Harry on Harry's Place

Harry's Place is down at the moment.  It could be one of those DDOS thingies or it could just be a technical glitch, I'm not sure.  Just before they were zapped they came up with a post that would have many decent folk reaching for the DDOS file but since I don't approve of that kind of thing - as a rule - I'm linking to the cache of a post where they claim that the killing of the eleven month old baby of a BBC cameraman was more likely by Hamas than by Israel.  The post is titled Who Killed Jihad Masharawi’s Son, Omar? and draws heavily on a highly speculative piece on the tastefully named Elder of Ziyon blog - but don't use antisemitic tropes anybody.

Here are two responses that I thought ought to be preserved after the HP sell by date:

Harry

25 November 2012, 7:57 pm

I wonder if you’d write a cheap little essay, full of rampant speculation, if your son had just been blown to bits.

Nah. I doubt it.

mynameisnotimportant

26 November 2012, 2:35 am

[I am trying to post anonymously here because I don't have any email addresses which do not contain my full name (because I have no reason to need them), but I do not wish to encourage those who view cyberstalking of someone with a potentially opposing view as reasonable behaviour.]

I stumbled across this website because of the comments made by the bbc correspondent about bloggers challenging his account of the ‘likely’ cause of the childs death. I was curious to find out if there were conflicting accounts elsewhere.

Having read what was here – I wished (if you don’t mind too much) too make a comment or two before I gradually retreat. I am not here because I have any particular axe to grind with anybody- and I am making no presumption about this site or those who comment here regularly. (Particularly as I haven’t seen enough to do so).

On the BBC account -

[I have worked in the defence industry and munitions in particular for a long time so I have some familiarity with at least part of the multitude of such objects (or varying reliability of performance) we have devised as a species which could cause such an event.]

If you really think that a BBC radio 4 ‘from our own correspondent’ programme journalist would invent a dead baby belonging to a colleague you are living on another planet and unable to be reached with merely human technology such as the internet. (The diversity and quality of this programme is remarkable- check it out!).

Whilst there are many possibilities as to how an apartment could be penetrated by an object and then burn ferociously in a warzone- the fact that it was not flattened is irrelevant as to determining whether this was an IDF strike. Missiles come in all sizes and purposes- as do other types of munitions. The IDF has more experience than most of having to carry out targeted strikes in urban areas where it may wish to have a smaller guided payload weapons to limit collateral damage- such as the those carried on a drone. Likewise a shell -(which does not contain high explosive such as a smoke round) could arrive unguided to the wrong location, penetrate a weak structure then burn with considerable ferocity without being described as an actual incendiary device. (I haven’t seen comment on the use of actual incendiary weapons this time however during cast lead WP shells were used to achieve a similar affect on the UN warehouse in Gaza at least- hence it featuring heavily in their report on that conflict.)

On the recent situation in Gaza -

Is it callously irresponsible that Hamas operates rockets or missiles sites close to civilians thereby attracting israeli fire onto those civilians? – certainly.

However – the gaza strip is a very small area under very close surveillance. Hamas intends to make its weapons – and (at least some of) its fighters difficult to track and spot in peacetime and in war- and wishes to enable such operations to be carried out quickly and with as little opportunity to prevent or observe them being carried out. As a result it is inevitable that this will mean that the weapons move closer to the urban areas where suspicious activity would be harder to detect.

Furthermore Hamas’s command and control probably becomes very rudimentary very quickly in wartime and is intended not to be reliant on any technology which can be jammed, overheard, de-crypted or fail due to long term power blackouts. This may end up degrading to the level of neighbourhood runners.

The effectiveness of the israeli blockade on even simple materials such as concrete and metal would make preparation of the sort of sophistocated tunnel complexes used by hezbollah to hide and move weapons and fighters in south lebanon impossible. (and given the level of surveillance probably impossible to conceal – and therefore pointless unless incredibly strongly constructed….as the israeli firepower is vast and gaza relatively tiny in area).

The more rural areas are presumed by both sides to be a completely free fire zone. With so little cover which will not be levelled if deemed to be even slightly relevant by the IDF – the desire to remain in the fight makes it again inevitable that Hamas will move into the built up area for pragmatic reasons again. (There is very little point in calling this cowardice. Hamas regards itself as the ’state’ in gaza and as such has a responsibility to preserve its ability to function as a military force in the event that a ground invasion occurs- where it would be far more likely to be able to exact casualties on the IDF.)

Incidently such a blockade also makes the construction of shelters for the civilian populace a complete pipe dream.

Whether you despise Hamas’s ideology or not – they are the de-facto government of gaza and have been democratically elected in the past.

It is utterly illogical to pretend this is not a war between states (in hte eyes of the combatants at least) whether the military imbalance makes the nature of the conflict into a bizarre alternate model. ie where being completely slaughtered (along with those you are supposed to have protected) becomes a ‘victory’ simply through your organisation continuing to exist in any form.

Also given the ongoing economic crisis in gaza during the blockade there are unfortunately hundreds of priorities which could come before shelters.

On the conflict in general-

I have lived long enough to have seen israel spurn enormous quantities of admiration, respect and goodwill across the world. I grew up in a world amazed by the bravery and the skill of the IDF.

This change in attitude is not due to infantile siding with the underdog. It is not due to anyone forgetting the lesson of the holocaust. It is down to talking about peace whilst continuously building settlements outwith the 67 borders. It is also about exacting collective punishment on the palestinian population as a group for their refusal to meekly accept a ridiculously miserable life in a few fragments of the country which their predecessors lived in. (Sometimes within sight of their former homes and land within the renamed towns and cities of Israel. Their cultural memory of the country which existed in those places prior to Israel is just as inconvenient as they are.)

Those who are friends of israel should understand that whilst the continuation of low level conflict alongside settlement building in the West Bank may appear a successful model to the israeli state (as the facts on the ground -within their area of control- continue to move in their favour), this is merely making it impossible for them to have any eventual overture for peace be remotely credible.

If the Palestinian people chose extremists like Hamas -that reflects on the duplicitous way that moderate leaders have been co-opted and then made ridiculous by israeli violations of previous agreements.

If zionism places the rights of jews above non jews, and this is inherent in the nature of the legal framework of the current israeli state then what palestinian leader could agree a one or two state solution which guarantees all or part of the palestinian people being left as second class citizens in perpituity?

In the name of security laws discriminating citizens by race and religion which are incompatible with the view israel holds of its own place as an honourary ‘western’ democracy are in effect.

The changes demanded to make the israeli state not a ‘zionist’ state (and meet the criteria of co-existence with Hamas and other in a two or one state settlement) are merely a recalibration back to the basic level of equal rights that are a pre-requisite for the democratic state israel proclaims itself to be.

Any such nonsense of the palestinian’s being in the grip of a death cult and seeking leadership who will lead them through fire until israel in any form is wiped off the map is nothing but drivel.

Israel now posseses the power to make peace on incredibly favourable terms.

Surely this must be better than perpetual war?

Otherwise what is the endpoint-

War in the west until the last gazan has been driven to the slums of cairo – and hamas are still raiding and rocketing from the sinai whilst becoming egypt’s hezbollah?

Or squeezing the life out of the west bank until jordan (already majority palestinian demographically) is racked by civil war due to a further influx of palestinians and ceases being neutral to become a hostile palestinian majority governed neighbour?

Surely there must be a better future than a victory (at best) requiring longer and bigger fences and israeli’s still unable to travel in the entire middle east – and at worst further sporadic bouts of conflicts with a choice of hostile neighbours.

The unconditional financial assistance from the USA underpins the israel economy, its military prowess, its research and development – releases Israel’s own tax revenue from other purposes to fund settlement (including duplicating infrastructure and the security walls).
It also affords the sponsoring of new immigrants with little or no connections to Israel who are willing to serve as settler militia to protect their new and better life. This sort of shameless policy of expansion by any means via hired economic migrants makes a fool of any palestinian politician who even suggests Israel is still interested in peace.

If the continuation of such generous assistance by the US was made conditional on a genuine pursuit of peace – this conflict could end very quickly.

As the deal which could be made now is far in advance of that which previous generations of israeli’s could ever have dreamed of- it is not unreasonable for a friend of israel to intervene in such a way.

Especially in return for its unceasing genorosity and the considerable difficulty caused to a hundred other foreign policy concerns ham-strung as the price of unequivocal support of Israel.

The flipside to this is this eventually a politician in america may effectively galvanise the american taxpayer to the inconsistency of massive aid to Israel versus the industrial regeneration, public services, improved military equipment, infrastructure which they are being told is unaffordable.

The worst thing anyone supportive of israel could do is work on the assumption that a lasting and workable peace is irrelevant as the american financial aid will be affordable in perpetuity- thereby leaving the risk to israeli security that such support may be withdrawn without suitable adjustment at a time not of israel’s choosing.

Anyhoo…that’s my tuppence worth.

Best wishes for the future.

No name bloke.

Well done those blokes and many thanks to the comrade who wades through all the repugnant dross at HP so you and I don't have to.


UPDATE 26/3/2013:
Apparently the speculation on Harry's Place that a bomb which killed a Palestinian baby may have come from Hamas turned out to be correct.  The UN is now saying the child was probably killed by a Hamas device. Of course that wasn't the only point of the comment from "mynameisnotimportant".

Guardian hosts 7 Jewish children so Harry's Place hosts Jud Süß

I thought I had a bit of a scoop yesterday when someone wrote to me saying that David T of Harry's Place had literally gone mad over the Guardian's hosting of a film clip of one woman doing a reading of Caryl Churchill's play, Seven Jewish Children: a play for Gaza. The guy told me that there was a ridiculously over the top post followed by a thread that was pretty nutty even by HP standards and that later in the day, Engage style, the embarrassing post had disappeared. But no, my contact was wrong. David Hirsh disappears embarrassing posts but David T is made of mm, er, better? no that's not the word, worse? no that's not it either. David T is different from David Hirsh; a little bit anyway. That is, he didn't disappear the post that if he had any shame at all he would be painfully embarrassed about.

So what's all this? The Guardian decided, what with all the hooha about the play, they would commission an actor to perform 7 Jewish children: a play for Gaza. I posted the script some time ago, here. So now you can watch the play and read the script. I couldn't get into the script but it is very ably performed, indeed the script really comes alive when performed by Jennie Stoller so if you haven't watched it yet you might want to do so before reading on.

The HP post simply says the following:

Guardian Stages Seven Jewish Children

David T, April 25th 2009, 1:15 pm

You can read the Guardian’s self-justification here.

You can watch it online here.

This is the Guardian’s next theatrical project.

And the next theatrical project is the notorious antisemitic nazi propaganda film, Jud Süß.

So that's all there is to the post. The Guardian has produced and presented 7 Jewish children and that apparently compares to a nazi propaganda film made, I believe, by Goebels and HP hosts the a youtube clip of Jud Süß helpfully subtitled in Magyar as if to emphasise (not) the widespread nature of antisemitic propaganda throughout the Anglosphere. The antisemitism of the play is held to speak for itself, in the title, in the comparison with Jud Süß and of course in the fact that HP has a beef about it. It's a curious paradox that for a hasbara parrot, David T isn't too big on the explain thing. He prefers enigmatic assertions, rhetorical questions and implied, sometimes even expressed, allegations.

See what I mean in the comments. The first one is quite a good one from an Andrew Adams :

So they’re staging a reading so that people can actually see for themselves what the fuss is about and make their own mind up. And that’s the same as showing a Nazi propaganda film. A sense of proportion is required here I think.

And the riposte from DT?

”tell her we’re chosen people”

See what I mean by enigmatic or am I doing it now? Is he saying that no Jewish children ever get told that they are chosen people? Where did the expression come from? Why was that film about frummer and reformers called "The Chosen"? or where I saw it, The Chosen PG. What about Tevia in Fiddler on the Roof? Why did he tell G-d to choose someone else? A similar thing gets said by one of the characters in the film Defiance. The chosen people thing runs very deeply in the Jewish religion and means different thing to different people but its incorporation into the zionist ideology, whether secular or religious, as an idea of Jewish superiority can't seriously be gainsaid. Personally I have had several Jews, Israelis and Christians say to me that Jews are the chosen people. So what's he saying?

DT needs time to think about what he is to say to firm up on the allegation that Caryl Churchill's play is comparable to a nazi propaganda film, so one minute after his first response comes his second:

Let me put it this way, Andrew.

You’re not an anti-racist. You’re happy to give anti-semitism a pass, as long as it is plausibly dressed up as anti-Zionism.

Goodness, all he said was it was a bit disproportionate suggesting that the Guardian was close to hosting nazi propaganda. For all we know Andrew might be very concerned about racism and possibly about antisemitism in particular. You really can't say one way or the other from the comment he made and sure enough, Andrew's having none of it:

You’re not an anti-racist. You’re happy to give anti-semitism a pass, as long as it is plausibly dressed up as anti-Zionism.

Crap. I don’t have a view about whether the play is anti-semitic or not, I haven’t seen it or read it. But it has certainly attracted a lot of controversy so why not give people an opportunity to make their minds up for themselves.

Typically the thread meanders a good bit while people try to outdo each other for allegations of antisemitism (I'm skimming) so whilst it's not entirely clear who DT is responding to here I'll assume it's this Andrew guy:

I’m not suggesting it should be banned.

I’m just explaining that people who do put on a play, the thesis of which is that Jewish children are told to celebrate the deaths of others, because they are “the chosen people” are antisemites.

I also think that people who do not see this is a racist argument, are tolerant of racism.

So Caryl Churchill has written an antisemitic play and anyone who hosts it for any reason is antisemitic. This includes the liberal zionist Jewish lobby theatre, Theatre J.

Now a lot more drivel follows, especially from DT but then in wades The Hasbara Buster :

It’s very amusing to see how many of Caryl’s negative reviewers have written critiques imitating the “Tell her that–” model. The play has hit home, not because of its literary merit, which it absolutely lacks, but because of how effectively it ridicules Zionist brainwashing. The crude, childish indoctrination depicted in the play is in fact what young –and adult– Jews are fed by their political and religious leadership.

You don’t like it? Then stop repeating moronic clichés like ”they never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity,” “we’ll have peace when they love their children more than they hate us,” or “we can forgive their killing our children, but not their forcing us to kill theirs.” Each time you Zionists repeat them you expose yourselves as the brainwashed lot you are.

Now that was good, what are they going to do now? Up steps Gene:

It’s very amusing to see how many of Caryl’s negative reviewers have written critiques imitating the “Tell her that–” model.

On a first-name basis now? Does she call you Hasbara?

No, she calls you hasbara, Gene, at least she would if she knew you.

Things go from weird to weirder when "Joshua" suggests, by quoting Theodor Herzl's notorious acceptance of antisemitism, that resistance to antisemitism is futile given that:

anti-Semites and anti-Zionists will achieve the same result in their newspapers and on their blogs. They will simply redouble their efforts and attempt to diminish you and those like you at every turn.

What? DT's not having any of that with all his achievements and ends his response by saying:

we most certainly aren’t standing around doing nothing. Our enemies have a pretty good idea of what we’ve achieved and it makes them very nervous.

Oo-er! But back comes Joshua:

The notion that you have had anything but the slightest effect on those anti-Semites and anti-Zionists is utterly absurd. You have made them nervous? Hubristic twaddle.

Sorry about that. Two lunatics slugging it out over whether nazi propaganda can be stopped at the Guardian is no better than just the one. I just wanted to show that little hint of a Napoleon complex on DT's part.

Back to the Hasbara Buster, picking up on some of David T's claims within the thread:

1. Jews have not threatened violence over this, or any other of they myriad racist defamations to which we’ve been subject

Robert Faurisson has been repeatedly beaten to a pulp by Jews, and Serge Klarsfeld has approved of the beatings.

To the deafening silence of world Jewry.

Hmm, not a great move, that one. Earlier in the thread DT had said:

What a hilarious play Churchill has written. I would spit in her face.

And he gets support from a fan, Chas Newkey-Burden :

“What a hilarious play Churchill has written. I would spit in her face.”

Join the queue.

Ah, now when someone else with an appalling hasbara blog of his own writes the same thing as DT did, DT can see what a stupid thing it was to say and hastily withdraws:

Actually, I hope I wouldn’t. I hope I’d have the grace to walk away.

Me too, I'd hate him to bring the Jews into disrepute.

But HB plumped for an incident involving a holocaust denier. What a gift from HB to HP and especially to DT. Straight away, ignoring the point completely HB is asked if he supports Faurisson:

No; I’m just debunking the myth that Jews don’t threaten violence over the defamations they’ve been subject to.

And he was and he did and he moved on to debunk another myth in the making.

2. This play claims that Jewish parents encourage Jewish children to revel in the dead of a civil war. That is, quite frankly, untrue. It is also essentially a rehashing of the Blood Libel.

Where, David? Where does the play claim this? It is these small misrepresentations that in the end lead you to call the play antisemitic.

The play says:

Tell her about the family of dead girls, tell her the names, why not, tell her the whole world knows why shouldn’t she know? tell her there’s dead babies, did she see babies? tell her she’s got nothing to be ashamed of. Tell her they did it to themselves.

The play claims that Jewish children are told to blame the victims — NOT to take pleasure in their deaths.

We ALL know this is true. We all know the official Zionist line is that the dead children is something the Palestinians did to themselves.

You don’t live in Israel. However, a journo who does live there said:

I heard comments similar to these from some of my relatives during the war. Going back through the 24 years I’ve lived here, I’ve heard comments like these from relatives, neighbors, fellow soldiers - I’ve heard it and read it all over the place. I’ve heard it from Diaspora Jews too.

Caryl Churchill told the truth and she’s called an antisemite. The usual prescription.

This goes to the heart of the issue. Caryl Churchill's play is being grotesquely misrepresented. The worst possible spin and improbable spin is put on her words and her intentions and Hasbara Buster appears to have demonstrated that the overall allegation of antisemitism is based on a false interpretation of what was written. Now you'd expect David T to respond to that but instead he pretends to take this paranoid Joshua seriously and continues his discussion with him. Meanwhile, Hasbara Buster is now being accused of antisemitism, holocaust denial and being a nazi.

So where is DT? Ah here he is, a few trolls in tow and he thinks he's found a get out from his silly notion that Jews never threaten violence when something offends their political sensibilities and that is because the example out of many that HB chose was a holocaust denier who seems to have been beaten up by a small gang of Jewish youths. So anyway, here's DT:

I’m not getting into that; I’ll only say that Faurisson was beaten by Jews, who in turn were praised by a leading Jewish personality, for the sole crime of exercising his right to free speech.

You bloody well are getting into that!

“I’ll only say…”

You scumbag Faurrison supporter.

See, what a dumb move. The point in that discussion was never the views of Faurisson, it was whether he was beaten up by some Jews or not. By all means check but I think HB made his case very well. But that's not the main point either. The idea that someone can in all seriousness say that Jews never threaten violence over their political sensibilities being offended is downright silly even without reference to specific examples but this was a side issue.

The issue was the play and many zionists are saying it is antisemitic and David T is saying that it is antisemitic to even show the play for any reason and to make his case he is misrepresenting what it actually said. Hasbara Buster demonstrated that in a significant passage the play wasn't as represented by DT. And yet David T, having accused Caryl Churchill and certain unnamed people at the Guardian never returned to the thread to discuss his bizarre take on the play and the ludicrous comparison he made of the play with a nazi propaganda film.

Now, if you still haven't taken in the reading of 7 Jewish children: a play for Gaza, at the Guardian site, then I suggest that you do that now.

Engage rounds on Lerman again

I checked Engage a few times today to see how they would inevitably misrepresent Anthony Lerman's article in yesterday's Independent. They got round to linking to it but the original post, by "professional sociologist", Dr Hirsh contained only a childish personal attack on Lerman (apparently he's a new conservative - not a neo-conservative) without mentioning what he had actually written. I'm guessing it's because the last time that I'm aware that Hirsh crossed swords with Lerman, Lerman wiped him out.

But anyway, all Hirsh did this time was hang a pointer to the article and insult the man to let the faithful know that "we" don't like this Lerman character. But what's all this? The Doctor has delegated the task of misrepresenting what Lerman said to someone who doesn't even have a whole name, just a first name, unless his surname's Saul. So what does this Saul say?

Where Arendt, Katz and Baron differ from Lerman, of course, is that whilst they offer a critique of “eternal antisemitism”, they do so in the recognition of the real existence of the antisemitism of their day. None of them, as Lerman does, denies its existence or blames the Jews for its existence. On the contrary, their critique of “eternal antisemitism” is made so as to bring into relief the specific contours of the antisemitism of their day so as to understand it all the more clearly and, as a consequence, to oppose it all the more effectively.

So Lerman has said that there is no such thing as antisemitism, that is he "denies its existence" and he "blames the Jews for its existence", er, in spite of the fact he denies its existence. How does he deny something exists whilst blaming people for its existence? Saul doesn't even note, still less does he explain the paradox.

Here's a little chunk of what Lerman actually wrote since Saul didn't actually quote anything that he wrote:

It's perfectly possible to acknowledge the pain caused by increased anti-Semitism but reject wild scenarios and counterproductive ways of dealing with the problem – such as demonising strong criticism of Israel. We should be able to have a dialogue about alternative ways of interpreting what's happening and what needs to be done. Sadly, the Jewish establishment here and other self-appointed gatekeepers of Jewish dignity see this as traitorous and a denial of anti-Semitism.

He seems to have read Saul's critique before Saul wrote it. I tell you, those Jews, they've got such uncanny powers.

Comments are back

The chaps at JS-Kit/Haloscan have restored the comments facility:

Update 2: Full Services Restored

Full services have been restored. The outage lasted about 13 hours.

Here’s a breakdown of what happened.

• Due to a number of reasons (Founder leaving with some broken promises, legacy software etc) Haloscan still runs on old hardware that has been patched and maintained as best as possible by our team
• Out of respect for Haloscan users who love the simple system, we aborted plans to migrate Haloscan users to JS-Kit until JS-Kit was able to mimick Haloscan 100%. The result has been a longer than expected migration process - so the upgrade to the faster, more feature rich JS-Kit system is long overdue.
• We have 4 database servers for Haloscan
• Master server had a hard drive failure
• Normally this should have only stopped new comments from being written to the system, but the legacy code could not cope and resulted in a full failure (Both read AND write);
• Read access (I.e. comments appearing on blogs, but no ability to add new comments) was fixed by our engineer Oleg within ~1 hour.
• We’ve been working in parallel on multiple tracks on a Plan A (Rebuilding the Server) and Plan B (Setting up EC2 replica) to get things up and running as fast as possible.
• In the process we also promoted one of the remaining replicas to master (and setup remaining to slave)
• From this moment forward Haloscan was back up and running
• In general two replicas are enough for service to run as expected
• We’ve got old the master server rebuilt with new drives and will add it as another replica within a day or two

In order to avoid this occuring again, we are going to redouble our efforts to migrate users to the JS-Kit service. We hope that we can minimise changes to our beloved Haloscan, but change is inevitable and, at this point, a welcome relief from the older system for both users and our system admins!

Thank you all for your patience. I have been communicating with you all day via Twitter, Blogger and Email and I’d like to thank you for being gentle with me (for the most part hah).

Founder leaving with broken promises? Hmm?

Haloscan outage

We now have an update on Haloscan's own blog, now authored by the new owners of Haloscan, JS-Kit. There message is pretty much the same as mine in the previous post:

Haloscan outage Posted: February 27th, 2009 | Author: Chris Saad | Filed under: Service Changes | Tags: haloscan, outtage |

Haloscan is currently experiencing some server difficulties. I want to assure you that we are aware of the problem and are hard working to fix it.

Users may experience problems loading, submitting or moderating comments with Haloscan during this period.

Please rest assured your comments are still safe and secure on our system.

We apologize for any inconvenience.

More information to come.

Update 1: Users can now view comments, but can not add or edit comments. This will take up to 24 hours to restore.

Apologies to those who are still awaiting moderation.

Ok, well, not exactly no comment

Hmm, it appears you can see comments that were approved up to a certain time today but no new comments are being accepted for the time being. It looks like there is a problem with haloscan that they are solving bit by bit.

No comment!

Sorry all, but the Haloscan comments facility is down. We've been getting literally thousands of hits today from Rense and What Really Happened? so, who knows? maybe it's a conspiracy! Anyway, I'm sure they'll be restored in due course but in the meantime, I don't want to resort to blogger's own comment facility so if you really want to comment while your idea is still fresh please click in the email link below and email the author of the post you want to comment on. If you would like the comment posted when service is restored, that can be arranged, no promises mind.

Thanks!