If it wasn’t for ‘scholarly’ disputes, Cambridge University would never have been established.

Best wishes, Craig. Hope you make it through the cordon!

Hope the local press/media have been informed, this would make good publicity for your books. Good luck!

I would very much like to attend your talk, and will try to do so. Unfortunately my guest, who as an invited visiting scholar does not have a university card, will probably be blocked by university security stating orders by David Feldman (chairman of the faculty).

Even members of the student representative body, well known to be university members, are being turned away due to lack of their ID card.

These actions are an embarrassment to the Law Faculty and the university as a whole.

“We all need to take a step back and see what kind of society we have become”

Craig

Interesting that you use the word “become” and not the word becoming.

I think it’s going to “become” a LOT worse then it is now.As the old saying say’s…”You ain’t seen nothing yet”.

Craig,

Go for it – glad to see that you are not being intimidated.

Best Wishes.

PS loved the new book – read it in 2 days!

good luck with it Craig, may the powers to be whince when they see you at the gate and may they shudder when they hear what you have to say. Peculiar this, the university known to recruit

most of our MI services are subverted by a political intrigue, tut tut, who would have thought, next thing they’ll be lobbied to run the BBC, LoL.

Dude, you are a star!

Thanks for The Catholic Orangemen, by the way, an excellent read.

Good luck.

Craig,

Good luck!

Dissent has always had a price, one way or another. Yet we were lucky that we grew up at a time when ‘dissent’ was not only fashionable, it was also possible, and tolerated to a degree that, seen in a historical perspective, seems almost like a ‘golden age’!

I’m talking about the post-war period up to the late seventies. Only about a quarter of a century. This was arguably the most ‘free’ period in British history, at its core the incredibly explosion of cultural creativity known as the Sixites. I believe one would have to go back to the period around the English Civil War to find a comparable era. I suppose that shows how precious and how seldom such times really are in our history.

The famous and radical playwrite, Trevor Griffiths, also believes that the ‘clampdown’ to quote Joe Strummer, began with the Thatcherite counter-revolution. Griffiths doesn’t think he’ll ever see one of his plays produced for television again. He’s got a brilliant script about the life of the radical and dissenter, Tom Paine, which would make a brilliant TV series, but alas it’s been kicking around for almost twenty years.

Slowly, but it’s speeding up, society is becoming more authoritarian. Our ghastly role as a vassal state in relation to the Great Imperial American War Machine, is costing us dear; not only in money, men and reputation, but in our cherished civil liberties too.

It’s probably a good idea to enjoy the luxury of using our freedom of speech while we still got it.

Go Craig!

George and the others see http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.html They Thought They Were Free 1933-1945 by Milton Mayer

Second and third paragraphs:-

‘What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could not understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it.

“This separation of government from people, this widening of the gap, took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter.’

Mary and others…

http://tinyurl.com/d4732r

Which way the wind blows…

http://tinyurl.com/5mxwmt

Anybody notice that a certain Mr Galloway has not been invited on our screens to speak about Gaza in the last few weeks, and that he clearly has been told to avoid/water-down as much as possible discussing it on his radio show.

Tony Benn has only managed to get heard when talking about the BBC issue, but not during the three week Israeli mass murder spree in Gaza.

Free Speech of a dissenting kind is indeed getting rarer & rarer.

Hats off to you. I do hope you have a friend with a digital handicam. It’s always worthwhile just in case something interesting happens. Not that I would wish that upon a fellow. Rather I hope it all goes smoothly for you.

Enjoy the fun Craig.

We live in interesting times and they will become more interesting.

I was wandering about the Graun yesterday and found a Toynbee article.

I re-quoted her quoting of a mail quote.

“Passports are not issued to us on condition we do exactly what we are told by the state … If such arbitrary powers are used against absentee fathers, how long before they are used against other people who have annoyed the authorities in some way?”

Correct.

http://tinyurl.com/cdof7t

All you can do is clean your own corner.

Hopefully everyone else does the same.

The notion of ‘a global crunch’ has occurred just too early – just before the ‘fait accompli’ that could have happened.

We still have a chance to voice opinion.

Use it while you can.

Here are some photos of the event, and the previous day’s occupation.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/34796647@N04/sets/72157613021179483/

Craig, thanks for the very interesting talk. I do apologize from the poor treatment you received from the faculty, and appreciate you taking it in your stride nevertheless.

I’d like to echo that thanks for your Cambridge talk. I hope you recognise the version of it I cobbled together here:

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/01/420502.html

All mistakes likely to be mine!

Come off it Craig for heaven’s sake! To use the word “Stalinist” in this context simply demeans you. Stalin killed millions of people and created a slave and police state. It’s this abuse of the English language (Gaza = Holocaust/Warsaw Ghetto etc) that devalues your arguments and turns people against you. Cambridge University is acting responsibly by making it clear that these students are in breach of university rules, that non-students should not be allowed access to the university buildings and that food in the building is a health ansd safety problem. (I take it you do support our health and safty laws? I must admit, it is the fist time I have supported the H and S police). As a Cambridge taxpayer I am grateful that the University is upholding the rule of law and preventing the waste of thousands of pounds of public money. The disgraceful capitulation of Howard Davies at LSE will not happen in Cambridge. I should also point out that Diouglas NMurray has been prevented from chairing a meeting at LSE. Are you protesting about that? Double standards if not.

By the way,I was a student once and made such silly protests – I just wish someone at the time had told me to grow up. These fools are being given a lesson in power.

eddie

So can we infer you are supporting Craig if you are supporting Diouglas NMurray (sic) ?

What is this argument if you don’t object to A you shouldn’t object to B ? It’s like trying to get off a speeding ticket on the M5 by saying they aren’t stopping people on the M6 right now.

John

The two situations are completley different so your attempt at equivalence is misguided. Douglas Murray (excuse my typos – I was in a hurry) has been prevented from chairing a legitimate event at LSE, which is not under occupation, for “security reasons”. Yet the LSE has consistently hosted pro-terrorist speakers in its buildings and has spent thousands of pounds on “security” during the recent occupation. Craig had been invited to speak at a building that is under illegal occupation where non-students are not allowed to enter, under University regulations. The first is a denial of free speech. The second is someone grand-standing for his own reasons. In any event he did speak to the students, but not in the illegally occupied building, so the “Stalinist” denial of free speech that he refers to in his post did not occur. I hope this is clear.

Eddie,

Actually the students were in the “illegally” occupied building – though I don’t think it is illegal for students at a university to be in their own building – and I spoke to them from the doorway through a barrier of security personnel. Many of the security personnel seemed to enjoy the talk, incidentally.

Douglas Murray should not have been prevented from speaking at the LSE, or indeed anywhere else, and I am very sorry if he was. Why you think that justifies my being forbidden to speak at Cambridge I do not know.

For the reasons listed above. The University has rules – it is a condition of study that students should obey them. It is therefore illegal for students to occupy premises overnight in contravention of those rules and in contravention of health and safety legislation (which I hope, as a good liberal leftist you would support?).

I hope that you agree with the need for rules at places of study? In addition, the university had made it quite clear that non-students should not be allowed to enter the illegally occupied buildng. You are a non-student. The case against you is clear, and you are just trying to distort the issues by talking about denial of free speech. I am sure that you would have been quite welcome to speak at any other venue than the one that is illegally occupied. I am a Cambridge resident – there are hundreds of suitable venues here. As I say, you were just grandstanding for your own reasons – perhaps to publicise your book? I don’t criticise you for that – we all have to live.

You have not answered my substantive point about your inappropriate use of language. Anyone who has studied the Stalinist period will find your comments about the “Stalinist silencing” of dissent contemptible in the context of this country. We have seen demonstrations throughout the land in recent weeks and all of those protestors are still alive and kicking and free to carry on protesting. Under Stalinism they would be either dead or in prison. Really, it does you no favours to use that kind of language.

Eddie

“Stalinist”

This is not a “substantive point” as you try to make out.

90+% of people realise that “Stalinist” is in common usage as a term to describe inappropriate stifling of dissenting opinions; it doesn’t in everyday usage mean acting literally as Stalin did. It’s called exaggeration for emphasis. Words change their meaning over time. Craig was not saying that these people literally want to kill or put him and like-minded people in prison (though some of them may do so…).

Obsessing about “inappropriate language” here seems to me to be displacement activity to take attention away from the main point, the misuse of power by global capitalism and by states, including the USA, Uzbekistan and recently, especially, Israel.

Castigating people you disagree with for being politically incorrect or not being careful enough over their choice of words or whatever doesn’t advance the argument, it suggests that you are unwilling to address the issues.

And as Craig himself has pointed out on several occasions, he’s in favour of free speech generally, not just for those he agrees with.

Eddie,

“Stlainist” is a commonly used epither for certain characteristics of political behaviour. I am not claiming the university authorities killed millions of people.

“In breach of university regulations” does not equate to illegal. As a liberal and not actually a lefty, I don’t think the abuse of health and safety regulation is a good thing.

I would strongly encourage everyone to read Craig’s speech and the Q&A session kindly transcribed by 01factory on Indymedia. Excellent stuff!

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/01/420502.html

John

I am quite willing to address the issues. But unless people use language correctly debate is impossible. I completely disagree with your opening statement about Stalin. Perhaps you can prove that 90% of people use “Stalinist” in the way that you suggest? I don’t think you can. The language of the far left over Gaza, for example, comparing it to the Warsaw Ghetto and the Holocaust has debased and devalued your (often valid) arguments and turns most ordinary people against you. Violent protests and occupations do the same. If you can’t see that then I suggest you read Orwell on politics and the english language. I suggest you also look at opinion polls. Unless you accept these arguments you will forever be a meaningless rump on the far left of politics.

As for the “misuse of power by global Capitalism”, apart from the fact that it makes you sound like Dave Spart, I would take you more seriously if you also drew attention to the far greater misuse of power in countries such as China, North Korea, Zimbabwe and Sudan where far greater evils are being played out as we speak.

I know Craig is in favour of free speech, but he was not comparing like with like. Incidentally, if you are in favour of free speech I would be interested in how you would take this. Would you be prepared, for example, to see this character on a platform in this country?

http://www.hurryupharry.org/

“We can live in a world with airy-fairy civil liberties and believe the best in everybody – and then they will destroy us.”

David Blunkett…

http://tinyurl.com/57o5n

A rose by any other name.

“turns most ordinary people against you”

eddie

Now you KNOW the minds of…”most ordinary people”…I don’t think so…thats another lie isn’t it eddie.

eddie

Two wrongs don’t make a right.

The evils of China, North Korea, Zimbabwe and Sudan don’t make the evils of Israel right.

Preventing Douglas Murray from the LSE doesn’t mean preventing Craig from Cambridge University is right.

You justify wrongs (Israel , Cambridge University) by pointing out other wrongs and that somehow that makes them right!.

exactly eddie, the situations are different, that’s why you shouldn’t base arguments on parallels that don’t exist

Craig

Just received books…Rest assured they will soon be adorning the bookshelves of the main branch library…Many thanks.

Reason (poor name by the way in your case)

I have pointed out above that the comparisons between Douglas Murray and Craig are spurious. I suggest you read those points before attacking me. They are completely different scenarios. I don’t justify any wrongs nor do I suggest that two wrongs make a right. I suggest that the West or global capitalism may have committed crimes but that far greater crimes have been committed by other regimes that are not part of the West or part of “global capitalism” (whatever that is) – yet you and yours refuse to acknowledge them. Your obsessive anti-Americanism clouds your judgement. In my opinion.

George – yes I do know the views of ordinary people, because there are these amazing things called opinion polls. They ask a sample of people for their opinions and publish the results. Perhaps you have heard of them? See the quote and link below.

Incidentally, I note your friend Mr Sheridan hjas now been charged with perjury. Still a supporter?

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/

“Finally – though these are just my selection, there is some other stuff in the poll if you follow the link – YouGov asked about the conflict in Gaza and who was to blame. 18% said Israel, 24% said Hamas, 39% thought they were equally to blame.”

John

I don’t get your point. I am not making a comparison between the two. I am saying that Douglas Murray represents a denial of free speech and Craig does not – for the reasons I have outlined above. To deny Douglas Murray a platform is wrong. To deny Craig access to an illegally occupied building is right. Can I be any clearer?

eddie

You’ve made it clear you’re a hypocrite.

Craig

Incidentally, I hope you will accept that the students at Cambridge are trespassing on university property and denying other students and staff the right to carry on their studies? If you know anything about the law you will know that trespass is a civil offence under the law – i.e it is illegal. This is above and beyond any University rules they may have broken and any criminal damage or other criminal offences that may have been perpetrated. I am using precise language here. Do you accept that trespass is illegal?

Your comment, “I am not claiming the university authorities killed millions of people.” is just crass. Why do you even say it? Did I suggest such a thing? I am saying the very opposite – that the use of inflammatory and crass comparisons devalues your case entirely.

eddie, please stop being so very, very silly.

Freedoms and progress have never been handed down by authority they have been taken by people. If laws had always been followed in the way you seem to suggest then your opinion polls would count for nought as you wouldn’t even have a vote (unless of course you’re an aristocrat).

There are such things as ‘good laws’ and ‘bad laws’ and your failure to spot the difference is, frankly, ludicrous and more than a little worrying.

eddie

“Given some enough rope and they will hang themselves”.

This sums you up.

The more you say.

The more you expose your position as flawed.

My advice: Don’t waste time focussing on pointless, circular discourse with those who are there solely to disrupt the effectiveness of the information exchange, awareness-raising, solidarity-building and activism modes of progressive/ dissident websites. This ‘sinking into the well’ technique is is achieved in part by ‘cascading’ confused arguments which one has heard for many decades now, constructed always in support of the powerful, every time there has been any kind of protest about anything that is not right-wing. It works when people respond to every nuance and every posting and it is aimed at inducing people to use up mental and political energy and at demoralising those who would seek to question the operations of power within society and the world. Ignore such manipulative tactics and instead, write, e-mail or ‘phone Cambridge University to protest!!!

Chris

I’m sorry but you are the silly one here pal.

You think the laws of trespass are silly do you? So if I come and squat in your house you wouldn’t use the law to evict me? Tell me where you live and I will send someone round. Idiot.

People go to Cambridge University to receive an education. The occupiers of the law building are denying other students the right to that education. Is that simple enough for you? If they want to protest they can do so elsewhere without shitting on other students. I support the right to protest but not in this childish way.

As for your comment that freedoms and progress have never been handed down by authority blah blah. Really? Do you think the progressive laws of the last few decades were “taken by people” or were they made in Parliaments? Diversity legislation, human rights leigislation, workplace protection. Assuming you live in this society I am pretty certain that you benefit from these laws. I could go on, but I think I have proved that your point is utterly worthless.

“You have not answered my substantive point about your inappropriate use of language.” This from someone who finds it necessary to repeat “I am a Cambridge resident.” as though it justifies his argument, but adds the crowning glory, “food in the building is a health and safety problem.”

So there you have it. The end of humanity as we know it. Food, one of those substances without which the human race cannot exist, is now a Health and Safety Problem! And eddie seems to be completely at ease with living not only in a Police State, but also exhorts us to support the founding of The Health And Safety Police State. There’s no answer to that.

By the way, eddie, please don’t say that the use of one word or some other word will turn MY mind from this argument or to that argument. You, for sure, do not know what is in my mind. But perhaps your support for the Health And Safety Police is soon to be followed by your support for the Mind Police. That’s something that I don’t know. And I’m gobsmacked at, “I do know the views of ordinary people, because there are these amazing things called opinion polls. They ask a sample of people for their opinions and publish the results.”

I’ve yet to see an opinion poll asking “a sample of people” what they think of the word “Stalinist”, and the only opinion poll result that I’ve ever seen that turned out to be accurate was the one that concluded that “Eighty seven percent of all statistics are made up.”

Lastly, you ask if hurryupharry should be seen on a platform in this country. Well, I, and anyone else, of any age or persuasion, can go to my local library, sit in front of a screen and read and see everything that hurryupharry has to say, at any time the library is open. If that isn’t being “seen on a platform in this country” I don’t know what is.

Eddie is such an unconscious comedian.

“I am quite willing to address the issues. But unless people use language correctly debate is impossible.”

Let me translate : “if you don’t use a word in a way I find helpful I will not allow you to use it”

Lovely.

Even better was : “I’m sorry but you are the silly one here pal.

You think the laws of trespass are silly do you? So if I come and squat in your house you wouldn’t use the law to evict me? Tell me where you live and I will send someone round. Idiot.”

Let me translate : “If I come and steal your land and you try and argue against it I will send the IDF round to flatten your home”.

Ken

It is the University authorities who are saying that food is a health and safety problem. Perhaps you may not have noticed that I raised that point in a slightly tongue in cheek way above? Perhaps not. As a rule I think hat some health and safety rules are pernicious but I admire the chutzpah of the University authorities in using them as an excuse? Irony, do you see?

Your comment that we live in a police state tells me more about you than I need to know. Don’t. Be. Stupid.

The link I referred to, is not about Harry’s Place but the truly shocking video from Al Rahma TV from the

Egyptian cleric Amin Al-Ansari. I suggest that you watch it. I think I prefer David Irving – at least he accepts that the Holocaust (had it happened) would be a BAD thing. This guy thinks it was great.

Merkin

Don’t give up the day job. Your translation skills are very, very bad.

Firstly, thank you Craig for an interesting and stimulating talk. I could only have enjoyed it more if I had been seated and in the warm.

It is a pity that the University Authorities, in denying access to yourself and part of your audience, could have come up with no better reason than non-possession of University ID cards. No doubt at that very time many non-University individuals were attending other events being held on University premises.

No doubt the Laws of Trespass and Health and Safety Regulations are a useful and necessary component of contemporary society. One would hope, however, that they were not originally framed, or developed, as a means of stifling free speech or legitimate protest. That they – and much other recent legislation, are used to this end very much supports your point.

Eddie

Just to say that the students in the occupation have been very careful not to disrupt anyone’s studies, and access both to the library and to lectures in the building have been uninterrupted. There is nothing so terrible about a studnet occupation, and the authorities have over-reacted sillily. The central demand of a couple of bursaries for deprived Palestinian students could and should have been easily granted.

You really don’t have a clue do you, Eddie?

“Diversity legislation, human rights leigislation, workplace protection.”

So none of these were ever fought for by members of our society? What planet do you live on?

Have you never heard of trade unions or human rights groups? It’s funny but I thought they fought for exactly these things.

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” – Margaret Mead (Anthropologist)

If you can explain why you wish to use my house as your target for trespass and give a suitable reason as to why this might progress our society for the good of all then you’d be very welcome.

Craig

But that gives in to mob rule and sidelines democratic procedures within the University. Surely you don’t support that? The issuing of bursaries may be a worthy end, but what if it was not? What if the protestors were Jewish and were demanding, for example, that bursaries should be given to poor Israeli students? What if they were far right students who wanted the expulsion of Muslim students? Would you still support their tactics? It is not for you to decide that the demands “should have been easily granted”. That is your own opinion, it may not be shared by the University or the mass of the student body. I support the right to protest, but I also support the right of the University authorities to uphold the rule of law. I’m not sure sillily is a word by the way.

Eddie

I was interested to see you championing the case of Douglas Murray, of whom I had not heard. Now I’ve researched him, I rather wish I hadn’t.

For the benefit of others who may not know about him, Murray’s latest book is called “Neoconservatism: Why We Need It”

In it he strongly strongly recommends that the West takes actions that kill and maim innocent civilians – in and out of the womb – as well as encouraging the use of torture and nuclear weapons.

What was your point about the holocaust Eddie? Do you mean that, like Douglas Murray, you’re in favour, provided that only Muslims are the victims?

By the way Eddie, I don’t think you’ll find that Craig has ever sought to deny anyone the right to free speech, whatever their views.

Your example of ‘far right students who wanted the expulsion of Muslim students’ might however be difficult to sustain because such a cause would itself be illegal.

A peaceful occupation is hardly ‘mob rule’ by the way. A stickler for language such as yourself should really be more careful.

eddie

I see what you are driving at now, for a minute I thought you were employing that jaded rhetorical trick of hijacking a discussion on one issue by raising a similar but unrelated issue.

What you are implying is the students had forgone their right to invite guest speakers because they had engaged in a form of protest you deem illegal. I think the point of this discussion is that our right to hear and be heard is being limited by the application of crowd control laws. In your own way you appear to have proved Craig’s point.

Civil disobedience is at times a duty, laws are based on concepts of control, at best we can hope that they are also based on morality. Since it is the nature of the state to veer towards the element of control, it is the duty of the citizen to stand up for morality.

As for your person who was denied the right to speak wherever, s/he just learnt a lesson in power. If you feel this was an abuse of power perhaps you should stage a sit in to protest it.

Language ‘n’ words. Law ‘n’ order. Rules ‘n’ regulations. In my ideal arnarchist society the ‘mob’ would rule the streets, the factories and the fields. Laws are fine, in their place, but not match for Power, and we live in a society where Power means almost everything. Who has it and who doesn’t, especially who doesn’t. The millions who don’t even realise they might have it.

The mob, armed with torches and pitchforks would have all the power. The aristocracy would be on the run. I think we may be moving towards a new 1789 ‘n’ all that. The Virtual Versailles of the last few decades is about to be surrounded, the New Bastille is ready to fall. Revoluions don’t follow the rules or the laws, they make up there own on the way.

The Thacherite counter-revolution had precious little to do with anything other than the abuse and use of Power, pure class-warfare, and now the entire corrupt edifice of market fascism is falling like a house of cards.

Now it’s our turn again. Time to use the power of the mob once more. I’m sharpening my sickle as we speak!

Chris

In your earlier post you stated “Freedoms and progress have never been handed down by authority they have been taken by people.” But we live in a paliamentary democracy where laws are indeed “handed down by authority”. Yes, trade unions and other campaigners may fight for new legislation but ultimately it is parliament that makes these laws. I hope that you are bright enough to understand this. Your Mead quote sounds like Leninism – “we know better than the masses” etc. I trust you are not a Leninist because he was also an evil mass murderer. As for your house, no I do not want to come round, I was making the point that if someone squatted in your house you would presumably use the law to get rid of them. You may advocate protest against unjust laws but I hope that you are not suggesting that the civil laws of trespass are unjust?

MJ your post is illiterate. Show me where Douglas Murray adviocates the things you say he does and I will bother to reply to you. At no point have I suggested that I support the views of Douglas Murray. You should also have a look at the video I posted as you clearly don’t understand the point I was making about the Holocaust. The Muslim cleric in that clip is gloating over images of the Holocaust in the most repulsive way imaginable.

John your point is nonsensical. The students at Cambridge are clearly in breach of both the law and university regulations, as I have stated repeatedly. I don’t deem it illegal, it is illegal. The students had not foregone their right to invite guest speakers. Craig could have spoken anywhere in the University, just not in the building that was illegally occupied. So his comment in the second paragraph of his post that he was being prevented from entering the University of Cambridge is simply untrue. He was prevented from entering the law faculty building which is a tiny part of the University. There is therefore no limitation on the right to hear and be heard. He is just grandstanding for effect. Douglas Murray, on the other hand, has been prevented from entering the whole of the LSE. As for your comments about the state and morality – well, your suggestion that the state is generally controlling and citizens generally moral is highly questionable – I could provide you with dozens of examples where the reverse is true.

Eddie,

I trust you aren’t suggesting that because we live in a democracy (now there’s an argument in itself) that we should all just stand by and be grateful for the crumbs that may, or may not, fall from the parliamentary table. If so, as pointed out above (unless you are an aristocrat) you would have no voice at all. This country did not become a democracy on its own.

The emancipation of women did not come about without considerable breaking of the kind of laws you seem to view as sacrosanct. Would you prefer a return to those times, perhaps?

I am afraid that it is a great danger to ever entertain the idea of “my country right or wrong”.

And I must have missed the bit about “we know better than the masses” in the quote I offered above. And I thought I said ‘Anthropologist’ not ‘Leninist’ in my attribution. You’re not seeing reds under the bed are you? That’s so 1970′s. Haven’t you twigged that it’s supposed to be Muslims that you’re frightened of now…. Communism is yesterday… that’s why we needed a new bogeyman to keep the arms companies in gold plated taps.

I also object – just a tad – to the pejorative use of the word ‘idiot’ above. As a response to the word ‘silly’ it was both disproportionate and lacking in imagination.

In this case the ‘silly’ referred to a personal stance on my part in relation to my view of your comments (it may have been right or it may have been wrong but it was merely an opinion of your position here not you as a person.)

However, ‘idiot’ makes assumptions about the person, not the opinion and that’s just silly.

Eddie, my apologies for my illiterate post. I’m astonished you were able to decipher it. My comments about Douglas Murray came from reviews of his book. Look them up at your leisure.

You’re right, I probably didn’t understand your point about the holocaust. I thought you were inviting us to share your disgust at a Muslim cleric gloating over images of the holocaust. Of course I do, but unfortunately you didn’t go on to state the underlying point you were making, which probably gave rise to my misunderstanding. As a result I simply pointed out that the chap whose freedom of speech you were so keen to protect seems to advocate the mass extermination of Muslims, which I find disgusting.

Chris, For Christ’s sake, please STOP putting words into my mouth. I did not say we should sit and wait for the crumbs to fall from on high. Similarly, the Suffragettes fought, quite rightly, against laws that did not allow them to vote. I clearly do not view such laws as sacrosanct and have never said so and to make any comparsion between those unjust laws and sensible property laws just shows how moronic you are. To repeat, it is generally accepted that the laws of property are sensible and just and no sane person would EVER compare them to unjust laws of enfranchsiement that applied in the ealry years of the last century. It is this kind of moral equivalence that makes you look stupid. Really it does.

You probably don’t understand my allusion to Lenin and democratic centralism. Never mind. Read John Carey on the intellectuals and the masses. It may enlighten you. I would class “idiot” as fair comment under the circumstances. People who make idiotic comments are idiots.

Eddie,

calm down….. I pointed out that the laws that people like the suffragettes broke were the sort of laws that you think are sacrosanct. They trespassed for example.

At least I, albeit briefly, raised my status with you from ‘idiot’ to ‘moronic’ which in the original designation given to such labels is a small, but significant jump. Unfortunately you confuse my particular disagreement with your point of view with the need to apply a pejorative label. Perhaps you need to take a few deep breaths and a cup of camomile tea and realise that we’re both just people and our entitlement to differing views is one of the great virtues of our, supposed, democratic system.

As are pompous twits such as yourself.

Sorry Chris, referring to Eddie the Eagle

Thanks alex!!!!

but I probably qualify as well

MJ

I’m not aware that DOuglas Murray (if that is who are referring to) advocates the “mass extermination of Muslims”. As I say, I don’t condone or support his views but would be interested if you can point me to a location where he makes such an assertion.

Writerman, you are such a Romantic and it is a joy to behold. A quiet word in your ear however about the French Revolution. It wasn’t quite the expression of popular power you think it was. It was engineered by the global financial elite in order, among other things, to facilitate the introduction of a Central Bank in France (ditto the Russian Revolution by the way). Robespierre got wind of this in 1794 but was assassinated the night before he was going to name names.

Sadly, it just goes to show that even when we feel at our most free and empowered, we are still just pawns in someone else’s chess game.

Eddie, it took me about 2 minutes to find the name of and reviews of Douglas Murray’s latest book. I just used google. I can’t be bothered to trawl through my history folder to find the precise pages. Since you’re so happy to call others illiterate, morons and idiots I take it you know at least how to use a search engine.

MJ

Yes I do know how to use a search engine thanks, but I cannot find any of the things that you allege, i.e. that Murray advocates the extermination of Muslims. I see from your recent post about the French Revolution that you are a conspiracy theorist, so that probably explains everything. The “global financial elite” sounds remarkably like the kind of thing that 9/11 nuts would talk about, or those who believe that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is not a forgery. The odd thing about conspiracy theories, rather like UFO sightings, is that no one ever comes forward to verify them. Strange that so many people can keep a secret for so long don’t you think?

abc

123

God I hate you Craig…please close your blog so I can get some work done.(JOKE)

Please correct me if I am wrong, I was not there, but is it not the case that it is the situation and not Craig and his views/lecture that are the problem.

That is, if the building was not the subject of current occupation you would be free to speak?

I’m having trouble posting. I thought you had blocked me from your site, but that isn’t the case.

I think ‘grandstanding’ is a silly comment.

Re ‘Stalinist’: I think it’s kind to point out the population of this country are currently not being interned/murdered in significant numbers.

Really, of course, ‘Stalinist’ is being used to denote a crushing, invincible power, against which the population are helpless. I think this is a strange way to describe our Parliament.

In between some interesting points (what’s happening in China is corporate communism; see PJ O’Rourke’s horrified account in ‘Eat the Rich’), Eddie sounds quite scared of the kind of “sharpening my scythe for the revolution” attitude that Writerman expresses. And I think there is a problem. Other extreme views can rise alongside such waves of righteous, reckless rhetoric. Reading Goodbye to Berlin I noticed everyone seemed persuaded that the Communists would win, right up until the point that the Nazis took power.

Thank you all for your interesting board.

I agree that most of the population of this country are currently not being interned in significant numbers. But I think it should be pointed out that there are some entirely innocent people who have been and some who still are incarcerated in this country to keep the lid on illegal government activities.

Eddie:

‘Strange that so many people can keep a secret for so long don’t you think?’

When the stakes are so high then no, I don’t think so. In any case the history of banking is not so secret, it just doesn’t advertise itself particularly. Follow the money is my advice.

Whether this makes me a conspiracy theorist or not I neither know nor care. Regarding 9/11 I suppose it would have been nice if there had been proper investigation, as there is with most crimes. Until then I suppose we have to rely on that passport found in the rubble and that holdall containing flying manuals and a copy of the Koran.

Regarding the Protocols of the Elders of Zion I have to confess I am not familiar with them, but someone else pointed out recently on this site that they date from the 19th century, so that probably rules out the French Revolution. What are they forgeries of exactly: the real Protocols of the Elders of Zion??

Regarding Douglas Murray try:http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/damian_thompson/blog/2009/01/23/gutless_lse_bans_islam_critic_douglas_murray_for_security_reasons

Chris I accept your comment about trespass, but I do not believe that you can make a moral equivalence between women who fought for the right to vote (i.e they were personally affected by the issue) to people who are upset about something that is happening elsewhere and that does not personally affect them.

MJ the Protocols is a forgery from the nineteenth century that has been repeatedly used as evidence by anti-Semites of a world-wide Jewish plot. Hitler referred to it repeatedly. More recently, for example, there are many web sites that claim no Jews died on 9/11 becasue they were telephoned beforehand and told to stay away. It is all part of the same pattern of lies. Perhaps you believe something similar? I have seen that Murray link, but I repeat that I cannot find evidence of your assertions anywhere on the web.

them.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion

The student occupation was used as an excuse to bar Craig. It has singled out Cambridge as a university that is under attack from a certain section within it.

Ideally there should be a degree of equilibrium between staff, lecturers and student achievable, but this physical rejection, a last minute reaction to a talk on Afghanistan, not Gaza, is untenable for a university thats evinced to be tops, it is not.

To make this interesting, how many university rectors have been barred by other universities in this country, ever?

I think that Craig should sedn out a belated press release and stub the press/s nose into it.

BTW. This issue is a good point one might want to spread on to other regional newspaper fora.

And a big hallo to Eddie, so succinctly sent to offend.

“Truth cannot be spoken in America. It cannot be spoken in universities. It cannot be spoken in the media. It cannot be spoken in courts, which is why defendants and defense attorneys have given up on trials and cop pleas to lesser offenses that never occurred.”

“Truth is never spoken by government. As Jonathan Turley said recently, Washington “is where principles go to die.”…

http://tinyurl.com/bqfvb6

Eddie:

“…there are many web sites that claim no Jews died on 9/11 becasue they were telephoned beforehand and told to stay away. It is all part of the same pattern of lies”

Thanks for the info. I’ve just found it on an Israeli news site (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=77744) Why are you so sure it’s a lie?

You’ll be telling me next that it’s a lie that several Israeli Mossad agents were arrested in NY for filming the attacks and cheering as they did so! Lies? Anti-Jewish? Tell the FBI, they arrested them, not me.

Regarding the Douglas Murray link, as I recall if you scroll down a bit you’ll find a comment from a rather erudite fellow familiar with all his work.

Just to let you know, the talk did take place – Craig Murray had to stand outside and give the talk with security guards acting as a physical barrier between the students and Mr. Murray. There was also a full Q&A session over the heads of the security guards.

MJ: Really? Are you real?

Authentic sounding answer on Yahoo to the question “How many Jewish people died in the World Trade Centre?”:

“Let’s see, I personally knew three.

I remember when this bit of dis-information got injected into the discussion: some nonsense about how jews were called and told not to go to work that day.

I’ve never seen a single bit of evidence to support it. But meanwhile I have three dead jewish friends, for whatever that’s worth.”

An earnest report on the subject, showing that 18 percent of the named victims were Jewish:

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/web

log/comments/how_many_jews_died_at_the_world_trade_center_on_911/

A dissection of the “dancing Israeli spies” story, which in fact suggests that Mossad *were* tapping the hijackers:

http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=624

And. Yet. The idea that “all Jews” were warned about the attacks, and “all of them” stayed away from work, and kept quiet about it, and were so coldblooded and fanatical that they did not warn their “goyim” friends, or run to the press screaming, is crazy. It would almost seem to be a maliciously motivated attempt to conflate the actions of a secret service with the morality of a people.

I sincerely hope I am wasting my time by pointing this out.

Oh goodness, this is so sick. The people who died are real people, not statistics.

Ruth, I agree. I wrote that thinking about the people in Belmarsh. It’s not as if we don’t know about them.

technicolour

What do you mean by

“It’s not as if we don’t know about them.”

Eddie, I didn’t raise this matter about no jews dying on 9/11. You did. I had never heard of the notion until you raised it. I’m sorry you lost jewish friends. The link I posted simply demonstrates that at least one jewish organisation was indeed tipped off.

The “dancing Israeli spies” story however has rather more substance to it. Because the agents were so well equipped, and because of documents in their possession (that the FBI referred to but has not revealed) it is difficult not to conclude that they had foreknowledge.

technicolor

Sorry, my last post was for you, not Eddie. Since you came in late you may have misconstrued what was going on. For the record I have never entertained the notion that no jews died on 9/11. It was a non sequitur raised by Eddie, I think because I had the temerity to mention banks in an earlier post. I am indeed sorry you lost jewish friends on 9/11 and have no reason to question the figures you provided.

Eddie you are such a dynamo, but nonsensical as I may be you are still missing the point. The point is how laws & rules & regulations are being used to obstruct free speech.

As for my point on control vs morality, sure we can cite examples, Tony Benn may be a moral man, Tony Blair certainly isn’t, but it is the duty of the electorate to keep them both in check, and if this means breaking a few rules, so be it. Otherwise you will find yourself in a stagnant and corrupt society. Oh, you already did.

By the way, I left the UK 20 years ago, the writing was on the wall then, it is still there now, next to the camera. Residents don’t notice the slide, but infrequent visitors like me do, I don’t think you are aware how submissive you have become.

Craig,

Am I alone in being fed-up with all the pandering and/or instigating that “eddie” generates here. You have a right to implement a policy of deleting “off-topic” posts, assuming you have time. They don’t have to be for posts disagreeing with your point of view, as you’ve disclosed many times, but eddie and the people baited by him is a real turn-off. Now they’re yelling across the room about who’s right re 9-11.

By the way, hope all is well with Nadira and baby-to-be.

Maybe Cambridge have got enough to worry about and they don’t need you along to stir up brilliant but naive undergraduates? But that’s just the sensible explanation which is not laced with melodramatic cries of dissent.

I should perhaps point out that I’m not actually advocating a bloody, violent, Revolution in the French 1789 style. I’m not even convinced that the concept of ‘Revolution’ is valid. But this is a big subject to get into here!

Romantic rhetoric has its uses, its time and its place. I do think though that the pendulum has swung in favour of the interests of the ‘aristocracy’ for too long, and this hasn’t been good for society as a whole. I believe we need to inject far more ‘people power’ and revive the idea of citizenship as being the bedrock of democracy, and not just the ability to ‘choose’ in the marketplace, which basically means that access to ‘democracy’ is based on one’s ability to ‘buy’ it.

SX

Well, the topic is about freedom of speech, so Craig may wish to ignore you. I think the debate here has followed a logical course. It was MJ who raised issues of conspiracy theories, not me, and this led on to the Protocols and the lie that Jewish people were warned about 9/11. However, one key point that I raised has still not been answered – Craig’s assertion in his post that he was banned from the University of Cambridge and that this was a denial of free speech. Not true. He was banned from one illegally occupied building in Cambridge – the rest of the University estate was open to him. Apart from the 9/11 thing I don’t think I have ever strayed off topic.

John you may be a right about your perception of the UK, but I am a UK resident and don’t see it. As for Benn being a moral man – I don’t agree with you. I think he is one of the most slippery politicians of the last few decades and as amoral as most. Who can ever forget him grovelling in front of Saddam? He has regulary fawned to dictators. He made Labour unelectable for a generation, he destroyed the Chesterfield seat for Labour and handed it to the Lib Dems. He is a thoroughly nasty politician who puts on the act of being a kindly old grandad.

This Eddie seems a cold fish. Petty minded, unsympathetic. Has he ever loved?Yacking on about health and safety and trespass. The students are presumeably moved by the atrocities committed by the jewish state of israel,crushed limbs, burnt babies, destroyed houses.Theft murdrer mutilation destruction terror. Obviously Craig Murray sometimes speaks in a colourful way in order to attract attention. Maybe he is sore at losing a good job for speaking out against acceptance of torture by the british government. He’ll always have friends amongst those with a heart. Imagine, concrete slab across your legs, never walk again Israeli soldier shoots into your wife children

Eddie seems to have occupied this chat forum, so perhaps we should all evict him.

Eddie says:

“You have not answered my substantive point about your inappropriate use of language. Anyone who has studied the Stalinist period will find your comments about the ‘Stalinist silencing’ of dissent contemptible in the context of this country.”

Where was Eddie’s “eloquent voice” when Bush and friends – and that includes Tony Blair – were comparing the Venezuelan president to Hitler? The Iranian president has also been described as Hitler.

Google:

“Rumsfeld likens Venezuela’s Chavez to Hitler”:

“Hersh: Bush Calls Ahmadinejad Hitler”

“Olmert compares Ahmadinejad to Hitler”

Why was this acceptable, Eddie? These are high-ranking politicians behaving worse than children. Their words matter far more than Craig’s.

Craig Murray has behaved far more responsibly, and not accused – or likened – any political leader to Stalin. He merely used a bit of hyperbole – a standard rhetorical device! – to make a point. Everyone intelligent understands this, Eddie, except pedants like you.

However, there are some strong correlates to Stalin’s Russia. Stalin used torture to extract false confessions – exactly what the U.S. has been doing under Bush (the UK has assisted this process of “special rendition”) – and Stalin purged his party of dissent, which is analogous to what is happening in this country and the U.S.

I could go on, but the intelligent readers get my point.

Finally, this country will be moving closer to a Stalinist-like state when the government’s £12 billion project to build a centralised database on all our Internet activity is complete. NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD, with, perhaps, the exception of China, is doing this. The people in government want our data to be accessible to government departments, local councils, health care providers, and the police.

Google:

“Private firm may run UK spy uber-database” and “theregister”

“Private firm may track all email and calls” and “Hellhouse of personal data will be created, warns former DPP”

Extracts:

“…the notion of total security is a paranoid fantasy which would destroy everything that makes living worthwhile. We must avoid surrendering our freedom as autonomous human beings to such an ugly future.

“‘…no other country is considering such a drastic step. This database would be an unimaginable hell-house of personal private information,’ he said. ‘It would be a complete readout of every citizen’s life in the most intimate and demeaning detail. No government of any colour is to be trusted with such a roadmap to our souls.’”

Other John

“Why was this acceptable, Eddie?” Did I say it was acceptable. Once again, someone putting words into my mouth.I condemn all extreme hyperbolic language whether it comes from the left or right. My point was that Craig used the example of the occupation in Cambridge and the fact that the authorities had stopped him from entering the building as an example of “Stalinist silencing of voices of dissent”. I think I have proved that it was no such thing – for a start, he was not banned from entering the University of Cambridge (a point he has not denied) and he did speak at the University on University land. The use of the word Stalinist in this context is a vile slur on the millions of people killed by Stalin and a misuse of the english language. That is my opinion. Your conspiracy theories belong to science fiction, not the real world. Perhaps you would tell me how we have less freedom now than thirty years ago. I grew up in the seventies and I can tell you, unequivocally, that I prefer now to then in many, many ways. So how exactly do we have less freedom in 2009 than in 1979?

Actaully, you know what really scares me? It’s not threats to our freedom of speech and the paranoid fantasies of people like you. What really scares me is that elements of the left are willing to ditch all their principles of freedom, equality, democracy and civil rights and ally themselves with groups and countries that are anti-democratic, repressive, homophobic, theocratic and misogynistic. So when large sections of demonstrations in UK cities either start chanting things like ‘Baghdad, Beirut, Kabul, Gaza – victory to the intifada!’ or do nothing to protest at such chants (as has been witnessed at many recent rallies) it sickens me to the core. Do these idiots really support the Taliban? Do they really support the policy of strapping suicide bombs on chldren and people with learning disabilities? Do they really support fascism? Sorry but I grew up with the Holocaust and the notion of “never again” so when I hear Galloway urging a boycott of Israel’s shops and I see people destroying Starbucks or goods in Tesco I think immediately of Kristallnacht and wonder how far we have come.

I’m sure Craig wouldn’t have been barred by Cambridge University in 1979.

Eddie asks:

“So how exactly do we have less freedom in 2009 than in 1979?”

One obvious example that comes immediately to mind is that in the 70s we were able to move around in public places without being under constant surveillance by CCTV cameras.

In the 70s we were able to drive around without our cars being under surveillance by number recognition cameras.

less freedom ?

shouldn’t we be aspiring to a better society, not a state of inertia

By the way Eddie:

“It was MJ who raised issues of conspiracy theories, not me, and this led on to the Protocols and the lie that Jewish people were warned about 9/11″ is untrue.

If you read back, you’ll see that it was you who raised these things as a totally specious non sequitur because I happened to refer to banks. You complain of people of people putting words in your mouth, but you are by far the worst offender on this score.

In the 70s victims of crime didn’t have their details stored on the DNA database.

In the 70s we couldn’t be arrested for minor things, so our details could be stored on the DNA database.

In the 70s we could take a 500 ml bottle of water on a plane.

In the 70s we didn’t have all our telephone calls monitored.

I think, if anyone should be kicked from this forum, it’s Eddie. He’s got an agenda and deliberately lies, wasting all our time.

When I wrote that Palestine was taken over by hundreds of thousands of Jews entering that country illegally, Eddie replied:

“John

England was once 99% non-Norman – look at it now. The USA was once 100% non-European – what are you suggesting, that we ship out all the Normans and the Europeans? Very clever…”

Eddie is all over the place in the above statement. First, he claims England was once 99% non-Norman. So, he considers the Norman invasion of England – effectively a French invasion, as the Normans were supported by France – as a perfectly acceptable way for countries to conduct themselves, and countries should still be invading each other today. But notice, these are COUNTRIES Eddie is talking about, NOT a religious group attempting to create a religious state. Also, Eddie compares the “old times” with a modern era that has established international laws and the U.N. to mediate conflicts and impose law and order (in theory, anyway – the U.S. veto often puts paid to that idea), with an era that had none of that. Nevertheless, Eddie is saying that MIGHT MAKES RIGHT – imperialism and colonialism rock!

Eddie says the U.S.A was once 100% non-European. When the U.S. was 100% non-European, there was NO U.S.A! The Europeans conquered the Native Americans and took over.

However, this comparison is misleading, as Palestine was not an undiscovered land that was unrecognised as having a people. Palestine was an existing country recognised by other nations. Eddie’s analogy is simply wrong. Israel harps on about its right to defend itself, but Eddie supports those that denied that right to Palestine. We can see where Eddie is coming from, can’t we?

Eddie concludes: “The history of Palestine/Israel is not as simple as Israelis ‘stealing’ Palestinian land.”

Yet, the historical examples that he gave me are just that.

Eddie then writes: “…but hold the front page, war is horrible. Shock. Horror.”

If it were Eddie and his family suffering as a result of this conflict, he would NOT be so facetious or contemptuous, then. However, when Jews get killed, such “wars” are not so acceptable. Eddie’s double standards are evident for all to see.

Eddie continues: “As for Jewish terorism, I take it that you therefore condemn Castro for his ‘terrorist’ tactics in taking over Cuba and Mandela for his ‘terrorism’ against the South African state? You can’t have your cake and eat it. Many states around the world have been born in terrorism.”

So, here, Eddie seems to be saying that the Palestinians were liberated by Jewish terrorists – Freedom fighters, according to Eddie – in much the same way blacks were “liberated” by Mandella and Co.

Let me quote again from the 1948 U.N. report to Ralph Bunche:

“The Arabs, initially living in peace with the Jewish minority, have been increasingly victimized by the Jews who, now that the British are leaving, are turning their savage behavior against them.”

“The initial Arab response to Jewish harassment over the past year has been very slow in coming, but it seems to be quite inevitable, and a terrible civil war is foreseen.”

Eddie then says: “War is war and if hamas had not been lobbing missiles into Isreal for years it could have been avoided.”

Quite amazing how Eddie condemns a few missiles coming from the Palestinian side, but accepts the dropping of huge bunker-buster bombs and a terrifyingly powerful rain of missiles from the Israelis.

Israel has broken many ceasefire agreements, as well as stolen land, but people like Eddie promulgate lies that Hamas is entirely to blame, and that Israel is willing to make the concessions necessary to bring about peace – like murdering hundreds of Palestinian children in cold blood, for instance.

This is not “war” – this is conquest!

Israel is deliberating targeting the Palestinian people NOT Hamas. The bombing of Gaza was planned months in advance. It is now reckoned that the blockade on Gaza might have been merely the groundwork for the recent assault, an attempt to weaken Hamas fighters by starving and denying health care to everyone in the Gaza strip.

Excellent post Other John, am awaiting Eddie’s response with interest.

Benjamin Franklin could have have had modern Britain and the Eddies of the world in mind when he said:

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety, and ultimately will have neither”.

“the Eddies of the world in mind”

Idiocy is usually described as “endlessly repeating the same process, hoping for a different result”.

Oh dear, are those the best things you can come up with – cctv and not being able to take water on planes? Poor you. Personally I like the fact that we have cctv as it means that thugs can be apprehended and put in prison. Also, cctv is supported by a big majority of the population as it makes them feel safer (74% support in a YouGov report last year). Your list is pathetic frankly.

Well, against your list how about the human rights act, the internet, equalities legislation, higher standards of living, improvements in medical treatment and mortality, the freedom of information act. I could go on, but I think I have proved my point that we are blessed with more rights and freedoms now than we had in the seventies. Your list is a drought, mine is a deluge.

John my point about Normans and Americans was what is called an analogy, albeit slightly hyperbolic (something you seem to find praiseworthy in Craig), and makes the point that once an area is populated by certain peoples it is going to be very difficult to ship them out. It’s the kind of thing advocated by the BNP and everyone knows it’s unrealsitic.

Palestine was never an “existing country” – it has never been a state. It was part of the Ottoman empire, and I suggest you read up on the 1948 UN partition plan and the Israeli declaration of independence that led to the invasion by several Arab states. The rest of your rant is barely worth responding to, as you are once again putting words into my mouth, except to say that re: your last sentence I can assure you that Hamas fighters would be the very last Palestinians to feel the effects of hunger. I can assure you of that.

Going back to the original subject of this post, I understand that the protestors may be evicted today. Good. That means ordinary students can get back to work – there are many reports of non-occupying students being thoroughly pissed off with the occupation and confirmed reports that protestors have assaulted other students.

Stop Press. The protestors have now given up and ended their occupation. A victory for common sense and the rule of law. Well done to Cambridge University for standing up to bullying and intimidation.

“improvements in medical treatment and mortality”

http://tinyurl.com/d4pm22

“Your list is pathetic frankly”

CCTV: DNA databases; telephone intercepts. Hardly a pathetic list I would have thought, and we were just plucking a few ramdom items.

In an earlier post Eddie you said “I grew up with the Holocaust and the notion of “never again”".

I really do suggest therefore that you look again at the rise of Nazism in 1930s Germany. Let me jog your memory with a few salient facts. Before Hitler, Germany was a liberal democracy with basic human rights seemingly enshrined in its constitution. Hitler was democratically elected. Within a few months however Germany was hit with a major terrorist event. In 1933 The Reichstag building was burned to the ground. Exploiting the public’s natural shock and fear caused by this event, Hitler almost immediately introduced a complex raft of legislation (the Enabling Acts) that undermined the country’s basic liberties to be undermined. Almost overnight, the familiar trappings of a Police State were introduced: surveillance, huge increases in police powers, control of the media, stifling of dissent etc. Hitler then embarked on series of invasions of neighbouring and other countries on a variety of pretexts. In the case of Poland I believe it was because of Jewish Communist (he almost always used the two terms interchangeably) terrorists massing on the German/Polish border.

Does none of this sound worryingly familiar to you? I should point out also that those mad conspiracy theorists who dared to suggest that the Reichstag fire was the work of agents of Hitler himself are today more politely called historians. Doesn’t the introduction of the Patriot Act in the US, only a month after 9/11 – a piece of legislation so long and complex it just had to have been drafted before 9/11 – remind you so vividly of the Enabling Acts that it sends a shudder down your spine?

Never again Eddie, never again.

What I find strange and difficult to comprehend is the allure of rabid tribalism, that evolves into exaggerated nationalism, twisted xenophobia and fervent chauvinism. Then, this seeting stew explodes and people burst forth in a frenzy which makes them capable of almost anything, any act of ghastly brutality becomes almost santified. Blood must be spilled to protect our blood. Blood begets blood. Round and round in the swirling vortex of blood.

Racial or nationalist/religious extremists are so self-righteous, especially when it comes to their ‘right’ to kill. They seem to have very simple, morally clarified veiw of the world, that turns them into one-eyed men, blind in one eye to their own faults and crimes, but extraordinarily aware of the crimes of the enemy, the others, the ‘not of us’ hordes.

It’s a manichean worldview – good vs. evil. We are good – therefore what we do is good, everything. This gives us the moral right to annihilate the bad, even the children of the bad, because, after all, they will grow up, so why not kill them now?

So this rightists are seething with anger, parnoia and hatred. They have no hearts and can kill with a shrug, because on has convinced onself one is engaged in a ‘holy war’ a ‘crusade’ against the forces of evil in the world.

Of course, they are barely rational and arguably borderline psychopaths, sad souls with no love in their stony hearts, believers in some special truth that’s been revealed to their tribe by a non-existant deity, who’s really Satan.

MJ no, none of that worries me because your analogy is false. This is not Hitler’s Germany. As I have shown above, freedoms have been extended since the seventies.

Writerman I tend to agree with you. Look at this text for example. These are words spoken by Ken Livingstone’s favourite cleric Sheikh Qaradawi (see link below). Is he a rightist or a leftist in your opinion? I must admit, I am finding it hard to tell the difference these days.

“Oh Allah, take your enemies, the enemies of Islam. Oh Allah, take the Jews, the treacherous aggressors. Oh Allah, take this profligate, cunning, arrogant band of people. Oh Allah, they have spread much tyranny and corruption in the land. Pour Your wrath upon them, oh our God. Lie in wait for them. Oh Allah, You annihilated the people of Thamoud at the hand of a tyrant, and You annihilated the people of ‘Aad with a fierce, icy gale. Oh Allah, You annihilated the people Thamoud at the hand of a tyrant, You annihilated the people of ‘Aad with a fierce, icy gale, and You destroyed the Pharaoh and his soldiers ?” oh Allah, take this oppressive, tyrannical band of people. Oh Allah, take this oppressive, Jewish, Zionist band of people. Oh Allah, do not spare a single one of them. Oh Allah, count their numbers, and kill them, down to the very last one.”

Frightening stuff, eh?

http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/01/12/kill-them-down-to-the-very-last-one/

“I really do suggest therefore that you look again at the rise of Nazism in 1930s Germany”

http://tinyurl.com/mb3gg

A LOT of Tories thought Hitler was…” He thinks the regime absolutely fantastic”…until they realised they couldn’t control him as his plan was to put them up against the brick wall as well.

Eddie,

Are you employed by the government? In particular the secret services?

“none of that worries me”

That’s a relief Eddie. We can all rest easy.

Eddie,

I tend to agree with you about the content of this ‘speech’ or whaterver it is, if it’s accurate and true. It’s insane. But then people ranting do tend to get caught up in the spirit of things. This doesn’t mean I’m trying to excuse this kind of intemperate language.

On the other hand only today I was reading about a couple of religious pamplets produced for the Israeli Army by a pretty militant rabbi, and his words didn’t seem that far removed from Qaradawi style. The main difference being that the rabbi actually has a direct and concrete influence on young men armed with real weapons. I’m not sure how much real influence this Qarawadi chap has.

Clearly there are extremists who use violent and ghastly language on both sides of the conflict, both Jews and Arabs. So that’s what I think about that. What do you think about the statements of Lieberman relating to Arabs? These seem rather extreme to me.

Writerman – I would condemn all such extremist statements but this guy and those like him also influence young men who go out with guns and suicide belts. For the record I support a 2 state solution on the 1967 borders, an end to all illegal settlements, the walls to come down and all settlers to return to Israel unless they are willing to live under Palestinian rule and abide by their rules (with tolerance and with forbearance on both sides) and all those who take a more extremist position should be rounded up and shot (actually, that last bit was a sick joke).

MJ wrote: “Excellent post Other John, am awaiting Eddie’s response with interest.”

Thanks MJ. But I didn’t want that copy posted – I rushed it before going out – but too late now!

A couple of sentences I wanted to add were:

“Israel is NOT a country like other countries ?” it’s a RELIGIOUS STATE FOR JEWS. Jews can go and live there for merely being Jewish, i.e ostensibly religious ?” the rest of us can’t!”

Anyway, I’ll read Eddie’s replies later – perhaps! – I don’t want to get into a slanging match with Eddie and ruin this forum for others. Also, I hate politics, so reading and writing about this stuff stresses me out.

(I caught a glimpse of one of Eddie’s comments – about the fact that he loves CCTV – that’s enough for me to not bother with him again.)

No probs Other John, it was a great post anyway. Your omitted sentences are nevertheless a fine addition.

Eddie,

You haven’t answered my question.

Are you employed by the government? In particular the secret services?

Ruth

“Pro-Israel media: Bloggers join media war”

“Some 1,000 new immigrants and foreign-language-speaking Jews volunteer to army of bloggers set up by Absorption Ministry and Foreign Ministry with the stated objective of flooding blogs with pro-Israel opinions”…

http://tinyurl.com/b9sfcp

And some living in the UK..I bet.

I would bet that Craig Murray’s blog would be a prime target.

Yes, that’s true but I think the secret services would be more interested because of elements from his book and where they lead. One of particular interest is where Sandline got its start up funds. But there are more.

Guys, guys!

Eddie is a troll from a glee club called Harry’s Place. Debating with him his pointless. If you reply, particularly if you put energy into your reply, he has won. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

There’s only one way to beat a troll, but fortunately it’s very easy. Do not feed him by responding to his posts.

If you don’t feed him he will post a few more times, escalating his level of outrageousness to get a rise out of someone. If no-one responds, he will eventually go away. If he keeps getting fed, he will keep coming back.

Strategist

Strange definition of troll. I have tried to keep to the topic subject – i.e. freedom of speech and the alleged “Stalinist” trend in the UK. It is only where others have gone off topic (e.g raising absurd conspiracy theories) that I have responded. It seems the problem is that none of you guys can answer legitimate questions put to you or counter my arguments in any meaningful way. I refer you to paragraph 2 of my post at 2.24pm, as just one example. Two fundamental points that have not been answered by anyone here are, firstly, Craig’s UNTRUE allegation that he was denied freedom of speech at Cambridge University. Secondly, his absurd notion that this represents a “Stalinist” silencing of dissent. Of course it is easy to shout troll when you have lost an argument. But you are right that I have won.

Eddie,

You still haven’t said whether you work for the secret services or not

I’ve just found this extract from the Cambridge News about the sit-in:

A letter signed by Christopher Warnes and Priyamvada Gopal, of the English faculty, said:

“These students are showing motivation, drive, commitment, perseverance and principle in abundance – exactly the qualities we as teachers value most in our students.”

“Coming out of the Closet – Anti-Zionist and Proud!”

“Forgive me if I’m a little late with this piece ..I’ve been out of commission lately and only come up for food and water…others online have probably already posted this piece. But even so it’s worth re-circulating.”

“Rethinking Zionism” by Philip Weiss is a refreshing piece, but as far as I’m concerned, zionism doesn’t need to be “rethought” it needs to be dismantled and driven from humanity’s lexicon.”

“Until then however, it’s good to count Weiss among the growing numbers of people around the world who are unabashedly Anti-Zionist and Proud!”…

http://tinyurl.com/avgv39

C’mon folks,

There’s no way Eddie is a troll. It only appears that way. And yeah, if the question was, ‘In what way does Eddie differ from a supporter for all things Fascistic’ we’d be stumped for an answer, sure. Same-same for the question, ‘How does he differ from a hell-bent zionist apologist for genocide?’ Scratching your head again? If anyone’s watching, just pretend you have an itchy scalp.

If I may, I can solve the dilemma. As everyone knows, trolls have a mad propensity for typing with the capslock key on. And since Eddie never types with the capslock key on, ipso facto he’s not a troll.

Therefore it’s quite right you go on feeding him. Since he’s not a troll etc. Feed him questions, wait on the results, rise to his baits, engage him in endless arguments, and otherwise give him lots of attention. And all safe in the knowledge that any resemblance between him and a fascism supporting zionist troll defending the indefensible is purely coincidental.

Sighs of relief all round.

Now feel free continue the debate, such as it is.

I am happy to continue the debate if there is anything meaningful to respond to but as the occupation is over and as none of you have been able to give answers to my questions or challenge the facts that I have posted here there seems little point. The University won, there was no denial of free speech or “Stalinism” – Craig did not tell the truth in his post. It was a victory for common sense and the rule of law. If you read the occupiers’ blog (see link below) the comments are overwhelmingly hostile to the occupation. Occupations and shouting evil chants about the intifada are no way to build a mass movement friends. I hope that even you can see that. You alienate people and end up playing with yourselves in the backstreets.

http://cambridgegazasolidarity.blogspot.com/2009/01/important-update.html#comments

Can you repeat the question ?

Craig – sorry for off-topic post, but I have no other way to contact you. Tried to email you today and got a “IP blocked” message from your Russian mail server:

> This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.

>

> A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its

> recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:

>

> craigmurray@mail.ru

> SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT TO::

> host mxs.mail.ru [94.100.176.20]: 550 Access from ip address

> 85.92.xx.xx blocked. Visit

>

> (blocklist appeal website provided)

I have appealed the block, and will try again if they respond positively. However I have read in these comments elsewhere that another person has had difficulty contacting you – if this is the case, I wonder whether you might change your provider… and somewhere perhaps a bit more liberal than Russia, I wonder?

Eddie’s view of the world January 2009

‘It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn’t happening. It didn’t matter. It was of no interest.’

Eddie,

this may come as a bit of a surprise but, well said, sir.

“For the record I support a 2 state solution on the 1967 borders, an end to all illegal settlements, the walls to come down and all settlers to return to Israel unless they are willing to live under Palestinian rule and abide by their rules (with tolerance and with forbearance on both sides)”

Maybe I was being a little harsh on Eddie, I haven’t read all his posts in detail.

My comments on not feeding Zionist or any other variety of trolls stand in general terms however.

Well thanks. It is a surprise. I am not a zionist, extremist or right winger, however you may define those terms. I probably agree with you more than you may imagine. I have been a member of the labour party for years, but I believe in social democracy, liberty, equality, fraternity etc – all those old-fashioned notions that were so hard won. In danger of repeating myself, I just despair at the blindness or stupidity of those on the far left who seek alliances with groups and countries who would deny them their rights and liberties. You are in danger of sleepwalking into the past. My apologies to anyone if my language has been intemperate at times – that’s what the anonymity of the web does I’m afraid. I’m sure if we met face to face we would all be very polite! (perhaps not). This is my last post.

Eddie’s disgusting posts can often be recognised in the first sentence when he personally attacks participants here. He is a transparent Supremacist, the basic belief behind Jewish religion and Zionism. His rethoric betrays years of training in propaganda techniques, foremost the big lie, followed by lies of all sorts, whenever they suit his agenda. When his lies are exposed, he usually changes the subject and does not reply. It is astonishing that he did not reply to Ruth’s question. Silence is usually his reaction to direct exposure. See my comments here:

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/01/boring_boring_b.html

His aim is to distract, absorb energy and to pollute this board so people stop reading and participating. He is employed full time to sabotage the power of this board as Craig Murray attracts people from the highest levels of the power elite here.

The banksters rule by launching, controlling and championing their own apparent opposition. Those repeatedly engaging in discussions with “Eddie” are part of the army of bloggers paid to obstruct real insights and opposition. The best way of dealing with people like “Eddie” is to repeatedly warn newcomers and casual readers that he is a Zionist shill and a notorious liar. His arguments are weak, and apart from exposing them as lies, debating them in endless circles is distracting and just gives him platform and recognition.

He has been caught lying on numerous occasions, like above “there was no denial of free speech”.

“Eddie” is a Zionist shill and a notorious liar.

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/01/boring_boring_b.html

Thanks, Ruth, George Dutton and others for exposing him.

What will be his next alias ?

>>This is my last post.

Da-derr!

Da-derr-derr-derr!

Da-derr-derr de-de de-de de-de-de-derr

Da-derr!

Eddie, if you are a nice guy, get yourself out of Harry’s Place. It’s real bad company

@ Researcher

Eddie says on ‘boring boring’ that he visits Harry’s Place, a very unpleasant locale in my opinion and best avoided.

On a nasty article there today about the poor unfortunate with learning difficulties in Exeter who has been jailed for life for ‘terrorist activities’

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7859887.stm

Eddie writes

eddie

30 January 2009, 4:27 pm

I agree that the punishment seems harsh, but have they had any success in finding and prosecuting those who groomed him?

By the way, is Benjamin in the sin bin?

aaaaaaaaaaaaa

BTW Eddie who is Benjamin – another troll?

“I am not a zionist, extremist or right winger”

“I have been a member of the labour party for years”

Bit out of step with your party there eddie.

This is my favourite eddie quote…

“I have been a member of the labour party for years, but I believe in social democracy, liberty, equality, fraternity”

Priceless…lol.

A little sad to see this degenerating into a “let’s insult Eddie” session. And who on earth would bother to answer the question “are you employed by the security services?”.

In fact, Eddie has stimulated a lively debate. I guess he is a perfectly decent person understandably seeking an alternative to the current political rubble. He has made me think about the importance of holding the centre, as have other people who posted here about the polarisation in pre-Nazi Germany. It is notable, from reading Goodbye to Berlin, that most people thought the Communists would win, before the Nazis suddenly took power. Instead, further reading shows that Hitler’s party jumped from 12 seats in the Reichstag in 1928 to 230 in 1932.

Hold the centre.

Have things quietened down a bit?

Back to ‘Silencing Dissent’.

The BBC news seems to be more and more outrageous in its selectiveness. Apart from the DEC appeal, I don’t complain much. That’s not good enough. This morning it went too far. So I sent off the following to the complaints dept. Perhaps not enough people do this.

To: BBC complaints.

The BBC made a huge, misguided fuss recently, claiming that it needed to decline broadcasting the DEC Gaza appeal to show its so-called impartiality in matters to do with conflicts around the world. Well, where is the impartiality in today’s News Front Page on the BBC website?

In the run-up to the Iraqi provincial elections, eight CANDIDATES have been shot dead, this apart from other supporters and activists.

One UK soldier is killed in Afghanistan.

The BBC chooses to place on its front page today:

“Iraqis vote in landmark elections.” “High hopes for peaceful polls.”

“UK soldier killed in Afghanistan.”

I repeat: “High hopes for peaceful polls.” Under the BBC’s judgement, does EIGHT candidates being killed during the elections actually constitute ‘peaceful’?????

Please tell me precisely, why does the murder of Iraqi election candidates constitute ‘peaceful’ while the death of a UK soldier warrants (as it rightly should) its own headline?

How, exactly, does that constitute impartial reporting?

If, during the next elections in Great Britain, candidates are shot dead, Britain’s borders are closed, traffic is banned from London and curfews put in place, will the BBC use the word ‘peaceful’ in its news reporting?

Thankyou

REMINDER:

If you walk past a bookshop today (WH Smiths, Borders, etc) then please spare 2 minutes to pop in and ask them if they are stocking Craig’s new book. These stores will be having deliveries over the next week so and your enquiry may well influence how many copies they get in and how much publicity they give it. Thanks everyone.

Eddie

Respect!

We must expose the SWP hard left which makes common cause with the misogynist antisemitic homophobic regimes in countries such as Iran.

Well I don’t think you can generalise about either the SWP or the “hard left”. George Galloway, for example, is a strange person. Mostly the left’s common cause is with the people suffering under these regimes, not the regimes themselves. And I don’t think that was Eddie’s main concern, anyway. Panicked by the idea of lawlessness (I share his concern) he is striking out at whatever he sees as a symptom; peaceful, well-meaning, traditional student protests among them.

“George Galloway, for example, is a strange person”

technicolour

You say that as if it were a statement of fact…it is not it is just your opinion.

It is my opinion that you are…”a strange person”…but I stress it is only my opinion.

“Johannesburg – South Africa’s deputy foreign minister has been taken before the national human rights body for allegedly saying that “Jewish money” controls the United States, officials said Thursday”…

http://tinyurl.com/azmkr3

“Respect!”

Alan

Thank you for pointing eddie to that great political party “Respect”. Lets hope he takes your advice and joins.

Yes, I do think anyone who quotes Lenin and Chairman Mao in support of their opinions is strange. Even if I agree with the opinion.

Of course, I am quite strange myself, you are right. How many people possess a solar powered lamp, after all?

But hey, Mr Galloway might have changed. You are right, it is only my opinion. My point about not linking the left in general, hard or not, to the support of homophobic brutal etc regimes still stands.

“support of homophobic brutal etc regimes still stands”

technicolour

You are getting your right mixed up with your left…

http://tinyurl.com/yuv62m