizens within Israel. Plus in the occupied territories there are separate laws for Jews and Palestinians (the latter being subject to military laws) and separate roads (for Jewish settlers only, that Palestinians are prohibited from using) and severe restrictions of movement which APPLY EXCLUSIVELY TO THE PALESTINIANS. Plus many Palestinians have had land seized by the state, which is subsequently handed over to Jewish settlers.

Nevertheless, to answer your question directly, i personally do NOT believe Israel's actions can be compared to the Nazis. However, the Israeli state does clearly discriminate against the Palestinians systematically, they are prevented from doing many things that they would be able to do, if they were born Jewish, plus many of these Palestinians have been repeatedly made refugees by the Israeli state, despite their families living in what is now Israel prior to 1948.

Ibrows,
You write: "i personally do NOT believe Israel's actions can be compared to the Nazis."

(a) Have you ever written anything in opposition to people who do compare Israel's actions to The Nazis?

(b) If you don't, why do you keep silent?

"proof, references"

... the usual plea of the Deniers and Time-Wasters

I have already given you the reference to my article on Z-Word blog. The blog "Seismic Shock" has masses of material on Ben White. Also see here:

http://cifwatch.com/cif-contributors/ben-white/

I cannot read it for you, you have to do that yourself. Then "get a life" as the saying goes.

Jonathan,

CIFwatch is where Jon got his decontextualised material on Ben White, like i said the whole quote that Jon cited actually reads in full...

'I have just provided a by no means comprehensive list of reasons why "I can understand very well that some people are unpleasant towards Jews." I DO NOT AGREE WITH THEM, but I can understand''.

GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT BEFORE YOU RESORT TO NAZI ASSOCIATIONS!