Tuesday, January 02, 2007
An article about The Left and Islam appears on Melbourne Indymedia. A comment to the post asks:
[I] query the authenticity of this article as i cant find it reproduced anywhere apart from indymediaIt appears that even Indymedia supporters don't regard it as a worthwhile primary source. Gee I wonder why?
Secondly: Its in an incorrect assumption that if someone posts on Indymedia that makes them a supporter.
Heres hoping your journalistic and investigative skills improve in 2007!
You continue to demonstrate that you are a world-class idiot.
I have quoted a comment on the Melbourne Indymedia post.
It is that person who needed to look around for a past occurrence of the article, not me.
Whether or not it appeared elsewhere is irrelevant. All I said - and the point still stands - is that Indymedia types don't regard it as a worthwhile primary source.
Go and ask a friend to read my article to you. Perhaps they can explain it slowly.
Get a friend to read my original comment out to you......
For example a Holocaust denier site is quoted by a number of contributors as somehow being an authority on matters relating to Jewish people.
In what might be called real news reporting organisations such as the BBC or AP this would never be tolerated and it shouldn't be on Indymedia either. Just because a story or report has been reported elsewhere first does not make it real. Indeed part of what makes the whole 9/11 movement so dubious is the their repeated habit of quoting each other as 'proof' of their ideas.
Indymedia MUST be an outlet for grass routes reporting of real events and indeed when we started it was that however now as with so many good ideas it has been hijacked by the minority to the detriment of thr majority.
A story so full of mistakes, lies and innacuracies as to make it a contender for the Booker prize for fiction and for its "proof", links to such websites as timetowakeup.net which even by the standards of the so called truth movement is way off the screen.
Despite a number of people posting to illustrate the garbage of the post it has been allowed to reamin, later posts have been hidden so we can safely assume it has been read by an Indymedia UK moderator.
Why are they leaving up this obvious rubbish then ? Well perhaps the clue is in a quote a quarter of the way into the diatribe,
"Zionist controlled... corporate media which is an un-elected de facto 4th branch of government"
Yes that's right it's our old friends the Jews again.
It seems Indymedia UK will allow just about any piece of obvious nonsense to be on the site as long as it includes the obligitory Jew hater comment !
In the meantime two articles written by black activist in Zimbabwe which document the arrest of 16290 mine workers in a continuation of Operation Murambatsvina which has so far displaced 2.4 million people in Zimbabwe have both been hidden. Robert Mugabe of course being one of those political leaders who is above critical comment as far as Indymedia UK is concerned.
I wonder if a story about 16290 Palestinians being arrested would have been hidden ?
Indymedia would have folded a long time ago had it been run by the knee-jerk reactionaries who run this site.
No doubt you were put off by the last line of that comment you censored. Its actually your line...
I'll reiterate the point - not everyone who posts on Indy7media supports it. Raul/Ex IMCer/Indymedia GB/IMC Monitoring Team is a classic example of a prolific poster who does not support the site....
If you keep censoring me I might have to set up a site to watch the watcher......
After all, you're all in favour of people having a say as long as they're civil, right?
Even though you're generally pretty rude.
Mr. Censor.... ;)
No "Sam", it failed to make it through moderation while I was asleep overnight, or had better things to do, like work.
If comments are civil, and mildly on topic, I take no exception to them. They do get approved, as soon as I have a chance. Even if they are completely stupid.
Speaking of which, your latest is now visible, as is your most recent comment citing censorship. You continue to look foolish.