Tendance Coatesy

Left Socialist Blog

Morning Star Publishes Holocaust Denier, Israel Shamir on Pussy Riot..

with 41 comments

http://listverse.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/history-wing-assets-room1-elders-of-zion-protocols-1.jpg?w=209&h=250

The Morning Star, Britain’s ‘Communist’ paper publishes in its print-edition today a page written by Holocaust denier, Israel Shamir.

It begins,

“Who’s behind Pussy Riot? An unholy alliance of big business and media barons…”
Shamir observes,

Pussy Riot’s two-year sentence is quite in line with prevailing European practice. For much milder anti-Jewish hate talk, European countries customarily sentence offenders to two to five years of prison for a first offence.

We have already blogged on this.

Isreal Shamir’s concern about sentencing for anti-Jewish actions is far from a co-incidence.

In his many articles on the Holocaust ‘revisionist’ site Entre la plume et l’enclume he has shown great interest in the ‘Jewish question’. Recently Shamir cast doubt on the innocence of Captain Dreyfus.

This is a sample of his opinions (Wikipedia):

“In an essay published on his website discussing Holocaust denier David Irving, Shamir wrote that “the Jews” now “rule over the minds and souls of Europeans””

David Irving was sentenced for denial of Jewish superiority. His doom seals the reign of (albeit limited) freedom that began with the fall of Bastille. European history went full circle: from rejecting the rule of Church and embracing free thought, to the new Jewish mind-control on a world scale. Not only is Western Christian civilisation dead, but even its successor, secular European civilisation, has met its demise only a few days after its proud and last celebration by the Danish scribes. It was short-lived: about two hundred years from beginning to the end, the Europeans may once have had the illusion that they can live without an ideological supremacy. Now this illusion is over; and the Jews came in the stead of the old and tired See of St Peter to rule over the minds and souls of Europeans.[34]

Shamir claims his concern with the Holocaust is with the use of the narrative of the Holocaust by Jews to promote Jewish “superiority and exclusivity”,

It has everything to do with the Jewish claim of superiority and exclusivity. There is a Jewish prayer saying: “Bless you, Lord, that you created me a Jew, that you separated between Jews and the earth folks, like you separated between the Holy and Profane, that our fate is not like their fate”. The Holocaust concept is just another form of this prayer. They say that even their death is not like the death of anybody else.[42]

This is how the Guardian described Shamir last year: “an anti-Semite and Holocaust denier..

And,

His latest book, in Russian, is called is called How to Break the Conspiracy of the Elders of Zion.

The Morning Star, a place where Holocaust deniers and anti-Semites are welcome.

About these ads

Written by Andrew Coates

September 22, 2012 at 5:38 pm

41 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. They’ve crossed a line haven’t they? How about some kind of open letter signed by as many trade unionists and civil rights campaigners as we can line up? I am about to put someting on the AWL’s email list about it.

    Jim Denham

    September 22, 2012 at 6:22 pm

  2. Absolutely Jim, and they must, they must have known what they were fucking doing and who Shamir is.

    Le fascisme ne passera pas!

    Andrew Coates

    September 22, 2012 at 6:27 pm

  3. Maybe because Counterpunch publishes him they think he’s okay. Alexander Cockburn airily waved away Shamir’s blatant anti-semitism.

    rosie

    September 22, 2012 at 6:32 pm

  4. Cockburn was a wealthy fool who could afford to indulge his prejudices.

    The Morning Star depends, as Jim essentially notes, on the Trade Unions.

    They should be more wary of indulging their prejudices against Pussy Riot with support from this quarter.

    Trade Unions are not known for their admiration towards Holocaust deniers.

    Andrew Coates

    September 22, 2012 at 6:36 pm

  5. I do wonder if Rosie has a point, have you contacted the Star about this, if it were not for Andrew and Tony Greenstein I would not have known abut Shamir’s history, etc and would have taken Counterpunch at face value, if you get my drift.

    Organized Rage

    September 22, 2012 at 6:48 pm

  6. Mick, it takes two minutes Googling to find this out.

    I added the Guardian reference to underline it.

    Tendance Coatesy has covered this particular article already:

    http://tendancecoatesy.wordpress.com/2012/08/31/counterpunch-attacks-pussy-riot-and-links-up-with-euro-far-right/

    Either the Star is incredibly out of touch (and frankly the stuff about Pussy Riot is such drivel it would be laughed at by most people, so maybe they are) or at least somebody knew what they were doing.

    Andrew Coates

    September 22, 2012 at 6:51 pm

  7. I have just been alerted to the issues raised by Andrew in this post.

    The article was presented by the arts team as an alternative viewpoint on the Pussy Riot furore and appeared on our culture pages. The article did not appear particularly controversial in its own right. Its main focus was Pussy Riot and purported US State Department backing.

    Israel Shamir’s background was not made clear when the reprinting from Counterpunch was sanctioned.

    I hope that this clarifies the issue.

    Richard Bagley
    Editor

    Richard Bagley

    September 22, 2012 at 8:04 pm

  8. Thank you Richard.

    The merits of the article aside I (and I’m sure others) was particularly offended because I had bought a copy of the Morning Star today (in the late afternoon) largely because I find the paper’s coverage of trade union issues very valuable.

    There has been a lot to say on these, and other subjects of concern to the labour movement, in recent months.

    I was looking forward to reading it – although I do not come from the same socialist tradition.

    The least that can be said is that Shamir is not part of that movement.

    Andrew Coates

    September 22, 2012 at 9:07 pm

  9. I note that the Morning Star published Shamir’s Blog address.

    Anybody who wishes to know what this man’s ideas are can (and the Morning Star could have) see what they are:

    “Shamir-bashing is a popular pastime for supporters of Judaic supremacy on the Web.” http://www.israelshamir.net/FAQs.htm

    As he says, “The problem is, good people are quite unable to stop the anti-Christian and pro-Jewish tendency, for the Jewish supremacists today control a major chunk of world media and wealth. Besides, the tendencies are unstoppable: they can only be counterbalanced. What good people can do is stop the opposite thought, and they do that very efficiently. In my essays I have frequently noted the advantages of Christian and Muslim universalism over Jewish particularism. ” http://www.israelshamir.net/English/antiSemit.htm

    ““The unified and perfected Jewish media machine can be utilised for much more important tasks than fighting off holocaust jokes. Its main goal is to bring us to the Brave New World, to the new spiritless totalitarianism, while smaller tasks are incidental to the great one.” http://www.israelshamir.net/English/Satanic.htm

    “9/11 was by far too powerful of a symbol to give it away to the Enemy. Not in vain did people all over the world rejoice when this Mammon symbol collapsed. The knowledge that the Americans may be beaten on their home ground has comforted the innumerable victims of the Empire. I do not know who did it, but it was planned and executed by people of great spirit.” http://www.israelshamir.net/English/Eng42.htm

    There is particular section on his site devoted to attacking our comrade Tony Greenstein. http://www.israelshamir.net/Left/Left1.htm

    Andrew Coates

    September 23, 2012 at 12:02 am

  10. Unbelievable.

    If it is any use I will be at Labour Conference in a week’s time and will bend the ear of any leading trade unionist I can find and try and get signatories to any open letter if that is still in process.

    And as the offending page you’ve linked to has now mysteriously disappeared has anyone copied it or scanned an image?

    Roger McCarthy (@RF_McCarthy)

    September 23, 2012 at 11:01 am

  11. Didn’t read the Bagley comment so scratch the comment on the page disappearing.

    However for a paper which whatever else it’s been guilty of does have an 80-odd year record of campaigning against fascism that apology is completely inadequate.

    Roger McCarthy (@RF_McCarthy)

    September 23, 2012 at 11:24 am

  12. they have apoligised and taken it off the website, the upshot is if they are paranoid they will stop publishing articles by other publishers so they know all the people who write for them. the people here seem to have more of an agenda of getting one over the morning star than be worried about this case. well no media is perfect lets be constructive instead towards left wing media. or do any constructive activity for a better word.

    jq mark

    September 23, 2012 at 11:31 am

  13. It is true that not every dubious website is immediately recognisable as such, for example the Voltaire site, where a bit of additional knowledge and further probing is necessary, as well as a knowledge of French, but I am surprised that the Star didn’t know about Shamir, as he’s been well known as extremely unpleasant for several years and not the sort of person that any left-winger would wish to use as an authority. Still, it’s better to learn late than never to learn at all.

    Dr Paul

    September 23, 2012 at 12:30 pm

  14. In my view it was an error to have reproduced the Shamir material.
    But it was clearly an error conditioned by a lack of vigilance in the highly pressurised working environment of producing daily paper with limited resources.
    What is highly revealing is the way in which the Star’s critics – from quarters that are notoriously tolerant of islamaphobia and zionism – interpret this as malign intent and symptomatic of anti-Semitism.
    I am absolutely sure that the AWL’s cheerleaders will be able to find any number of Labour Friends of Israel to sign an open letter designed to weaken the Star’s links with trade unions.

    Nick Wright

    September 23, 2012 at 2:00 pm

  15. Somebody knew perfectly well what they were doing. The original Counterpunch article contained the sentence “Western governments call for more freedom for the anti-Christian Russians, while denying it for holocaust revisionists in their midst.” That sentence was deleted in the version the Star printed, presumably not accidentally or randomly.

    The problem is political – I don’t suspect the Star of any sympathy with anti-semitism, but there is a strong current of sympathy with authoritarianism, so long as it is anti-American authoritarianism. And that runs the risk of flirting with “red-brown” politics of the Shamir type. QED.

    Francis

    September 23, 2012 at 2:30 pm

  16. I’m glad you found that Francis, I thought there was something missing (I blogged on the original).

    Paul the Réseau Voltaire site, it’s true could fool people. If Thierry Meyssan and his 9/11 book are well known, his support for the racist Parti Anti Sioniste is probably not.

    For future reference here is a picture of the links some have drawn between these various forces. Shamir is not there but comes in through his connection with Ginette Hess-Skandrani the founder of the Holocaust revisionist site http://www.plumenclume.net/ which publishes him, in French.

    It is worth looking at.

    But as many people have said, Shamir is well-known enough to have got described in the Guardian as an Anti-Semite (I link to this to confirm what I said).

    If the best you can find Nick is to call me an “AWL cheerleader” then you should perhaps start trying again.

    Andrew Coates

    September 23, 2012 at 2:41 pm

  17. My Morning Star turned into an Evening Star yesterday and I didn’t read my copy until early evening when I was contacted by someone asking me if I had read the Shamir piece. I think it was a good thing that Andrew raised this.

    Since then I’ve been in contact with the editor, Richard Bagley and this is the statement that is going in tomorrow’s paper:

    “A NUMBER of you have raised concerns over the decision to reprint an article by Israel Shamir on the Russian band Pussy Riot that appeared in the weekend’s Morning Star.
    The paper would like to reassure readers that the piece was syndicated from Counterpunch in good faith without knowledge of the author’s background.
    We would like to reiterate the paper’s commitment to publishing writers who reflect and remain steadfastly committed to the values of anti-racism, anti-fascism, international solidarity and social justice that the paper has campaigned for ever since its establishment.
    It remains guided by those goals and will seek in future, wherever possible, to establish the full biography of writers before publishing their work.
    In the meantime the Morning Star would like to distance itself from the opinions of the author of the piece, which do not reflect our position or those of the wider movement.
    We apologise wholeheartedly for any distress caused.”

    Steve Silver

    September 23, 2012 at 3:26 pm

  18. Dear Nick ,

    You would be better off simply apologising for Your staff’s sloppy standards of basic source checks & Their lack of basic Anti-Fascist knowledge about who Israel Shamir is .

    Making stupid remarks about Zionism being similar to Islamophobia ( symptomatic of the bluring of legitimate criticism of Israel and outright Anti-Semitism so common on the Left ) and Conspiracy Theories about the AWL & Labour Friends Of Israel being out to damage the Morning Star are just adding insult to injury .

    I am angry because I am a regular reader of the Morning Star – it is a shame that a paper that I enjoy reading has been brought into disrepute by printing this man’s article – I hope that immediate steps are taken to ensure that these mistakes are never made again !

    Ian

    September 23, 2012 at 3:30 pm

  19. I think Andrew can be acquitted of the charge of being an “AWL cheerleader”. He is something else entirely.This is a cap that fits someone else I had in mind (with a rather big head).
    But the way this issue has been presented does rather fit that curiously skewed perspective which accepts Zionism as the expression of outraged sensibilities and a tragic history (as I do) yet fails to understand the roots – in Zionist expansionism and imperialist domination – of contemporary feeling among moslems.
    Ian. I have no managerial authority over Morning Star staff. I once worked there and I know how hard pressed they are. Saying something is a mistake (which I do in relation to the Shamir piece) is not the same as apologising for sloppy standards.
    Describing some of the Star’s critics as ‘notoriously tolerant of islamaphobia and zionism’ cannot be conflated with ideas ‘symptomatic of the bluring (sic) of legitimate criticism of Israel and outright Anti-Semitism’. Rather it is a political criticism of a tendency that seeks to do that precise thing.
    Neither is it equivalent to saying that Zionism is similar to Islamophobia. With standards of comprehension and political literacy that these points of yours indicate you would find it difficult to meet the challenges of working as a sub editor or writer on the Morning Star.

    Nick Wright

    September 23, 2012 at 4:48 pm

  20. With standards of comprehension and political literacy that these points of yours indicate you would find it difficult to meet the challenges of working as a sub editor or writer on the Morning Star.

    Y’know, if a publication has just published a piece by a well-known anti-semite, it’s not a good idea for that publication’s defenders to talk about other people’s “standards of comprehension and political literacy”.

    rosie

    September 23, 2012 at 5:14 pm

  21. And if Shamir was unknown – well, I’ve just done a google search for “israel shamir”. I’m first offered “israel shamir holocaust” then “israel shamir dreyfus”. You don’t have to be that “politically literate” to start smelling a rat (and Shamir is a rat, a plague-carrying rat).

    rosie

    September 23, 2012 at 5:19 pm

  22. Correction – I’m offered “dreyfus” first, “holocaust” second.

    rosie

    September 23, 2012 at 5:33 pm

  23. OK Nick , fair enough You make some good points .

    As I said I am a friend of the paper & I made those comments in a spirit of Comradely criticism – not for the purpose of attacking the Morning Star .

    But it is You Who have responded to this matter by raising the issue of Zionism – for us this matter is about the great mistake of publishing the views of Far Right Extremists which the staff did not know anything about ( and Shamir is well known to anybody involved in Anti-Fascist work ) – Zionism is not really the issue here .

    It is perfectly acceptable for You to reject My view that the boundaries between Criticism of The State Of Israel & open Anti-Semitism have become blurred – but I can ensure You that that view is widely held in Jewish Communities worldwide .

    The Communist Party used to have a lot of sympathy from the Jewish Community – unfortunately this sympathy was thrown away by the CP’s silence about the ” Doctor’s Plot “, the Anti-Semitic Show Trials in Eastern Europe , the ” Anti-Zionist ” campaigns ( complete with vile Anti-Semitic cartoons & stereotypes of Jews ) in Poland & The Soviet Union during the 1970’s , the persecution of Soviet-Jewish Refuseniks etc .

    I think that You You should take an honest look at the extensive history of ill feelings between the Communist Movement & the Jewish Community & try to find ways that this relationship can start to be rebuilt .

    Ian

    September 23, 2012 at 5:45 pm

  24. This is helpful Steve.

    But Richard Bagley’s statement is feeble. It shrinks from condemning Shamir or admitting more than minimal responsibility for giving him a public platform.

    “We apologise wholeheartedly for any distress caused.”

    They, “will seek in future, wherever possible, to establish the full biography of writers before publishing their work.”

    As if this were a matter of upsetting a few sensitive souls, with “concerns”.

    This is the kind of thing you hear in local government when the rabble get a bit narky and somebody tries to meet it with managerial-speak.

    There is more than hint of, “Yes, we’ll do all that extra hard stuff of researching our authors’ background, even when we’re hard-pressed, and end the day totally exhausted, but if you insist..” “really…”

    He could have added, “I hear where you’re coming from.” or “I’m glad you asked that question.”

    There is nothing, nothing, about the fact that Shamir is an Anti-Semite.

    Francis, Paul Flewers, and others have made the point that it not difficult to find this out.

    As Rosie says, he is a “a plague-carrying rat“.

    What should the Morning Star do?

    To begin with, they should stop ‘syndicating’ anything from Counterpunch, which publishes Gilad Atzmon as well as Shamir, and which has already printed Shamir’s attack on Dreyfus – which might have given a bit of a hint about his ideology.

    Apart from the obvious, I am not AWL (systematic backing for the French Front de gauche, from its creation, would rule that out), I do not know what Nick Wright’s real point is.

    Anybody who blogs is unlikely to be a shrinking violet.

    As for the Morning Star, I’ve said that like Ian I read, and sometimes buy, the Star, principally for its trade union coverage and for investigative articles by people who know what they’re talking about, like Solomon Hughes, and other stuff, like Mat Coward’s gardening column and, say, Simon’s writing (if he still there).

    I dislike the streak of what Francis calls its sympathy for “anti-American authoritarianism.”

    I do not want to read a print version of Russia Today.

    If I want that I can turn the television on.

    Andrew Coates

    September 23, 2012 at 5:46 pm

  25. In partial defence of Counterpunch and the Morning Star’s practice of using it, it does carry some better stuff as well. The article to which Shamir was responding was also on Counterpunch, by Chris Randolph.

    It contained this rather perceptive paragraph, which applies not only to elements on the US left, unfortunately:

    “Once upon the time the Left was in favor of free speech, feminism, and confrontational protest, and simultaneously suspicious of authoritarian predatory privatizers, misogynist clerics and prudish censors. From the many articles and comments like Whitney’s in the (putatively) left of center blogosphere, we learn that the American Left is now quite alright with misogynist religion, censorship, rigged trials and the like just as long as the oppressing government is a foreign policy foil of the United States. This turns so-called progressives into just another group of intellectually dishonest bigots.”

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/09/in-defense-of-pussy-riot-and-the-russian-punk-movement/

    Francis

    September 23, 2012 at 6:11 pm

  26. Very, very significant that Nick Wright (who I understand to be on the staff of the Morning Star) hits back by:

    1/ Attempting to smear the AWL

    2/ Raising the (irrelevant) issue of “Zionism”

    3/ Accusing Andrew of lacking the kind of “standards of comprehension and political literacy … to meet the challenges of working as a sub editor or writer on the Morning Star.

    Point # is just desperate. Point #2 is typical Stalinist antisemitism. Point #3 (as Rosie splendidly points out) is simply laughable from someone associated with a publication that’s apparently unaware of who Israel Shamir is.

    Jim Denham

    September 23, 2012 at 6:39 pm

  27. Paul Flewers has just dug up this piece by Shamir, published by Counterpunch,

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/09/18/pol-pot-revisited/

    Dispatch From Cambodia Pol Pot Revisited by ISRAEL SHAMIR, September 18, 2012

    “The Pol Pot the Cambodians remember was not a tyrant, but a great patriot and nationalist, a lover of native culture and native way of life. He was brought up in royal palace circles; his aunt was a concubine of the previous king. He studied in Paris, but instead of making money and a career, he returned home, and spent a few years dwelling with forest tribes to learn from the peasants. He felt compassion for the ordinary village people who were ripped off on a daily basis by the city folk, the comprador parasites. He built an army to defend the countryside from these power-wielding robbers. Pol Pot, a monkish man of simple needs, did not seek wealth, fame or power for himself… New Cambodia (or Kampuchea, as it was called) under Pol Pot and his comrades was a nightmare for the privileged, for the wealthy and for their retainers; but poor people had enough food and were taught to read and write. As for the mass killings, these are just horror stories, averred my Cambodian interlocutors. Surely the victorious peasants shot marauders and spies, but many more died of American-planted mines and during the subsequent Vietnamese takeover, they said.”

    I began reading it and also saw this “Surprisingly, Cambodians have no bad memories of that period.”

    The Morning Star should publish this forthwith.

    Andrew Coates

    September 23, 2012 at 7:43 pm

  28. Andrew, I wrote to Richard Bagley asking for a retraction to be printed and that was the response I got.

    Nick Wright isn’t a member of the Morning Star staff as I am sure he will tell you. The spat between him and Jim Denham is an unhelpful distraction.

    If only it was as simple that loony “anti-Zionists” were to be found in one political tradition on the left in Britain. Anyone who knows anything about antisemitism knows what happens when you scratch one.

    Steve Silver

    September 23, 2012 at 7:44 pm

  29. Steve, Paul Flewers has just found the article on Pol Pot from Counterpunch (see above for details), which I would prefer to underline as proof of the kind of person Shamir is, and what kind of journal Counterpunch is.

    Andrew Coates

    September 23, 2012 at 7:46 pm

  30. If Nick Wright is not a member of the Morning Star staff, I’m happy to acknowledge that. I understood that to possibly be the case because of what another commenter here said. But in any case Wright is clearly an apologist and supporter of it, though. I honestly fail to see how my points are either a “spat” or “an unhelpful distraction.”

    I think Wright’s kneejerk reactions (especially the recourse to “Zionism”) are extremely telling.

    Jim Denham

    September 23, 2012 at 8:08 pm

  31. We apologise wholeheartedly for any distress caused.”

    They, “will seek in future, wherever possible, to establish the full biography of writers before publishing their work.”

    As if this were a matter of upsetting a few sensitive souls, with “concerns”.

    Yes- that sentence really riled me. I did a search “sorry for the distress” and the first was a supermarket apologising to local residents for staging building work that upset their sleep. It’s PR speak from a corporation.

    If I had found I had accidentally published a piece by a rabid antisemite, I wouldn’t be thinking of my readers’ distress, I would be thinking of how mortified I am to have made such a gross error.

    rosie

    September 23, 2012 at 8:12 pm

  32. Thanks for drawing so much cogent attention to this Andrew.

    Nick Wright’s defence is to argue that (the otherwise intelligent and skilled subs) were under such an incredible pressure of time that they had no time to check the source.

    Not checking the source ( this includes the seconds it takes to google a name) is never an acceptable excuse for any journalist let alone a political journalist.

    However the fault cannot lie in just failing to check any biographical details of an author of a political article a political Newspaper wishes to re-publish.

    Those who placed the article must also be held accountable for any failure to analyse the content and political orientation of any article.

    Whoever placed this article ‘edited; it more than superficially as Francis above notes the line that was most overtly in defence of holocaust deniers was deleted, but that is not all.

    There are several instances where the article wishes to show that Western hate speech laws disproportionately protect Jews and target neo-Nazis that have been diluted.

    The editors have clearly subtly shifted the emphasis by Shamir on a reactionary clearly ‘Jewish-Wealthy-Oligarch-Western US-liberal -anti Christian’ conspiracy at work behind Pussy Riot.

    They even added a grammatically hanging lead in of ;

    Who’s behind Pussy Riot? An unholy alliance of big business and media barons, says ……

    This while still conspiratorial somewhat cleanses the article of its use of clearly anti-semitic tropes of powerful wealthy Jews and their Oligarchic and Western liberal media and business contacts.

    Thus for Richard Bagley to say that the article itself was unobjectionable is extraordinary. Has he read it? The problem for the Morning star is not just who they re-published but ‘what’ and ‘why’?

    ‘a few choice extracts (partially edited out by Morning Star subs) show the reactionary nature of the article Surely even if one did not know the author the content would have been enough to reject it as reactioanry?

    ..but it was just a question of time when the global anti-Christian forces would step forward and attack the Russian Church like they attacked the Western Church. As Russia entered the WTO and adopted Western mores, it had to adopt secularization. And indeed the Russian Church was attacked by forces that do not want Russia to be cohesive: the oligarchs, big business, the media lords, the pro-Western intelligentsia of Moscow, and Western interests which naturally prefer Russia divided against itself….

    The alleged organiser of the PR, Marat Gelman, a Russian Jewish art collector, has been connected with previous anti-Christian art actions which involved icon-smashing, imitation churches of enemas.

    During the trial, the defence and the accused did their worst to antagonize the judge by threatening her with the wrath of the United States (sic!) and by defiantly voicing anti-Christian hate speeches. The judge had no choice but to find the accused guilty of hate crime (hooliganism with religious hate as the motive). The prosecution did not charge the accused with a more serious hate crime “with intent to cause religious strife”, though it could probably be made to stick. (It would call for a stiffer sentence; swastika-drawers charged with intent to cause strife receive five years of jail).

    Two years’ sentence is quite in line with prevailing European practice. For much milder anti-Jewish hate talk, European countries customarily sentence offenders to two-to-five years of prison for the first offence.

    The Russians applied hate crime laws to offenders against Christian faith, and this is probably a Russian novelty.

    The Russians proved that they care for Christ as much as the French care for Auschwitz, and this shocked the Europeans who apparently thought ‘hate laws’ may be applied only to protect Jews and gays.

    The Western governments call for more freedom for the anti-Christian Russians, while denying it for holocaust revisionists in their midst.’

    Far from Nick Wright’s diversionary attempt to crudely smear critiques as Zionists working. I would think it draws us to a closer examination of exactly what symmetry between the views and Israel Shamir was in the mind of the editor or editors that could lead them to so carefully and knowingly to edit the article to remove the more obviously egregious far right political associations?

    mettaculture

    September 23, 2012 at 10:09 pm

  33. “The problem for the Morning star is not just who they re-published but ‘what’ and ‘why’?”

    ASs you ask, Mettaculture, for what reasons did they “so carefully and knowingly to edit the article to remove the more obviously egregious far right political associations?”

    Indeed.

    There is also this:

    The Spanish Prisoner commented on this article’s original publication in Counterpunch,

    “In it, he repeatedly refers to the members of the band by the misogynist term, “viragos”. This fact alone should have been sufficient reason to reject the article. Alas, it’s actually even worse than that. Shamir argues that the Putin government was right to send these women to prison for merely expressing their opinions. He writes: ”

    http://thespanishprisoner.wordpress.com/2012/08/25/israel-shamir-and-counterpunch/

    The more you get closer to this the more dubious it all gets.

    Andrew Coates

    September 23, 2012 at 10:29 pm

  34. In relation to the Star’s coverage of Russia in particular, I suspect that the links with the KPRF have tended to skew its perspective in a “red-brown” direction. Once you start to accept the red-brown narrative on events in Russia, the conspiracy theories of Shamir don’t seem so very extraordinary. I fear that Roger Bagley’s surprise at the reaction this piece has caused is entirely genuine and sincere..

    Francis

    September 23, 2012 at 10:58 pm

  35. Interesting the Star seems to have pulled all reference to Shamir piece from the website. Why not put the apology on the website? I notice the Star published a similar attack on Pussy Riot the previous week by Counterpunch regular Diana Johnstone, who also dabbles in genocide denial. The Cambodian genocide denial by Shamir in Counterpunch is particularly offensive. Why anyone who claims to be of the left is syndicating anything from Counterpunch is a mystery.

    BobFromBrockley

    September 24, 2012 at 12:48 pm

  36. I notice the Star once published an article by Dave Landau that mentioned Shamir’s antisemitism: http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/layout/set/print/content/view/full/59838

    BobFromBrockley

    September 24, 2012 at 12:52 pm

  37. similar sexist stuff on Pussy Riot was recently aired on YouTube by the German “Querfront”-afficionado and former Die Linke candidate Chris Sedlmair (alias Baath Simpson) … that Shamir likes Pol Pot should further disqualify him even among Morning Star & Co. for whom the support of Vietnam plays an important role

    entdinglichung

    September 24, 2012 at 3:05 pm

  38. Ian
    We can draw a distinction between your criticism of the decision to publish this piece (which I share) – which is an expression of basic sympathy with the Morning Star – and the comments made by some other posters here whose basic antagonism to the Star is an expression of a barely concealed alignment with Zionism (and other expressions of imperialism).

    I rather agree with the notion that the boundaries between criticism of the State of Israel and anti-semitism have become blurred. Indeed, I think it is a political device of the Israeli state, of zionism generally and of its camp followers in groups like the AWL to propogate the fallacious notion that opposition to zionism as a political movement and the State of Israel can be conflated with anti-semitism.

    To these tricksters ‘anti semitism’ is an homogenous phenonmena, expressions of which whether by neo-nazis and Holocaust-deniers fall into the same analytical category as the angry voices of Palestinians raised against those who stole their land and continue to oppress them.

    Nick Wright

    September 24, 2012 at 5:43 pm

  39. “the fallacious notion that opposition to … the State of Israel can be conflated with anti-semitism”

    Hm… I could say that a person that opposes the existence of the State of Israel, while proclaiming his opposition to antisemitism, is, how to say it gently: a “practicing closet anti-Semite”. Nah, sounds complicated.

    But dear Mr Wright: why that insistence on mixing the issue of all-around vermin “Israel Shamir” with a hodge-podge of Morning Star style rubber stamped “Islamaphobia”, “Zionism”, “angry voices of Palestinians”? After all, the article Morning Star published was by one Israel Shamir about one “Pussy Riot” and one Russia. Unless you insist that there is a link between Pussy Riot and Zionists (I guess your beloved paper is able to find more than one in a jiffy, but it’s neither here nor there), I propose to leave the Zionists alone, they are going to lunch soon and it may cause havoc to their digestion.

    Let’s turn back to Israel Shamir and choose a Shamir-related issue you may be able to handle without a recourse to cursing the Zionists. You see, I am one, by the mere fact of residing in the Zionist Entity and, besides, my antagonism to the Star is more than just basic.

    So I would like to choose an angle of looking at “Israel” Shamir from a point where two of us could easily coexist. Bob from Brockley could have done it himself, since I will be quoting his post, but for some reason he has chosen not to, so here we go:

    http://brockley.blogspot.co.il/2012/02/assangeshamir.html

    “Assange allowed Israel Shamir, a genuinely sinister Holocaust denier, to take unredacted US State Department cables to Belarus. These were pure gold for Lukashenko’s KGB because they contained the names of opposition figures who had spoken to American officials.”

    I apologize for that “genuinely sinister Holocaust denier”, probably the author of that text was unable to hold his horses, but still – try to ignore it. How do you like them chicken? Your beloved paper publishes an article by a stool pigeon of one of the worst dictatorships in existence, without a smidgen of a background test.

    I would say that this is a more worthy subject for this specific discussion, isn’t it?

    snoopythegoon

    September 27, 2012 at 12:40 pm

  40. [...] week, the UK far-left Morning Star newspaper attracted criticism and condemnation for publishing an article by the notorious figure of Israel Shamir on the subject of Pussy Riot. Shamir advanced the theory [...]

  41. […] Cockburn as an editor of the creepy Counterpunch, and his airy dismissals  of anyone who thought Israel Shamir a dodgy piece of […]

    Poumicated | Poumista

    August 8, 2014 at 10:54 am


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: