22 replies »

  1. I see no reason for the deletion of this comment. It is certainly relevant to the thread and the information is authentic and carefully sourced.

    Thank you for showcasing the comment Hawkeye. I would have been the poorer for not reading it.
    It is good to see that the Palestinians agree with us that the will of the majority rules. Israeli minorities, the Arab community among them, should take note of this.

    They agree with us too that their state should have a national character. As our state is Jewish, so their state is to be Arab.

  2. Petra’s posts are always measured, fact-based with references and polite. If she gets deleted on CiF, this is a clear indication of bias.

  3. Again, simple:

    Palestinians\Other Muslims + Unflattering Facts = Deletion

    Mustn’t upset our dear readers with facts.

  4. The deletion of Petra’s comment proves her point.

    The mistake she made was mentioning the Palestinian Charter, which one must never do on Cif, unless in glorification of the Palestinian cause. She could have written anything, made up even, that would have been critical of Israel (Jews?) and that would have been ok, but say anything critical, based on facts and historic accuracy of the Palestinian Charter and you’re done for.

  5. “The mistake she made was mentioning the Palestinian Charter”

    You know, that is insighful. Things Palestinians write show that they have an ideology of their own that might guide their actions. This fact conflicts with the constant (and racist) portrayal of them as merely reacting like zombies to the actions of Israel. Reason and will is taken from them, probably to replace it with Europeans’ own will, reason and desires.

    Insightful.

  6. Absolute bollocks deleting that – and so frustrating for Petra after the time and effort that went into it!

    I suspect one of the mods might have been oversensitive to the accusation of anti-Semitism. But given that a) I find it a fair accusation given that thread and more importantly b) she did not name any specific poster (thereby theoretically/potentially “offending” someone) that would be a pretty unjustifiable decision.

    CiF has its regulations, but I cannot see where Petra violated any of them.

  7. Yet another example of removing from the discussion one of the most serious and informed commenters (and contributors).

    Shame on whoever the ignorant moderator was who did this. The descent to the bottom continues.

  8. It was deleted for calling into question the revisionist history that has become accepted fact at the guardian and other such places.

    It is uncomfortable for them to see that there is a whole real world out there hiding behind the sheen of westernized propaganda that has shaped and prepared the “palestinian” history in the image of Jews and Israel.

    It is so appealing to see a poor ragged people ,indigenous assuages indian, aboriginal and maori guilt…..nobody gives a damn about kurds, or pick an African, but i digress.

    They cannot continue to paint Israel as colonialist, european, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, racist blah blah blah without accepting a separate and distinct population of indigenous people that have been discriminated against….in short, they very much need to project.

    Petra, in pointing out the mistake by using documentation of the very people in question, has crossed the line and Must be deleted.

    Interesting that the house Jews, rarely if ever have their comments deleted isn’t it.

  9. It is uncomfortable for them to see that there is a whole real world out there hiding behind the sheen of westernized propaganda that has shaped and prepared the “palestinian” history in the image of Jews and Israel.

    Indeed reality is a shocking concept to The Guardian management and many of its subscribers.

    Some advertisers are not happy about the virtual reality that The Guardian is attempting to enter though.

  10. Israelinurse

    Petra’s posts are always measured, fact-based with references and polite. If she gets deleted on CiF, this is a clear indication of bias.

    No its not I agree Petra is measured but they maybe thought it was incendiary She opens with “demonisation of the Jewish state.” Many people think to refer to Israel ( especially the occupied areas )as a Jewish State is deliberately prococative and attempting to install the ol’ anti Semitism attack even before the debate has begun.

    It seems petty I agree and Hawkeye has found a deletion which is appropriate to discuss ..unlike the last one which was typifying nonsense. However indication of bias.. is groundless.

  11. Really Berchmans you’re so illogical. You object to ‘demonisation of the Jewish state’ because you don’t like the fact that it’s called a Jewish state when in the course of the comment we find that the Palestinians wanted to call theirs an Arab state. Sauce for the goose and the gander. No?

    I have no objection to them calling it an Arab state. They’ll make damned sure it is one

  12. Greensleeves

    .

    “you don’t like the fact that it’s called a Jewish state ”

    Rubbish …I am saying that such slack and juvenile verbiage ensures that any criticism of ” the Jewish State ” is ipso facto anti Semitic . I dont mind if it is a “Jewish state ” … I simply want to be able to say that such a state is a violent aggressive entity without gimps alleging that such criticism is based on hatred.. which …even you must admit …is the entire reason d’etre of this site.

  13. Scottish postie/ex-social worker/bullshitter

    If you were able to justify your comment in saying that the Jewish state is a violent aggressive entity by pointing to the fact that the state behaves (!!) in a violent aggressive manner in response to a peaceful situation then I would agree with you.

    However you choose to characterise Moslems as ‘gentle’ and Israel as ‘violent’ and ‘aggressive’,as a general rule, without real reference to their actual behaviour. So I say to you that your judgement is based on something other than fact.

    Now what could that be….?

  14. It was deleted because it mentioned the Palestinians without claiming they have suffered more than any other people on earth have ever suffered in the whole of recorded history.

  15. Fabian from Israel has gotten it just right in his first comment. Don’t bother or be bothered by the Guardian. Just took a quick look at CiF and see an article about time running out for a two-state solution. The author of the article maintains time has been running out since 1967 because of Israeli actions, colonizing, etc. What on earth were the two-state solutions proposed by Palestinians or any Arab state before 1967?

    On a different note, is Here’s to Davy actually Berchmans? Does he have a new ID besides Abandon Hope, or is it just the “lipstick on a pig” theory that it must be Berchmans because of the same nastiness and tired old arguments. I do enjoy it though when he says he finds no bias on the part of the Guardian. Surprised they don’t make him a moderator.

  16. Greensleeves

    “If you were able to justify your comment in saying that the Jewish state is a violent aggressive entity by pointing to the fact that the state behaves (!!) in a violent aggressive manner in response to a peaceful situation ”

    Ye of little understanding…what do you think 60 years of targetting and sectarianism has achieved … it has taken peaceful protest and turned it into the present situation.

    Where there is peace…let us bring violence…this will certainly end any peace….as it is designed so to do.

  17. Ye of little background…

    Since you consider plane hijacks and kidnapping and murdering school-girls to be peaceful behaviour then of course Israel’s reaction seems to be ‘targeting’ of the terrorists that carried out these vile actions.

  18. I simply want to be able to say that such a state is a violent aggressive “entity without gimps alleging that such criticism is based on hatred..”

    But as it clearly is not a ‘violent aggressive entity’, then it is not unreasonable to offer some explanation of why you should think it is. Either you are ignorant of the constant attacks on Jews in Palestine, long before the establishment of the State of Israel, and do not see that these attacks have little to do with dispossession, but that any majority of Jews in whatsoever tiny piece of land ii anathema to Palestinian Muslims, and will always remain so, or, you retain a contemptible attitude, which you share with many on Cif, that many us feel is too reminiscent of the base inhumanity that lead to the formation of the ‘entity’ you despise so.