A Profound Comment on the Weingarten Thread (Deleted of Course)

The Weingarten thread has been the source of a myriad of posts this evening. Here’s a deleted comment which is too long to take a screenshot of and is a must read:

aindiachai

15 Mar 2010, 12:43PM

SdBoker, you say :
” Seeing as the Guardian is probably the only other place that even attempts to provide a balanced viewpoint of the I/P conflict this can only be good news.
As far as i can see theres no JNews Watch so far, so get cracking on that one fellas! “
Haha, ” the Guardian… that even attempts to provide a balanced viewpoint….” What a peculiar, jokey person you are. 🙂 Really, you must be!
You also say:
” you arent the first to mention this Hamas propaganda. can you point me in the direction of said material. Im not sure ive come across it before. “
Ignorance is no excuse when the subject is I/P especially as you claim the Guardian ( soon to be joined by Jnews, in your opinion ) is probably the only org attempting a balanced viewpoint. Some would argue the Guardian is obsessed with the issue so, once again, ignorance is no excuse.
Here’s a hint, the Hamas hate propaganda is all over the place but isn’t likely to see he light of day on the Guardian. Yes, it’s been shown here, no doubt, and is deleted as quick as a flash or at the very earliest opportunity when some mod scans the thread.
And as you made an implied and passing reference to Cif watch via your jnewswatch jibe, tell me something, in all seriousness. Cif watch regularly posts comments, submitted to cif, of a largely pro-Israel / pro-Israeli viewpoint admittedly but those posts weren’t impolite, aggressive but, more to the point, neither were they lacking pertinence re the issue at hand. I can also say ” aren’t” as well as weren’t because to the shame of the Guardian, those posts do still exist. Just not on the Guardian.
Certain posts made by Shermanator, for example, to choose one poster of many, come to mind. Then Cif watch asks, why was this or that post deleted? It’s a fair and valid question of theirs because, for the life of me, after reading and re-reading the posts I can’t see any rational, fair reason whatsoever for such posts to ever be deleted. And I’ll be completely here and say that opinion stands whether or not I agree or disagree with the general argument articulated in any particular post. Now why am I not allowed to read such posts here on Cif, I ask myself, where they were originally submitted? Why would I need to, why should I need to, also read Cifwatch to see what was” airbrushed” away by the Guardian?
Such stuff would be arguably understandable if such censure and distortion of free flowing debate was a rarity but it’s far from being such. One can only conclude, therefore, that there is an agenda at play here on the Guardian Cif and moderators control that agenda at the expense of tolerating all sides of the argument. The Cif rules and regulations are so vague, in many important and vital respects, that it serves to help and facilitate the agenda of those deleting posts and those, also, of a general Anti-Israeli agenda. That’s the bottom line. All at the expense of fulsome discussion and debate, I might add.
As for the Hamas hate propaganda, as I say, you’re not likely to come across it here and if the Guardian is your only source of a ” balanced viewpoint” then you’re doubly out of luck. Another hint, try youtube —one source of many no doubt… and just type in the very words ” Hamas hate propaganda” seeing as the phrase has been used here.
Note that it’s not a bunch of zionist’s or anyone else playacting in the vids it’s Palestinian Hamas. Note also that age is no barrier and toddlers and infants are fair prey for those Hamas adults determined to spread vile, Nazi -like propaganda on one hand or undeniable anti Jew hatred taken directly from the mouths of some Imam or whatever. In some cases, directly from the Koran itself.
That’s if you get the chance to read this post before some mod deletes it. If this post of mine stands then fair play but only to a slight extent because, as I’ve already said, it’d be more like an exception to a rule, especially when things get too close to the bone. I don’t consider this post of mine to be offensive or extreme but I’ve seen evidence ( myriad posts of it) that much milder posts than this one have been deleted.
Of course, considering the Guardian likes to trumpet to the world its ” most liberal and progressive ” credentials it’s ironic that its discussion pages are arguably one of the most censored on the internet. In the West at least.
Such irony indeed.

For those new to CiF Watch – here are the offenses committed by the poster:
Cardinal sin number one:  CiF Watch was mentioned in a positive light;
Cardinal sin number two:  Moderation policy was questioned; and

Cardinal sin number three: An analogy was made between Hamas and the Nazis
Note how this deletion along with the numerous other pro-Israel deletions occurred in a thread discussing the purported curtailment of free speech of the Jewish self-haters.
You couldn’t make this up if you tried.

Written By
More from Hawkeye
And the Winner of the CiF Watch Pinnochio Awards for 2009 is….
Victoria Brittain for her despicable blue baby syndrome blood libel piece. To...
Read More
Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.