Guardian

Guardian World View in Action on the Ben White Thread


A few hours ago I posted examples of antisemitic comments gushing from the Ben White thread.  Some of them have now been deleted, no doubt because of my post (where’s my paycheck?). Anyway, I was going to include in the post this comment below because if I did I knew it would probably not be deleted.

Instead I copied it to see what happens and guess what its gone. Georgina, Matt and Brian pray tell what is wrong with what chasnb said in the thread?

chasnb

27 Sep 09, 10:24am

I don’t know who’s worse: Ben White and his obsessive, tireless, one-sided distortions against Israel, or the odd people who follow up his articles with even more misguided hatred against the Jewish state.

POSTSCRIPT

Here are a couple more deletions from the same thread that clearly do not align with the Guardian World View:

MichaelBournemouth

27 Sep 09, 1:54pm

Ben White and his supporters are unhappy again – which means Israel is again doing the right thing.
I guess every sign that Israel hasn’t disappeared yet, is very annoying to some people.

Sabraguy

28 Sep 09, 10:01am

Ben White writes from a country that was stolen from the natives by the Portugese in 1500 and was a colony for 400 years. Its wealth was built on slavery, the effects of which persist to this day.

His obsession with Israel must seem a little peculiar to those of African ancestry in his own country, who 100 years after slavery was abolished are still generally to be found emptying the bins and cleaning the houses of the white folks.

Let me make it simple. He’s a hypocrite.

7 replies »

  1. ChasNB, try not to be overly concerned, you are in good company. CiF is rather like a poor deluded person who gets very hot under the collar when anyone tries to challenge the delusions.

    Among its delusions is that it is open-minded (??) about Israel and presents its readership with “the Truth” about the conflict. CiFWatch has shown that it does not. CiF is therefore going to very sensitive to criticism of some of its most accomplished haters and any posts which try to force it to reality test its biased attitude towards Israel are bound to be pulled because they wobble its reality.

    Keep on doing it.

  2. Funny how there are special rules for those with Jewish names

    ======
    The world can’t trust Iran
    questionnaire’s comment 26 Sep 09, 5:28pm
    Why is the Guardian allowing two hard-line Zionist authors who work for a Zionist quasi-governmental research organisation attached to the US government to write op-ed pieces on Cif?

    Surely Cif is a forum for independent journalists offfering opinions, not Zionist quangos disseminating propaganda.

    Recommended (35)

    KrustytheKlown
    26 Sep 09, 5:49pm

    Why is the Guardian allowing two hard-line Zionist authors who work for a Zionist quasi-governmental research organisation attached to the US government to write op-ed pieces on Cif?

    I’ve no problem with them being allowed to write here – it gives us the fun of taking them apart, after all! However, I do think that the institutional alleigance of the writers should be clearly indicated either at the start of at the end of the article. This is the usual procedure when a government or diplomatic offical writes for CiF, and should also be applied to individuals working for ‘thinktanks’ representing nation states.

  3. The Washington Institute for Near East Policy is a 501(c)(3) organization with no “quasi-governmental” “allegiance”. If the above posts rem ain on CiF, it will put a nail in the coffin of the Guardian’s already-soiled reputation as purveyor of “facts”.