User:Bobfrombrockley/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Working Definition:[edit]

https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=SLMGmSbQm4EC&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=%22working+definition+of+antisemitism%22&ots=dp1M2HsQ2z&sig=vkPjNH2Rg5cCdi1MLGX7hXPPb5M#v=onepage&q=%22working%20definition%20of%20antisemitism%22&f=false https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Parliamentary+Inquiry+into+Antisemitism+in+Canad&oq=Parliamentary+Inquiry++into+Antisemitism+in+Canad&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Contemporary+Global+Antisemitism+report+to+Congress&oq=Contemporary+Global+Antisemitism+report+to+Congress&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=GmVKDQAAQBAJ&pg=PA213&lpg=PA213&dq=Alexander+Pollak+antisemitism&source=bl&ots=qOAx0AnYok&sig=8Nnro2FjcW8UHO3N8B9ntyVgMaU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwji1sH2oa7dAhXt4IUKHQMrCL8Q6AEwCHoECAMQAQ#v=onepage&q=pollak&f=false

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=GmVKDQAAQBAJ&dq=Alexander+Pollak+antisemitism&source=gbs_navlinks_s

https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=O-MoDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP9&dq=%22working+definition+of+antisemitism%22&ots=cqkgcQoreR&sig=xEivb0ZIqo8YH5DtiujLxKND5tc#v=onepage&q=%22working%20definition%20of%20antisemitism%22&f=false https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Anti-Zionism+as+Racism%3A+Campus+Anti-Semitism+and+the+Civil+Rights+Act+of+1964&oq=Anti-Zionism+as+Racism%3A+Campus+Anti-Semitism+and+the+Civil+Rights+Act+of+1964&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i61&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8


Syria/US relations[edit]

https://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/washington/10military.html?pagewanted=all&mtrref=en.wikipedia.org

http://213.251.145.96/cable/2009/03/09DAMASCUS179.html


Labour and antisemitism[edit]

https://www.jstor.org/stable/41806170?read-now=1&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

SWP comment[edit]

The following, apparently well-sourced, couple of sentences on major issues facing the party in 2013 has been edited out with the explanation "Removed outdated, now irrelevant speculation": It also formed an alliance with George Galloway and Respect, the dissolution of which in 2007 caused an internal crisis in the SWP. A more serious internal crisis emerged at the beginning of 2013 over allegations of rape and sexual assault made against a leading member of the party.[1][2] The SWP's handling of these accusations against the individual known as Comrade Delta led to a significant decline in the party's membership.[3] Additional reliable sources could be added easily if the current ones are insufficent.[4][5] The mainstream sourcing and significance for party membership (including the departure of several noteworthy members[6][7]) suggests this is noteworthy, as does on-going reporting[8][9][10][11] and several mainstream opinion pieces over the years.[12][13][14][15]

References

  1. ^ Muir, Hugh (29 July 2013). "Diary: Adieu, Comrade Delta. The SWP leader at the centre of sex abuse allegations departs". The Guardian.
  2. ^ Cohen, Nick (3 February 2013). "Why 'leftists revolutionaries' are not the best feminists". The Observer.
  3. ^ Platt, Edward (20 May 2014). "Comrades at war: the decline and fall of the Socialist Workers Party". New Statesman.)
  4. ^ Taylor, Jerome (2013-01-11). "Ranks of the Socialist Workers Party are split over handling of rape". The Independent. Retrieved 2020-06-15.
  5. ^ "Socialist Workers Party leadership under fire over rape kangaroo court". the Guardian. 2013-03-09. Retrieved 2020-06-15.
  6. ^ "David Widgery: instigator of Rock Against Racism". openDemocracy. 2017-10-11. Retrieved 2020-06-15.
  7. ^ "An Appreciation of Neil Davidson (1957-2020) - online socialist magazine". International Viewpoint. 2020-05-11. Retrieved 2020-06-15.
  8. ^ Brown, David; Manning, Jonathon (2014-05-17). "No sex please comrades, we're British". The Times. Retrieved 2020-06-15.
  9. ^ Bienkov, Adam (2016-10-17). "Jeremy Corbyn supporters demand he apologise to rape victims for 'laundering' SWP's reputation - Westminster". politics.co.uk. Retrieved 2020-06-15.
  10. ^ Smith, Saphora (2017-02-04). "Owen Jones blasts organisers of Saturday's anti-Trump march". Evening Standard. Retrieved 2020-06-15.
  11. ^ Hunter, Wiliam (2020-06-15). "Students warned to avoid anti-racist organisation linked to systemic cover-up of sexual abuse". Varsity Online. Retrieved 2020-06-15.
  12. ^ Jones, Owen (2013-01-20). "a movement on the Left". The Independent. Retrieved 2020-06-15.
  13. ^ "Does the hard-left have an 'old-fashioned misogyny' problem?". the Guardian. 2016-04-11. Retrieved 2020-06-15.
  14. ^ Qasim, Wail (2017-02-04). "I chose not to march against Donald Trump at the US Embassy in London today – here's why". The Independent. Retrieved 2020-06-15.
  15. ^ Jones, Morgan; Reily, Cason; Martin, Eleanor; Cooper, Reuben; Calder, Jade; Webb, Effie; Kayanja, Matthew; Healey, Isaac; Yosief, Dag; Shirreff, Lauren; Owen, Abi; Hewitt, Adam; Harrop, Thomas; Evans, Amy; Kayanja, Matthew (2019-01-26). "The Socialist Workers Party and Stand Up to Racism are no friends of the Left – The Oxford Student". The Oxford Student. Retrieved 2020-06-15.

The Canary[edit]

1/


  • Comment: I'm having a look at Google scholar to see what academics say about The Canary. It's difficult, because "the canary" is not a very easy search term so needs to be combined with other terms such as "media" and still takes time to find the references. I'm adding some of these to our article on the website. Here are the first few I've found:
    • General reputation for hyper-partisan reporting and sensationalism:
      • Leeds University political scientist Jonathan Dean wrote in the peer-reviewed Sage journal Politics in 2020 that "websites such as Evolve Politics, Skwawkbox and The Canary have aped a more tabloid style, with short, punchy headlines and an often rather sensationalised style of reporting. The Canary, in particular, has faced criticism for its highly partisan presentation of political news stories, with critics often deeming it symptomatic of the rise of so-called ‘fake news’".[1]
      • Three UK media studies scholars from three different universities in 2018 in New Media and Society: "In the fallout from the 2017 UK general election there was much discussion about the growth of sensationalism in online political news as a result of the popularity of new, ideologically-slanted news sites such as, for example, Breitbart UK and Westmonster on the right and the Canary and Evolvepolitics on the left."[2][3]
      • A 2018 Routledge book on new media and journalism by two journalism lecturers: "If there was a British equivalent of Breitbart it would be The Canary... It is a simplification to say hyperpartisan news is automatically fake news. What unites these sites is a commitment to report stories that they believe that mainstream media ignores. In this respect, they see a role of expanding media plurality and provide a platform for alternative voices. Kerry-Anne Mendoza, Canary editor, states the site's aims: 'Today, a handful of powerful moguls control our mainstream media. As such, its coverage is largely conservative. But we have created a truly independent and viable alternative. One that isn t afraid to challenge the status quo, to ask the hard questions, and to have an opinion.' (Canary n.d.) Their skilled use of social media optimisation when promoting stories on social media has meant their stories are often widely shared. In some respects they share the traditions of journalism, e.g. they usually seek to break exclusive stories and expand the public debate. But with a strong commitment to a particular political cause their reporting is by definition one sided."[4] (chapter 3)
    • Specific examples of misleading reporting:
      • Leicester Uni (and now Kings College London) scholar on digital media Daniel Allington, in the specialist Elsevier journal Discourse, Context & Media in 2018 gives an example of misleading reporting: "both the pro-Corbyn online tabloid The Canary and the website of the Israel-critical organisation, Jews for Justice for Palestinians, presented the research positively but reported it selectively in order to create the false impression that the finding was that only those on the political right were likely to be a problem for British Jews (see JFJFP, 2017, Micner, 2017). This was in effect a denial of racism."[5]
      • Labour Party scholar Tim Bale, professor of politics at Queen Mary University, wrote about the Portland Comms conspiracy theory: "McCluskey suggested that these sinister forces could be linked to the public relations firm Portland Communications – an organisation which he claimed had clear links with Tony Blair and the Labour right. This conspiracy theory was largely drawn from an article published on the pro-Corbyn website The Canary that (falsely, as it turned out) argued that the firm had been directly behind the attempted coup (see Topple, 2016). "[6] BobFromBrockley (talk) 15:44, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

2/

Black socialism[edit]

George W. Woodbey Hubert Harrison Claude McKay Williana Burroughs Chandler Owen A. Philip Randolph Frank Crosswaith Negro Labor Committee Richard B. Moore Wilfred Adolphus Domingo George Schuyler Ella Baker Orval Faubus Combahee River Collective Bernice Johnson Reagon

[1]

References

  1. ^ Megan Ming Francis (2017-01-24). "Ida B. Wells and the Economics of Racial Violence". Items. Social Sciences Research Council. Retrieved 2021-10-28.

Jimmy Dore[edit]

[Stranded content:] In 2021, a conspiracy theory which falsely claims that Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez lied about her past employment as a bartender originated on The Jimmy Dore Show. In an interview with Paula Jean Swearengin, Swearengin incorrectly claimed that Ocasio-Cortez was actually the co-owner of the bar she worked at. Following Dore's video, this claim spread on social media and was repeated by other political YouTubers.[1]

References

  1. ^ "Bizarre conspiracy claims AOC secretly owns famous bar". The Daily Dot. 2021-07-26. Retrieved 2021-08-12.

CounterPunch[edit]

We can find lots of reliable sources, including major scholars of antisemitism, describing at as using dog whistle antisemitism or engaging in the denial and minimisation of antisemitism, including using such terms to describe the editors' own positions and those of books it has published (e.g. by Michael Neumann or Cockburn and St Clair) as well as op eds.[1][2][3][4] The question is whether this is enough to deprecate. These are just opinion pieces that we shouldn't use for facts anyway and which would not likely be due as this isn't a reliable source. But if there is a consist editorial policy to promote (or even deny) antisemitism that might push into deprecation territory. BobFromBrockley (talk) 11:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Chanes, Jerome (2004). "Review essay: What's new and what's not about the new antisemitism". Jewish Political Studies Review. 16 (1/2). Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs: 111–124. ISSN 0792-335X. JSTOR 25834592. Retrieved 2022-01-17. Finally, there is Alexander Cockburn. What has not already been said about Cockburn, a fine wordsmith, a sharp polemicist - and, frankly, an intractable foe of Jewish interests? The tropes of "the Israel lobby" resonate throughout The Politics of Anti- Semitism, a collection of essays (co-edited by Jeffrey St. Clair), that culminate in a self-serving complaint by Cockburn himself ("My life as an 'Anti-Semite'") in which he offers his definition of antisemitism: "to have written an item that pisses off someone at The New Republic. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)
  2. ^ Sina Arnold & Blair Taylor (2019). "Antisemitism and the Left: Confronting an Invisible Racism". Journal of Social Justice. 9. ISSN 2164-7100. Retrieved 2022-01-17. A textbook example of downplaying is the book The Politics of AntiSemitism (Cockburn and St. Clair 2002). Widely available in left bookstores, where it is often the only book on the subject, it clearly announces its intention from the first page: "I think we should almost never take antisemitism seriously," and adding, "…maybe we should have some fun with it" (p. 1). On the rare occasion antisemitism is acknowledged to exist, it is trivialized: "Undoubtedly there is genuine antisemitism in the Arab world: the distribution of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the myths about stealing the blood of gentile babies. This is utterly inexcusable. So was your failure to answer Aunt Bee's last letter" (Cockburn and St. Clair 2002: 7). Ten out of the eighteen chapters address not antisemitism, but its "misuse" by groups who accuse pro-Palestinian activists of it. Not one contribution deals with the historical background of antisemitism in general, or the left in particular. Instead it assumes antisemitism is an irrelevant issue, especially in contrast to Islamophobia. This is perhaps unsurprising given the book is co-published by Counterpunch, an ostensibly left magazine that has given space to white nationalists and antisemites including Alison Weir, Israel Shamir, Paul Craig Roberts, Eric Walburg, and Gilad Atzmon (Levick 2002, Wolfe 2016). What is more surprising is that left authors and publishers would produce a book whose primary function is to downplay and deny the existence of antisemitism. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)
  3. ^ Hirsh, David (2007). "Anti-Zionism and Antisemitism: Cosmopolitan Reflections" (PDF). Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Antisemitism (YIISA) Occasional Papers. Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Antisemitism. Retrieved 2022-01-17. Michael Neumann, a philosophy professor at Trent University in Canada, is an extreme example of one who refuses to take political responsibility for the consequences of his anti-Zionism. He outlines his approach to the question in an email exchange with an antisemitic group (Jewish Tribal Review 2002). They ask him whether he thinks that their website is antisemitic. He replies "Um, yes, I do, but I don't get bent out of shape about it. I know you're site and it's brilliantly done. Maybe I should say that I'm not quite sure whether you guys are antisemitic in the 'bad' sense or not…. [I]n this world, your material, and to a lesser extent mine, is a gift to neo-Nazis and racists of all sorts. Unlike most people in my political niche, this doesn't alarm me: there are far more serious problems to worry about…. [O]f course you are not the least bit responsible for how others use your site."11 This discussion occurred five months after Neumann (2002) had published a piece entitled 'What is Antisemitism?' in which he argued that antisemitism is trivial compared to other racisms and that it is understandable that Israeli crimes result in a hatred of Jews in general. Here are some quotes from this piece by Neumann which illustrate a willful and showy refusal by somebody who considers himself to be an antiracist, to take antisemitism seriously
  4. ^ Spencer Sunshine (2019). "Looking Left at Antisemitism" (PDF). Journal of Social Justice. Vol. 9. The anti-Zionist activist Michael Neumann did not deny the reality of antisemitism but rather justified it in the well-known anthology The Politics of Anti-Semitism, co-published by the anarchist AK Press and CounterPunch, the latter of which has published antisemitic writers for many years. {{cite journal}}: |volume= has extra text (help); Text "ISSN: 2164-7100" ignored (help)
  • Comment. I still haven't !voted and am still unsure how to. The argument for deprecation is that There are two arguments I can see against deprecation. First, several editors have argued that CP is effectively a SPS: an essentially un-edited platform for hosting opinions, where we should take each citation on a case by case basis. I'm not convinced by this argument, as it doesn't publish just anything; it publishes material which fits with its editorial worldview, i.e. contrarian/muckraking/anti-establishment, whether from the left (mainly) or from the libertarian/populist/paleocon right. I think this means it has an active preference for material which might include a conspiracy theory content. Second, some editors have pointed out that it publishes a significant number of contributions from notable authors, some of whom are experts in their fields. Some of this content is definitely DUE for inclusion in our articles, and a couple of editors have given strong evidence here of USEBYOTHERS showing this. I find this convincing, which is why I !voted 3+ rather than 4 in the original RfC. (Of course, not all of the apparent USEBYOTHERS is a "citation" in the strict sense. For example, among the citations Zero has listed above is Anthony Julius, Trials of the Diaspora, Oxford Univ Press, which cites Oren Ben-Dor, ‘The silencing of Oren Ben-Dor’, Counterpunch, 15–16 March 2008, but this turns out to be Julius sharply criticising Ben-Dor as a Holocaust denier and antisemite. Similarly, among the citations on JStor are examples of writers identifying their edited collection The Politics of Anti- Semitism or articles by Tariq Ali among others as antisemitic.[1] Nonetheless, it's undeniable there are CounterPunch articles taken seriously by serious sources.) Here, the question would be the extent to which being deprecated enables careful use of these more noteworthy CounterPunch articles, or if it precludes it and therefore would be inappropriate. I would urge the closer to either keep it deprecated but make it clear that some exceptions should be made for noteworthy (i.e. referred to by RSs) contributions, particularly those by relevant experts, or to rule it generally unreliable, but make it clear that a large amount of content goes beyond normal general unreliability into dangerous disinformation territory so more care should be taken than with typical generally unreliable sources.

References

  1. ^ Ben-Rafael, Eliezer (2017). "Belgian Jews and Neo-Antisemitism". Contemporary Jewry. 37 (2). Springer: 275–293. ISSN 18765165 01471694, 18765165. JSTOR 26346554. Retrieved 2022-02-01. {{cite journal}}: Check |issn= value (help)

Grayzone[edit]

Coda Story "far-left news site"; Washington Post "far-left media outlet"; Diplomat "far-left website"; Unherd "far-Left news site" (this is an opinion article on a contrarian opinion site - I would avoid using); Telegraph "controversial far-left news website", Irish Times "far-left website"; Times "far-left website"; MMFA "Far-left conspiracy theory outlet"; Telex "a far-left news website noted for pushing conspiracy theories, ... best known for its support of authoritarian regimes, denial of the Uyghur genocide, and an explicitly pro-Kremlin perspective on Russian events"; WNG "a far-left news site founded by Max Blumenthal that positions itself against U.S. interventionist foreign policy. The site also supports the Assad regime in Syria, questioning accusations of the Syrian president’s abuses; backs Venezuela’s dictator Nicolas Maduro; and claims Hong Kong’s pro-democracy protesters are backed by the CIA"; Jewish Chronicle "known for its pro-Kremlin editorial line and its support for the government of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, and has published content denying that the Syrian government used chemical weapons against civilians"

Katchanovski[edit]

Deleted refs to check.[1][2][3][4][5][6]

References

  1. ^ Taras Kuzio (2017-04-11). "Umland needs a more balanced approach". New Eastern Europe. Retrieved 2022-06-19.
  2. ^ Kuzio, Taras (2019-01-29). "Ukraine "experts" in the West and Putin's military aggression: a new academic "orientalism"?". Головна сторінка eKMAIR (in Latin). Retrieved 2022-06-19. ([pdf https://www.cicerofoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/Kuzio_Western_Experts_on_Russian_Aggression_Ukraine.pdf])
  3. ^ Serhiy Kvit (2019-06-13). "Ukraine in the struggle for independence in the age of post-truth". KyivPost. Retrieved 2022-06-19.
  4. ^ Echols, William; Yarst, Nik (2019-07-15). "Vladimir Putin Speaks with Oliver Stone: New Interview - Old False Claims". Polygraph.info. Retrieved 2022-06-19.
  5. ^ Vaux, Pierre (2019-07-14). "Oliver Stone's Latest Piece of Pro-Putin Propaganda May Be His Most Shameless Move Yet". The Daily Beast. Archived from the original on 2019-07-14. Retrieved 2022-06-19. The other "stars" listed on the film's IMDB page are Ivan Katchanovski, an academic promoting conspiracy theories claiming that the protesters shot dead on the Maidan in 2014 were the victims of a "false flag" operation
  6. ^ "What Really Happened in Ukraine in 2014—and Since Then". The Bulwark. 2022-04-13. Retrieved 2022-06-19.

Ukrainian journalists[edit]

References

  1. ^ a b "Open letter to media professionals who cover Russia's invasion of Ukraine ". Комiсiя з журналiстської етики (in Ukrainian). 23 March 2022. Retrieved 16 December 2022.


SCW belligerents[edit]

Pro-Assad:

References

  1. ^ "Analysis: A revolution is taking place in Syria's Palestinian camps". politics.co.uk. Archived from the original on 12 June 2018. Retrieved 11 May 2016.
  2. ^ "News Update 5-11-15: Reports of Amal Movement sending fighters to Syria". Syria Direct. 11 May 2015. Retrieved 27 June 2016.
  3. ^ "بعد نفي مشاركتها بمعركة القلمون.. تساؤلات حول توريط 'حركة أمل' في المستنقع السوري!". Retrieved 28 July 2018.
  4. ^ "حركة أمل تنفي اشتراكها مع حزب الله في الحرب السورية". Retrieved 28 July 2018.
  5. ^ "Syria rebels clash with army, Palestinian fighters". Agence France-Presse. 31 October 2012.
  6. ^ "Overview of some pro-Assad Militias". Syria Comment. Archived from the original on 10 August 2016. Retrieved 25 October 2015.
  7. ^ "Quwat al-Jalil: A Pro-Assad Palestinian Syrian Militia". 23 December 2015.
  8. ^ Racha Abi Haidar (12 February 2014). "The Deal in Yarmouk: End of the Tragedy or Empty Words?". Al Akhbar. Retrieved 14 February 2014.
  9. ^ "Palestinians in Syria Are Reluctantly Drawn Into Vortex of Uprising". The New York Times. 30 June 2012. Retrieved 5 October 2014.
  10. ^ "Syrian war widens Sunni-Shia schism as foreign jihadis join fight for shrines". The Guardian. 4 June 2013. Archived from the original on 4 June 2013. Retrieved 7 June 2013.
  11. ^ "IAF strikes in Syria, kills rocket launchers". Ynetnews. 21 August 2015.
  12. ^ Phillip Smyth (8 March 2016). "How Iran Is Building Its Syrian Hezbollah". The Washington Institute. Retrieved 17 September 2016.
  13. ^ "Iran mourns 7 Afghans killed fighting for Damascus ally". Daily Star Lebanon. Retrieved 7 May 2015.
  14. ^ "IRGC officers killed in Palmyra | FDD's Long War Journal". www.longwarjournal.org. 15 December 2016.
  15. ^ "The Zainabiyoun Brigade: A Pakistani Shiite Militia Amid the Syrian Conflict". Jamestown Foundation. Retrieved 28 July 2016.
  16. ^ Phillip Smyth (13 January 2014). "Hizballah Cavalcade: Faylak Wa'ad al-Sadiq: The Repackaging of an Iraqi "Special Group" for Syria".
  17. ^ "Syrian tribal leader Nawaf al-Bashir rejoins Assad regime after years of supporting rebels – ARA News". 5 February 2017. Archived from the original on 26 June 2017. Retrieved 27 June 2017.
  18. ^ "Egypt sends 150 troops to Syria to 'fight for Assad'". TheNewArab.
  19. ^ "Egypt sends forces to Syria for Assad regime". AA. 30 July 2020.
  20. ^ "Have Egyptian Troops Joined Iran-Backed Forces in Syria?". IranWire | خانه.
  21. ^ "Egypt's Sisi expresses support for Syria's military". al-Jazeera. 23 November 2016.
  22. ^ Kynfield, Ben. "Egypt shifts to open support for Assad regime in Syrian civil war". Jerusalem Post.

Annie Machon[edit]

Engdahl[edit]

He has been described by James Kirchick in Time magazine as being a "crank 'historian",[1] by the Genetic Literacy Project as a "conspiracy theorist",[2] and by the Centre for the Analysis of the Radical Right (CARR) as a "LaRouchite fascist" and "Holocaust denier",[3] CARR has documented his close connections to the conspiracy theory organisation GlobalResearch, the far-right Lyndon LaRouche movement and Alexander Dugin's Eurasianist movement.[3]

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference Kirchick was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ "Viewpoint: Depopulation conspiracy debunked. Western billionaires aren't using GMOs to control Africa's food supply". Genetic Literacy Project. 2020-12-18. Retrieved 2021-07-09.
  3. ^ a b Bevensee, Emmi (2020-09-25). "How COVID and Syria Conspiracy Theories Introduce Fascism to the Left Part 3: The Red-Brown Media Spectrum – Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right". Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right – Serious Issue. Serious Analysis. Retrieved 2021-07-09.

Maram Susli[edit]

WP:ABOUTSELF from LinkedIn (i.e. usable for "uncontroversial self-description.":[7]

  • She has contributed to publications such as the New Eastern Outlook and media outlets including RT, Press TV, and Al Mayadeen. Susli has appeared as a guest on Satellite News channels France24, SkyNews, Al Mayadeen, Indus News as well as George Galloway’s Mother of all talk shows
  • Conference contributions listed:
    • World Online Conference on Multipolarity (April 29, 2023)
    • 4th Western Australia Computational Chemistry Conference (December 2-3 2021)
    • Schiller Institute Conference (March 20 2021)
    • 2nd Western Australia Computational Chemistry Conference (November 13, 2019)
    • Internationale Friedenspolitik Kongress Brandherd Syrien (October 22 2016)
    • Kongress Verteidiger Europas Forum Linz (October 28 2016)

Freelance gigs listed:

    • Sputnik, Al-Mayadeen, GlobalResearch, New Eastern Outlook

Monbiot, George (15 November 2017). "A lesson from Syria: it's crucial not to fuel far-right conspiracy theories". the Guardian. Retrieved 7 November 2023. (WP:RSOPINION)

  • Postol and Susli both appeared on a podcast run by the Holocaust “revisionist” Ryan Dawson

Carlston, Morgan (18 February 2016). "Don't Doubt the Iron Dome". bellingcat. Retrieved 7 November 2023.

  • Even though there appears to be mainstream acceptance of Postol’s criticism, he also has affiliations with fringe individuals, appearing in YouTube videos with 9/11 conspiracy theorist Ryan Dawson, and (along with Richard Lloyd) assisting Assad propagandist Maram Susli in her attempts to disprove allegations of Syrian President Assad’s alleged use of chemical weapons in August 2013. Both also assisted Seymour Hersh in his widely criticized Ghouta articles. When questioned over Susli’s alleged Holocaust denial, Postol said “When I got statements from outside people saying she was a Holocaust denier, quite frankly I wasn’t going to ask her”.

Holt, Jared (30 October 2019). "Angelo John Gage Spreads Hate with a Twitter Blue-Check". Right Wing Watch. Retrieved 7 November 2023.

  • On his YouTube channel, Gage has hosted anti-Semitic pundits and white nationalist pundits, including E. Michael Jones, Jean-François Gariépy, Kevin MacDonald, Adam Green, Ryan Dawson, and Tomislav Sunić, and conspiracy theorist Maram Susli.

Burley, Shane (2022-10-25). No Pasaran: Antifascist Dispatches from a World in Crisis. AK Press. ISBN 1-84935-483-9.

  • Susli herself has far right sympathies, appearing on podcasts hosted by [David] Duke and having been interviewed by [Richard] Spencer and Lana Lokteff.

Guckert, Élie (21 August 2020). "Le massacre chimique de la Ghouta, cas d'école du conspirationnisme pro-Assad". Conspiracy Watch (in French). Retrieved 7 November 2023. (considered RS by fr.wikipedia)

  • Dans une interview accordée au complotiste Ryan Dawson en 2014 au sujet de la jeune blogueuse [Susli], le chercheur du MIT [Postol] lâche sans sourciller : « Je savais qu’elle était chimiste car je la suivais sur Twitter. Je pouvais voir à sa voix qu’elle était une chimiste aguerrie ».
  • Higgins, Eliot (2021-05-27). We Are Bellingcat. London Oxford New York New Delhi Sydney: Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 1-5266-4506-8.
  • Espousing baseless theories about 911 and more, [Susli] has appeared on the podcast of former KKK leader David Duke as well as that of Ryan Dawson, who denies many aspects of the Holocaust, calling the gas chambers 'extraordinary bullshit'

Fanon[edit]

Herman[edit]

By Ear:[edit]

  • Sophal Ear (2009). "Review of Dependent Communities: Aid and Politics in Cambodia and East Timor by Caroline Hughes". Contemporary Southeast Asia. 31 (2). ISEAS - Yusof Ishak Institute: 360–362. ISSN 0129-797X. JSTOR 41487391. Retrieved 4 January 2024.</ref>

    This is the first book to attempt a comparison of Cambodia and Timor-Leste (East Timor) since Noam Chomsky's and Edward Herman's duets After the Cataclysm: Postwar Indochina and the Reconstruction of Imperial Ideology (South End Press 1979) and Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (Pantheon Books 1988), neither of which were dedicated studies of comparative analysis nor particularly notable for their objectivity.

Cites Ear and Herman:[edit]

  • Tallyn Gray Justice and transition in Cambodia 1979-2014: process, meaning and narrative PhD thesis Westminster Law School, 2014

    The earliest document readers may have encountered in this debate is a review article by Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman for the Nation in 1977. It concerns three books: [Barron and Paul]'s Murder of a Gentle Land: the Untold Story of a Communist Genocide in Cambodia; [Ponchaud's] Cambodia: Year Zero; and [Hildebrand and Porter’s] Cambodia: Starvation and Revolution.... Rather than investigating the substantive allegations of genocide made by the authors they criticize, Chomsky and Herman use their review to discuss the perceived ideological bias of western media against communist/socialist regimes. Indeed Hildebrand and Porter’s conclusion... chimes with the view Chomsky and Herman reiterate in Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media - that anti-communist bias in the western media manipulates, distorts and suppresses information to suit capitalist interests. To that end, tales of communist atrocities serve to discredit leftist ideas. Chomsky and Herman state they do ‘not pretend to know where the truth lies amidst these sharply conflicting assessments.’ However, they denigrate Barron and Paul without independently verifying the facts, and are critical of the ‘extreme unreliability of refugee reports’ and the interviews with KR survivors by Ponchaud, Barron and Paul. The fact that Hildebrand and Porter are entirely uncritical of the DK regime appears to escape their notice...

Hildebrand and Porter and Chomsky and Herman were, along with Laura Summers, Malcolm Caldwell and Ben Kiernan (who later changed his mind), part of a group committed ideologically to pro-revolutionary narratives focused on anti-colonialism, anti-imperialism and the superiority of communism/ socialism . DK survivor Sophal Ear states, ‘They were so caught-up in the idea of a peasant revolution that they did not stop and ask the peasants themselves how they liked the ride.’35 Developing a term coined by Michael Vickery , Sophal Ear refers to this group’s narrative as the ‘Standard Total Academic View’. They are ‘standard’ in the sense of mainstream in their generation of scholars or journalists in reputable left-leaning publications. (More seasoned scholars such as David Chandler were of the previous generation, not part of STAV.) Historians are rightly critical of the way pre-KR Cambodia was popularly portrayed as ‘ a gentle land’ of peaceful Buddhists, ‘paradise,’ ‘a fairy tale kingdom’ of happy peasants - an image Sihanouk deliberately cultivated. 38 Yet the STAV scholars created an equally simplistic fiction, constructing the KR in ‘romantic’ terms as brave 1789-style revolutionaries battling the encroachment of American imperialism.

  • Gunn, Geoffrey (9 October 2023). "Cambodia Watching Down Under: A Thirty-Year Retrospective". Asian Review Vol. 36 No. 1 (2023): January-June 2023. Retrieved 4 January 2024. {{cite journal}}: More than one of |website= and |journal= specified (help)

    Writing in an unpublished University of California honors dissertation (albeit given an extra half-life with the advent of digitization), as Sophal Ear (1996) explains, having first read Malcolm Caldwell, the British academic murdered in Phnom Penh on December 23, 1978, soon after meeting Pol Pot, he realized that an entire “community” of Cambodian scholars served as the Khmer Rouge’s “most effective apologists in the West.” True, but however misguided or misled in their understanding of KR behavior leading into the evocation of “killing fields” as was already being exposed by some media, they were also critical of US policy reaching back through the “Vietnam War” and so they should have been. These he labels STAV scholars, and he names them; Summers, Caldwell, Hildebrand and Porter, Chomsky and Herman, Chandler (“briefly”), and Kiernan (“deservedly”). As Ear (1996) declaimed, three works reveal how different facets of the STAV have previously been explored, namely, the first, an essay by William Shawcross (1983); the second, an essay by Stephen J. Morris published in the National Interest (Summer 1989); and the third, Gunn and Lee’s CWDU [Cambodia Watching Down Under, 1991]. As explained, Shawcross focused on the Chomsky-Herman thesis... In particular, Ear cites CWDU on the Sydney-based News from Kampuchea, noting as well the Gunn and Lee proposition that News was published “as a catalyst to the Barron-Paul book Murder of a Gentle Land (1977),” described as “the first English-language book to lambaste the Khmer revolution for its brutal excesses.” As Ear fills in, with News endeavoring “to deconstruct distortions and bias in western press coverage” on DK, it was joined by Chomsky and Herman in letters-to-the-editor, etc. In the Conclusion to Chapter 5, as Ear writes, the early works of the STAV scholars are today “remembered only in a footnote.”

  • Mitamura, Emily (2019). "The coloniality of abridgment: afterlives of mass violence in Cambodia and the US". Third World Quarterly. 40 (2): 389–404. doi:10.1080/01436597.2019.1568191. ISSN 0143-6597.

    in the latter half of the Khmer Rouge era, the public debate between French journalist Jean Lacouture and American academics Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman foregrounds moments of violent encapsulation and productive foreshortening. ... In their June 1977 article ‘Distortions at Fourth Hand’, Chomsky and Edward Herman analyse successive waves of scholarship and coeval media coverage around these events, examining the presence of what they term a ‘line’ in the American imaginary. By 1977, Chomsky and other leftist academics sought to pose a different question than that asked in 1975: not can but rather should these reports be believed?... Within and beyond this debate, those such as Sophal Ear identify a determination to undermine the credibility of refugee accounts of Khmer Rouge violence in the works of Chomksy, Herman, Hildebrand, Porter and others. Indeed, the castigation of refugee narratives as ‘unreliable’ or manipulative in attempting to secure survival present in several of these works is not mitigated by the now well-documented Chinese and covert American support of the Khmer Rouge as an geopolitical counter-balance to Vietnam.

Middle East Monitor[edit]

  • Jewish News: The CST [[[Community Security Trust]]] accused MEMO of peddling conspiracy theories and myths about Jews, Zionists, money and power.[8]
  • Jewish Telegraphic Agency: On Monday afternoon, i24News, an international news cable news network based in Jaffa, reported that Corbyn visited Israel and the West Bank to meet with Hamas officials in 2010. According to the report, Corbyn, then a minor MP, was flown in by Middle East Monitor, a British organization which has accused Israel of “ethnic cleansing” and whose rhetoric was described as “strikingly familiar [to] older forms of antisemitism” by the Community Security Trust, British Jewry’s anti-Semitism watchdog.[9]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Bobfrombrockley/sandbox&oldid=1219953075"