Comments Policy

One of the goals of this site is to promote critical discussion and debate on US foreign policy and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We want Mondoweiss to be a place that everyone feels comfortable visiting, to read and comment, regardless of political perspective. People might not always like what we post, but everyone should feel invited and encouraged to join the discussion, share their opinions, and engage in debate.

Unfortunately, more and more we are hearing that people are not comfortable participating in the site because of the noxious and often abusive language that proliferates in the comments section. We’ve tried the hands-off approach, hoping the site would regulate itself. This hasn’t worked.

For this reason we are putting in place the following ground rules:

1. No racist or sexist comments. This includes anti-Arab, Islamophobic and anti-Semitic comments (and yes, Christian-bashing too). This includes comments that disparage, intimidate or attack a person based on perceived ethnicity or gender.

2. No Nakba or Holocaust denial. We’re not going to tolerate any discussion of the Jewish role in the rise of the Nazis which is used as a pretext for blaming Jews for the Nazi rise, a form of Holocaust denial we want no part of. Similarly, this policy includes Nakba denial as well, and efforts to blame the expulsion of Palestinians in 1948 on Palestinian actions.

3. No profanity. Along with racism and sexism the prevalence of profanity in the comments on the blog has forced people away. This has to end.

4. No personal attacks. We encourage spirited, passionate debate, but if you have to resort to vicious personal attack, you’re not advancing the discussion. Stay on the issues.

5. No imposture. You can use any pseudonym you like, but if you represent yourself as someone you’re not, you’re outta here.

6. No trolling. Wikipedia defines trolling as “someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response.” That definition is good enough for us. We hope our comment section can feature an engaged and free flowing debate, but we are not interested in commenters whose only aim is to disrupt or sabotage the discussion.

7. This is not a site to discuss 9/11 theories. This discussion turns into a huge distraction, is not central to the life of the site, and is a drag on the moderators.

If we judge that you have broken one of these rules you will be banned. We will ban the IP address you are posting from and if you try to post from another IP address we will ban that as well.

We like to think that this site has become a dynamic and necessary forum. Your help will ensure that it continues to grow and develop.

Thanks,

Phil & Adam

{ 311 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. Hanzala says:

    While the world is focused on Libya, Yemen, and Bahrain, Israel (as usual in these types of situations) conducts aerial bombardment in Gaza
    link to english.aljazeera.net

  2. eljay says:

    Every site needs a comment policy – good move there – but unless it is fairly and fairly-strictly enforced, it’s not worth much.

    Best of luck (sincerely) with the new policy.

  3. Dear Mondoweiss: 1.2.3.
    1. Has anyone followed up on the possibility that an unpaid Thai worker was behind the Itimar murders?
    2. Is there any study of the Thai workers community or their condietions in Itimar?
    3. Who could do this and shouldn’t it be done before everyone is left believing (convinced) that Palestinians were behind the murder?

  4. Why wasn’t my comment to the Itamar article posted? If there was some sort of problem, please let me know–simply not posting it does not look like you are interested in creating dialogue.
    As for Alvin Alexsi Currier’s question, a Palestinian group initially took credit for the slaying and celebrations among Palestinians were in effect. If you need me to substantiate that FACT, then contact me and I will do so. As far as why people are “convinced” that Palestinians are behind the murder, it’s pretty obvious if you’ve been observing the last 100 years (or more) of activity in the region. Why are you so desperate to believe otherwise? And if you are so intent on trying to challenge this, are you also challenging the allegations against the IDF that commonly appear on this site?

    • Chaos4700 says:

      See? Avid “Researcher” is damn sure those dirty Arabs did it. So there.

      And you wonder why your comment probably got blocked, huh.

    • Mooser says:

      Dear Avid, what can I tell you? The whole world sucks!

    • annie says:

      oh let me take a stab at why it might not have made it thru moderation.

      a Palestinian group initially took credit for the slaying and celebrations among Palestinians were in effect.

      someone reported a palestinian group took credit for it but there was no confirmation of this alleged ‘credit’ in fact it was denied. it was also reported another palestinian group took credit but it isn’t even confirmed this group exists. for example i could write in to the police and claim i represent a palestinian group that doesn’t exist and claim responsibility for the crime, i could do that from california and them it could be reported a palestinian group claimed credit for the crime. and then you could write something stupid like ‘If you need me to substantiate that FACT, then contact me ‘ when the only ‘fact’ you were substantiating is that someone claiming to be a palestinian group claimed credit for it. do you think a settler could figure out that complicated process? me too. that is why when it was first reported in the press some alleged group under the name of the hezzbollah martyr claimed responsibility the press even reported the idf questioned the truthieness of this report.

      i reported and linked last night in the thread the murders were revealed the same day a unity rally was held in gaza, one that began the day before on friday the eleventh. there were many many photos of this rally but one caption claiming they were celebrating the murder sets hasbarists on a roll repeating this lie til kingdom kome. meanwhile the msm chose not to report the rally (oh gee wonder why) there have been no confirmation of this alleged murder celebration it is only repeated by hasbarists like yourself who relish in any news (real or not) confirming your lust for proof palestinian are not normal people.

      iow, someone might have assessed your comment held untruths. maybe this comment should have been banned for that alone although that’s not implicit in the rules.

      As far as why people are “convinced” that Palestinians are behind the murder, it’s pretty obvious if you’ve been observing the last 100 years (or more) of activity in the region.

      perhaps if you are an israeli you are not aware of the little tradition we have here in the US called ‘innocent until proven guilty’. what is ‘pretty obvious’ to a racist might not be obvious to the rest of us. or more importantly someone reading your comment might have interpreted your comment as a result of a racist interpretation of reality.

      those are just a few examples of why i might have trashed the comment you just made. having not seen your other one i can only speculate you probably just sounded like..yourself. this site isn’t a democracy. some people might not be that interested in engaging w/certain kinds of discourse. if you want your comments to get thru try cleaning up your act. that would be my advice to you. also remember hasbarists are a penny a thousand (more common than a dime a dozen by a large %), there are many out there. maybe you need us more than we need you. remember that. every single rabid zionist hasbarists should be kept on a very short leash here as far as i am concerned. of course that just my opinion, i can’t speak for the site. review the rules and see where your comment may have crossed the line.

      • Considering none of you know the comment I am talking about, you’re not really in a position to dispute it.
        What’s up with “every single rabid zionist hasbarists should be kept on a very short leash here as far as i am concerned?” I don’t think my post was particularly rabid. So in other words, anyone that challenges your point of view should be silenced?
        So let me re-pose my question. You wrote a miniature book here about “innocent until proven guilty.” Do you apply the same standards to the Israel Defense Forces? When an article from the ISM comes out making all sorts of outrageous claims about soldiers’ behavior, do you challenge the source there? Or do you immediately take it as fact and write harsh words of condemnation?
        As far as what I hate said about the Palestinians, their history, and their recent act of savage butchery, at least read this article. It’s by Larry Derfner, who has made a career out of being a harsh critic of Israeli policy, so it’s from anything but a pro-Israel source.
        link to jpost.com
        So no, my views do not in any way stem from racism and I’ll bet that I’m friends with more Arabs than you are, and I mean in real time, that I spend time with every day. Don’t accuse me of being a racist when you don’t know the first thing about me.

        • annie says:

          Considering none of you know the comment I am talking about, you’re not really in a position to dispute it.

          perhaps you did not noticed i used examples from the comment on this thread to demonstrate why your comment may not have made it thru moderation: “those are just a few examples of why i might have trashed the comment you just made. having not seen your other one i can only speculate you probably just sounded like..yourself.

          comprendo?

          So in other words, anyone that challenges your point of view should be silenced?

          a ‘short leash’ doesn’t mean silencing.

          You wrote a miniature book here about “innocent until proven guilty.” Do you apply the same standards to the Israel Defense Forces? When an article from the ISM comes out making all sorts of outrageous claims about soldiers’ behavior, do you challenge the source there? Or do you immediately take it as fact and write harsh words of condemnation?

          please provide me with an example of a crime no witnesses and i will give you my answer.

          As far as what I hate said about the Palestinians, their history, and their recent act of savage butchery……..my views do not in any way stem from racism and I’ll bet that I’m friends with more Arabs than you are

          let’s just say i’m not convinced. i do not care how much you claim this writer has made a career out of being a harsh critic of Israeli policy (if he were famous for it i might have heard of him), i am really not interested in the opinion of a person who assumes he knows who the killer(s) is when there is thus far no evidence.

          What Palestinians cannot do, though, is take collective responsibility for such an abomination

          please link to an article confirming israelis have taken collective responsibility for the oshenko family slaughter that occurred in 09. i’m a little confused by the reporters claim of “moral cowardice ” especially in light of him reporting the palestinian reaction as “from all evidence, they do genuinely deplore it”.

          also, i noticed by him diverting the attention from israeli torture of palestinians. i wonder if he used the same racist arguments to condemn every jew for the brutal occupation the way he has used this crime to condemn every palestinian you wouldn’t call it anti semitic? i doubt it.

          Until Jews acknowledge savage streak in their society, resolve to root it out, then there will be more abominations done in their name.

        • Mooser says:

          “I don’t think my post was particularly rabid.”

          ROTFLMSJAO! Yeah it’s only the “particularly rabid” ones you gotta watch out for.

      • mikomikeyz says:

        I read defensiveness by both Avid researcher, but even more so by his detractors. There is no trust, and there is no conversation. Instead I read creations generated to justify one’s polemics. No ideas have been considered valid by each polemicist, and so this is fighting. Both sides each trying to verbally silence the other.

        I wag my righteous, know-it-all finger at you. Do you have rooms you can all go to?

  5. CK MacLeod says:

    So who actually does the “moderating,” and why is it that someone can have every comment he posts be whisked away into the void, and never receive a response after repeated inquiries as to the reasons or justifications?

  6. annie says:

    someone can have every comment he posts be whisked away into the void, and never receive a response after repeated inquiries as to the reasons or justifications?

    every comment? do you have any evidence this happens? what would be the point of keeping a poster around if they were going to trash all their comments? i’m sure they would just ban them.

    maybe you’d have more fun at a site like this. notice the 300 plus comments debating what and wasn’t anti semitic?

    this site isn’t a democracy and it isn’t up to the commenters what passes moderation except on those times someone might complain thru the report function and the comment disappears. maybe phil and adam have better things to do than explain every banned comment. if someone has something important to say and it doesn’t make it on the thread they have the option of rewording and trying again.

    but if you want to be part of a community that self moderates try that link, i know from experience you would fit in there and it’s a very important site, one where you could really make a difference.

    • CK MacLeod says:

      I’m confident that what I described is what has occurred, and that if the individual was “banned,” he was never formally warned or given any reason for the banning. Furthermore, it would be ludicrous to claim that his commenting style was even remotely comparable in offensiveness to the normal verbal conduct of numerous regulars at this site.

      The policy obviously seems to be that, if you are perceived by someone to have the “right” ideology, you can get away with anything. If not, you can simply be disappeared, while everyone pretends that this is a fair and open “community.”

      Now, if you’re able to give an informative answer to my questions, annie, how about doing so, instead of providing yet another typical comment chock full of flagrant and never moderated violations of Rule No. 3?

      • annie says:

        yes, i do think people just get disappeared. but that’s not that unusual around the internet. i just got disappeared from the site i linked you too. well, not quite just disappeared. they first tried to ban me accusing me of being a sockpuppet. then i think i was put on some kind of temporary thing. i guess i got banned, my comment function doesn’t work any more but i can still log in. i never really asked them if i was banned but effectively what’s the difference of being able to log in if you can’t comment. whatever, it’s their business tho. it got excruciating posting there anyway, on and on conversations about the rules and having to endure the zionists moaning and groaning about how unfair it is and the continual anti arab discourse. of course they’ve driven off most of the regular pro posters so the comment section is kinda a zionist controlled zone.

        so is that an answer for you, people can just be disappeared i guess. why not? like i said it is not a democracy. there have been people on the pro p side who have disappeared from here too.

        Furthermore, it would be ludicrous to claim that his commenting style was even remotely comparable in offensiveness to the normal verbal conduct of numerous regulars at this site.

        there are different kinds of offenses. maybe it was one of those posters that commented 10 times in 15 minutes and the mods got sick of reading all their stuff.

        why are you so worried about it ck? if you don’t like the comment policy here why not just go somewhere else? i don’t understand your problem. aren’t there an abundance of sites on the internet more valuable for a zionist voice than here?

        or do you think this site is especially targeted like i do? personally i think it’s the best i/p site on the internet.

        • Potsherd2 says:

          annie, that’s not an answer. You’re being evasive.

        • annie says:

          evasive? you would have to ask phil or adam about their banning policy if you want more. you have been around here as long as i have potsherd so your guess is as good as mine. doesn’t it seem to you like sometimes posters just disappear? i don’t know that there is a blanket policy but i don’t think there is. i don’t know any other way to say it. i complain when i get sick of certain posters. i’ve had an email exchange with one other poster here who complained to phil about a poster who was eventually banned.

        • mikomikeyz says:

          I would think this would be a great blog for a Zionist. This blog was started with 4 aims, and I would think that nothing would be more healthy than non-provincial perspective. I am reminded of WWII films taken from the Japanese point of view.

          This IS a progressive blog, no?

        • davidsc says:

          Dead silence reigns – so I guess the answer is NO.

        • annie says:

          what dead silence? the post is from april. a comment like yours flushes thru the robo function on the home page in moments(unless like a crap shoot it lands there for hrs due to mods taking a break). what wasn’t answered for you david?

          yes, i do think people just get disappeared.

          not clear enough?

          The policy obviously seems to be that, if you are perceived by someone to have the “right” ideology, you can get away with anything. If not, you can simply be disappeared, while everyone pretends that this is a fair and open “community.”

          not really. the site does ban both sides of the spectrum. the site makes no pretenses of being anything but what it is. why don’t you be more specific wrt what you perceive as unclear or unanswered.

          as i mentioned earlier if you are one of those people that enjoy community moderation go to dkos. they have endless threads there about what is or isn’t ok. here, people are just banned and nobody seems to notice their absence that much as far as i can tell. the hasbrats are a dime a dozen. ban one another replaces him the same day. the israel project sees to that. and then there are those ‘special trolls’. the ones that come at you from the left and push the envelope w/anti semitic crap. of course we never know whether they are ‘real’ or here to set up the site. but they go either way.

          so spill the beans david. what do you want to know?

        • mikomikeyz says:

          I think David was answering my rhetorical question, “This IS a progressive blog, no?”, Annie.

        • annie says:

          yes, it covers issues from a progressive pt of view. but i don’t think it is moderated ‘progressively’. but i will tell you one thing, it isn’t run in a zionist fashion. no one gets detained and held w/no charges for unknown periods of time. there are no gag orders iow if someone does asks where someone went they do not get banned for it. it’s not as if we treat it like the zionist gov treats the freedom theatre. so we’re a damn sight better than those policies we abhor. at least we do not pretend to be a democracy. i wonder how the 18 year old daughter of the mayor of bethlehem is doing today? what is she eating in prison held w/no charges. did she sleep well? is someone torturing her today, or questioning her? we’re sure as heck more progressive than that. and look on the bright side. no endless comment section filled w/CRAP about what is or is not anti semitic..unlike other blogs we know. what brings you here tonight miko? long time no see.

        • Ray984954 says:

          I think if there is a good argument to be had by certain Pro-Israelis, then they are able to make it, as well for those who feel the Palestinians are getting screwed still since the beginning of the 20th century, during the British Mandatory and the Balfourism that followed, as I do, but the difference may be that the Pro-Iraelis are running out of being able to justify their actions having revised history for so long and their shill the great exceptionalists the US, while the truth cannot remain hidden forever, and that is the Palestinian side. WWII following Europe’s guilt and a young 2 yr old UN through the UNSCOP made a terrible decision to compensate the sufferers of the Jewish Holocaust by giving them Palestine, and the Zios jumped at their chance to go from 5.8% of the land to 55%, as mandated by the UNSCOP. So, chalk up part of the debacle to ignorance and a flagrant disregard of the Palestinians feelings in favor of the ZIOs, notice I say ZIOs not Jews, cuz’ all Jews thankfully are not ZIOs, however the UN made no such distinction. Israeli claimed security threats were their problem yet they are the aggressors mostly.
          Sorry, off topic a bit but just making the point that this site will accept all good arguments on both sides, it is just that the Zios only argument left is if you question their crimes they yell anti-semitism, and if that is not so, then make a better argument, ZIOs.

        • Mooser says:

          I am always amazed at this discussion! Look, for some crazy reason many years ago, I though I wanted a blog. Once I got started, I liked doing it and by the end of the afternoon, I had three, all free, all on different subjects.
          I certainly can see no reason why a single commenter, or even a group of commenters couldn’t start a blog called “Mondoweiss is for poopoo-heads”, and it wouldn’t cost them a cent. And they could ban anybody they didn’t like

          Listen Schmendricks, the reason you are all so hot to get your dumb hasbara up on Mondoweiss is because Mondo has readership, and you want to parasitise that readership.
          Complaints about “censorship” are pretty goddam feeble in the age of the free blog. Go start one.

  7. jon s says:

    Thanks for bringing back the “recent comments” sidebar!

  8. poorwilly says:

    I’d be more than happy to support you, that is if you ran my comments. I’ve written nothing in the past two or three comments section that could be considered trolling. I’ve merely disagreed with your anti-Zionist stance. I have not gone out of my way to offend.

    When you’re willing to give voice to other voices, fine, I’ll donate.

    And what I find so strange about this is that you regularly revile Marty Peretz (and he deserves much of your reviling), yet Marty ALWAYS allows posters to say whatever they like–to the point of calling him a demented old man, a fucking bastard, a racist liar. I’m not suggesting you stand for this kind of abuse, but it’s strange that you have such a heavily censored cite. You have a couple of pro-Israeli posters, but I’m sure there’d be a lot more pro-Israeli points of view if they were allowed in. So in a way, you have your own separation-barrier. Strange for a man who claims he wants open conversation. I guess “open” means as long as you regularly refer to Israelis as Nazis and fascists.

    And annie: like I said, this, in your words, “yes, i do think people just get disappeared. but that’s not that unusual around the internet” is somewhat unusual. At least for the places I check out. I can’t remember when TNR (you know, that site I mentioned that’s run by the dybbuk) has never disappeared anyone. And I’ve been harassed plenty over there. Though I could care less. If someone calls me a blithering idiot or bitch, who gives a crap.

    • Mooser says:

      poorwilly, you are pro-Zionist? Wow, I never ever thought I would finally meet a Zionist and hear their views. I mean, what with the pro-Zionist viewpoint completely banned from the MSM, and the complete dearth of the pro-Zionist viewpoint in newspapers and radio.
      Anyway, can you tell us a bit about this “Zionism” you’re in favor of. We are all eager to hear exotic philisophical narratives, and isn’t it time somebody got the facts concerning what the Palestinians are really like into public view?

  9. Mayhem says:

    I joined mondoweiss recently after looking around for an open forum to discuss Middle East issues. After reading some of the posts and comments I have sensed a certain bias which is not borne out in the site’s comments policy. If anti-Zionism and opposition to principles like democracy are tenets of mondoweiss, why hasn’t your politburo been honest and officially enshrined them in the comments policy guidelines on this page. so we know where we stand? Or is honesty another mondoweiss taboo?

    • Donald says:

      “If anti-Zionism and opposition to principles like democracy are tenets of mondoweiss, ”

      Opposition to ethnic cleansing is not opposition to democracy. Thought I’d clear that up for you.

    • Woody Tanaka says:

      “If anti-Zionism and opposition to principles like democracy ”

      Talk about Orwellian… The Zionists, in practice, keep have of the people under their control from voting and have for 40 years. So, as a consequence, being anti-Zionist is being for democracy (unless you are defining the “people” as Jews only.)

    • Mooser says:

      “I joined mondoweiss recently after looking around for an open forum to discuss Middle East issues”

      But you became disenchanted when there were no ads for mail-order brides?

  10. i have a technical question on posting comments….
    how do people add italics/bold, post blocked quotes, or put a hyperlink on chosen text?
    i assume i need to use some wordpress portal or something??? just using the blog itself from my browser, i see no options to do such… and am ignorant of another way to post.
    thanks for the help in advance.

    • Mayhem says:

      It would be nice if the powers that be gave some attention to requests for help about how to use this site. I think they are preoccupied with eliminating Zionists.

    • annie says:

      hi anon, one uses html links here just linke most other sites in the internet. if you google html links there are many sites that explain them. here’s one.

      but for a really easy way to understand it, the way i learned actually was this site. go to any thread and click on ‘comments’ at the end and then scroll. there is a very simple instructional presented under “Allowed HTML Tags:”.

      i would post them but they transform when you write them. good luck and ask again if you still cannot figure this out. people will help you and thanks for asking. ciao.

  11. How long do we have to support Zionist centric policies in Middle East? Can anybody tell me how long? Until ve completely go bankrupt ? When? anybody? Why Israelis cannot do the dirty jobs themselves? If they want to attack Iran, be my guess, do not ask for our tax dollars our technology and certainly NOT our troops.

    • Mooser says:

      “If they want to attack Iran, be my guess, do not ask for our tax dollars our technology and certainly NOT our troops.”

      Wow, a lot you care about the six-million Jews who perished in Hitler’s camps, buddy. I’ve never seen such crass selfishness. Have a nice day.

  12. How long do we have to support Zionist centric policies in Middle East? Can anybody tell me how long? Until ve completely go bankrupt ? When? anybody? Why Israelis cannot do the dirty jobs themselves? If they want to attack Iran, be my guess–do not ask for our tax dollars our technology and certainly NOT our troops. The truth is, Israelis know they cannot fight without US and Western help. Further Israelis used to idea of free money getting free billions dollars without any condition from our tax dollars. How long are we going to tolerate these policies? For those in discontent with economy, living standards–protest your government’s foreign policies in the Middle East. These failed pro-Israeli policies to blame first.

  13. I am very concerned about American Israel “firsters’ attempts to work toward deposition of President Obama in the coming election in favor of a president who will bend to Israel’s call for war with Iran, continued settlement building in East Jerusalem and the West Bank and so on. I also feel that Obama needs “numbers”: strong citizen support of his (what to me) is rational policy toward Israel, i.e. we’ll help you if someone attacks you, but not if you attack others. Can anyone put my mind at rest or suggest how we, common everyday citizens, can support the current administration’s policies toward Israel effectively? Sure: letters to the editor, contact with elected officials, but beyond that, what?

    • Eh, Mr. Obama has been one of the biggest allies of Israel in recent history.

      Even Bush I and II put up more obstacles to Israeli expansion… they ultimately were ineffective when faced down by the AIPAC-controlled Congress, but they had little palate for Israeli intransigence. Obama, on the other hand, has done nothing. He’s let Netanyahu run rough-shod.

  14. Mooser says:

    So Wondering Jews comments telling us which Iranians deserved to die (along with the “collateral damage”) are just fine?

    It is so obvious what is going on at Mondoweiss. You can just about hear the thoughts in the part that comes after Mondo: ‘But what if Israel and the Zionists prevail? Where will that leave me? Reliant on my murky and inchoherent writing and immature emotions, and bereft of philosemitism forever?’

  15. lib319 says:

    “I joined mondoweiss recently after looking around for an open forum to discuss Middle East issues. After reading some of the posts and comments I have sensed a certain bias which is not borne out in the site’s comments policy. If anti-Zionism and opposition to principles like democracy are tenets of mondoweiss, why hasn’t your politburo been honest and officially enshrined them in the comments policy guidelines on this page. so we know where we stand? Or is honesty another mondoweiss taboo?”

    I found this too, I’m not a troll, I’m not a racist, I’m sympathetic to Palestinian suffering, I’m not an idiot.

    I even emailed Philip Wiess for a little clarification about moderators.

    Disagreeing with the majority view of people here seems to be allowed only a certain amount of the time however. Usually not when supplying an effective counter argument it seems.

    It’s fine to have a site for a certain point of view but don’t disguise it up as a discussion forum. If you do it will make people wonder what is it about the common themes espoused here that need such protection? Are they lacking in argumental integrity or just outright dogmatism?

    • Donald says:

      “I’m sympathetic to Palestinian suffering.”

      In a condescending way, yes. I mentioned in the other thread where I saw your comments how I have friends who sound like you. They “sympathize” with the Palestinians, and then proceed to twist the history in a way that puts most of the blame for their suffering on their own leaders. There needs to be a name for this kind of “liberalism”, because it’s very common. It enables people to take blatantly one-sided borderline racist stands and still think of themselves as not racist. Growing up in the south right after Jim Crow I also saw the same sort of thinking among whites who never used the N word and thought of themselves as non-racist, but who invariably put most of the blame for black poverty on blacks themselves and thought American blacks should be grateful given the fact that blacks in Africa were much poorer. Some other commenter from the south made a similar point the other day–if you grew up listening to whites talking about blacks in the 70′s and then start reading the rationalizations offered in defense of Israel one can’t help but notice the similarities in the arguments made. There are the crude bigots, of course, but there are also the people who insist on their sympathy for both sides who invariably whitewash (no pun intended) the crimes of the more powerful faction.

      Incidentally, I’m on record as having some problems with the comment section here, but make it as civil as possible and people here, including me, will still find your stance morally repulsive.

    • Woody Tanaka says:

      “I’m not a troll, I’m not a racist, I’m sympathetic to Palestinian suffering, I’m not an idiot. ”

      No, you’re a serial Nakba denier. That you haven’t been banned so far, but only had a couple (maybe 1) comments deleted makes me question this new policy.

    • LeaNder says:

      Disagreeing with the majority view of people here seems to be allowed only a certain amount of the time however.

      Wouldn’t time be space in the above context?

      Usually not when supplying an effective counter argument it seems.

      Do I understand this correctly. A comment disagreeing with what you perceived as the majority here is not allowed at all, or censored if it is an “effective counter argument”.

      Now you really made me curious what you consider an effective counter argument.
      Do you have a context and example?

  16. lib319 says:

    “Now you really made me curious what you consider an effective counter argument.
    Do you have a context and example?”

    Supply me with an email address then, because that entire point is………

    ……..I can’t give you an example here because it gets modded away.

  17. jahan says:

    Sorry, here is the corrected version of the post

    Frequently we hear “no option is off the table”. What are the options: sanctions and threats of air strikes. A tenet of good faith negotiations is to offer a benefit. Could there be a win-win scenario? We know what Iran has to offer– a cessation of uranium enrichment, that is adequately monitored to the satisfaction of Israel & the West. But what could the Israeli’s and Americans offer? To those saying no offers, please realize that threats only harden positions. Pushing America to a war may spawn USA’s bankruptcy, sunken air craft carriers and 10,000 body bags.

    What to offer? Iran will not be satisfied with money, factories or the like. Offer Iran something that fits its ideology. Practically we can not establish Shia states, or even free Shia areas of the Gulf. Iran’s regime is committed to the Palestinian fate. In sense what has been dealt the Palestinians drives the Iranian animosity to the west as in “Great Satan” and “Little Satan”.

    Perhaps a substantial benefit to the Palestinians will be a quid pro quo that is accepted in exchange for cessation of nuclear armament. What is the substantial benefit? The benefit must be real and relatively immediate. The benefit must be measurable and profound. A promise to pull back the settlements will not appeal to the mullahs. A benefit with an element of truth and justice will appeal worldwide.

    Iran’s Ayatollah Khameineh may agree upon Israel allowing the return of a fixed number of indigenous Palestinians to Israel. Trade potential bombs for the exercise of the right of return. Israel and its apologists then decide between its fear of Palestinian returnees and of nuclear bombs. Pick a number 500,000, 700,000 or 1,000,000 returnees in exchange for nuclear non-proliferation.

    I would like to sign an internet petition to this effect.

    • mikomikeyz says:

      An admirable thought. From a purely geopolitical point of view though, it’s clear that Iran has been granted a huge post-Iraqi war opening and is doing what all countries do given such: act in its self-interest. There are 70+ million Iranians, met only with a similar number of Turks. All the other countries vying for influence in the gap opened in Iraq are much smaller in population.

      What I’m getting at is that no matter what “concessions” Iran presently makes, they have no time limit on their goal of nuclear capability. Every government knows this, including Israel. What is happening in the region right now is theater, the intended hope on each party’s part of being some modest advantage going forward. MAD is a stand-off; only madmen would act on it.

    • to the satisfaction of Israel & the West. But what could the Israeli’s and Americans offer?

      it’s not about ‘israel and the west’ or ‘ Israeli’s and Americans offer’. quit gluing us together. it’s israel driving this madness.

      .A promise to pull back the settlements will not appeal to the mullahs.

      that is not for you to decide. you’re just taking it out of the equation because it’s not what you want, and pretending it has something to do with iran.

      Pick a number 500,000, 700,000 or 1,000,000 returnees in exchange for nuclear non-proliferation.

      1 million to israel ‘proper’ and the 67 pullback plus palestine’s capitol in jerusalem and some people might take you seriously. but either way iran has as much right as anyone to have a nuclear program.

      miko, the intended hope on each party’s part of being some modest advantage going forward.

      not israel. as usual israel is willing and eager to pressure the US into another war so it can get on with their land theft and ethnic cleansing. there’s nothing modest about that. it’s theatre all right, just not the kind you’re envisioning.

      • mikomikeyz says:

        “not Israel. as usual Israel is willing and eager to pressure the US into another war so it can get on with their land theft and ethnic cleansing. there’s nothing modest about that. it’s theatre all right, just not the kind you’re envisioning.”

        Ha! As I stated, countries do what is to their own self-interest. It is certainly modest when all parties know a war won’t happen. The countries are not likely biting on any of this; only the public mob. It’s illogical on any deep strategic level for the US to attack Iran when the Straits of Hormuz are indefensible. What you have done in your first sentence is jump past the first modest move (pressure on the US), and assume an outcome without logically entering the innumerable counter-moves which make up the chess match that is foreign policy. Every party involved has a similar “fantasy” outcome which by your definition would be immodest.

  18. Proton Soup says:

    2. No Nakba or Holocaust denial. We’re not going to tolerate any discussion of the Jewish role in the rise of the Nazis which is used as a pretext for blaming Jews for the Nazi rise, a form of Holocaust denial we want no part of. Similarly, this policy includes Nakba denial as well, and efforts to blame the expulsion of Palestinians in 1948 on Palestinian actions.

    this one is really annoying the hell out of me, and makes me think twice about Phil. it was not until i started learning about Edwin Black, Rabbi Weissmandel, and Benjamin Freedman that i started piecing together the reality of what actually happened. this is a hidden reality that wasn’t shown to me in either my public education, or popular narratives shown in the media. talking about what the Zionists did to the Jews is not Holocaust denial, it’s Holocaust acceptance. these Zionists are no more Jewish than the Nazis are Christian. and just as Germany could not be redeemed without dealing with the Nazi issue, neither can Israel be redeemed without dealing with the Zionist issue.

    • mikomikeyz says:

      It is factually false to say “what THE Zionists did to the Jews “. Most Jews were Zionists or became Zionists who were Nazi victims. As a comparison in this forum, it would be false to use the phrase “the Palestinians” to describe the actions of specific Palestinians. Had you stated what specific people did to other people, I can accept the facts; I can’t accept attempts to re-write history. In your small inclusion of the word “the”, you make the huge implication that those who followed Zionism, just as those who followed Naziism, were responsible for the deaths of Jews during the Holocaust. Accuracy matters. I assume you would take offense to being called a Holocaust denier.

      I do agree though, that the forum should stay open to all discussion about past events.

  19. Mayhem says:

    There is no facility to communicate with the moderators or those managing the site over site issues.
    I have a couple of questions:
    1. The search facility should return items in chronological order – at the moment items are returned in no particular order so it is very hard to find a particular item that you might be looking for.
    2. The facility to display a person’s list of posts in Mondoweiss is constantly broken
    3. There should be an opportunity for us mere mortals on MondiWeiss to initiate or make discussions. At the moment as you can see in this section people make postings under a specific topic that are not relevant to the topic but they do it because that is the only way to express something they would like to say

  20. Mooser says:

    “There is no facility to communicate with the moderators or those managing the site over site issues.”

    Not true, Mayhem, not true at all! As a matter of fact, Mondoweiss is one of the most open, inter-active sites on the web. Now, as to why the moderators are avoiding you, I don’t know. But I have my suspicions. Maybe they’ve been kvetched at carped at, lied to or rhetorically bullied enough today, and they’ll get to you tomorrow.

    BTW, Mayhem, if you want to “initiate or make discussions” there are many free blogging services on the web. Why do you think Mondoweiss owes you an audience?
    Why do you think Mondoweiss owes you the validation of posting privileges on the site? BTW, Mayhem, you want all the search and list and archive services to work as they should? That takes bandwidth, and that costs money. Send Mondoweiss some.

    • Mayhem says:

      How do you communicate with a moderator? Other sites also have members with email addresses who can chose whether they want to communicate with other members or not. Only trying to make it easier to discuss and exchange ideas.

      • Mooser says:

        “Only trying to make it easier to discuss and exchange ideas.”

        Who needs ideas when you’ve got the power of the will, and the bonds of blood and soil! And tht’s the kind of stuff you just can’t put in a comment. People have to experience it for themselves!

  21. Mooser says:

    “5. No imposture. You can use any pseudonym you like, but if you represent yourself as someone you’re not, you’re outta here.”

    Oh, that’s very tricky! You say you want Zionist voices to be heard here, too, and then you make a rule that pretty much leaves them all out in the cold, y’know? I mean, they all can’t sign themselves “Judah Maccabee”, can they?

  22. Mayhem says:

    If I post comments that are perfectly acceptable according to Mondoweiss policy guidelines I find very often that my post does not appear. There is a selective, censorious policy to block those who post comments that may defend Israel too strongly. On the other hand those who disparage Israel get free reign to abuse and say whatever they like, whether it is true or not.
    In fact Mondoweiss condones dishonesty and untruths for the sake of the Palestinian cause. If I post something that challenges the Mondoweiss ethos it won’t get published because it is seen to undermine the basic message that Mondoweiss wants to deliver. It is no wonder that we are as far from a peace agreement as ever, because such disingenuity and intransigence is typical of the Palestinian position.  There is no willingness to admit being wrong on any major issue; the essential attitude is to stubbornly oppose reconciliation or any form of compromise.
    This ultimately reveals the great fallacy behind Mondoweiss’ agenda. If the Palestinian cause cannot withstand every challenge it will buckle under the weight of its deceptions. This is a delusional policy which believes prolonging the Israeli/Palestinian conflict will eventually enable the Palestinians to jockey themselves into a more powerful negotiating position to put more and more pressure on Israel.  This is exactly what Omar Barghouti admitted in his justification of BDS in the debate with Waskow, when he affirmed that BDS aims to improve the ‘balance of power’ in the conflict.

    • eljay says:

      >> It is no wonder that we are as far from a peace agreement as ever, because such disingenuity and intransigence is typical of the Palestinian position.

      Disingenuity and intransigence – that’s pretty heavy stuff!

      But what is much more likely keeping peace at bay is the existence of an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State” in Palestine, created by means of Zio-supremacist terrorism and ethnic cleansing, and maintained and expanded by means of a 60+ years, ON-GOING and offensive (i.e., not defensive) campaign of aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction and murder. Plus refusal to be held accountable for any of its past or ON-GOING and tremendously (war) criminal behaviour. Plus refusal to enter into sincere negotiations for a just and mutually-beneficial peace.

      But, yeah, disingenuity and intransigence…

  23. Fredblogs says:

    LOL. Yeah, I know, you censor every post complaining about censorship too. So how about e-mailing me the reason if you don’t want to say it here?

  24. Mayhem says:

    My tally of comments goes up as I post but nothing is appearing. Any explanation?

  25. realzionist says:

    Slightly off topic but interesting none the less….for the truth about Liebler/Davis/Millis/Hoffman click here: link to hoffmanchronicled.wordpress.com

  26. bpm says:

    For more than two hours Friday night, the lead photo on the New York Times website was a photo from Gaza of several men identified as “Hamas supporters” burning an American flag. It ran under a headline of ‘Protests flare beyond Mideast.’
    Last time I checked, Gaza is pretty much front and center in the Mideast. But more significant to me was that the picture wasn’t particularly noteworthy in a visual sense, nor much in terms of news, given that elsewhere in the Middle East, American facilities were under direct threat or even breached. Yet the Times put that up front.
    That says plenty about what’s on the Times’ agenda. Never miss a chance to confirm a negative stereotype of the Palestinians, no matter what the context. The news for the last two days has been about threats to US embassies, consulates and so forth and the killing of Americans. But there is absolutely no US government presence anywhere in Gaza. Moreover, Hamas has never killed or even injured an American. But the Times feels it must highlight a handful of Hamas “supporters” burning an American flag — something that more than a few Americans have been know to do over the years. But I suspect many Times’ readers were led to believe that Hamas is taking part in the violence against American facilities and Americans. Yes, Hamas, and by extension, Palestinians, want to kill Americans. Mission accomplished, New York Times.

  27. mondonut says:

    OK, so in itself a minor insult. But also gratuitous. And frequent. It seems that many of your regulars cannot post a comment in disagreement without an unnecessary backhand.

    If you really want this place to be something other than an echo chamber you should work to change the tone and climate.

    ============================================
    Cliff says:
    January 10, 2013 at 1:57 pm
    Yea mondonut, the Mandate of Palestine was mostly Palestinian Arab.

    What gave Zionist Jews and the British the right to divide the land and give the best parts (and slightly more) to Jewish colonists?

    Practice what you preach, Zionist tool.

  28. The comments policy should be amended to reflect the fact that the editors wish to exclude letters that do not help the discussion. The updated policy regarding editing should be included in the comments policy.

    • yonah, not sure what kind of letters you mean but wrt exclusions that ‘do not help the discussion’ there’s this:

      we are not interested in commenters whose only aim is to disrupt or sabotage the discussion.

      • ritzl says:

        @Annie I agree with yf that sometimes comments get delayed if they are not in line with the objectives of the post. I know that when I post obtuse or brief or skeptical (sarcastic?) comments, they are delayed or moderated.

        What I don’t agree with yf about is that any of that matters even one little bit.

        Keep on doing what you’re doing.

      • annie- If i keep a copy (from now on) of all my excluded comments, will you verify that they were excluded because my only aim was to disrupt or sabotage?

        • yonah, i just took a little trip to the trash pile on the hunch this might be related to some message close to your heart that didn’t make it thru today.

          a little tip for you. the next time you post a comment, for example (hypothetically of course!) ‘I want to say a word in defense of Meir Kahane…..not the this Meir Kahane who does yada yada yada or that Meir Kahane who does yada yada yada etc but the Meir Kahane who said this and that,’ i would just turn around, look for your thinking cap, put it on and figure how to say whatever it is you want to say, another way.

          and the next time you get that urge to denigrate one of our valued contributors by calling him a demagogue (not once but several times in one comment) go over and post it on stand with us, because we probably won’t be publishing it on mondoweiss.

          see ya!

  29. Walker says:

    Could someone at Mondoweiss please tell me why the two comments I posted this morning have been “awaiting moderation” all day, one since 8:39 AM?

    If they violate your policy please tell me how. If you simply don’t like my face, please tell me why. This isn’t the first time it’s happened, nor the first time I’ve asked for an explanation.

    Thank you.

    • yeah, comments come in faster than staff moderates. mornings staff work on getting drafts up, so moderation is slow. what thread are they on. i think all the threads have many unmoderated comments.

    • RoHa says:

      “If you simply don’t like my face”

      It’s nothing personal, Walker. Everyone loves me, and yet I had one that waited nearly a week to be moderated! Right now have several that have been waiting at least two days.

      I know it is frustrating to see a comment remain in limbo until everyone has forgotten about the topic you were commenting on (and doubly frustrating when your comments are as brilliant and incisive as mine) but there just don’t seem to be enough moderators to get through them all.

      Perhaps Phil and Adam could get some funding from AIPAC to hire more moderators. If not, the only recourse is patience.

      Builds character.

      • Walker says:

        Builds character.

        True, but makes it hard to carry on a conversation.

      • Sumud says:

        I’m guessing the way that moderations is set up is on a per-article basis rather than with a dashboard of comments to be reviewed that lists from oldest to newest. So some comments are falling through the cracks.

        annie ~ perhaps you and Phil can request your developer add some kind of alert system where if a comment remains unmoderated for, say 24h, moderators are sent a notice by email or on screen in the moderator’s area.

      • piotr says:

        I feel your pain. It is one thing to throw pearls before the swine, but to throw them just to have them linger in the inbox of the moderators is painful indeed.

        Clearly, someone has to moderate is there is such a policy, and the policy is justified by the goals of this site. I thought that there could be a fundraiser for the stipend for the moderators.

        Moreover, many sites have that problem and commercial sites like newspaper have efficient methods. I think that the good approach is like that: very quick and superficial review of a post, and a “complain” button. Posts with complains can be reviewed again and removed.

        • i would urge concerned readers to email both adam and phil and let them know you’d appreciate their attention directed towards resolving the timeliness of comment moderation. we were going to be dealing with this soon a few months ago, a couple months ago, a month ago, a few weeks ago, a couple weeks ago, last week and then again this week.

          alas, we get distracted with other urgent issues. i have confidence at the pace we’re going things will get more streamlined sometime soon, this year, or next, or within the decade.

        • Danaa says:

          Or, annie, you can institute a “pay up and play” system. Like you can have a “trusted commenter” system, for those who are “never ever bad”, a “semi-trusted commenter” for those who are suspected of having occasional bound-overstepping tendencies, a “could-be trusted commenter” for those (like me?) who are tempted to throw a good rant now and then, during which period they cannot be trusted with anything at all, not even with the cats, and an “always moderate” group who are in perpetual purgatory (ie, give them a finger and they take the whole arm). the system can be infused with extra cleverness by instituting a “penalty box’. If a “trusted’ commenter is found to over-step the mark, they will be sentences to an entire day of moderating comments on MW. If a “semi-trusted” one does so, lower them a rank and put them on probation, or send to a re-education camp where they learn the art of avoiding run-on sentences, till they shape up.

          Joking aside (which is what the above was), I can imagine what a thankless task moderation must be for this site. Now and then I notice something slipping through the cracks – usually while high on ziocaine. Once I thought a comment or two of mine should have been [kind of] moderated – at least enough to put in a a few periods (note: I never forget the commas, but do now and then get carried away with adjectives).

          Anyways, I am with RoHa and would be game for having a special fund-raiser for moderators, to include a part-time psychologist to treat PTSD. or it could be used for one of those specialty softwares that at least filter out the worst trolls. I do understand that MW can attract the many waywards out there, looking to get their daily kick. And one wouldn’t want to see the comment section degenerate into endless bickering and one-liner retorts. The latter have certainly been culled in the past year thanks to the time delay, but there seems to have been a price to pay….

        • danaa, we are not at a loss for ideas or plans. in fact i keep hearing how it’s going to be improved shortly.

          i have probably written at least 100 emails regarding streamlining the comment moderation over the last 6 months. how many have you written?

  30. Mayhem says:

    Comments on threads are now being curtailed after a story has been up only for a few days.
    How about some disclosure here?
    Those who post on Mondoweiss and sustain it get treated very poorly indeed.
    No proper avenue with which to communicate with moderators, authors and other commenters.
    No transparency.

    • is there a particular thread you are referencing?

      • Mayhem says:

        One in particular Alex Kane’s “Boston bombings unleash a new wave of Islamophobia” which has only been up for 5 days. I have seen this happening with other postings as well.

        • mayhem, i have no idea why the comments on that thread were turned off and wasn’t even aware of it until now. a decision of that gravity only comes from up top, not moderators. write adam and phil, their emails are on the about page.

          i can reveal from past experience threads have been turned off as a result of email complaints about a discussion that call attention to a particular thread. adam and phil are busy guys and often do not have time to follow the thread discussions, unless and until we get complaints. then they check them out and sometimes delete already published stuff. (iow, you may not find the offending comments by reviewing the thread). i’ll add the lion’s share of email complaints i have been privy to come from pro zionist advocates.

          [edit: all comment threads are discontinued now after 5 days]

        • Danaa says:

          annie: i’ll add the lion’s share of email complaints i have been privy to come from pro zionist advocates

          As I’d expect. That’s been the case from time immemorial for any blog that deals with I/P issues. there’s mainly one side that resents too much truthfullness, and is easily offended at the drop of a hat. the worst complaints usually come from those on the side of the greater power in the real world. That’s true on almost any issue where ordinary people aim to take on some PTB. I’ve seen that most recently on established energy blogs that critique say, fracking, or big agri-business.. It’s usually the side that seeks to defend potentially harmful practices that complains the most about commenting rebel rousers poking holes in the officially-sanctioned propaganda.

    • Sumud says:

      Those who post on Mondoweiss and sustain it get treated very poorly indeed.
      No proper avenue with which to communicate with moderators, authors and other commenters.

      Lazy Mayhem.

      Did you ever think to look on the ABOUT page at the top of every page. There are 7 different email addresses, 6 different twitter addresses and a postal address.

      What about the CONTACT page at the bottom of every page? There is message window there.

      PS Have you “sustained” Mondoweiss lately by donating financially?

  31. mcohen says:

    Annie Robbins says:
    April 25, 2013 at 1:46 am

    “is there a particular thread you are referencing?”

    are you being serious – i would say that 50% of my comments make it through
    why is that i rarely post anything controversial-are you overworked ? underpaid ? image problem ?underfed ?or do i simply not make the grade

    tell what i will swap you a free farmers prophecy if you allow 75% of my posts through
    fair deal ?

    • mcohen, hmm, what can i say. there’s a lot code stuff going on about winds and storm or something. not sure if it’s end of times talk or what. try not ‘going there’ or at least explain what you are referencing because we’re not interested in comments with stuff inserted moderators can’t understand.

      • mcohen says:

        Annie Robbins says:
        April 25, 2013 at 12:08 pm

        “comments with stuff inserted moderators can’t understand.”

        what the farmers prophecies-i thought i was quite lucidational-
        take “wave of sand”

        chomsky visits gaza -hurricane sandy
        sandy hook massacre
        obama,s last day in israel-dust storms
        boston marathon
        bds before american congress-earthquake in california
        and so on……………..

        You Don’t Need a Weatherman to Know Which Way the Wind Blows,

        however i might donate-if you had paypal

    • marc b. says:

      mchosen, I regularly have comments ‘disappeared’ (I wouldn’t say anything like 50%, but i’m not counting either) or take days for seemingly innocuous statements to be published. if you’re suggesting that you and yours are being singled out for special treatment, that’s not the case.

  32. notatall says:

    Some of the comments I post go up fairly promptly, while others take much longer or do not appear at all. Is the difference due purely to a backlog of work, or are comments screened beyond your contents policy as stated above? I do not see a pattern; everything I say offends someone; if it didn’t there would be no point in saying it.

  33. DissedStance says:

    I have a question: I am new to the comment board; I have one now that seems to
    in purgatory. I need help in deleting it so I can try again. I’m bad at the tech. part,
    so I wish the site had a comments’ ” how-to for idiots”- like how to edit without
    double posting (like I have!) or how to erase one that seems to be stuck in “awaiting
    moderation”? Maybe if I can’t stand the heat…. but really, I’m trying and I want to
    contribute sometimes. Thank-you, if anyone can help me!

    • dissed. i strongly urge you to write phil and adam and complain about comments being backed up for days. they need to streamline the moderation. and i would urge everyone to do that.

      go to the reply function on the comment you want deleted and write ‘please delete my comment at 3:42 am, or whatever time stamp is on your comment.

      if you have one stuck on some page for days place a comment below it in reply that says “please moderate this comment”.

      that might help.

      • jon s says:

        I have a comment in which has been in moderation limbo for over two days , on the “On NPR, All Trivia Considered” thread. Even a reminder hasn’t helped.
        I can’t make sense of the system: sometimes new posts go up fairly rapidly , while older ones languish, go stale, wither and die.

  34. miriam6 says:


    For anyone who wants to know more about HTML, blockquoting and so on these to links to the same website are brilliantly useful.

    Bear in mind only some of these HTML tags below will work with comments posted on M.W.

    link to yourhtmlsource.com

    link to yourhtmlsource.com

  35. jon s says:

    I don’t understand the criteria used by the moderators, since it’s clearly not “oldest-first”. Do they moderate based on whether they agree with the post, like the poster, the number of posts from the same poster…it’s a mystery.
    A suggestion: If the moderators are swamped and can’t keep up, rerhaps a quota system should be considered: every commenter would have a limited number of posts per month.

    • hi jon, i’m going to take a break in moderation to answer your question. and while i am doing it about 20 more comments will stack up. you’re right, it’s clearly not ‘oldest first’. i would imagine everyone who moderates here has their own system. my ‘system’ , which mirrors my system for any work that might be monotonous is mix it up so i don’t get bored (you might save that little factoid because it’s a clue as to the kind of person i am).

      so let me give you a little example of how i bounce around. i generally choose to start on the comment moderation page in back and start at the very top (because it is easiest and i like to see and publish what’s fresh, just coming in) and i work my way down the page (newest to older) often skipping really long posts because they are time consuming and i want to get at least 10/20 comments cleared (and then maybe my email pings and i get distracted and don’t get back for awhile, maybe not). if i see a batch together by one poster i skip over them all, iow, i don’t publish ten comments by one poster on a page, it’s not practical/fair use of my time. and then i might come upon a post that i feel perhaps i should read the context in which it was written, ie this morning link to mondoweiss.net

      cha cha..hmmm, interesting! so i click on it and read the context, clear it and notice right below it is another uncleared comment so i start working my way down the thread from that link up there (iow the newly cleared comments working my way down the thread will get cleared having NO bearing on when they were written/timestamped), i may skip over comments using inflammatory language, leaving them for another moderator to decide upon. then once i have worked my way to the bottom of the page, i scroll up to the top of the thread and catch all the comments on the top of the thread working my way down to the cha cha comments. then, i refresh the page and catch all the comments that have been posted on that thread since i started (all new). often i find whole threads that never got moderated the day before.

      then, i go back to the back pages and start clearing more comments.

      also today and yesterday i probably trashed at least 20 comments by pro israel posters insulting us for not writing about syria. because they are for the most part off topic on the thread and because when i see hasbara comment themes/memes like this (oh my what a radical coincidence every single pro israel poster is hassling us about syria today!)…and then i try to be consistent and trash them all, just because.

      now, once in a blue moon when i am feeling particularly orderly (rarely) i might decide to go on a hunting expedition and search for the oldest uncleared comment. i go back 15 pages, yep 2 unmoderated comments! then i go back 23 pages , oh my, it’s trapped, then i go back 30 pages, wow,another. then i decide that’s a waste of my time and i go back to page one. then i decide to take a break and answer a question like yours, and whoops, while i am doing it 20 comments stack up.

      iow totally random. oh, and i generally trash comments that rag on me for being unfair. and off topic comments and sometimes if a comment is bolded for whole huge blockquotes so they stand out on the page, i might just skip over it because it’s so glaring.

      if you want the moderation more streamlined write phil and adam. i hope that answers your question.

      If the moderators are swamped and can’t keep up, rerhaps a quota system should be considered

      you mean like count everyone’s comments?

      not a bad idea, if you want i can skip over your comments between now and when they hire someone to streamline in a more logical fashion. just let me know.

      • Djinn says:

        While I don’t think you’re under any obligation whatsoever to explain anything Annie, that was quite interesting and I suspect I’d do it in much the same way (short attention span and all). Apart from everything you’ve said and the obvious point that there is no obligation on MW to post every single comment, something else folks might want to take into account is time zone differences. I’ve noticed that when I am in the US my comments are posted much quicker than when I am at home in Australia. For the obvious reason that generally when I post back home the mods are likely sound asleep.

        • RoHa says:

          “For the obvious reason that generally when I post back home the mods are likely sound asleep.”

          And there is part of the problem. Annie and her like need to sleep.

          I want the mods to eschew sleep, food, and every other distraction until they have cleared all my scintillating posts, but if they can’t, it’s time for Phil to get some robots!

  36. jon s says:

    Annie, thanks for your reply. It explains a lot.
    As to your reaction to my suggestion: no need to be nasty. There’s probably an easy technical way to count the comments, for all commenters.

    • i wasn’t being nasty, i was snarking. my point being the chances you’ll get adam and phil to resolve this anytime soon is not great, and in the meantime maybe just rejoice in whatever system it is that gets anything moderated. this is, after all, my sunday. i could be doing other things.

      • just says:

        Annie- *).

        You are a peach of the first order. I know you must have other things to do, and I so appreciate your insight and the difficult work of moderating all of us.

      • Danaa says:

        Seconding just. A medal of honor to Annie for going above and beyond call of duty. Just for moderating my interminable, syntax-challenged, typo infested, participle dangled, haste-makes-waste comments a giant gold star is due.

  37. Blank State says:

    Annie, you’re full of it. Your ego is the only thing you possess that comes close to equaling the size of the bag of crap you offer as an excuse for the dismal moderation on this site.

  38. tree says:

    This is a call to other posters here to see if we can improve upon the current sorry state of moderation, i.e. the long waits for comments to get cleared because of the large number of comments and the insufficient number of moderators here.

    I know that annie has addressed this issue numerous times, and appears to be up against a brick wall at the moment.

    What I am proposing is that other commenters make suggestions here as to what can be done, whether streamlining the moderation process, or creating a a “trusted commenter” category, or ponying up for a paid moderator, or whatever.

    I will promise to write to Phil and Adam about our suggestions, since I assume that they don’t regularly visit the comments policy thread, and urge some kind of resolution of this problem. If you don’t have any suggestions but still want to register your concerns about the time it takes to get comments moderated, then please mention that here. I think the comment sections here are a very valuable resource, as is Mondoweiss itself, and I think its time that we let Phil and Adam know, politely of course, what we think. If you wish to email Phil or Adam on this yourself, then go with that as well. I would simply suggest that, as always, politeness is important when asking for any resolution of the problem.

    Thanks, all. I hope I hear from some of you here. (After moderation, of course. LOL)

    • tree says:

      Bumping this request of mine(above) just in case it got lost in the sea of comments. It seem like we still have problems with backed up comments. If you just want to note in a cmment here if the delay in moderatiin is a problem for you, then I can pass that on when i email Phil and Adam. If you want to email Phil and Adam yourself, feel free to have at it. From what I understand, annie’s tried and run out of options, and its unfair for her to take the brunt of the majority of the moderating.

      I agree with American that flagging would just lead to pie fights, but I think that a trusted commenter position (to bypass moderation), determined solely by the MW powers-that-be, and subject to continued good behavior, might be one way to cut down on the number of comments that need to be checked by the moderators. In any case, it seems to me that having more moderators would be a big help. Perhaps some of us can pony up specifically for moderation. Any other suggestions are welcome.

    • Danaa says:

      I am all for adding a paid moderator and am willing to pony up. It’s a part time job so I’d assume that 20-30K should cover it? Of course, it can’t be just anyone, but surely there are enough people out there who can and are able to moderate comments.

      To streamline the comments, having a trusted commenter category is a good first step. Examples: can anyone think of any comment by the likes of Shmuel and Hostage that would not be welcome? there are many others – can count at least 12 without thinking (you tree are among them, so not to worry). We could even take a vote – whatever side we are on – and though we got into a few food fights, I have a feeling it wouldn’t be hard to send Phil/Adam/Annie the recommendations.

      Your other ideas are good too, tree – I am not sure I’d go though with a “flagging” system. For one we’ll be flooded by zio-trolls and pretenders who will flag everything they disagree with. For another, I’ll probably get flagged for (1) going on and on (2) failing to properly edit leaving a plethora of dangling sentences littering the comment section, (3) getting carried away with verbiage (including choice words that get past moderation but just barely), and (4) going OT (never intended; just happens). And flagging me down would be ever so sad, violations notwithstanding, no?

      I do think something needs to be done because like many here I believe the comment section is a highly valuable part of the blog. There are only so many front page posts that can be oput up a day, so the comments often provide lots of additional links and information. It also serves as good “echo chamber” for discussing issues, and it is my belief that oftentimes, Phil’s posts are meant to exactly generate these kind of discussions. If anyone were to look far and wide, I bet you won’t find a more in depth and broad-based commentary on the issues we are discussing here. The fact that people can embark on conversations is a key part of that. Example: I agree wholeheartedly with Keith on some issues but disagree on the way he sometimes colors US action (too much weight given to Empire, corporatocracy, pipeline politics, etc vs the ziopolitical influences). nonetheless, every one of his replies/retorts made me think and rethink my positions, as it did for others. We have such conversations pop up periodically – Syria brings it all to the fore again – and that is a useful and enlightening feature of the blog.

      Do I care for all the ziobots that pop in now and then? heck no! but it’s a necessary evil. WE do need to see what the other side says, as annoying as it is. The ones here now are not the worst, even yrn (though I dread to think how much had to be trashed to enable me to make this statement. I am sure there is a huge number of crazy comments coming from the zio side that mercifully, we never get to see).

      Tree, I’m all with you for writing such a letter and will volunteer to write one of my own.

  39. Eva Smagacz says:

    Hi tree, trusted commenter category is cool – you could also have flagging system for unsavoury comments. Or you could have controversial commenter category, with every presumed ok unless proven otherwise. A feature highlighting words likely to inhabit potentially provocative post and response can also help: denial, Jew, goy, semite, holocaust, terrorist, eternal, etc, would definitely help.

    • American says:

      Oh lord…please no trusted commenters or flagging or rating system…..absolutely ruinous…like Dkos….it will attract ziobots teams to flag anti zio comments….it will lead to pie fights and people zapping people just cause they disagree with them and taking sides in the pie throwing and all kinds of childish stuff even we growups do on boards.
      My comments also go down the rabbit hole sometimes for various unknown reasons but I dont consider the disappeared ones to be any great lose to MW or other commenters in the grand scheme of the blog.
      Yes it is frustrating occasionally but sometimes trying to fix things ends up creating something worse.

      • Danaa says:

        American, let’s think this through though. I am against the flagging system for the reasons you mention – at DK it’s been a real downer. But a trusted commenter category would allow at least some comments to be moved along pronto, limiting the total that need to be moderated. As i mentioned in my reply to tree I can think of 15 (up from 12) commenters that could be posted through without wait. And that I say, realizing I may not be one of them (due to this little tendency for envelope pushing – good exercise!). May be you won’t be either, but it’s a small price to pay for being able to say our piece in the end, even if we have to wait a bit longer for it to show up.

        Anyways, it’s just a thought. besides, I would be surprised if moderators don’t effectively use a trusted commenter category, even if it’s not in the open. Unfortunately, if that’s the case clearly it isn’t enough.

        the only good solution IMO is adding another paid moderator and MW could have a fund raiser for just that. I am sure most of us ware willing to pay for the privilege of commenting, especially if it leads to streamlining.

  40. miriam6 says:

    I tried clicking on the website link offered up on new commenter Bataween’s Commenter profile MW page and the result was an entirely blank Commenter’s profile page.

    That’s a problem you ought to correct.

  41. jon s says:

    Obviously, more moderators would help, but if that’s not possible, or until it happens, perhaps my suggestion should be considered: to introduce a quota system, limiting the number of comments per poster.

    • Danaa says:

      A quota system would have merit on its face, but if you look at some comment pages (the most popular ones) you’ll see why that won’t work. Some topics are of considerably more interest to some individuals than others, so they post more on those. In the past, MW did have an issue with lots of short one or two-liners from the same commenter littering the pages but I haven’t seen too much of that in the past few months (and you know there’ll be no one liners from me, right?).

      A case in point: Taxi’s recent series of comments on the Egypt situation. People disagreed with here take but she has every right to reply to each. It ended up as an interesting discussion overall that allowed several of us to clarify our own thoughts about what happened in Egypt. So no, when something like this happens, that a poster generates a whole bunch of responses, obviously it would be both unfair and sel-defeating to limit that commenter’s posts.

      Back to the drawing board, I says…

  42. NickJOCW says:

    I have no issue with what moderators pass or bury. Pure objectivity is an abstract concept and doesn’t survive translation to the real world. One needs accept imperfections and view them as reflections of culture, belief, character or whatever, indeed, What would perfection be without imperfection?

    However, the relevance of comments, even those not in immediate response to others, may depend on appearing within a certain time. Not infrequently I find something I contribute awaits moderation so long while later posts appear that mine has lost its point by the time it makes the page, that is to say I might not have made the comment at the stage it finally appears. I now see from Annie’s explanation how this may happen and have no quarrel with it, but if others have similar feelings one suggestion might be to provide an option for a post to be deleted by the contributor, somewhat in the manner of the ‘edit’ button, certainly at any time while it is still ‘awaiting moderation’ and perhaps even ever afterwards. This is not an original idea, a site I spend much time on allows contributors to eliminate a comment of their own at any time, simply leaving in its place the message: This comment was removed by its author.

    • ritzl says:

      @NickJOCW Good suggestion. There’s definitely a shelf life for “comments awaiting…” (“Hostage-ments” and their factual cousins being the exceptions.)

      Maybe we could all do our own little bit for moderation by having the option to delete our own comments that the discussion has passed by. I think that most people who comment here are conscientious enough to have a sense of when that shelf-life expires – as you showed in your comment. Or ego driven enough not to care. Either way there’s little or no downside for the site, imho.

      Though to do this, “comments awaiting…” would have to show up in our logged-in comment history.

  43. I send three times a comment in which I wrote that Arab countries responsible for the Naqba…… The comment is very important to me and to the sequence of the debate. I think, although many disagree with my comment, that it is a legitimate comment.

    Mahane,

    1. do not send mods personal messages thru the comment threads, we have email addresses for that, see ‘about page’.

    2. i am not the only person moderating here. once a comment has been trashed by a moderator all succeeding replicates will also be deleted. so prefacing a comment by stating you are republishing a comment previously deleted will likely get it automatically deleted by a different moderator. it’s like placing a red flag on your own comment. but it does save us decision time, so thanks for that.

    3. scroll up and read #2 . no nakba or holocaust denial. we’ve moved on. you want to debate the truth of the nakba, go to another site because it’s not happening here. if you have another point to make and wish to engage you need to learn to reframe and rethink because your ideas including nakba denial, while perhaps ‘important to you’, are not allowed here.

  44. ritzl says:

    Issue: Cites from previous/responded-to comments are included as the 100(?) character “lede” in the recent comments column at the right. This masks the original content of the responses (and therefore the vibrancy, imo, of the conversation)

    Suggestion: Script something that eliminates “em” or “blockquote” from being included in that column.

    I would like to see the original response before I see the repetitive cite. I think it furthers the discussion.

    Keep up the good work.

  45. fnlevit says:

    Moderator – I would like to complain about unfounded allegations in the post on the string “J Street leaders praise IDF, but audience cheers BDS” which I copy below. I am not allowed to post a single fact without giving links to “neutral” sources. This is acceptable if this policy is applied to all contributors. In the statement below there is no any link to substantiate the claim that ” Israeli army funds Syria’s foreign “rebel” under the cover of the spring “. Such comments should not be allowed to be posted. They are hearsay at best and slander at worst.
    W.Jones says:
    September 30, 2013 at 1:55 pm
    “When a rightwing member of the Knesset says that the Arab Spring is a disaster.”
    So… the Israeli army funds Syria’s foreign “rebel” under the cover of the spring and then calls the spring a “disaster”?

    • fn, lots of people say things unsourced on the threads, including you. i see your comment here: link to mondoweiss.net

      try placing a remark directly under the comment in question using the ‘reply’ feature and ask w.jones for a source link. like this:

      w.jones, i am not familiar w/ your allegation “the Israeli army funds Syria’s foreign “rebel” under the cover of the spring”, could you source that please

      and then not only w.jones but other commenters might offer links.

      • fnlevit says:

        Or really?. I thought that my comments are subject to numerus clausus
        (link to jewishvirtuallibrary.org)

        or was it “tightening the leash” – I was admitted to only one or two comments per day When I tried doing this in the past my comments simply would disappear without being posted. Or at best appeared after several days when the string was not active anymore.

        • there’s no numerous clauses here. we do however limit the amount of BS, untruths or inflammatory allegations people get to make. like for example this

          I am not allowed to post a single fact without giving links to “neutral” sources.

          which anyone can look at your archives and see this is completely bogus. you’re frequently referencing facts or allegations of ‘fact’ without supporting links.

          your comment are similarly obsessed with yourself and others posting habits.

          The fact is – I am seeing your site freely as well as many vicious anti -Israeli sites and FB pages. You cant continue blocking me

          Joel Kovel’s Palesreal
          fnlevit August 18, 2013 at 6:29 pm with 1 replies
          Browsing through articles and comments on this site with their anti Israeli and anti Zionist hatred and venom

          Media sensation Sam Horowitz loves Israel
          fnlevit August 16, 2013 at 3:22 pm with 1 replies
          Browsing through articles and comments on this site with their anti Israeli and anti Zionist hatred and venom

          I will probably not be able to diffuse all the hatred you have towards my country and most probablyI am wasting time.

          Is Israel an apartheid state?
          link to unitedwithisrael.org
          These simple facts must be allowed to be posted on this site.

          Moderators – if you ban this, you will be doing a job similar to what was done by KGB in a former USSR who was AFRAID that people will hear the thruth. Are you afraid of my posts? Israel

          WHAT I WANT IS THAT THESE FACTS ARE ACKNOWLEDGED ON THIS BLOG …..THESE ARE FACTS.

          Hatred on these pages blinds your eyes. Even about well known facts.

          tightening the leash is associated w/quality control, limiting repetition, spewing/unleashing inflammatory lecturing etc.

          but as any cursory glance at your archives reveals, you still get an awful lot of crap posted. try not whining/lecturing so much if you want to get more posts thru.

        • Woody Tanaka says:

          “my comments simply would disappear without being posted. Or at best appeared after several days when the string was not active anymore.”

          Oh, quit your crying and climb down from the cross. EVERYONE on this site has this experience all the time.

  46. fnlevit says:

    Moderator, why my comments from yesterday on the string” Netanyahu delivers predictable speech fear-mongering on Iran” were not posted? Again KGB suppression policy. God if you could only know how this reminds me the endless arguments with the prison censor to get my letters and letters to me through him. You must be ashamed of this analogy. I am not using abusive language, I give “neutral links”.

    Look at others. Yesterday I checked three links of Citizen – two were to outrageous anti-Israeli sources, some dark communities, one being simply anti-Semitic. And these links were allowed whereas when I gave a link to Camera I was jubilantly banned as a criminal.

    What is with you? And what about so many commentators s including you using abusive language toward me personally and other pro-Israeli commenters, like Miriam and MY1.

    You can not continue like this – either you declare that this is an anti Israeli and anti Zionist blog and that all comments contradicting this party line will not be posted. This is legitimate. But otherwise, with all the official slogans around and the picture of Israeli and Arab shaking hands with Kerry on your “donate money” poster,
    you must post my comments which follow the guide lines of the “Comments policy”.

  47. fnlevit says:

    You allow for openly anti-Semitic comments to be posted without any time delay. And the slander about my Institute in which I work. And when I try to protest you block my comments. That is on the background of verbal abuses and direct cursing which I personally and all pro Israelis experience here. I tlod you – change the motto of the blog and we will alll be gone. Look at the poster you are using asking to donate the money. Abbas and Peres with Kerry as a mediator. This is the real biggotry to represent your blog as such if one looks at the content of this blog. And it is getting worse and worse. Even in the short time that I am here.

    • eljay says:

      >> That is on the background of verbal abuses and direct cursing which I personally and all pro Israelis experience here.

      “Pro-Israeli” sounds innocuous. You – and Zio-supremacists like you – are much more than that. You’re Jewish supremacists. You advocate for, defend, justify and/or excuse:
      - Jewish terrorism;
      - the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their homes and lands;
      - the creation of an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State” of Israel in Palestine;
      - Israel’s 60+ years, ON-GOING and offensive (i.e., not defensive) campaign of aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction, torture and murder;
      - Israel’s refusal to honour its obligations under international law;
      - Israel’s refusal to be held accountable for its past and on-going (war) crimes; and
      - Israel’s refusal to enter into sincere negotiations for a just and mutually-beneficial peace.

      Aggressor-victimhood is a tough gig…even for a perfesser. :-(

    • Woody Tanaka says:

      “That is on the background of verbal abuses and direct cursing which I personally and all pro Israelis experience here. ”

      oh, yes, when you defend the theft of Palestine, the murder of Palestinians and the destruction of their lives and culture by the israelis, the main tragedy here is that someone called you a god damned name.

      “Abbas and Peres with Kerry as a mediator.”

      Kerry is no mediator; mediators are neutral. Kerry’s a bought-and-paid-for agent of the zio criminals, like all the Americans have been for decades.

  48. fnlevit says:

    My compilation with facts of what happened to Arab Jews in Arab counytries following Israeli War of Independence was not posted. I am protesting this. I demand that I am given reasons for not posting my comment. It was in responce to one Wooden Tanaka who continuously abuses everyone who does not agree with him.

    • was it completely off topic in the thread? where did this happen? did it include some nakba denial stuck in somewhere?

      as an aside, the israel governments hasbara campaign to offset the ethnic cleansing of palestine byway of a ‘balancing act’ has been routinely hauled out time and again in these threads, often times used as a distraction to spam threads having absolutely no relation to the subject at hand.

      so believe me we have no lack for the state of israel’s narrative of this phenomena. in fact your sidekick miriam inundated the threads with information of this sort this just weeks ago. ” compilation … of what happened to Arab Jews in Arab counytries” are a dime a dozen around here. also note, we do not use or highjack the term nakba wrt the experience w/arab jews just like we do not clear comments referencing the ethnic cleansoing of palestine as ‘the holocaust’. i noticed once before you tried this tactic.

      so review whatever it is you said, where and when you said it, and how you said it. then try revising and commenting again in an on topic thread, and you might get your comment cleared.

      i do not recall trashing a recent comment about arab jews so possibly it was phil or adam. or possibly it just has not been posted yet. but something tells me it’s redundant.

      oh, and just an aside (in case you’re wondering why a recent comment got trashed). this is a comment policy thread. it’s not a thread to rant how someone is your ‘enemy’ and insert lots of insulting political allegations that doesn’t make it thru moderation on another thread.

      • fnlevit says:

        This is completely off topic? Arent you ashamed to say this? Anti- Zionists on this thread are raising all sort of topis in discussions which turns and twist in which ever dirction they please. And you are telling me that the fate of 800.000 Arab Jews is off the topic?

  49. miriam6 says:

    Why is Mike_ Konrad’s Commenter Profile completely blank???!!?
    Apparently he has had 0 comments since 2009-08-02?
    That cannot be correct surely..
    Has he been subject to Stalinesque erasure from the MW Commenter Profiles or something?
    What a pity if so..
    After all – he has got the most amazing sense of humour and irony..

    A Stiff-necked people indeed..

    • fnlevit says:

      Why dont you answer this complaint? It is a valid one, isnt it? Please reply to miriam6. By the way you called her my “sidekick”. I looked in the dictionary for the precise definition of this word

      a person who helps and spends a lot of time with someone who is usually more important, powerful, etc.

      I do not know who miriam6 is. I never met her. I never talked to her.

      Then who are you to Weiss and Horowitz? That exactly fits the dictionary definition of the “sidekick”. Shame on you to call someone else by this name.

    • Cliff says:

      miriam666,

      So you’re defending a religious fanatic (Christian Fundamentalist and Zionist)?

  50. fnlevit says:

    You have consistently suppressed my comments lately. Objective, informative comments. At the same time all the anti-Zionists are posting freely within minutes on this blog expressing feeling and opinions which can only be characterized by one word. And you know this word.

    In fact I searched internet for a working definition of when this word applies. It turns out that there is one which is officially adopted by EU. Below is its text. As you can see there are several paragraphs which apply to what you allow to happen here. This is not a discussion – you viciously suppress opinions which go against the trend and flow of very brutal expressions of animal hatred towards Zionists Jews who as you yourself know and admit form the overwhelming majority of Jew in the world.

    One can fight opinions or government action. This is not what is done here. Here is the definition
    link to european-forum-on-antisemitism.org

    WORKING DEFINITION OF ANTISEMITISM
    The purpose of this document is to provide a practical guide for identifying incidents, collecting data, and supporting the implementation and enforcement of legislation dealing with antisemitism.
    Working definition: “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
    In addition, such manifestations could also target the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. …..

    con’t….

    • fn, please scroll up and read the comment policy. specifically #2. we’ve moved past nakba denial, iow, we don’t debate whether it happened. just like we do not debate whether the holocaust took place. if you’d like to ‘prove’ otherwise, you’re at the wrong site.

      for example, let’s take an tiny excerpt from the last long comment of yours that didn’t make the grade. (accompanied by a slew of irrelevant photos)

      Look how the country was in those years. It was deserted

      the country was not deserted. and showing a photo of some guys standing on sand dunes and essentially insinuating jaffa didn’t exist in 1910 and this is your ‘proof’ is just not worthy of posting. anyone can simply google jaffa 1910 for photos of people on the streets. ie: link to commons.wikimedia.org

      so no, we’re not hosting your fantasy. i can stand out on the sand dunes in california and claim the state is deserted too, but it will not be true.

      as for the european definition of anti semitism, this is the US. we’re not bound by that definition. and did you know there’s now a new definition of holocaust denial that includes “anyone who includes the 1939-1945 holocaust among other great tragedies in human history.” link to jewishpress.com

      here’s the thing, we make the rules here. not you, not gideon bachar, the head of israeli foreign ministry department for the fight against anti semitism’, not abe foxman and not the european forum on anti semitism. if you want to get your posts passed moderation, you need to work within our policy, not continually defy them. if you’d like to challenge the policy rules write phil and adam.

      and, fyi i just went back 3 pages in trash to read the other comment of yours that got dumped this month. it was just a rant accusing phil of anti semitism and lashing out ad hominems like: I feel like vomiting that our nation produces such genetic deviations as you.

      you do not really think we’re obligated to publish your tirades do you? (ps, scroll up and read #4)

      [edit] fyi, my personal pet peeve is accusing ones adversaries of hatred. something you, and many many zionist bloggers are very good at. if i had my druthers this would be against the rules everywhere!

      you: the trend and flow of very brutal expressions of animal hatred towards Zionists Jews

      from a person that doesn’t blink an eye at brutal demolition of a family’s home or butchering of olive trees, events that goes on all the time by the state/system you protect. the hypocrisy is simply stunning. and btw, i don’t hate you. actions speak much louder than words. zionism’s actions scream destruction.

      • eljay says:

        >> You have consistently suppressed my comments lately. Objective, informative comments.

        The perfesser whines that his comments are being suppressed because he is Jewish (“anti-Semitism!!!”) when the more-likely explanation is that they are being suppressed because he is a hateful, immoral and Zio-supremacist bigot.

        Aggressor-victimhood is such a tough gig, even for a perfesser… :-(

    • Sumud says:

      In fact I searched internet for a working definition of when this word applies. It turns out that there is one which is officially adopted by EU. Below is its text.

      WRONG.

      The “working definition” is just that, a draft edition that has NOT been adopted by the EU after 8 years, and will likely never be adopted because it seeks to conflate anti-semitism and criticism of Israel.

      In fact, we’ve had detailed discussions about this bogus definition here before:

      Discarded EU definition of anti-Semitism is important tool in silencing criticism of Israel

      fnlevit, if you don’t like it here maybe you should start your own web site. The administrators here have been very patient with your juvenile victim routine, from what I read above. They are under no obligation to post any of your comments.

      Frustrated you can’t OCCUPY Mondoweiss also?

      • fnlevit says:

        But of course they do. This is a public domain. And when you complained that somewhere in Canada the organizers excluded two or three out of 120 participants in some Jewish activity then you did not use this argument, did you. I mean that the organizers were “under no obligations” etc. So – you stop playing these juvenile games.

    • RoHa says:

      “At the same time all the anti-Zionists are posting freely within minutes on this blog expressing feeling and opinions which can only be characterized by one word. And you know this word. ”

      It is very rare for one of my posts to be passed minutes after I posted it. Some take hours, some take days, and some (usually the best ones) never make it at all. And yet I am told that mine positively reek of the “feeling and opinions which can only be characterized by one word”.

  51. fnlevit says:

    Here is the US Department of State definition of Anti-Semitism.

    link to state.gov

    Commentators of this blog repeatedly commit the following violations of the list defining Anti-Semitism in the above link

    Contemporary Examples of Anti-Semitism

    Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews (often in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion).
    Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as a collective—especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
    Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, the state of Israel, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
    Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
    Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interest of their own nations.

    What is Anti-Semitism Relative to Israel?

    EXAMPLES of the ways in which anti-Semitism manifests itself with regard to the state of Israel, taking into account the overall context could include:

    DEMONIZE ISRAEL:

    Using the symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism to characterize Israel or Israelis
    Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis
    Blaming Israel for all inter-religious or political tensions

    DOUBLE STANDARD FOR ISRAEL:

    Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation
    Multilateral organizations focusing on Israel only for peace or human rights investigations

    DELEGITIMIZE ISRAEL:

    Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, and denying Israel the right to exist

    However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic.

    I demand that the above link and the list of violations it contains are introduced in your “Comments Policy”, that the moderators of this blog stop allowing anti Semitic comments as defined by the above list and promptly inform the respective commentators of the enforcement of these rules.

    • Rusty Pipes says:

      You mean the AJC-crafted EUMC Working Definition of Anti-Semitism, which even the EU doesn’t consider definitive? Under the Bush Adminisration, the Israel Lobby tried to get the State Department to adopt it, but Condi Rice refused. Hillary Clinton adopted it shortly after she became Secretary of State. Surely, this site does not need to be bound by choices Clinton has made to advance her career and fundraising abilities at the “Democrats’ ATM.”

    • eljay says:

      >> I demand …

      “The Nutty Perfesser”!

      >> Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, and denying Israel the right to exist

      Jews / Jewish people have a right to determine that they are Jews / Jewish people. No-one denies them that right.

      Jews / Jewish people do not have a right to set up a supremacist “Jewish State”. No-one has a right to set up a supremacist state. No-one should be granted the right to set up a supremacist state.

      Supremacist states are unjust and immoral constructs. This explains why Zio-supremacists are so in favour of a supremacist “Jewish State”.

    • i was going to try getting a little note up to the professor before anyone commented and then my email started pinging.

      to help facilitate clarity on fn’s link i went ahead and blockquoted directly from the page, so there was no confusion where the professors comments ended and the st dept began. since there originally were no quote marks in his post.

      anyway i thought i would point out, there is nowhere on the st dept site that claims this is “US Department of State definition of Anti-Semitism”. just a minor little glitch in fn’s logic. however at the very top it does say “Defining Anti-Semitism” and then gives “examples of contemporary” usage, and at the very bottom it also says: However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic.

      iow, all those criticisms also leveled at SA apartheid…well, there you have it.

    • talknic says:

      @fnlevit It’s self defeating and Antisemitic to apply the above only to Israel and Jews. The same rules must be applied to all peoples, all states

      E.g., Denying the Palestinian people their right to self-determination, and denying Palestine the right to exist

      “I demand” that either; no proper nouns be appropriately capitalized or that all proper nouns be capitalized e.g., Arab, Arabs, Palestine, Palestinian/s, Islam, Muslim/s, Israel/i/s, Jew/s, etc

      BTW “I demand” you show examples of allowing anti Semitic comments as defined by the above list

    • Talkback says:

      “Many thinkers have long opposed nationalism and the nationalist interpretation of the principle of self-determination, namely, that each national, ethnic, or cultural group is entitled to political autonomy or statehood. They cite historical evidence that political systems favoring one nation or culture have too often shown intolerance and discrimination toward resident minorities, besides fostering a good deal of interstate belligerence. There is another interpretation of the principle of self-determination by which self-determination is recognized as a right of popular sovereignty belonging to regionally defined collectives regardless of the ethnic, cultural, or religious identities and affiliations of their members. In this sense, all have a right to share in self-determination, Jews and non-Jews alike, but they have this right as residents of regions, not as members of cultural or national units.

      By implying that those who deny a right of self-determination to Jews qua Jews, or who raise doubts about the legitimacy of the state of Israel, are anti-Semitic, the working definition is thereby privileging the nationalist interpretation of the principle of self-determination, and de facto criminalizing the views and acts of those who oppose nationalism, including Jewish nationalism. This is not only an instance of historical and legal naïveté; it is a dangerous assault on our cherished democratic freedoms of expression and opinion.” – Tomis Kapitan, Professor of Philosophy Northern Illinois University
      link to chronicle.com

    • Talkback says:

      fnlevit says: “I demand …”

      I demand the US state department to quote the definition correctly which reads: “Contemporary examples of anti-Semitism … COULD, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE OVERALL CONTEXT, include, …”

      So the examples COULD be examples for antisemitism, but they don’t have to be. It’s not exactly what Kenneth Stern wanted, but with this insertion the EUMC basically told him where he can stuff his Apartheid supporting definition proposal. :D

      • MHughes976 says:

        Clearly it is possible for someone – anyone; as I often say, no one owns words – to define ‘anti-Semitism’ so that disagreement with Zionism falls fair and square under that definition. Anti-Zionists then have to reply ‘you can use that definition if you like; but then you may not like the fact that under that definition there are forms of anti-Semitism that are justified’. In logic it is not possible for a definition, since it is merely a rule for the use of words, to prove either the factual existence or the moral justification of anything.
        My own view is that Zionism cannot be justified – is wrong, is mistaken, which implies that the attempt to put Zionism into practice must result both in absurdity and in cruelty. Which is to say that, in the common understanding of the words concerned, I regard Israel as illegitimate.
        This brings me up against the quasi-official, or would-be quasi-official, definitions of anti-Semitism that float around with the patronage of important political figures. For my part I absolutely deny that politicians have any special right or ability to settle moral questions.
        I thank Talkback for the valuable quote from Kapitan. I don’t, alas, altogether share his/her view that the ‘overall context’ phrase is a helpful defence for the likes of us, or at least of me. It’s not that I want to put my belief that Zionism is wrong, indeed indefensible by any recognisable moral principle, into some or other context. Rather the other way around: this is the idea that provides the overall context for what I want to say here.

  52. fnlevit says:

    How is the following statement
    “Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interest of their own nations.”

    has anything to do with SA?

    Or
    “Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, and denying Israel the right to exist”

    Or

    “Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as a collective—especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.”

    Or

    “Using the symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism to characterize Israel or Israelis”

    Etc, etc….

    • seafoid says:

      Denying Israel the right to exist is not anti-Semitic.
      Denying Goldman Sachs the right to trade is not anti-Semitic.

    • fn, it might behoove you to try using the reply function in the future. wrt your questions, i wasn’t addressing most of those allegations. and note what it says at the top of that section about israel:

      EXAMPLES of the ways in which anti-Semitism manifests itself with regard to the state of Israel, taking into account the overall context could include:

      iow, it doesn’t say “does include”, it says could. and the state department facilitating the listings of contemporary definitions is just that. there’s nothing definitive/clear cut on the page.

  53. mondonut says:

    Comment Policy question based on twice having comments deleted. Is it not permissible to refer to the West Bank as “disputed territory”. If so, why?

    • Ludwig says:

      The “West Bank” is disputed territory. Why are comments deleted that point this out?

      • it’s an inflammatory threadjacking diverting lie, that’s why.

        • mondonut says:

          Annie Robbins says: it’s an inflammatory threadjacking diverting lie, that’s why.
          ==================================
          You may find it inflammatory but it is no lie. It is yet to be Palestine, the Palestinians currently only have claims but they had also agreed that borders would be a final status issue. East Jerusalem is claimed by both parties and by the very nature of two parties claiming the same thing – it is disputed.

        • Shmuel says:

          East Jerusalem is claimed by both parties and by the very nature of two parties claiming the same thing – it is disputed.

          The guy who nicked my laptop and I both claimed it, but that didn’t make it disputed, just stolen.

        • mondonut says:

          Shmuel says: The guy who nicked my laptop and I both claimed it, but that didn’t make it disputed, just stolen.
          ==============================================
          Poor analogy. Your laptop in its entirety was indisputably yours.

        • gamal says:

          ” Your laptop in its entirety was indisputably yours.” not according to the guy who stole it, surely you are not taking sides, wheres your balance man!

          He only thought it was his, on the same basis that we all think our lappies are ours, in his case though, its somehow sinister, surprised you dont you see that.

        • Shmuel says:

          Poor analogy. Your laptop in its entirety was indisputably yours.

          Thank you for coming down on the side of justice. Sadly, the thief was not of the same opinion – which brings me back to your assertion regarding East Jerusalem. Admittedly, the analogy is not perfect, but it is sufficient to demonstrate that the mere fact that two parties claim the same thing does not necessarily make it “disputed”.

          That East Jerusalem is occupied (the indisputable fact that terms like “disputed” are meant to obfuscate) is denied only by the occupier (and Costa Rica, bless its soul). I’m pretty sure the guy who grabbed my computer got more support than that, at least from his mates.

        • Elliot says:

          The Talmud (Bava Metzia) teaches:
          If one says it’s all mine, and one says it’s half mine, the one who says it is all mine shall receive three-fourths, and the one who said, it’s half mine, takes one fourth.

          It follows that the authentic Jewish solution for Jerusalem is for the Palestinians to give up half of East Jerusalem (which they claim) to the Jews (who claim the whole city). Israel is close to achieving this goal. Through increased settlement construction for Jews and oppressive policies against the Palestinians, the Jewish population in East Jerusalem is rapidly approaching parity with the Palestinians (approx. 200,000 vs. 260,000)

          Thus the Jewish State fulfills the Talmudic dictum.

        • mondonut says:

          Shmuel says: That East Jerusalem is occupied (the indisputable fact that terms like “disputed” are meant to obfuscate) is denied only by the occupier …
          ===========================================
          Occupied and disputed are not mutually exclusive. Israel is in fact, occupying disputed territory.

        • Shmuel says:

          Occupied and disputed are not mutually exclusive. Israel is in fact, occupying disputed territory.

          1. East Jerusalem is indisputably occupied, yet Israel claims that it is not. Does that make the very fact that is occupied disputed? Of course not.

          2. As noted, “disputed” is a term that is often used to obfuscate the fact that the territory is occupied, so that although not mutually exclusive, the one is generally intended to negate or, at the very least, mitigate the other.

        • eljay says:

          >> Occupied and disputed are not mutually exclusive. Israel is in fact, occupying disputed territory.

          Occupied and disputed are not mutually exclusive. The rapist, with impunity, occupies the victim’s disputed* vagina.

          (*She claims it’s hers, the rapist claims it’s his, so – according to mondonuteee’s Zio-supremacist “logic” – it’s disputed.)

        • Cliff says:

          No, Jewish supremacist – Israel is occupying Palestinian territory.

          No one ‘disputes’ this but Israel and it’s far-right lackeys.

        • mondonut says:

          Shmuel says: 1. East Jerusalem is indisputably occupied, …
          =============================================
          Yes, you are correct, my previous statements apply to the West Bank only, Israel does not believe Jerusalem is occupied or disputed as they do the West Bank. As for the nature of the term “disputed” it is not intended to negate the occupation, rather it is intended to negate the notion that the territories belong to the State of Palestine.

          Conversely the Palestinians and their supporters refuse to use the term so not to minimize their claims. It is a strategic choice to conflate the status of the territories with the occupation itself. It is no more correct than the Israeli choice.

          Choosing the Israeli lexicon (which is not incorrect) is not an inflammatory threadjacking diverting lie, as Annie so wildly puts it. It is 100% legitimate. However it is their blog and if they wish to police the language to bolster their own opinions so be it. But they should edit this…

          One of the goals of this site is to promote critical discussion and debate on US foreign policy and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We want Mondoweiss to be a place that everyone feels comfortable visiting, to read and comment, regardless of political perspective. People might not always like what we post, but everyone should feel invited and encouraged to join the discussion, share their opinions, and engage in debate.

          And while they are at, they should edit out “4. No personal attacks.”, several of the regulars can barely post a thought without resorting to insults.

        • Shmuel says:

          As for the nature of the term “disputed” it is not intended to negate the occupation

          Pull the other one, mondonut. I used to be in the hasbara game myself, you know. Here’s just one example (there are thousands) of the use of “dispute” to negate “occupation”: link to articles.chicagotribune.com

          Interesting how (after your hasty correction) “two parties claiming the same thing” makes the WB “disputed”, but not EJ.

        • eljay says:

          >> Shmuel: Interesting how (after your hasty correction) “two parties claiming the same thing” makes the WB “disputed”, but not EJ.

          He couldn’t back-track fast enough from that one! :-)

          >> mondonuteee: Choosing the Israeli lexicon … is not an inflammatory threadjacking diverting lie … It is 100% legitimate.

          It’s as legitimate as 2 = NEVER. Too funny…

      • talknic says:

        Ludwig “The “West Bank” is disputed territory. Why are comments deleted that point this out?”

        Because it is quite simply nonsense. Show us otherwise by a quote from International Law, Customary International Law, the UN Charter, a convention, an Armistice Agreement, Peace Treaty or UNSC resolution using the term “disputed territory”

        • Citizen says:

          Only Israel claims the OT is disputed territory because only Israel has ever claimed it’s not really an occupier and that international law does not forbid the Israeli settlements. Go read their absurd rational on, e.g., Elder of Ziyon.

  54. miriam6 says:

    Mayhem@;

    Are the moderators permitted to censor posts made on Mondoweiss?

    Are you saying parts of your comment were deleted?
    Pray tell if you can Mayhem..
    Wouldn’t surprise me though.

  55. Ludwig says:

    Annie,

    It’s morally wrong for you to edit the meaning of comments and censor them to such a degree. I suggest you stop. I have had many posts that in no way violate the comments policy been censored. Remember, it is only places like Iran, Syria and North Korea where this sort of censorship exists.

    • ludwig, if i had a dollar for everytime i edited “you are a troll” out of otherwise very succinct comments i could buy a round trip ticket to palestine. if you don’t believe me ask cliff.

      also, considering the massive efforts hasbrats have put into misquoting people, cherry picking text to thwart the meaning, i’d be rich if i could profit off busting it. so if what you mean is “i tried to make a point by misquoting you and it was edited to include the whole/or correct quote”, then yes, i have been guilty of changing someone’s meaning. don’t do that here. but, i can’t specifically recall ever editing one of your comments.

      also, at least 3/4 of your deleted posts sitting in trash right now (on the first 2 pages, i didn’t check back very far) were not because of me. so take it up w/management. or maybe not…they might opt to just get rid of you. that’s what i’d advise if they ask me anyway, but so far no one has asked me. i’d stay off their radar if i was you. there’s simply no compelling reason to keep you around (imo).

      also, look on the bright side, it’s not as if anyone of us can abduct you or your children from your home at night, steal you away, torture you, under administrative detention..unlike the state you support. what’s it feel like to be treated so unfairly? not be in control? silenced? it’s not like we can arrest you: link to mondoweiss.net

      • Mayhem says:

        @annie, your remarks are unctious and ungracious. We are hear to
        discuss the Middle East conflict openly and fairly (I would hope). You
        aren’t entitled to resort to bullying and manipulatory tactics at
        whim, if you want to retain an ounce of credibility. Are you above the
        MW policy or are you making it on the run?

        Pray explain how Cliff at
        link to mondoweiss.net
        and seafoid at
        link to mondoweiss.net
        were not trolling, which supposedly contravenes MW policy?

        I tried to explain why the first para of my post at
        link to mondoweiss.net
        does not make sense. It is because of this ad hoc policy of
        MW that we are now finding out about from our commandant.
        @annie, if you are half honest you will publish this entire post uncensored.

        • mayhem, this is not a democracy here. if you don’t like it you are free to leave. also, for your and everyone’s edification, a while ago after much ado, sometime around august or september, phil and adam ‘fixed’ the stacked up comment problem. probably because lots of people started writing in! (thank you tree for trying to organize that and everyone who wrote in!!! and especially phil and adam who finally made it a priority!) and around that time i find most of the comments are cleared by other people. or lots and lots of them.

          and as a result of that, even tho there have always been multiple moderators, now most of the moderation is not done by me. therefore my “explanation” as to how those comments passed moderation is whatever whim or decision whomever was moderating at the time decided.

          and sometimes life is just not fair.

          I tried to explain why the first para of my post at
          link to mondoweiss.net
          does not make sense. It is because of this ad hoc policy of
          MW that we are now finding out about from our commandant.

          actually, see “#2″ in this comment: link to mondoweiss.net

          prefacing a comment by stating you are republishing a comment previously deleted will likely get it automatically deleted by a different moderator. it’s like placing a red flag on your own comment.

          and i explained right under your comment: link to mondoweiss.net

          we often either delete or edit posts dealing with comment rules or questions about moderation policy. we do however have a thread for that where you can air your grievances

          iow, if you want to complain about why your past comment got deleted, why a moderator made a decision etc, your post will likely either be deleted altogether or published with that section of the comment removed. that way the threads do not turn into long discussions about comment rules. which, as anyone who’s hung out at dailykos knows, is a huge distracting diverting waste of time.

          however, we will check out (usually) the complaint.

          You aren’t entitled to resort to bullying and manipulatory tactics at whim, if you want to retain an ounce of credibility.

          to be honest with you mayhem, i don’t care what you think of my credibility. it’s sort of irrelevant to me at this point. we’re on opposite sides of the ideological fence here. would you lose sleep over me telling you’ve lost credibility with me?

          i hope that addresses your concerns, i’ve answered to the best of my abilities. in the future i will try to be more accommodating regarding your posts and simply delete ones discussing mod decisions instead. then you can be the one to remove any OT references to comment/moderation policy (except in this thread).

  56. jon s says:

    What’s with the new CAPCHA requirement for every posting? What an annoyance!

  57. jon s says:

    Should be :CAPTCHA. Still annoying.

  58. eljay says:

    Hmmm…I hit one when logging in, but not when posting this test post.

    I hope it’s a temporary addition. The tinypass screen is annoying enough.

  59. Phil and Adam:
    I little don’t understand why you, that cover any event in Israel, important or lees important, sometimes ignore major and very important events occur in Israel. Or instance, here are four major events were not mentioned in your site:

    - Israeli President, Shimon Peres, talked to 29 Arab countries foreign ministers in Abu-Dhabi. I didn’t see any post about it (Only one commenter mentioned it in the comment section)
    link to ynetnews.com

    - Israel will join the “Horizon 2000″ EU scientific project and Israeli scientists will receive 1,500,000 Euro for research. This will increase the level of cooperation between Israeli and European scientist teams. Israel added an comment to the agreement that the EU request from Israel to avoid investment of the money in the OT, does not constitute a legal precedent. I didn’t see any post about it.
    link to i24news.tv

    In the last elections in Arab municipalities, moderate Arab leaders were elected. The biggest surprise was in Nazareth, where Hanin Zoabi received only 11% of the vote, much less than the unknown candidate, Ali Salam. I didn’t see any post about it.
    link to maki.org.il

    Israel, Jordan and Palestinian Authority signed the “Seas Canal” agreement deals with construction of the Two-Seas Canal which will connect the Red Sea to the Dead Sea. According to the agreement, approximately 100 million cubic meters of water per year will be carried to the Dead Sea area. All three, Israel, Jordan and the PA, would enjoy the water (Jordan would also receive water from the Sea of Galilee).
    link to ynetnews.com

  60. Is it the author of an article that moderate comments to that article or doesnt that matter?

  61. miriam6 says:

    I do not like the new MW layout at all.

    The old layout was more stylish. What on earth has happened to the green lines in a new comment?

    It was a good way of singling out new comments from the older ones.

    Also with this new layout design the ‘reply’ under some commenters comments is missing !!!!!!

    The comments look squashed together too!!!

    Put MW back to the old design we had yesterday please!

  62. just says:

    Is anyone else having trouble locating new comments? Seems that the “green flag” has disappeared.

  63. Bumblebye says:

    Yeah, wot just said. Plus we can’t click on a commenter name any more (ie to see the historic wisdom of Hostage!). And this is taking an age, cos my old computer curls up and dies when there are more than 100 comments on a page. :-)

  64. miriam6 says:

    Please change MW back to how it was yesterday please!

  65. Bumblebye says:

    Wow!
    Something we all seem to be in agreement on!
    Please reinstate the ‘old’ comment features, pretty please!

  66. Keith says:

    The sudden, unexpected deactivation of the commenter profile and searchable comment history has ominous implications. Surely, some sort of explanation is called for.

    • MHughes976 says:

      I haven’t thought of the ominous implications yet but I certainly regret the loss of this very useful feature.

      • Keith says:

        MHUGHES976- The ominous implication is that, if allowed to continue, this will result in a massive de-emphasis of the Mondoweiss comments section. A truly significant change in editorial policy implying a significant change in Mondoweiss goals and outlook. Perhaps even a winding down of the website itself. This is a truly significant change and the fact that it took many (most? all?) commenters by surprise makes me apprehensive.

        • MHughes976 says:

          Yes, I see what you mean. The comments are a vital thing.

        • American says:

          What worries me is that there is a ton of research and information and links to documents in the commenter archives that are no longer accessible.
          We have lost the equivalent of a Library of Congress data base on I/P in losing this MW function.
          It would take mountains of time to seek it out in other ways.

        • eljay says:

          What if it’s just a technical glitch?

          • MHughes976 says:

            I do hope so! Keith’s remarks have lit a fuse of worry in me. It’s the continuity of the comments and the visible personalities of the commenters that give Mondoweiss – even though it derives its energy, up-to-the minute quality and compelling style from Phil and his immediate colleagues – its distinctive flavour.
            Which is the flavour of discussing the ME with complete absence of anti-Semitism and very often of listening to people who are (I don’t refer to myself) very well informed by way of research, personal acquaintance with the region and a moral integrity I’ve been proud to encounter. Which is what the many circling enemies of MW can least stand and most desire to eliminate.

          • Keith says:

            ELJAY- “What if it’s just a technical glitch?”

            Then, I would have expected an announcement to that effect.

    • Cliff says:

      Yes, this is very strange.

      I’m hoping it’s just a technical issue.

      Being able to search a commenter’s past history is very important.

  67. Citizen says:

    The ability to track a present commenter’s past comments on MW with a click onto his or her commenter name is very valuable. Who got rid of that feature? And why? Phil, Adam, we need you tell us.

  68. miriam6 says:

    Please change MW back to what is was.

    Have tried accessing my and other MW commenters comments archive by google but pages turn up blank!

  69. RoHa says:

    Please restore the archives of MW commenters.

    First, it saves me a lot of time. Instead of rewriting my points, I can go back through the archive of my previous brilliant posts and find the point already spelled out in my inimitable, pellucid, prose.

    Second, I can re-read Mooser’s gems.

  70. Peter in SF says:

    Phil? Adam? I came here for the same reason as all the other people above. The ability to look up a commenter’s profile and history is very useful. Taking away a popular feature with no explanation is not a good idea for a website that relies on donations from its users, especially during the month when the average American gives the the most money to charity.

  71. MRW says:

    Bring back the individual comments archive. Please. Moreover, why did you wipe them out? Any reason?

  72. miriam6 says:

    Are we going to get some input from Weiss/ Horowitz about this situation soon?

    A lot of commenters dislike this new arrangement and want it changed.

    • Keith says:

      MIRIAM6- “Are we going to get some input from Weiss/ Horowitz about this situation soon?”

      The fact that there has been no announcement suggests that this is some sort of experiment/demonstration, the results of which would be tainted by knowledge of the objectives. Perhaps we are being demonstrated the importance of these features so that they can once again be made available for a modest fee. Also, please note Annie’s conspicuous absence from the discussion suggesting that she is in the loop as to what is going on but can’t comment. Elementary, my dear Watson!

    • amigo says:

      Miriam , as you refused to pay a modest sum to access Haaretz, one has to wonder firstly if you pay for this site and if not should you really be taken seriously when tabling complaints.

  73. Tuyzentfloot says:

    I suspect someone was tweaking the individual comments listing and broke it. It that’s true then there’s not much time left to make it as embarrassing as possible for that person. So we must hurry :)

    • Sumud says:

      Considering the comments are moderated I have trouble accepting that someone at MW isn’t aware that this has happened.

      Something else is happening – disappointing no-one has bothered to explain it, and doubly so to have this happen during a funding drive.

      I know lots of people including myself have commented on the missing profile pages but the new comments in green is also a big loss. I work full time and it helps me to catch up fast. hope the powers that be at MW haven’t overlooked just how important the community aspect of MW is and how if you choke that, people will feel less motivated to donate to support the site.

  74. piotr says:

    Comments differentiate “author’s site” from a “community”. Not being able to check past comments is a major nuisance. For example, today I made a swipe at “bilal a” using somewhat personal language “what are you smoking” and I started to have doubts — perhaps he was snarky (Adelson as liberal may be a glaring mistake or an obvious absurd used rhetorically). Riven by the doubt I clicked on “bilal a” to check his past comments — and bwa-ha-ha! No link!

    And, damn it, we pay for this site! : || :@ >:(

    • MHughes976 says:

      I’m getting quite nervous about the absence of an official statement here.

      • eljay says:

        >> I’m getting quite nervous about the absence of an official statement here.

        The lack of communication isn’t bothering me yet, but I do think it’s somewhat disappointing.

        And I’m puzzled by a new development: The way some posts+replies are being grouped such that one can only reply to the last reply in the series rather than to the original post.

  75. Danaa says:

    Chances are the comments feature is being modified/upgrade or is just partially down for maintenance. Something is definitely happening. Yesterday, for a time I was unable to post any comments at all and all the ‘reply’ buttons were dead. then today it’s back to what it was, with archives absent and only some ability to reply plus no green highlight of new comments.

    But I do agree with commenters here that some alert/information should be forthcoming from the site management. Especially as we know that there are powers who would like nothing more than to eliminate the comment section altogether. I doubt Phil would want to that, but who knows. Not communicating during a fund drive period is a somewhat curious way of letting people know their contributions matter. May be they don’t all that much?

  76. James North says:

    To all: I just spoke to Mrs. Phil Weiss about the problems with the new format. Phil himself is in transit somewhere in the New York area. She plans to remonstrate with him the second he is back in touch, so he can start to answer your various concerns about the new set-up.

  77. Peter in SF says:

    Thank you, Phil. Now if a commenter is banned, is that person’s profile also supposed to disappear, as has happened with fnlevit?

    The main page used to display the number of comments that have been posted on each article. I liked that; it showed that there were active conversations going on. Now the number is no longer there.

  78. pristine2 says:

    I’m brand new here, and I could not agree more with the principal objectives of the site. I’m also entirely comfortable with the rules of engagement — ie, the comments policy as it applies to what is written, and in what tone. The rules of civil discourse should of course apply. If someone is incapable of expressing passion without hatred, I don’t mind excluding them, no matter what their particular politics are.

    I was taken aback, however, and the clause in the user agreement that public comments belong to the website “in perpetuity.” That’s way too sweeping and you should re-think this approach, if you really want to elicit sustained and productive dialogue. As a journalist, I don’t mind at all contributing material directly to public domain, but I have to think twice before developing language that others may copy and sell. If you’re claiming blanket economic rights over commentary, you risk excluding virtually anyone who writes for a living, or at least constraining them from offering all that they can to the dialogue.

    All that said, there are precious few fora comfortably congregating Jews who are rationally critical of Israel, much less open skeptics of Zionism. Monitoring discussions between them and those who support Israel just as passionately can’t be an easy task. No matter what your comment policy, the existence of your web site in itself deserves kudos, and I hope it thrives.

    For what it is worth, I have a very caustic view of the Israeli state, irrespective of its “Zionist” origins and despite my Jewish heritage. While I find much to admire in the spirit of the Israeli people, among whom I count family and friends, I think the Zionist project was misguided from the get-go, and its entrenchment is mostly bad news for the Jewish people specifically. It’s certainly a disaster for the region, where the Nakba plays an ascendent role in the identity narratives not only of Palestinians, but of Muslims from Morocco to Pakistan.

    Israel cannot help but be a bad actor in the region. Every state in the middle east is, at least to some extent, compelled to act with malevolence to its neighbours, or to minority communities trapped within their own borders. Israel is no exception. It believes that it must meddle in regional affairs to survive, which is probably true. From the Israeli point of view, assassinating civilian Iranian physicists is a perfectly rational act.

    The time I spent in the country convinced me that the state itself is but a persistent echo of World War II, and the ethnic hostilities that defined it. It still functions largely as a colonial order, with Israeli capital and its richest citizenry seamlessly and bountifully integrated with the West, especially the United States.

    At the same time, it projects alarming military and strategic power from the very heart of the Islamic world. That power shouldn’t be seen solely as a fortified outpost of pro-American, Western civilization. Yes, it has a dynamic and productive service economy similar to some brights spots in the West, but Israel is, in fact, often quite rogue, with interests that are not aligned to those of the US, its principal benefactor. It benefited considerably from the Iraq war, for example, while the United States did not. Israel is an important source, and safe haven for, the most sophisticated international organised crime. It exempts itself from international treaties on nuclear material and arms, and has been less than forthcoming on everything from water to toxic waste disposal. Judged by value-neutral standards, and even ignoring the Palestinian “issue”, Israel gets low grades for transparency, diplomatic achievement and international fair play (as do most other states in the region).

    In other words, it should have about as much pull with Washington as Argentina, or Thailand. Instead, it wields a bizarrely disproportionate influence over US foreign policy. More and more Jews who have sovereign loyalty to the United States, and no direct loyalty to Israel, have a big problem with this.

    I find a cultural rapprochement between Israelis and Palestinians to be a highly unlikely prospect without a strong third party force on the scene. Militant, obscurantist Islam is ascendant, the mediating presence of Palestinian Christians has nearly evaporated, and the Israelis aren’t about to give up any land. They are, in fact, still acquiring it. Just ask any Palestinian landowner within the Israeli state how secure their property holdings are.

    In my view the only thing that could reconstruct Palestine, while allowing Israeli society to survive, is the original notion that sanctioned the Israeli project in the first place: formal international control over Jerusalem. It must be the first city with truly global sovereignty, with plenty of elite troops from the US, Russia and China, and plenty of international banking institutions. All Israeli settlements in the occupied territories would also have to fall under Palestinian control, and even the 67 borders will need pruning to ensure the contiguity and viability of a Palestinian state.

    The rump Israeli state should nonetheless be defensible, even if it is nowhere as big as the Zionists dream, and believe they have a divine right to. The new circumstances and reduced tensions would create plenty of new economic opportunities for the Israelis and everyone else involved.

    From the American perspective at least, I believe it is the right solution.

  79. miriam6 says:

    Please bring back the new comment- green line signifying thingy – it was a great way to sort new comments from the older ones.

    Bring back the green line!

  80. miriam6 says:

    I continue my solitary campaign on behalf of the return of the green line thingy.

    I am in my forties – I have to wear varifocal glasses these
    days in order to read properly !?! ( sob! )

    So please bring back the green line so I can access the new comments more easily!

    Please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  81. How come my first comment are still pending here?

    link to mondoweiss.net

    While other users comment shows up?

  82. ritzl says:

    PLEASE put the new comment markers back in. Hard enough for me to persevere past 20 comments or so as threads develop their content, but newbs or casual readers will very likely not follow-up after the first pass. If you don’t know the patterns and writers, the threads quickly become an undifferentiated and uninviting comment jungle. imho.

  83. ritzl says:

    Suggestions of the I-don’t-know-how-hard-it-would-be-but… variety:

    - Ability to tweet individual comments. Sometimes a comment just nails it or provides specific, standalone info. @MW would get credit and it would bring people to the whole article, but sometimes the whole article is not what I’m feeling at that point, or don’t know enough to share it with my name attached. This comment, by Sumud, link to mondoweiss.net is what made me think of this today. There are many other examples. Given the high level of the comments here, I think it would increase @MW exposure overall.

    - Ability to post [moderated] graphics with a certain donation level, and/or other criteria. Maps are my thing, but sometimes there’s a iconic pix or something that makes an immediate, theme-enhancing point that a link just doesn’t provide. Less work for the lurker. Again, more exposure, imho.

    Just thinking out loud…

    • Citizen says:

      Thanks for that input, ritzy. Yes, quite a few comments are worthy of their own tweets, and MW would still be the link in the tweet. One work around is to edit a normal tweet from a MW article and edit the headliner to reflect a really good comment.

  84. Talkback says:

    Please forgive me, if it has been allready mentioned. But most of the comments lack of a “reply button” which is very unfortunate, because only if I directly reply to someones someone’s comment, s/he can see it in her/his profile and vice versa.

  85. Again my comments show up many hours later and newer comments by other shows up before? Whats going on here?

  86. It would be great if the someone could respond to my questions that I have asked here.

    Another urge would be to update the comments faster, whats the point with commenting if comments shows up after several hours or not at all?

  87. Ecru says:

    Any chance of this comments reply glitch being sorted out?

    • ritzl says:

      Hi Ecru. It may not be a glitch as it is always below the fourth, response/nesting level. It may be a design, budgetary, moderation time, or mechanical limitation on discussion – i.e. something other than an oversight.

      Coupled with the demise of the “new” flag, it makes things pretty confusing, especially when a thread might be getting insightful and/or points refined. Though compared to a lot of other sites, four levels is pretty generous.

      The reason is known. Some explanation would be good. Hi Ho.

  88. Citizen says:

    Even if we accept your premise that Islam proponents are engaged as you say, we non Muslims object to Israel’s policies and conduct because they are not in accord with Western notions of human rights. America stands for equal rights for all humans, and separation of religion and state. Americans and the West generally, don’t like any religious proponents working for something else, whether to further Islamic regimes or Zionist Jewish regimes,

  89. puppies says:

    Which of your rules above is supposed to be violated when one invites a poster who calls different people “Antisemitic” or “Holocaust denier” without proof and the post inviting to provide definite proof is repeatedly censored?

      • puppies says:

        Wrong. Personal comments were not more intense than usual, and in fact were not even there in the last ones. 4 and 6 is pure bullshit: if you can’t see that you are selectively implementing your personal interpretation of a piddling regulation in order to stop the request for major slander to be documented, you’d be in the same situation as a cop ejecting arresting protesters for jaywalking in a street closed to traffic.
        Anyway, as already said, it’s your site. You can do whatever you wish with it. Just don’t try to use this kind of fig leaves.

  90. ckg says:

    May I suggest, as a way to enhance commenter satisfaction, to moderate and accept comments in chronological order on a given thread. I can understand why Hostage may get immediate posting, but some of the trolls do too, while others seem to wait for hours on the same thread.

  91. ckg says:

    I am sorry if my comment

    I see now that Clinton gave a speech to the AJC on March 21. AJC vice president Herb London provided her with talking points on BDS beforehand. Afterwards London was incensed that she did not say one word about BDS in her speech.

    was offensive enough to delay moderating for 8 hours now and counting while a dozen others, including a troll, appeared earlier in the thread. I will have to look more closely at the moderating policy to determine my offense.

    • it’s probably just buried back there somewhere. why not put a note under it that will land on top of the pile. i wouldn’t even know what thread it’s on by that description. if you think someone is willfully skipping your comment, you’re head tripping.

  92. ckg says:

    Mondoweiss–It’s not that difficult. Just moderate the comments in CHRONOLOGICAL order on each thread.

    • comments are not listed on the threads in chronological order nor are they generally moderated on the threads, they roll in on a back page top to bottom, the new ones landing on the top. which is why yours was the first one i saw when i opened the page. and if there are 60 plus comments stacked up and i can clear ten in the time it takes me to clear one long one, i might skip over the long one. it’s just not an orderly thing. and if we want order they should hire someone to work systematically, which is obviously not a priority.

  93. ckg says:

    Annie, I apologize for my anger. I know the staff at MW are working around the clock. And your work is greatly appreciated.

  94. Mayhem says:

    How long are articles now being kept open for comments? Seems like just a few days before comments are closed.

  95. ritzl says:

    The “Recent Comments” crawler isn’t working…

  96. Ellen says:

    It looks like the updating of comments to the left is not working…..or has this site gone dead for two days?

    Ot is it my tablet?

  97. jon s says:

    It’s still frozen.

  98. jon s says:

    I recently posted a comment which didn’t pass moderation, and I’m rather mystified.
    On the “Michael Oren…” thread there was a discussion of the Mohammad al-Dura case.
    I posted a comment with a link to a German TV documentary which is available on Youtube. My comment didn’t include offensive language, Holocaust denial, Naqba denial, 9/11 conspiracies or any other violation of comments policy. The docunentary I linked to is sober and well-made, presents the different sides (including all major “players” in the case) and raises serious questions. I really don’t understand why it was shot down.

    • it was not a german documentary. the youtube page was an org called ‘israel productions’ or something like that.i googled the name and it leads to a propaganda org that produces pro israel videos. try inserting it again without trying to pass it off as ‘german’. yes it did run on german tv, but unless there’s some evidence ‘israel productions’ is a german production company it is misrepresented and not a ‘german’ documentary. it’s like trying to post a memri clip and claiming it’s a palestinian video.

      ps, i didn’t bother watching the film for this reason. if you post it again i might decide to check it for content. we’re not required to publish propaganda films, videos purposely produced to spread lies. just saying.

    • Woody Tanaka says:

      If it related to Michael Oren and the Mohammad al-Dura murder, I would be willing to bet it constituted Nakba denial.

  99. jon s says:

    Annie, it is a German tv documentary, as can be seen from the opening titles. As a matter of fact I first saw it in the German original but since I’m not fluent in German I looked for a version with English subtitles, and this is the one I found.

    • jon s says:

      Perhaps the Mondoweiss commenters who are fluent in German can find the original version, and confirm that it’s a German TV production.

      Incidentally, why is the “recent comments” feature frozen again?

Leave a Reply