This is essentially a free speech forum. I enjoy much of the banter which goes on between commenters, particularly the dedicated band of people who post on a daily basis. There is an important distinction between my writing, and the comments section. The proportion of readers who leave comments is well under 1%. I cannot know what percentage of the readers read comments, but I suspect it is not terribly high.
In social media I find establishment hacks – particularly journalists and Labour Party functionaries – dismiss my thoughts by referring to the comments section. “Craig Murray – have you seen the tinfoil hats comments on his blog!” being a genuine and very typical example. Well, if people wish to damn me by association with the views of other people, that is sadly an example of the low intellectual standards of the British nomenklatura of our time. The only views on here which are mine are those which I write.
I cherish the diversity of the comment threads and am fond of our little community, most of whom I have never met. I do not value people by the standard of how close their views are to my own. I am sometimes saddened by the personal animosities which arise between people.
We state some rules from time to time. This is the current set, which I just made up:
No racism. Any comment which is racist will simple be deleted immediately. The biggest problem we face is anti-Jewish comment, which I will not tolerate. We are not in the business of stigmatising anti-Zionism as anti-Jewish, but there are quite frequently distinctly anti-Jewish comments. I deleted one just an hour ago.
Similarly, no holocaust denial. I do not believe it should be illegal (I am against thought crime) but I do not wish to have it on my blog as those associated with it often have very unpleasant sympathies. That is not to say the subject of the holocaust can never be mentioned – it will never be possible to ascertain the precise number who were killed, and it is important we remember not only the Jews but the Poles, gypsies, gays, freemasons and numerous others who suffered. But the basic facts are not in doubt. It is surprising how often people attempt to insinuate holocaust denial.
Sockpuppetry. It is in practice impossible to outlaw sockpuppetry without a formal registration system, which I do not want. But the adoption of multiple identities within the same thread is not to be allowed, nor the creation of identities of which the purpose is to ridicule, attack or insult another contributor.
Fair Play. Play the ball, not the man. Address arguments, not people. Do not impugn the motives of others, including me. No taunting.
Relevance
Attempts to keep people on topic are hopeless, but do try.
9/11
We don’t discuss 9/11. There are plenty of places on the web where you can do that. It tends to take over threads.
Contribute
Contributions which are primarily just a link to somewhere else will be deleted. You can post links, but give us the benefit of your thoughts upon them.
No explanation.
Enforcing these rules is necessarily arbitrary and needs judgement calls. Moderators are precluded from explaining decisions online. If you want to complain use the contact button.
Moderators
We have, and have had, excellent moderators over many years. But almost all have found it not only time consuming but also surprisingly emotionally draining. If you are interested in volunteering and are willing for me to know both your real and online identity, please get in tough using the contact button.
Craig : “Actually Node you are quite wrong. I have a genuine intellectual contempt for holocaust revisionism, which comes from two things – a) direct knowledge gleaned wjile I was in Poland including from eye-witnesses b) my experience of holocaust revisionists and their motives.”
Fair enough, it was presumptuous of me to answer on your behalf. However I was answering Monteverdi’s specific question, which was not about your beliefs regarding the holocaust but why you won’t allow discussion about it on an otherwise unrestricted blog. I’m sure your wide personal experience has given you personal insight on many other matters which you do not seek to ban from discussion.
Fed Up,
You are right to say that attacks on Muslims are under reported. On the other hand, exaggerated claims of antisemitic attacks on Jews within the UK are over reported:
http://www.thezionion.com/2015/02/08/the-fraudulent-rise-in-uk-antisemitism/
After George Galloway subsequently brought attention to the misleading claims of the Zionists on the BBC’s Question Time, some of the partisan Jewish extremist mob in the audience physically assaulted him and damaged his car outside the venue in North Finchley. The media portrayed Galloway as the villain.
Whilst it’s true the media tend to focus their ire (rightly) on the radicalisation of Muslims and the motivating factors underlying the latter’s tendency to join up with extreme jihadist elements in places like Syria and Iraq, they don’t appear to apply the same journalistic standards to Zionist Jews.
It ought not to be a surprise to anybody familiar with the media’s pro-Israeli bias, that we rarely, if ever, hear about thugs like the Zionist fanatic who hospitalized George Galloway as a result of a serious assault on the streets of London who subsequently emigrate to Israel by courtesy of the Likud fascists in order to fight for the IDF against unarmed Palestinian, men women and children.
But alas, such double standards are part of the course for our Zion controlled media.
“What are these motives?”
I’d assume there are various, some more grotesque then others.
Though to me is was quite a unique in scale and sheer madness. I still have problems with isolating that event in this manner sometimes. The British essentially just took over the camps for some time after. And then like now these seeds not only exist, but flourish in many places. Ie racist ideology…
As if states have ever cared for oppressed peoples anywhere if it’s not in their perceived interests to do so…. I know, let’s find you a home in the center of the middle east. Next to Jerusalem? Why not. ‘sigh’
Though to me is was quite a unique event* in-
“What do you think – would that be too harsh?” — Habbabkuk
I’d have to think about that, Habbabkuk.
When it comes to “Friends of Israel” I sometimes wonder if some people sign up to that because they think it’s the “done thing” (and they might get a free trip to Israel out of it.) That it’s just a box they tick, like joining the ‘right’ golf club. Or, whether they would actually refuse to put their names to anything that might even suggest giving a leg-up to the Palestinian people. In other words, I don’t know how important it is in practical terms that they’re on that list.
As for a “Jewish grandparent or two” — I’ve had a bellyful of that, and I’d have no problem with you deleting those.
This is all assuming (as you implied) that the comment in question was not specifically related to Israel, or to Jewish matters anywhere else.
Friends of Israel and CRIF and ADL/AIPAC are political lobby organisations. Very powerful lobby organisations.
It would be very curious indeed were discussion of their activities curtailed.
But yes, amusing that habby slipped that one in there. Now you know where he’s coming from. The intent is to curtail discussion of political activity by very powerful groups.
I’m of the view that all forms of holocaust revisionism/denial are not an appropriate form of discussion/debate for a blog like this or any other blog or forum for that matter.
I cannot see the point of arguing over matters of detail in terms of the evaluation of precise numbers, etc, when the substantive issue among those who are motivated by antisemitism, is to fundamentally question the validity of historical narrative per se.
I respect Craig’s motives and reasoning for censoring Holocaust revisionist discussion. But nevertheless, like other posters’, I don’t quite understand the selective approach taken.
To expand upon the question of motives, some people argue, conversely, that there are motives among those whose interests are, it is claimed, to perpetuate the primacy of Jewish suffering as a means of exploiting the Nazi Holocaust for political and financial gain, as well as to further the interests of Israel:
http://normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=3&ar=11
According to Finkelstein, this “Holocaust industry” has corrupted Jewish culture and the authentic memory of the Holocaust.
Herbie,
Are you referring to Habbabkuk at 11:59 am?
because if so, he wasn’t talking about any such curtailment.
Somebody — was it Voltaire? — once observed that the way you can tell who has the real power in a society is to determine whom you are not allowed to criticize.
“I, for example, – if I were moderating – would be inclined to delete posts which talk about MP X, let’s say in connection with the theme of the NHS, and then go on to remind us that he is a member of the Friends of Israel.”
You don’t think deletion amounts to curtailment of discussion?
“Somebody — was it Voltaire? — once observed that the way you can tell who has the real power in a society is to determine whom you are not allowed to criticize.”
Dunno.
But it’s a major theme of Gilad Atzmon these days.
Lysias, yes it was. And a very astute observation it was too. If we are serious in evaluating the roots of power, we ought not, in my view, be afraid of hiding from recognizing the disproportionate level of Jewish power contained within the whole and by extension the detrimental impacts this has on the Palestinian people and the fascist concept of Eretz Yisrael that this implies.
Craig
“Before you get too comfortable, I should say that both of you frequently attempt to provoke anti-Jewish comment or to insinuate any-Semitism in threads in which the issue has not arisen. Along the lines of “somebody will blame the Jews.” That behaviour is also very heavily interdicted.”
__________________
Well, I’m sorry you got the impression that I was expressing indue comfort because that certainly wasn’t my intention.
But I admit that I am comfortable with them because – given Moderators who play the game (as Jon conspicuously did not when he briefly banned me) – I think I have much less to fear from them than many others on here.
(It follows that I can’t agree with the strictures in your second sentence: I’m unaware, off-hand, of any posts where I’ve attempted to provoke anti-Jew comment, nor have I had to insinuate anything since the anti-semitism in most posts is only clumsily concealed and evident to anyone with eyes who wants to see).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
May I leave you with a final, evidence-based thought?
Some of your nine guidelines are so self-evident that one would not expect them to elicit comments.
Some of the others – eg “fair play” and “contribute” – might legitimately have given rise to comments and in particular questions. But they have not, on the whole.
Is it not telling that the guidelines which have stimulated the great majority of comments ( mostly more or less concealed complaints and all manner of quibbles) are the ones on racism/anti-Jew posts and, to a lesser degree, Holocaust denial?
That fact, in my opinion, shows that you were onto something when you drafted your guidelines.
///////////////////////////////
This is not for you, Craig, but I also note, finally, that some of most vociferous commenters on matters Jewish, Israeli and Zionist have shone by their absence from the discussion so far. I wonder why.
I wanted to talk about the lizard creatures who control the universe, but since Craig has banned that here’s Habba’s favourite: Chunky Mark interviewing Mhairi Black earlier today…
Mhairi Black the Rebellious Scots 1/3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUtVXD4Tp-M
Mhairi Black MP the Rebellious Scots 2/3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bIWZo79oHg
Mhairi Black MP the Rebellious Scots 3/3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSK8OXqm_5M
“them” in line 3 = Craig’s guidelines
Herbie
““I, for example, – if I were moderating – would be inclined to delete posts which talk about MP X, let’s say in connection with the theme of the NHS, and then go on to remind us that he is a member of the Friends of Israel.”
You don’t think deletion amounts to curtailment of discussion?”
___________________
No, because the objective of the deletion would be to disallow the introduction of an extraneous factor – ie, membership of the Friends of Israel – into a discussion on, say, the alleged privatisation of the NHS.
Because such introduction would be irrelevant to the subject matter and would only be there to get in a kick at the Jews.
Hope that’s clear, Herbie.
To avoid deletion, talk about the alleged privatisation of the NHS and leave out the irrelevant information that one of the actors is a Friend of Israel.
It’d be in the poster’s hands, really, wouldn’t it.
“No, because the objective of the deletion would be to disallow the introduction of an extraneous factor – ie, membership of the Friends of Israel – into a discussion on, say, the alleged privatisation of the NHS.”
How do you know that the individual’s membership of a powerful lobby organisation is an extraneous factor if you’re not allowed to refer to it?
Well it didn’t take long for Donald Trump,to show us his vision of America,if he wins the Presidential race.
Mr Trump, would axe Obamacare,massively reduce spending on education,push the pro-gun lobbies rights,and build a giant wall to stop Mexicans entering the US.
Mr Trump says that those measures would help make America great again.
Mr Trumps vision of America,makes Jeb Bush almost seem normal,but then again maybe not.
Other Republican front runners are, Kentucky senator Scott Walker,Rand Paul and Texas senator Ted Cruz.
well said Craig, Habby had been goading others in the past and being such an ace finding the comments of others, he could do better and look/search for his own unfortunate posts.
It will come as no surprise to many that whistleblower William McNeilly,(the submariner who blew open the state of the UK’s sub fleet) has been dismissed.
Mr McNeilly bravely pointed out the dangerous lack of maintenance and procedure surrounding the aging and leaking UK’s nuclear submarines.
Amongst the many extremely dangerous faults found by Mr mcNeilly were alarms being put on mute because they went off so often,and toilet rolls stored on power boxes,not forgetting submariners working out surrounded by nuclear weapons.
Mr McNeilly in my opinion should’ve been comended,for doing the right thing.
Herbie
If there is some connection between Friends of Israel and the NHS that I (and possibly other people) are unaware of, perhaps you’d be so kind as to enlighten me/us?
Habby.
Don’t take this the wrong way,but unfortunately,you’re not moderator material,your view of the world is much to slanted I fear you’d be far to heavy handed in moderating comments.
Stick to ruffling posters feathers,it really is your forte,leave the moderating to someone more balanced.
“If there is some connection between Friends of Israel and the NHS that I (and possibly other people) are unaware of, perhaps you’d be so kind as to enlighten me/us?”
The issue is one of principle, of openness.
We won’t know what interests people ought to declare unless their connections are laid bare.
This is quite a common principle, or at least used to be.
The key really is to apply the principle broadly and not allow some groups to evade it by special pleading.
Amber Rudd, posing in front of nuclear power stations reiterating that we need prettier power stations does not seem to be aware, despite being a scientist, what it means if one top shelf technologically astute country such as Japan runs out of options.
How long does she think it will take before TEPCO’s top brass get attacked and taken to task for their deliberate dithering, refusing to accept foreign help for nearly 2 years?
The 2020 Olympics are dead in the water, sell your tickets now
And why does Mrs. Rudd think that German precision engineering and minds are turning away from these dangerous, indiscriminate, hallo all you four eyed fish in the pacific, PWR’s? Does she think her knowledge trumps that of Merkel, herself facing both ways in this debate?
If she accept this Chinese French deal and present us with ten PWR’s, she is as guilty as the blokes in TEPCO, she is also creating a powerful informed opposition who had enough of marching to Aldermaston and berate self serving scientists.
Bullshit, Herbie.
The principle is not applied broadly. The main/only interest that is regularly declared here is membership of Friends of Israel.
I’m done with this. I’m going to watch a film.
Forgot to mention, PLEASE DO NOT LET YOUR KIDS OUT IN THE RAIN WITHOUT BEING COVERED BY A BROLLY OR MACK. IF THE CONCENTRATION OVER WASHINGTON STATE WAS THAT HIGH, THEN WE ARE FACING AND UNPRECEDENTED IMPACT ON THE GLOBAL SOCIETY.
Nuclear power in its pursuit for [profits has faced many warnings and challenges. Now, in the face of utter failure they are prepared to poison one of the best sources of protein, shorten lifespans, massive increase in childhood and other cancers,
Do they think we’re stupid, the fucks are living in a blinkered utopia with no regrets for their abject failure.
Is Andy Burnham a labour friend of Israel?
It seems to be the rules banning Jew-hatred and Holocaust denial that are causing the most objection.
Dreoilin
The principle is one that applies in political life more generally.
Israel, Israelis and Israeli companies have financial and political interests in the UK.
We need to know whether politicians are pursuing policies based on their merits or whether there are financial interests behind them.
That means exposing all memberships of groups, lobby groups etc, including Friends of Israel.
So when habby suggested that mention of FoI be excluded then that’s not positive for openess.
It’s unfortunate that you seem unable to view anything on this board other than in terms of your hatred of Mary.
That’s bad enough but your analysis rarely amounts to anything more than the most superficial nonsense.
Run along.
Watch your film.
Let’s hope it’s a medium better suited to your abilities.