Anti-Semitic comments?

Have you seen the Anti-Muslim comments?

Come on......

If those are the best examples that Vic can come up with then there would not appear to be a severe problem. There are, indeed, many idiots on the internet. Many hang around OLO and I might even be one of them!

Vic:

Ten ways to toughen up:-

Some points that may help, from “Management today”.

1. Don’t take it personally.
2. Believe in yourself.
3. It’s OK to make mistakes
4. Success needs to outnumber mistakes.
5. Don’t be distracted.
6. Hold your nerve.
7. Don’t compare yourself with others.
8. Let go of anger.
9. Take a few risks.
10. Recognise the importance of switching off.

Many people in this country are unhappy with the "Zionists". Maybe you people on the inside should deal with the extremists among you, to improve the public image of Jews generally.

Oh come on Vic mate, feeling a bit sorry for ourselves today are we?

I am pro Israel, & always have been, but too much of this rubbish, & that could change. Cry babies are hard to take.

"The New York Times introduced a pilot program for "trusted commenters". Readers with a history of exemplary comments are offered this status and their submissions are automatically accepted."
What has happened to 'free speech'.

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
"Monsieur l'abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write."
So said Voltaire,

I don't think I would go as far as Voltaire, but I agree with what he said.
You would think more than any other people the Jews would understand genocide, yet they haven't had a problem exercising it against the Palestinians for decades.
I wounder if that would get published in the New York Times as a trusted comment. I think not.

One of the problems is that the average punter can't distinguish between Jews and Zionists and unfortunately in the minds of the many all Jews are Zionists which is fortunately not the case.

David

Israel is a serial human rights international law abuser. The UN Human Rights Commission affirms that it violates nearly all 149 articles of the Fourth Geneva Convention that governs the treatment of civilians in war and under occupation and is guilty of grievous war crimes.

David is this the work of the Zionists and not the Jews. State sanctioned genocide?

Vic is attacking Online sites like OLO, yet uses a whore program like Channel 9 Current Affair as his prime example of racism?

I must have misunderstood, Mr Alhadeff appears to be conflating anti-Semitism with (1)criticism of Zionism and (2)expressions of moral repugnance in regard to the policies of the government of Israel, when he quotes the following.

"A recent article on New Matilda prompted comments that called for boycotts of the "evilly pro-Zionist Murdoch media" and "the evilly anti-Semitic ALP (aka the Apartheid Labor Party, Apartheid Israel-supporting Labor Party)". Furthermore, suggested the writer, "the racist Zionists and their supporters (such as Labor) should be sidelined from public life as have been like racists such as the Nazis, neo-Nazis, Apartheiders and KKK".

Admittedly the comment is somewhat incoherent in parts, however, the main theme appears to be that Zionism is a racist ideology and that Israel has some characteristics in common with apartheid South Africa.
This is a matter of opinion of course, but the comment, itself, is not necessarily anti-semitic.

Is racist propaganda against those other Semites, the Arabs, and in particular the Palestinians, also morally unacceptable?

Savvas Tzionis,

Agreed, anyone who disagrees, should visit some of the more rabid pro-Zionist sites.

Paul1405 summed it up pretty well with http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=13166#227353.

The danger in overt censorship looks far greater than the danger in extreme views (and who decides what's extreme) being up for a period.

No perfect answer's, I use the recommend delete button on OLO posts with some regularity if posts (or discussions) look like ones I think the moderator needs to check so I'm not opposed to a degree of censorship.

Personally I'd prefer that the more extreme posts stay on record so that all can see the character of the poster rather than be removed but that could and does present a range of problems for the site, both legally and in terms of the impact on subsequent debate.

I agree with what I take to be David's point about a difference between Jew's and Zionist's. Hope I'm not invoking Goodwin's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law) here but in the context of this discussion I hope this is relevant. Historically most Nazi's were German, the German state did staggeringly horrid things while the Nazi's were in charge but it is possible to attack Nazism without attacking German's.

R0bert

Amazing, Vic doesn't mind advocating loudly for the bombing of Gaza and refuses to be censored.

Seems the likes of Vic only want everyone censored over anything to do with jews.

RObert,

I can't bear it any more ! Please ! No apostrophes with plurals ! 'views', 'posts', yes ! But Nazis, Jews, Zionists, Germans: plurals without apostrophes.

Yes, use the apostrophe for possessives like Goodwin's, Israel's, and for abbreviations like it's ('it is') and I'm (I am).

What the hell are they teaching kids in schools these days ?

Yours (not your's, whatever that might mean),

Joe

I totally disagree with Vic Aldheff's opinion that political debate and social commentary should be censored.

Free speech is a foundation stone of a free, democratic society, and any attempt by pressure groups to deflect criticism of their own group, or any group favoured by them, must be be rigourously opposed. No one, and no group of people, should be above informed criticism.

All of us, left wingers and right, agree that there can be no abosolute freedom of speech, slander,libel, child pornography, and calls to violence, are unacceptable. But anything else is fair game. The push by well meaning people of zeal such as Vic to censor the internet for political reasons, is something which all citizens should be concerned about.

Next we will have the Catholic Church demanding that all opinions about divorce, contraception, stem cell research,abortion, or euthenasia should also be banned. Or the Muslims and Christian fundamentalists will demand that any opinion casting doubt on the existence or God is blashemy, and should also be banned.

One wonders if Vic would oppose any opinion denouncing Nazis? Well, Vic, the Jewish religion is a belief system, and so is Nazism. If Jews should be exempt from criticism and insulting posts, then the same should apply to Nazis. To do otherwise, is to "discriminate" between belief systems.

Stop thinking like a Nazi or a commissar, Vic. Go and have a hot bath and re-think that one, mate.

Joe, if that's such a big problem for you then perhaps you'd be better reading a dictionary than an online discussion forum. I do as well as I can with punctuation but obviously not as well as some would like.

R0bert

RObow, Mez reckcons uuu's gota fix tat dar grammma of yaz cauz ya not doen' its rite way, Mez been to dat 'fancy' scool place.... am mez'e gota mez'z a reel goood "egg-u-cation". lukey 4 mez, mez wiz reel goood at that der ing-le-ish, mez 'arith-me-tick was reel bad. LOL.

Naughty RObert! That's a fail for English.

Not however for ideas & opinions, keep them coming.

Loudy learn to skim mate, & you shouldn't even notice them.

Of course if you have spent much time marking kids papers that might be hard too, but no one marks papers any more, do they?

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but bits and bytes will never hurt me!

RObert et al, it might also be apropos to mention that correct English usage demands that a sentence should also not be ended with a preposition.

David

Loudmouth (Wednesday):

...Thanks Loudmouth, and further; lower case follow semi-colons: Oh, and capitals (‘?) follow colons! But not everyone agrees that apostrophes should denote a plural “s”.

The whole thing about human rights is that all humans are entitled.
That also means that racism or "religionism" or any discrimination based on difference per se is not on. Therefore anti-Jewish comments which are based only on the person's Jewishness is not on.
However, opposition and criticism about bad /criminal behaviour is permissable.
Therefore I can oppose Israeli government's criminal /illegal treatment of Palestinians. But I cannot denigrate a person just for being Jewish.
It is not that hard is It?
And for those of you who wish to say that war criminals may disagree with me. Well that is also their right to disagree.
Doesnt make them unaccaountable for their crime though!

"The whole thing about human rights is that all humans are entitled."

That raises so many questions:

1. Entitled by whom?
2. Entitled to what?
3. What is a human?
4. Why just humans?
5. Why?