Harry’s Place is the natural home for ex-socialists who joined the neo-con assault on the developing world, and then sought to justify themselves by extreme vituperation against anyone who exhibited a greater degree of political consistency. But these rather sad people need a home, and it is quite wrong for the site to be taken down.
I am genuinely flummoxed as to why people who disagree with something don’t simply argue back, expecially on blogs which have undermined the need for access to a printing press. The fact that I am really nice and the denizens of Harry’s Place really horrible does not in the least make the attack on Harry’s Place any more justified than Alisher Usmanov’s or Tim Spicer’s attacks on me. Support freedom of speech and an open web! Bring back horrible Harry!
We have had our fill of holocaust deniers. Were we to ask the question, who would top the league of holocaust devaluers. What would the answer be?
Craig, I heartily agree with your main point but this is an unfortunate case to be making it with. Read Lenin's Tomb on the matter.
It has got nothing to do with the evils of 'Holocaust Denial' – as implied by Benny the BB – and everything to do with persistent, deliberate and malicious conflating of support for the Palestinian cause with anti-Semitism. There is a world of difference between being anti-racist/apartheid/Zionist and being anti-Semitic. But, given the historical and relentlessly worsening treatment of the Palestinians by the Israeli State, such conflating is about all they have to counter their critics. As this case illustrates, it continues to be very VERY effective. Harry's Place and its Zionist supporters must be be rubbing their hands with self-righteous glee at the propaganda coup handed them right now.
I suppose I was really only making the point in passing that the Israelis have totally devalued the holocaust.
Sabretache
I know what you mean, but the point is that no matter how right you are, you shouldn't take down a blog. You should argue your case.
Benny – Sorry; I missed the rhetorical question bit and went off half-cocked (again – oh dear). Anyway, I agree completely. And the depressing thing is that it is STILL a very effective way stifling rational debate on one of the greatest ongoing persecutions of the age.
Craig. You're right of course but, as I understand it, all she did was complain to the ISP. She certainly doesn't have the wherewithal to make a credible threat of legal action.
David Duke's site does host a valuable collection of documents on Deir Yasin. If the Sheffield academic linked to the documents directly, and not to the home page, she has reasonable grounds for complaint if she's accused of being a Nazi apologist.
The Israeli lobby, by bandying around accusations of anti-Semitism at anybody whose political views are not in accordance with mainstream Zionism has weakened much of the opprobrium that used to be associated with the term (and will no doubt be the first to squeal when the real anti-Semites). It's got to the stage where if somebody says, "He's an anti-Semite" my reaction is "Oh, that's OK. I was a bit worried he might have been a fascist."