In other words survivors of the alleged Holocaust can say whatever they want, accuse whomever they choose, make the most outrageous and irrational statements i.e. fabricate reality and lie and not have to produce an iota of evidence to sustain their contentions nor suffer the rigors of cross examinations.
http://community.nytimes.com/comments/krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/30/bad-for-the-jews/?sort=oldest&offset=10
Excuse me, "alleged Holocaust"? Are we to understand that Holocaust denial according to The Times is "not abusive" and a legitimate contention that will be posted in response to op-eds?
Today I received an e-mail from CAMERA detailing New York Times anti-Israel bias and asking that I suggest to Times advertisers that they "reconsider linking their reputation to the agenda-driven publication." Peculiar. This is exactly what I proposed to them regarding advertisers placing ads on The Times's readers' comment pages, but received a cold shoulder (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2010/07/can-intellectualizing-alone-keep-us.html).
Meanwhile, I sent additional complaints to the investor relations departments of Levi Strauss and Gap concerning their online advertisements with The New York Times.
Andrew Rosenthal? Silence.
I apologize if this came through twice. For some reason, my message was evicted the first time.
ReplyDeleteI too protest anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial publicly. In response, I have been lambasted by deniers, Jew-haters and ignorant anti-Semites. These people cite You Tube and Neo-Nazi web sites, as though they were Harvard, Stanford or Yale. They say that the US Holocaust Museum and Yad Vashem are lying about the Shoah. It certainly must take an IQ below 50 and a passionate dislike for the Jewish people to believe such rubbish.
Whenever we stand up to those who deny or minimize genocide we send a critical message to the world. As we continue to live in an age of genocide and ethnic cleansing, we must repel the broken ethics of our ancestors, or risk a dreadful repeat of past transgressions. We know from captured German war records that millions of innocent Jews were systematically exterminated by Nazi Germany - most in gas chambers. These facts have been proven repeatedly through countless thesis and dissertation research papers. Virtually every PhD in the world will stake their career on known Holocaust facts. Despite this knowledge, Holocaust deniers ply their mendacious poison everywhere, especially with young people on the Internet. Such deniers have only one agenda - to distort the truth in a way that promotes antagonism against the object of their hatred, or to deny the culpability of their ancestors and heroes.
Museums and mandatory public education are tools to dispel bigotry, especially racial and ethnic hatred. Books and films can also establish the veracity of genocides, such as recent Holocaust films. They help to tell the true story of the perpetrators of genocide; and they reveal the abject terror, humiliation and degradation resulting from such blind loathing and prejudice. It is therefore essential that we disclose the factual brutality and horror of genocide, combating the deniers’ virulent, inaccurate historical revision. We must protect vulnerable future generations from making the same mistakes.
A world that continues to allow genocide requires ethical remediation. Books, films and required public education about genocide can help to reduce such unacceptable behavior. We must show the world that religious, racial, ethnic and gender persecution is wrong; and that tolerance is our progeny's only hope. Only through such efforts can we reveal the true horror of genocide and promote the triumphant spirit of humankind.
Charles Weinblatt
Author, Jacob’s Courage
http://jacobscourage.wordpress.com/
Charles, thank you very much for taking the time to write.
ReplyDeleteJeffrey
An e-mail from Levi Strauss:
ReplyDelete"Dear Jeffrey,
Thanks for your recent email advising us of the offensive comments posted by individuals in the New York Times recently. Your contact was forwarded to us by our Investor Relations Department.
We appreciate hearing from you and we have forwarded your concerns to our Marketing Team for review. They are responsible for all advertising
decisions.
Thanks again for letting us know about this."
My reply:
"Thank you very much for your response.
Please inform your marketing department that these were not isolated incidents of anti-Semitism posted by The New York Times. I have had ongoing discussions with senior editors at The New York Times concerning this horrifying phenomenon throughout the past year, which can be reviewed by your marketing team at: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/search/label/anti-Semitism
Moreover, although these comments are submitted by individuals, they are approved for posting by The New York Times after a decision is made by The New York Times that they are "on topic and not abusive". From what I have witnessed, Jews are currently the only minority allowed to be targeted on these pages.
Should your marketing team have any questions concerning this matter, or wish to review my correspondence with senior editors of The New York Times, I will be pleased to make this available.
I look forward to learning of the decision of your marketing team and hope that Levi Strauss will take a stand against anti-Semitism.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey"
Hi, Jeffrey
ReplyDeleteSince July 16, I communicated with Ricki Hollander from CAMERA. She stated that she prepares research about anti-Semitic comments. She thanked me for the links, I was sending her. Couple of days ago, I asked her if she is still working on the research. No answer.
Also, I sent a letter to Jewish Community Relations Counsel of New York. They answered that I should contact CAMERA.
Why are they so shy about these ugly comments sections? What do you think?
This guy, Santomauro, the author of the comment, is a real person. He publishes books denying Holocaust:
ReplyDeletehttp://counterknowledge.com/2009/03/michael-santomauro-there-was-no-holocaust-just-a-massive-massacre/
and expresses his views everywhere on the web:
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=7260
Now, he is published in NYTimes as well.
Marina,
ReplyDeleteMany thanks for your efforts and for this important information!
Re CAMERA, I don't understand their methodology. I come from a different world: If it works, I run with it. If it doesn't work, I change strategy and seek the most viable alternative. Maybe CAMERA is succeeding, although my belief is that anti-Semitism in the media is more rife than ever. Regardless, I wish they had been more cooperative.
Jeffrey
Re CAMERA: I think they focus on fact-checking to provide others with the material to fight the fight, which is indeed very helpful. They did a great job on Kristof's settlement piece that contrasted Israelis with the Arabs.
ReplyDeleteOn a different note, Tom Friedman shut down comments on today's Ground Zero Mosque piece (34 approved so far) possibly because so many are rationally in opposition. The WSJ is covering the controversy very well, adding to my confidence the WSJ will win the hearts and minds of even more NYT readers for that precious home delivery and metro area newsstand customers. And the advertisers will follow.
K2K
K2K,
ReplyDeleteThe article on Kristof's settlement piece was excellent, but probably read by relatively few persons, all sympathetic to the author's view. Fact-checking is also important, but I was hoping to enlist support for a campaign with real-time impact. Let's see where this goes.
Jeffrey
NY Times is officially in the business of Holocaust revision: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/08/05/world/AP-ML-Israel-Iran-Holocaust.html?ref=global-home
ReplyDeleteThis is an "objective" publication, where one can get points of view of Iranian cartoonists, and of Yad Vashem, while the newspaper sees both positions as equally valid, does not take sides. They give links to both sites. Just in case some readers are lazy to look at the Iranian site, they explain some anti-Semitic cartoons. The piece is called "Iran Holocaust-Denying Website Angers Israel". Who else care?
It is interesting that the publication is anonymous.