Comment at end
23rd March 2010
ANTI-ISRAEL, ANTI-JEWS, ANTI-AMERICA, ANTI-BLAIR …
WHAT ARE THE LITTLE CIF-ERS FOR?
If you’re into keeping an eye out for the bias on The Guardian Cif pages it can be a full-time job.
From time to time, when I can stand visiting this infiltrated/ignorant/brainwashed Excuse for Thought and Opinion, I have gone to the trouble of copying some of the comments written against Tony Blair. I could write a book. In fact one day, I might.
The Cif moderators are quick at removing the “Blair is/was the best PM we ever had” and “And now he’s gone, don’t we miss him?” comments, while they invariably leave the “to The Hague with the murdering WC” & sometimes even the “string ‘im up” incitements, just for the flavour. This one, thankfully, WAS removed.
I referred to the business of recognising one’s friends by noticing their friends here yesterday.
Next to the polite, appreciative, but removed comments at Cif you often find a moderator’s “this comment has been removed”.
[If and when they remove the murderous hanging ‘n’ flogging suggestions it is likely only because they don’t want to be accused of soliciting or encouraging murder, not because they disagree in principle. ‘Surely not?’, I hear you ask. Why not ask the editor and chief moderator Matt Seaton? He’s the one responsible, so to speak.]
Those they remove are obviously too virulently nasty to give online space to, unlike those they leave.
That’s right – NO.
This site CiF Watch keeps an eye out for anti-Israel/anti-Jew comments. They’re on the job. If you want to read their relentless and well-deserved daily “dissing” of the Guardian and its largely brain-dead commenters and moderators, you should read Cif Watch regularly.
The particular article under scrutiny here is this one, written by Stephen Pollard – an excellent man who signed the Ban Blair-Baiting petition so he’s clearly on the right track.
Here are three comments Cif Watch managed to copy before they were removed by the Moderator in the Sky with di-i-iamonds (drugged to their eyeballs, presumably.) Such dastardly comments must NEVER be allowed to stand, clearly.
Quick resume –
- Tewks give them a history lesson on whose land it is anyway – so Tewks’s comment is removed.
- Ilovedoggies asks what was the point of Hamas, ‘purportedly’, (a word never used by the WE ALL KNOWER regulars) killing a foreign visitor in Israel. So Ilovedoggies’ comment is removed.
- STAN58 provides an even more-in depth history lesson than did Tewks on whose land is it anyway. For that STAN58 joins Tewks and Ilovedoggies in the sin-bin.
From Cif Watch-
And of course what would an I/P thread be without the pro-Israel deletions:
19 Mar 2010, 12:30PM
It was Jordan until in 1967 they started a war which they then lost, so now that land belongs to Israel.
Just like in 1939 Germany started a war which they lost, and so part of their earlier territory is now part of Poland.
19 Mar 2010, 3:09PM
Hamas (purportedly Hamas) fired a rocket this week and killed an East Asian guest who was working an a kibbutz. What was the point of this despicable act?
19 Mar 2010, 5:56PM
1. Jews are the original inhabitants of Israel in the last 3300 years. There is no another peple in world, except maybe Chinise, which history is so long.
2. Matk Twain, when visited the country in 1870, found there almost no population at all, except Jerusalem, in which the majority were the jews, so talking about populatino proportions in that time is nonsense.
3. The majority of arab populatin in 1947 was only the first or second generation in the country. The rest were the descandants of jewish population converted to Islam by force, since the 7 century, when they have been conquered by arabs. It explained why they have escaped so fast, instead ot fight for “their” land. To remind you, they was also been calledf by their arab “brothers” to live the country for while and come back with “victorius” arab armies after all the jews will be killed.
4.Why the local arabs under Jordanian occupatin did not demand indepandant state ? Because they feel themselves the part of this already exist “Palestinian” state . Remind you, the British colonizators illegaly gave in 1922, as gift, the eastern part (80 %) of the country to the Hasemite king Abdalla from Saudi Arabia. The 70 percent of Jordanian population today are the “palestinians”, exectly the same arabs that living in Israel. So why to establish another “Palestinian” state ? It is only to have excuse to demand Israel extermination.
5. There are lot of peoples in Europe itself in the the other corners of the world, they have not achived religious/national/ethnic/historical right to their own country/. So why the “palestinians” have the right for 2 states and they do not have even for one ? Why the so “liberal and freedomlovers” Westerns, like you, does not demand their freedm ? Maybe it is because of the financial and economacal selfinterests that you have ?
And finally there is no such thing as Zionist claim.
The jews have stopped to claim 62 years ago and started to do..
The travesty of balance and truth on offer in comments at his article is responded to by Mr Pollard himself, thus:
Hardly a surprise that my article has led to the usual stuff on the comments section.
But what’s always so frustrating with this type of thing – but again, not a surprise – is that the angriest commenters rarely read what the piece says or, perhaps still more important, what it does not.
I am accused of defending the settlements and Israeli building in East Jerusalem. Where though? You will not find a word of that from me, anywhere, in any piece, ever. Because I don’t defend them. I think the settlements are wrong morally, politically and practically, and I would to like to see some form of international protectorate over Jerusalem. And I’ve written that many times.
But the piece wasn’t a vehicle for me to spout such views; it was a piece in which I offer my views over the context of this crisis, and what lies behind it.
Still, I never expected anything else from the anti-Zionists, anti-Israeli brigade or whatever they choose to call themselves.
Even when commenters at Cif rant their “certainties” they show their ignorance, or inability to read; likely both.
More recent posts from Cif Watch –
“Tragically, widespread newspaper abuse has become so endemic, it has crippled the country’s ability to conduct a sensible debate about the “war on drugs“.”
And on any other “war on…”, perchance?
Not sure if the writer, Charlie Brooker, saw the analogy in his complaint about “newspaper abuse”. Probably not. It IS the Guardian, after all. Haven’t bothered to read the mind-altering commenters.
PREVIOUS RELATED POSTS HERE AT THIS BLOG
- Press Watch 1 – Guardian Cif-ers “suicide-bomb” Tony Blair
- Day 8: The ‘TRIAL’ of Tony Blair – The Guardian Cif-ers & ‘We already KNOW’-ers
- Comment is NOT Free! (The Guardian) EXCERPT:
Q: I have a complaint about moderation, how do I escalate it?
A: Unfortunately, the huge (and growing) quantity of user content on guardian.co.uk means that we can’t enter into correspondence regarding specific moderation activity, although all correspondence will be read. If you have suggestions or questions about any aspect of moderation and community participation on guardian.co.uk, you can write to firstname.lastname@example.org or email@example.com (as appropriate)
Just remembered. Cif removed my comment at the ‘Blair, EU presidency’ article here:
15 Jul 2009, 10:48PM
So what did I say that was so reprehensible?
If your concentration levels are limited – (what do I mean “if“?) – just scroll to 22 seconds to see what I did when I first glanced through your cloned comments at this article today.
[Aside: If I thought you could grasp the value of it I COULD mention the fact that Mr Blair helped in no small measure to end the decade of civil war in Sierra Leone and is a hero in that land. But since former Liberian President Charles Taylor is defending himself today in the The Hague International Criminal Court today regarding war crimes charges in Sierra Leone, I won’t mention it. (No, really I won’t.)]
Wouldn’t want to bother your tiny minds as to the merits of pre-judging if and when exactly people are guilty, candidates for locking up, chopping up, disembowelling, frying, lynching or other tasty methods of doing away with that you so love to share in your juvenile chat rooms at the hang-out for society’s confused.
Hate to spoil the children’s fun.
I saved it here, because I expected it to be removed.
If there’s one thing Cif mods hate more than the truth, it’s mocking.