Friday, April 28, 2006

More fun with you-know-who

Another great post that apparently was too “inflammatory” for the Indybay censors. Concerning the Hamas lead Palestine:

Since you support practitioners of attempts at genocide, you're a genocide supporter and are immediately to be suspected to be a liar, so your musings cannot be taken seriously.

Calling Israel a "terror state" and a "liar" while childishly referring to the Palestinians as "the good people of Palestine" till you're blue in the face and making the nonsensical accusation that Israel has terrorized the Palestinians won't make it any more true, even if you get to feel better about your morally decrepit apology for genocidal racist murderers.

What's unacceptable is your zealous pro-racism, pro-Muslim theocracy, pro-terror, pro-Muslim fundamentalist stance. That you brand the Israeli leadership as fanatics gives you away as a tiresome buffoon.

"The Palestinians haven't ever been given a reasonable aggreement [sic]"
"Give them back their stolen land!"

Did I say you're a liar? Not even a remotely good one at that. And no, Israel won't undo itself just so your pet murderous theocratic friends get to expand Shari`a and dhimmitude to the last extant non-Muslim patrimony in the Mideast. To you an agreement means capitulation to fundamentalist Muslim forces. Anything short of that you consider to be "fucked up".

And did we mention that your fanatic favorite Muslim terrorists believe they've got a god given birthright to all the land of Israel which they consider a Muslim land but isn't theirs?

Dream on. - Shime`on ben Kosiba


Well said. You can read the whole article and thread here.
I still have not heard back from Santa Cruz Indymedia concerning their editorial policies...

"Nice... Nice, I like."




I am surprised Indymedia does not quote Borat more often. Many of Borat’s anti-Semitic and racist comments would fit nicely into any of the “Zio-Nazi” reports Indymedia sites love to run. Borat thinks the Jews take everyone’s money, attack people with their “Jew claw”, and he has advocated throwing them down a well on more than one occasion. Sounds like your standard “Zio-Nazi” report to me.

Thankfully, Borat is just a character by Sacha Cohen whose antics are meant to expose the closeted anti-Semitism that still exists in the West. The “Zio-Nazi” report however, is poorly disguised racism, masquerading as legitimate journalism. Israelis and Jews are continually described as:

“vulgar fascist zionazi(s) doing what they can to suppress the truth.”

“Since the Nazis, has there been a more diabolical group of people than the Zio-neo-Nazis?”

“Then when people try to defend themselves, their families and countries from the attack of the Zio-American Neo-Nazis, those brave freedom fighters who risk their lives to defend their countries are slandered mercilessly in the Zionist controlled mass media.”


No, that is not a joke or intended to be ironic, that is the stated views of Sydney Indymedia, and sadly, most of the other affiliates. You might as well be reading the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

I think Borat put it best when he said:

“How many punch you take to cow before it fall? For me, my record is 11."
Ok, that doesn’t explain anything, but I needed to laugh at something after reading through the “Zio-Nazi” report.

Thursday, April 27, 2006

Dur da Dur da Dur Dur

From our good ol "buddies" over at “Electronic Intifada.” Seems like they can’t deal with the legitimate reason for the European Union cutting its aid to Palestine.

"In the new situation following the Palestinian elections," he says, "we have remained true to our principles. We respect the Palestinians' democratic choice; we do not intend to punish them or to blackmail the Government they have chosen. But if the party in power no longer shares the peace agenda underpinning our partnership or a vision of a pluralist Palestinian society attached to the rule of law and respect for human rights, we are obliged to reflect on the conditions under which the European Community and the Governments of the Union may continue to use European taxpayers' money in the context of assistance to the Palestinians and their institutions. Our laws require us, at all costs, to avoid funding terrorist activities. Our political goals require us to ensure that the actions of both parties to the conflict remain compatible with the two-State solution negotiated between the parties." - Javier Solana, European Union Foreign Policy chief

Sounds understandable to me, but this is an Indybay article, so you know how they feel about this. I have included the 'hidden' comments in my link. You know, the ones that makes sense.

Rockin in the Free World

Over at DC Indymedia Watch, they have a nice defense of Neil Young and his new record, which apparently takes a few swings at President Bush.

Frankly, Neil Young could make a whole record of fart noises and I would probably buy it and like it. And let us not forget that Neil was a supporter of Ronald Reagan back in the day. Since Young spent a good decade and a half making bizarre and un-commercial records, I really don’t think this protest record is a publicity stunt as some have suggested. For the love, the man is Neil Young, he don’t need no damn publicity.

So keep on rockin Neil.

Liberation: from the Jews?

How do you celebrate the liberation of your nation from Fascism? By blaming the Jews of course!

“Israel’s ambassador in Rome said on Wednesday he was filled with “shame and rage” after two Israeli flags were burned during a demonstration commemorating the liberation of Italy at the end of World War Two.”

Wednesday, April 26, 2006

More on the Euston Manifesto

Matt over at "An Insomniac" explained why he is a signatory to the Euston Manifesto, which I have also signed. He states:

"Despite one or two reservations about the wording of parts, it wasn't a difficult decision to sign the manifesto. I opposed the war in Iraq, and I believe that the occupation of that country has been at best incompetent, at worst criminal. I long to see Bush removed from the White House. However, for over a year now I've found myself increasingly uncomfortable with an anti-war left that seemed more and more opportunistic and populist in its arguments, more and more willing to side with or support reactionary and vicious groups simply because they too were opposed to the US. The logic of 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' has seemingly swept away the principle of opposing oppression in all its forms for much of the left.

Too many people opposed the war not because they believed in the right of self-determination for Iraqis, not because of the untold suffering it could cause, but merely because the US was carrying it out. Simplistic arguments and barely concealed anti-Americanism sadly seem to pass for much of left-wing thought nowadays.

The Euston Manifesto, while far from perfect, is at least an attempt to recapture the spirit of a progressive internationalist politics that is so desperately needed. This is why I signed. Adding my name to a long list of like-minded (and some not so like-minded) individuals won't change the world. It won't even change the current political discourse.

But it's a positive step in that direction."

Open Letter to Indymedia Santa Cruz

It would not be the first time I have emailed Santa Cruz Indymedia, but I thought I should post the open letter that I sent to them this morning concerning their ‘editorial policy.’ I recommend that everyone who has a problem with the way Indymedia is currently run to email them and ask them to explain their publishing guidelines. If they decide to respond, I will post their reply in its entirety here.

Dear Indymedia Santa Cruz,

I am looking for some information about your procedure for removing or ‘hiding’ comments and articles posted on your website.

Your website’s ‘about’ page states:

“Like all IMCs, Santa Cruz Indymedia hosts a website with an open publishing newswire to which anyone can post text, images, audio and video using the online publish form. Unlike a newspaper or other form of media, content uploaded to the website using this form is published directly to the newswire without being approved or edited. The articles that are featured in the center column are taken right from the newswire, thus highlighting original content and reporting. This system empowers anyone to become the media for the purpose of sharing information and views that are blocked out or misrepresented by the corporate media; that is, to stand with the oppressed against the oppressors.”

I would like to know why a number of posts and stories, that are neither inflammatory nor part of the ‘corporate media’, are often removed from your website. It appears to many observers that posts are removed simply because they do not fall within a very strict ideological position.

I have two requests of your editorial staff.

1. If information is removed from your site, could you supply a detailed reason for its removal? I think that if a reason was given for the removal of content, we as readers and contributors would better understand what is acceptable and what is not.
2. Perhaps the rules and regulations presented on your site concerning ‘inappropriate content’ should be revised and expanded. A media wire whose stated goal is “to stand with the oppressed against the oppressors” is rather vague.

I appreciate your time, and I look forward to receiving your response to these issues.



Sincerely,

Roland Dodds

More on Indybay and Free Speech

Here was a recent post that was deemed inflammatory by the ‘moderators’ at Indybay.

"Please be civil in your posts; if an editor sees a flamewar starting that seems to be overly personal or to just contain insults, the comments may be hidden. We want to keep this site a friendly place for people to post news and discuss issues and our goal is to facilitate that. Feel free to email us any suggestions. This site is here to serve your needs and we would love to hear from you.

Indybay's editorial policy

So if I get banned or blocked for responding to a hate post, why is the hater/baiter still allowed to post?

Just wondering

tia”

Good question; anyone at Indybay dare to respond?

I am sure I sound like a broken record concerning this topic. Indymedia websites rarely, if ever, support free speech. I can understand removing spam and inflammatory comments, but they remove anything that challenges their hegemony.

Don’t believe me? Although they don’t advertise it, you can see all of the hidden stories and posts at Indybay by going here. Take a look at some of the things the thought police don’t find acceptable.

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Ah that Charlie Sheen!

I recently wrote about Charlie Sheen and his conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11. Well, apparently, his nuttiness has caused problems in his personal life as well.

I don’t often like to use tabloid like material to make my point, but I think Sheen has taken erratic Hollywood behavior to a place it should never go: politics. Hollywood actors are entitled to their crazy lifestyles; they may even be famous for them. Their eccentricities do not make them politically enlightened however.

Islamic Apartheid

Over at Israpundit, there is a report concerning Indybay’s constant acceptance of the persecution of Christian Arabs. Truly appalling, especially from a site that claims to support the ‘oppressed.’

Christian Arabs are often forgotten by leftist activists in the west. Indymedia sites from around the world constantly attack Israel for being what they call ‘an apartheid state’, but say nothing about the very real injustices that Christian Arabs face in Islamic nations. While Israel allows for the free expression of all religious identities, most ‘Islamic nations’ routinely, and legally, repress anyone outside of the dominate faith.

Hypocrisy at Indymedia? I can’t believe it…

Hat-tip to Indymedia Watch for the story.

Monday, April 24, 2006

“Support your community, unless you’re actually doing useful work.”

Ah, more stupidity over at Indybay.org/SantaCruz. This time it is delivered in a post by “Aaron Aarons.” Gail Pellerin wrote an article titled “Poll Workers Needed for June Election.” A short, simple piece simply asking for adults to contribute a few hours to making sure the election runs smoothly. She explains that they get paid to do so, and what would be required of them if they decided to help out.

But not our buddy Aaron, who sees this type of civic participation for what it is: capitalistic subordination of the highest order. Here is what he had to say:
“You get to work from before 6:30 am till after 10 pm. For clerks, that's at least 15.5 hours for $60, or a maximum of $3.87 per hour, and no time-and-a-half for overtime!

Of course, you get the satisfaction of knowing that you have kept the fraud of capitalist democracy functioning. Worth more than money, I guess!”
So let me get this straight, first he is complaining about what he feels is low pay to do this service to our society. Second, he ridiculous folks who want to help out. ‘Keep the fraud of capitalist democracy functioning’? Where does he come up with this? Last time I checked, Communists are still allowed on the ballot, whether they will receive any support is another thing. But heck, when you belong to the ‘vanguard’ those types of details are insignificant.

I know this may come as a shock to many lefty activists, but our democracy is built on volunteerism, not the Socialist nations they hold in such high regards. It is our democratic capitalist system that allows for this type of public engagement, not their forced collectivism. Isn’t participation what the socialist dream is all about; folks wanting to help their fellow man and society without financial benefit?

I am thankful that some individuals in our society will take a pay hit for one afternoon so that our elections will run smoothly. Sounds to me like a very real and practical sacrifice that most citizens can be involved in.

Since Indymedia writers often grip about the general public’s lack of involvement, Aaron’s nonsense rings hallow with hypocrisy. His motto should be “Support your community, unless you’re actually doing useful work.”

Working class concerns

Over at The Autonomist, they have a quick piece about a black activist named Ted Hayes who is protesting against illegal immigration. He feels that illegal immigrants are the biggest threat to the black working class.

The problems that black working class individual’s face is often glossed over by middle class and upper class commentators on the subject of immigration. While illegal labor does produce cheap goods that allows for the standard of living we currently enjoy, the working class citizens who have to compete with them for work are hurt in the process. Leftist activists don’t think that illegal immigration is the problem, and that anti-illegal immigrant activism is inherently racist. While I agree that there is no easy answer to our immigration issues (i.e. a big ass fence), pro-illegal immigration proponents should be honest about whom illegal immigration hurts: colored working people. If we are not considering working Americans in this debate who are already citizens, we are doing a good portion of our community a great disservice.

Indybay's Constant Attack on Free Speech

A great post over at Indybay by an individual who has gone through what all dissenters at Indymedia have.

“I'm kind of in a quandary. I have tried reading the different comments here, as well as in other articles, to better understand the mindset of SAW. I made a comment on the subject of the UCSC SAW members, and their treatment of the military recruiters at the job fair. I was not rude, profane, or inarticulate in my comment, but it appears to have disappeared none the less. A gentleman was able to respond to me, and included a couple of select quotes from my comment, but my comment has disappeared into the ether. (Kind of what I expect to happen to this one as well). I read this sites rules and disclaimers today, and even by using the broadest interpretation of them, I can see no reason for anyone to censor what I said. Considering the amount of vitriol, and profanity I observed in some of the SAW supporters comments, I am left with the conclusion that dissenting opinions are really not wanted here, regardless of what the sites disclaimer, and policies state. I tried looking for my comments under the hidden comments section, but my comments were not contained there as well. One final irony to point out to the members of SAW, is that their actions at the job fair, bear a striking resemblance to the actions of Right to Life protesters at Abortion Clinics, (ex-cluding of course the actions of Eric Rudolph, and that idiot who was sniping doctors). Both sides believe they are defending lives, and both sides are so convinced of their rightness, that they will go as far as to deny the rights of others, in order for their point of view to reign supreme. Finally, the gentleman who answered/refuted my post, stated that SAW was not against the military per se, but was actually protesting them because of the "Don't ask, don't tell", policy. SAW themselves, in their words, (which I have extensively read), and in the very acronym they use, refute that statement fully. If they are using that policy for a reason, I could find no mention of it in the comments by the members themselves. Instead it appears to be a convenient excuse, for actions they would take against the military, regardless of who we were fighting, or what their policies were. I'll leave you all to your echo chamber, and take my independent self back to moderate land.

Brad Morgan

Marshall, Michigan”

Well said. Not that it is going to change a damn thing. The censors at Indymedia will only increase their vigilance against free thought.