Ben White complains about censorship on Philip Weiss’ blog

So here’s the story. Jonathan Hoffman is the Vice-President of the Zionist Federation in the UK. Last month he wrote on Harry’s Place of his experiences at Ben White’s book launch in the Houses of Parliament. At the event, Hoffman noted that his friend with a Jewish name had been roundly booed, and he was told that the Nazis ‘should have finished the job.’ In addition, Jonathan Hoffman wrote a review on the American Jewish Committee’s blog Z-Word, in which he took White to task for, among other things, including doctored Ben Gurion quotes and ignoring Nelson Mandela’s own rejection of the Israel-South Africa apartheid analogy.

Ben White had another book launch promoted by War on Want last week. War on Want banned Hoffman from the meeting, which turned out to be a rather depressing affair.

Seemingly affected by the criticism of the negative book review, Ben White posted a response to Hoffman on his blog, and brought it to the attention of ModernityBlog and Z-Word. Z-Word refused to publish his comment, with Ben Cohen explaining:

‘White needs to understand that the ban on Jonathan Hoffman attending the launch of his ridiculous excuse for a book means that he is, as a direct consequence, not welcome here.’

Anti-Zionist blogger Philip Weiss then complained that ‘American Jewish C’tee enjoys slagging off critics, then refusing them a platform to respond.’ Weiss included a comment from Ben White in the main body of the article, complaining:

‘So the ‘range of comments’ includes the claim that I am the ‘reincarnation of Goebbels’, but not my link to a response piece which points out that Z-Word have published untruths about a published work. ‘

Jonathan Hoffman has since published a response to White on Z-Word, noting:

‘Turning to White’s comments on my review, there are several points which he concedes, either explicitly or implicitly.’

But let’s ignore that for now. According to Ben White and Philip Weiss, the AJC refuses its critics ‘a platform to respond.’ You’d think, judging by that, that Ben White’s blog would be an ocean of free speech. Not exactly. You will notice that comments are off.

Ben White received plenty of negative comments for a blog post in which he claimed that the arrest of antisemites in New York threatening to blow up a synagogue was ‘a fully controlled threat to our freedoms.’ Ben White, who claims to understand why some people are antisemites, could not understand why the U.S. government would want to arrest antisemites planning antisemitic terrorist attacks. I took him to task for this on Harry’s Place, prompting people to leave comments on his blog. White refused to answer questions about this, with one commenter asking him to specify the freedoms threatened by these arrests. White didn’t respond.

A few weeks later, on his blog, White criticised a Harry’s Place article on antisemitism at UNISON. (Like the NYC synagogue piece, White was criticising those who falsely cry ‘antisemitism’. One wonders if White is capable of writing about antisemitism without claiming to understand it or denying clear examples of its outworkings.) As you can see by the comments on both Ben White’s blog and Harry’s Place under those articles, White deleted, edited and restored comments from his critics, whilst failing to respond the questions asked of him and his ethics. A few weeks later, White turned off the comments option on his blog pieces.

A commenter at Harry’s Place recently noted:

Getting back on topic…
Ben White is the administrator for the ”Israeli Apartheid: A Beginner’s Guide” Facebook group at
Until about 15 minutes ao it was an open group which anybody could join, so I did. I took the liberty of posting links to Jonathan’s article on each of the threads on the site. Within minutes, my posts had been deleted, I had been expelled from the group, and it is now a closed group.
I have requested to join the group and await Ben’s response with interest!

Last week, White had an article at The Guardian’s Comment Is Free (also published in the Tehran Times) in which he argued that the Israeli security fence (or as he prefers “Israel’s separation wall”) should be dismantled (not, interestingly, moved back to the Green Line, as most critics of the fence would prefer). As Modernity noted twice, many critical comments on Ben White’s article were censored for no good reason. We heard no complaint from Ben White.

So to summarise: Ben White has edited, deleted, and then restored comments on his own blog. He has turned comments off for his own blog. If you leave a critical comment on one of his articles on Comment Is Free, it may go into moderation and/or be deleted. And now he is complaining on Philip Weiss’ blog about other people censoring his comments!

Perhaps Philip Weiss was unaware of Ben White’s own censoring of comments, which would explain the Mondoweiss article accusing the AJC of censorship. Otherwise, what point was Weiss really trying to make?



Filed under apartheid analogy, censorship

11 responses to “Ben White complains about censorship on Philip Weiss’ blog

  1. Maxwell

    Great piece.

    It’s always the same with these people.

    It’s called ‘Hypocrisy’

  2. Dooley

    ha ha ha very good post Seismic!

  3. Pingback: More Damn Lies About Israeli “Apartheid” at Z-Word Blog

  4. modernityblog

    As a member of the ,that’s Israeli Apartheid: A Beginner’s Guide fan club on Facebook, I can confirm that comments have been switched off.

    So White is quite happy to limit the freedom of speech of others, when it suits him.

  5. zkharya

    banning Ben White’s comments is a mistake.

  6. modernityblog

    It was NOT banning, it was insisting that he apologize first.

    Bloggers are NOT compelled to put forward the views of others, if they do then it is their choice. That is a recognized convention in blogging.

    You decide the moderation policy of your own blog, no one else does.

    I allowed Ben White to post on my blog, the Z blog didn’t, in THIS particular instance, which is fair enough.

    White on the other hand, deletes comments, goes along with banning people from his meeting (he could have refused to speak unless Jonathan Hoffman was allowed in, or White could have express REAL regret at the banning, in neither case did he), etc.

    So White’s whining now is just so much hypocrisy.

  7. seismicshock

    I agree with Modernity, White is similarly welcome to comment here should he choose to, however White & Weiss’ article omits the broader context of the debacle, which I hope this piece provides.

  8. modernityblog

    Damn, there was me about to ask a question on Ben White’s blog,

    But, you’ve guessed it, I can’t, because comments are turned off completed. Funny that!

    More a case of “Do as I say, not as I do”?

  9. Pingback: Ben White’s questionable book « Engage – the anti-racist campaign against antisemitism

  10. Hi,
    I have viewed this site its really worth for best traveling deals.

  11. Pingback: Ben White, David Irving, An Israeli And Oxbridge Types. « ModernityBlog

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s