The Big One Cometh
War with Iran is imminent – but will Antiwar.com be around when the shooting starts?
We are currently experiencing the worst fundraising drive we have ever conducted. I am frankly appalled at the dearth of contributions, because if we continue at the present rate we are going to have to start winding down Antiwar.com, and – yes – even close up shop.
It’s as simple as that.
This couldn’t have happened at a worse time. US officials are saying – off the record, of course – war with Iran is “likely.” Hardly a day goes by without Washington rattling its saber, in unison with the Israelis, and our politicians are clearly on the warpath.
This is going to be the
Big One: a war that will make the invasion of Iraq look like a dress rehearsal
for Armageddon, which is precisely what it was. The War Party has been building
up to this for many years – ever since the early
1990s, when the neoconservatives (later organized
around the Project
for a New
American Century) launched a focused effort to convince the elites we had
to “transform” the Middle East and make it into something more like the
Middle West.
The result? Disaster in Iraq, quagmire in Afghanistan – and now we’re on the road to an even worse catastrophe as the War Party ratchets up the pressure to attack Iran.
Defense chief Leon Panetta says the Israelis will strike in the Spring: April or May. Others anticipate an “October surprise” – but it won’t be much of a surprise to regular readers of Antiwar.com.
For sixteen years, we’ve stood watch on the ramparts, keeping track of the War Party 24/7: we’ve given you the best foreign policy news and commentary available on the web, attracted an international audience of several hundred thousand per month, and we’ve done it all on a shoe-string. We stood almost alone, back in the dark days of the run-up to war with Iraq, debunking claims of Saddam’s “weapons of mass destruction.” We accurately predicted how the Iraq war would end – in chaos, and having sown the seeds of the next war. We were the first to name Scooter Libby as the brains behind the conspiracy to “out” a CIA agent, the first to comprehensively debunk – and trace the origins of – the Niger uranium forgeries, the first to raise the warning in the shadow of 9/11 that the US was being provoked into making a fatal mistake.
We don’t have any billionaires paying our bills, nor do we have big foundations backing us up: we just have you. We just have thousands of readers of all political persuasions united in their desire for a peaceful, non-interventionist foreign policy.
We’ve turned to you over the years for the support we need to keep going, and now we’re turning to you once again – because the world needs Antiwar.com now more than ever. Every day the US government gets closer to attacking Iran and launching a major war in the Middle East. Israel is scheming to drag us in by starting a conflict they intend for us to finish, and the War Party here on the home front is in full hysteria mode: once again, we hear the war cries of “weapons of mass destruction,” the lies, the half-truths, the war propaganda that accompanies every “mainstream” newscast.
In short, it’s starting all over again, and we must put a stop to it – because the fate of this country hangs in the balance.
Another war would destroy the US economy, or what’s left of it, and spark a major international financial crisis. The “oil shock” alone could bring down already shaky markets, and plunge a badly ailing economy into a Second Great Depression – one that will make the depression of the 1930s look like a Sunday school picnic.
Yes, we can prevent another war, we don’t have to sit passively and watch the same liars peddle the same lies. Given the right information, as opposed to the war propaganda they’re routinely fed by the “mainstream” media, the American people will choose peace – and rebel against being lied into another disastrous Mideast war.
But we can’t do it without your support. We need your tax-deductible donation right now in order to lay out the facts – the real facts – to the American people. Those facts are simple and easily explained:
-
The US intelligence community has determined the Iranians gave up their nuclear weapons program in 2003, and haven’t restarted it.
-
The US government has refused all Iranian offers to talk, one on one, and resolve the outstanding issues that separate them.
-
The Israel lobby, a powerful force in Washington, is determined to drag us into war with Iran, and they’re pulling out all the stops – including funding a massive propaganda campaign designed to convince us Iran is about to nuke its neighbors.
-
We can’t afford another war, and besides that: the American people don’t want it.
We have the facts on our side. The problem is that the American people aren’t told the facts: instead, they’re fed a constant diet of war propaganda, fake “intelligence,” and anonymous “leaks” by US government officials of “factoids” that don’t add up to hard evidence of anything.
The internet gives us access to the public discourse, and allows us to cut in between the mass media – which is controlled by the War Party – and the public. We can indeed provide a much-needed corrective to the misinformation they’re being fed, but there’s a catch – we don’t have a lot of time to do it.
The clock is ticking. The War Party is putting enormous pressure on Washington, and the Israelis are daily threatening to attack – confident in the knowledge that President Obama will intervene on their behalf once the shooting begins.
There isn’t much time, and we are stretching our resources to the max in order to keep up with the demand for our “services” – and, yes, we are providing a service to our readers, and a valuable one at that. We are giving you the undiluted truth about this administration’s war plans and the facts that refute the alleged “necessity” of attacking Iran. Once the American people learn the true facts, they’ll turn on the War Party with unprecedented fury: think of all the lives that have been sacrificed on the altar of our rulers’ mad ambitions! Not to mention the billions – nay, trillions! – of our tax dollars that have been wasted at a time when Americans are being driven out of their foreclosed homes, jobless and hopeless.
It’s an outrage, and the American people will be properly and implacably outraged if they ever get the chance to discover how they’ve been systematically deceived by their own government.
This is important, so please stop whatever you’re doing or thinking of doing
– aside from reading this – and get out your charge card, your checkbook, or
whatever. The Big One is coming – and when it does, we need to be here. Except,
at the present rate of donations, we won’t be here – and we need you to fix
that. We need your tax-deductible donation
and we need it now.
Our average contribution is under $50 – so we need a lot of them. No matter how modest, every donation counts.
The War Party doesn’t have to worry about paying the bills. They have the whole US Treasury – and the Federal Reserve – at their disposal. We have – you. Help us level the playing field. Give as if your future and the future of the country depended on it – because, in fact, it does.
Read more by Justin Raimondo
- Up Against the FBI – May 23rd, 2013
- Antiwar.com vs. the FBI – May 21st, 2013
- Two Cheers for ‘Isolationism’ – May 19th, 2013
- Our Civil Liberties, RIP – May 16th, 2013
- Raping the World – May 14th, 2013





David Grayling
February 19th, 2012 at 10:21 pm
Justin, do you really think that Anti-War is going to stop what is coming? The American people aren't listening and neither are the Israelis. A terrible fusion between anachronistic religion and ultra-nationalism is sweeping the world towards Armageddon.
Even if there was a God (which there isn't), He or She couldn't stop it. It seems to be in our DNA, this death-wish, this belief that the Second Coming is imminent.
Kiss your children each night!
Guess Who
February 19th, 2012 at 10:41 pm
you won't be missed…adios…
gerry
February 19th, 2012 at 11:35 pm
Clearly the israelis are pushing obama as much as they can. What will happen is there will either be a 9/11 style event that is blamed on the Iranians (whether it was started by them or not) and boom, you have WW3. I think Obama and his crew have intelligence of a major attack being planned by Iran against Israel or some western assets. They will let them attack. Most of this is sabre rattling meant to get America to do more when it comes to Iran.
james
February 20th, 2012 at 3:11 am
Guess who?an a*hole with an attitude, I guessed right?
xcz
February 20th, 2012 at 4:42 am
the negative feedback on your comment suggests the opposite is true.
The Big One Cometh – Antiwar.com
February 20th, 2012 at 5:13 am
[...] The Big One ComethAntiwar.comThe “oil shock” alone could bring down already shaky markets, and plunge a badly ailing economy into a Second Great Depression – one that will make the depression of the 1930s look like a Sunday school picnic. Yes, we can prevent another war, … [...]
Guess Who
February 20th, 2012 at 6:37 am
For months this supposedly antiwar website has been parroting the mainstream media coverage on Syria…
The work antiwar.com has done on the Syria story has been openly in support of regime change propaganda orchestrated by the war party…opposition storyline have been taken at face value…nonstop atrocity stories all proved fake when the monitors arrived in country…
Now after months of mainstream media propaganda demonizing the government and victimizing the opposition…Western public opinion is prepared for violent support of a civil war in Syria…and Nato intervention…
And for months readers have been posting voluminously in protest…all of it ignored…comments routinely censored…dissenters barred from posting…
how many readers and donors have been turned off…?
If you want to be an antiwar website and have the support of people who are against war then you cannot engage in regime change propaganda…simple as that…the two don't go together…
smithy1000
February 20th, 2012 at 6:39 am
Oh stop. We know the dirll by now. You will hem and haw and then at the appropriate time you will say some generous donor has agreed to match funds and then you will make your goal.
John V. Walsh
February 20th, 2012 at 6:45 am
Sustainers, monthly donations to AW.C, however small are needed IMHO.
That makes everything more predictable and will keep Justin out of panic mode and his adrenaline levels safely lower.
So join in and make it a crowd. Sign on for a monthly donation however small.
And kick it off with a large one-time donation to make up for last year's lack of a sustainer.
If you are one of those who reads AW.C every day, ask yourself if you are contributing even a fraction of what the daily newspaper costs you – at least $365/yr. At $20 month, you still are paying far less than for the newspaper which has less content and mostly propaganda content on foreign affairs.
If it is a question of choices in these difficult times, get rid of the daily paper and give your $$$ to AW.C.
MvGuy
February 20th, 2012 at 7:12 am
*****Comment was pre-deleted by writer to avoid the burden being foist upon "administrator"…….
antiwar7
February 20th, 2012 at 7:32 am
I don't know what website you're talking about: definitely not Antiwar.com. Here's what I got from Antiwar.com: intervention in Syria would lead to a Libya-type result, in other words, ethnic cleansing, torture, murder, detentions by the West's "good guys". The rebels in Syria are not unarmed protesters, they have militant Sunni elements, they instigate violence, they summarily execute prisoners, a rebel victory would be another disaster for local Christians.
http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2012/02/19/jason-ditz…
maidhc
February 20th, 2012 at 7:41 am
“The internet gives us access to the public discourse, and allows us to cut in between the mass media – which is controlled by the War Party – and the public. We can indeed provide a much-needed corrective to the misinformation they’re being fed…”
To paraphrase Romney, there was hardly “an inch of space” between Antiwar.com and the mass media in their “reporting” on Libya and Syria. If there was a “much-needed corrective to the misinformation,” it was mostly to be found in disillusioned readers’ comments.
Sibel Edmonds
February 20th, 2012 at 8:01 am
Justin,
I have been a fan of yours for many years. I respect you, and love your fiery, straight-forward and no-nonsense analyses/commentaries. I was also a loyal follower of AW.Com …until two years ago when things began to change significantly. Your news gatherers have been promoting all the known culprits who have by now zero credibility. At any given day at least 45% of news provided come from: Wash Post, BBC, NYT, Al Jazeera. Believe me a few of us have been compiling statistics (have documentation). Not only that, without citing any reasons, your new woman Angela Keaton has decided ban all y articles/analyses (you guys used to publish my pieces regularly in the past). Your moderators have been censoring not only my comments but dozens of other previously loyal AW followers. Many have received labeling response 'Anti-Semite' from Keaton…Exactly the kind of thing you and many of us have been fighting against.
I hope you decide to change course. Respectfully,Sibel Edmonds
maidhc
February 20th, 2012 at 8:06 am
I hope you decide to change course. Get rid of this poisonous lady (maybe she can work for AIPAC or JINSA press division). Boycott the MSM prostitutes (the ones you admit to be liars, prostitutes; the ones who have been marginalizing Ron Paul …and please be what you guys used to be. I love Giraldi. Garris was good… The new crew on the other hand: major no-nos.
Respectfully,
Sibel Edmonds
MvGuy
February 20th, 2012 at 8:24 am
It is difficult for me to know which side to take in the Syria situation…. Do we REALLY want to support the regime that tortured the innocent Canadian Maher Arar's who was tortured at the request of the bush gang of war criminals…… No, I say..!!
Do we want to see the feeble push back against the Israeli soft-core genocide of South Lebanon Christians (six million cluster munitions spread by Israel) and land theft and murder of the native people of Palestine be hobbled by the loss of Syrian frontline assistance and defiance? No..!!
Yes, No on both counts..!! So I am conflicted… I want to see the authoritarian Assad gone, but , I don't want the local Christian and Muslim victims of Israel genocide further isolated, weakened and exterminated… Does AWC have the same inner conflict…???
Thomas L. Knapp
February 20th, 2012 at 8:47 am
"In my imagination, for months this supposedly antiwar website has been parroting the mainstream media coverage on Syria…"
There, fixed that for ya.
niqnaq
February 20th, 2012 at 8:57 am
According to the Urban Dictionary, "ditz" means "a giddy or frivolous person (often female)."
verb. sap.
:-)
liberranter
February 20th, 2012 at 9:00 am
We are currently experiencing the worst fundraising drive we have ever conducted. I am frankly appalled at the dearth of contributions, because if we continue at the present rate we are going to have to start winding down Antiwar.com, and – yes – even close up shop.
Will someone PLEASE inform Justin that Amerika is in the midst of one of its worst economic recessions ever, one that is affecting more and more people with each passing week and that is gradually morphing into the "Greater Depression?" I would venture to say that many, perhaps even most of his readers are lucky to have access to the internet at all right now, never mind being able to dig into their pockets to cough up a few precious bucks for a particular web site. And maybe, just MAYBE, as other disaffected readers have posted here, AWC no longer has the firm backing that it once did, for the reasons Sibel Edmonds cites and many others voiced here and elsewhere. If you really had the backing of the broader anti-war constituency, a hundred grand or so might not be a problem to raise each quarter. That this amount is becoming harder and harder to come by with each new calendar quarter sends the message that not only are regular contributions beyond the means of most of the readership, but that what little disposable income they have is better contributed to other sites that better serve their readership's interests (and that are probably a bit more consistent and honest in their standards).
Maybe fundraising time is a time for some introspection as well.
David Daniels
February 20th, 2012 at 9:16 am
An unresponsive and sarcastic moderator/administrator team that would rather ridicule than be responsive to the concerns of the readership. If the antiwar.com leadership is looking for reasons that people are hesitant to open their pocketbooks they need look no further.
niqnaq
February 20th, 2012 at 10:25 am
AntiWar.com has never defended Assad, but neither has any other US organ I can think of. If it did, it would be descended upon from a great height, as for instance Gareth Porter was many years ago when he dared to say that Pol Pot hadn't killed as many people as official liberal hawkdom said he had. The usual line of the entire liberal spectrum is, at best, "of course [targeted regime du jour] is vile, but… " followed by various half-hearted protests at the brutality of the Pentagon's proposed solution. Most USAians are so infatuated with the idea that they are "mankind's last best hope for freedom" that they don't see anything self-contradictory about bringing freedom to the world at the point of a Hellfire missile fired from a Predator drone. Antiwar.com, being an organ of 'libertarianism' rather than mainstream 'liberalism', prefers to see freedom brought to the world by means of popular uprisings, and is prepared to turn a deaf ear to those who try to point out that these popular uprisings are engineered by the CIA. This willful blindness has crippled its already excessively mainstream-oriented selection of news and analysis. Since all news and analysis aggregation sites embody some ideological perspective, I prefer to surf half a dozen or more such sites each day, and use my intelligence to cancel out, tweak, or modify the ideological slants as I think fit. Certainly it has been a long time since AntiWar.com has been my first port of call.
Jeff Albertson
February 20th, 2012 at 10:29 am
What a strange thread! attn: trolls, your shrill paranoia is what we sane people call a "tell". Some of us were reading Justin before "Sibel Edmonds" went to work for the FBI, so talk to the hand. With friends like that, who needs enemas.
Thomas L. Knapp
February 20th, 2012 at 10:34 am
niqnaq,
"Antiwar.com, being an organ of 'libertarianism' rather than mainstream 'liberalism', prefers to see freedom brought to the world by means of popular uprisings, and is prepared to turn a deaf ear to those who try to point out that these popular uprisings are engineered by the CIA."
Really?
Deaf ear?
Bull****.
Guess Who
February 20th, 2012 at 10:50 am
Where did Sibel's and Maidhc's post disappear to…?
And here you are hat in hand…while booting out readers who dare question your very bad coverage…
smithy1000
February 20th, 2012 at 10:56 am
Agree, where did Sibel and Maidhc post disapper?
You want us to contribute to support censorship?
niqnaq
February 20th, 2012 at 11:04 am
The only one of those three that deals with Syria appeared a mere two weeks ago, and I rapidly scored ten points from you discriminating readers for commenting, "The information is only about three months old.Perhaps the scorn I have poured on AntiWar.com's various columnists and editors in these comment threads over the last month has helped to wake Justin up, but more likely this is based on the awareness that it doesn't matter any more, since the Syrian Ba'ath is now quite obviously and irreversibly doomed. It might have been possible to obstruct the process of subversion by vigorously publicising it earlier on, which may be why Justin & Co refrained from writing about it."
jeff_davis
February 20th, 2012 at 11:05 am
You've stated the problem perfectly. Allow me to add a little something to think about.
Different cultures have different values, which is to say CONFLICTING values, and these values are held to be absolute non-negotiable truths which are never examined much less questioned. This is where cultural conflicts originate, because it seems unthinkable to compromise these values and "allow" the "other" to live in peace and in accord in with values abhorrent to us.
Western culture worships at the alter of democracy, never questioning the pure and absolute truth and goodness of this value. Never questioning the good of democracy, even when we see that our "democracy" is a fraud and a hoax, corrupted utterly — if not logically — into the service of the rich and powerful as with all systems of governance since the beginning of time. Neither do Westerners ever question the inherent "evil/wrongness" of non-democratic systems, despite the self-evident fact that whether "democratically" elected or not, all state power is authoritarian.
The Arab culture (and most others) consider "strong man" (ie authoritarian) rule to be the natural way of things, and legitimate on that account (I'm certain the armed rebels in Syria feel that way.) The strong lead. The others — the followers — then rely on the strong to maintain domestic social order and protect against foreign aggression. Domestic challenges to the strong man's leadership arise in the natural course of events, and, without resort to the foolishness of "elections", the rebellion is quashed or the strong man deposed. This is the way of things in most of the world and has been, until "the enlightenment", the way of things for all of human history. The brainwashed-by-fraudulent-democracy Westerners can't get this, and continue to support the same-old-same-old military adventurism by their ruling classes.The only difference is that now, thanks to cultural evolution, imperial aggression is draped, not in religious preference, but in fake humanitarianism (R2P) and the banner of (fraudulent) democracy.
Onward Christian soldiers,…..
David Daniels
February 20th, 2012 at 11:05 am
More ridicule and threats of assertive moderation.
I love the free market and if this is how I treated my customers (you know, the people who decide whether or not to push the "donate" button?) I would not be in business long.
Your argument is insulting, i.e. that critics of Antiwar.com's coverage of the "uprisings" are "mentally unstable," have a "personal problem," incapable of intelligent thought, etc. I can see it if one or two real kooks were all you had to worry about, but I have for months seen very intelligent and insightful criticism on these pages.
You should realize that those people who post here to "annoy" you and the others over what they see as biased coverage of the "uprisings" by this site are the ones who have not yet voted with their feet. They are the ones who still care about this website enough to spend time trying to urge its return to the correct track.
They are the ones you can still win back by careful consideration of their comments. Perhaps you do not hear it, but many former readers have long since given up and no longer come here anymore. Thankfully there is some real competition out there and antiwar.com is no longer the only game in town.
I would highly recommend that the leadership of this website consider the market that you (and I) have so much faith in.
Shane
February 20th, 2012 at 11:07 am
I like AWC, but can only afford to spread around the $$$ so much…I send a few bucks to LRC, LvMI, and Stefan Molyneux each month…at this point I'm paying more for 'free' online content/commentary than I used to for hard-copy magazines delivered to my home…there are tons of worthy sites and causes, but I can't afford to support them all.
Maybe some consolidation needs to happen in the Freedom Movement's internet media outreach efforts?
David Daniels
February 20th, 2012 at 11:14 am
"There are some at Antiwar.com who think we should moderate comments more heavily "
Looks like they have been busy on this thread! Several comments seem to have disappeared.
jeff_davis
February 20th, 2012 at 11:29 am
I'm gonna be watching your commentary closely, niqnaq, because you've got some talent, but you appear a bit too sure of yourself.(A common failing.) I'm a hard-left progressive, an American — though decidedly unenthusiastic about that — and a Jew. As to libertarianism, it needs to be "rebranded" so as to further distance itself from the pouting childishness of Ayn Rand.
(When I was a youngster, we used to say, "Don't trust anyone over thirty." That should now be, "Don't trust anyone over thirty who still "believes" in Ayn Rand.")
Would you be so kind as to provide a list for the Antiwar.com readers of those" half a dozen or more" "news and analysis aggregation sites" you surf each day?
With provisional respect, Jeff Davis: jrd1415@yahoo.com
Thomas L. Knapp
February 20th, 2012 at 11:31 am
Yes, they got "busy on this thread."
And I raised hell about it, and apparently changed enough minds to reverse it, for the moment.
Here's the dilemma:
Antiwar.com relies on reader support for its funding.
Some people think that when a bunch of nobs show up in comments saying "don't give money to Antiwar.com because in my imagination they are not antiwar," the best thing to do is delete those comments and ban those commenters.
Others — myself included — believe that that's a bad way of handling things. The better response is to point out the defects in the criticisms, correct the problems that aren't imaginary, and give provocateurs with hidden agendas (be they affiliated or freelance) the public shaming they deserve.
Thomas L. Knapp
February 20th, 2012 at 11:35 am
smithy,
Antiwar.com has been fortunate enough to have our bacon saved by generous "matching funds" angels in the past.
While I have not been involved in recruiting those angels or discussing terms with them, my perception of the matter is that said angels always consider themselves to be helping out on an interim basis, giving AWC's readers one more quarter each time to step up to the plate and get the enterprise on a stable financial footing.
So no, it's not guaranteed that one of those angels will swoop in this time, or next time, or the time after that.
Thomas L. Knapp
February 20th, 2012 at 11:38 am
niqnaq,
I did a quick Google and pulled up three random columns, over the course of years, that dealt with US-government-funded NGOs being used to promote "color revolutions" and "Arab Spring revolutions."
I did it THAT way because I knew your first response would be "oh, they're just now getting it right because I've been screeching about it."
Antiwar.com has always opposed US government intervention abroad, be it military or via "soft power." Every time. Without exception.
Those are the facts. They'll remain the facts no matter how much you complain otherwise.
Thomas L. Knapp
February 20th, 2012 at 11:42 am
smithy1000,
Those comments happen to have been undeleted — not to take personal credit, but I did argue for taking on Edmonds, O'Cathaill, et. al instead of trying to ignore them and hoping our readers ignored us ignoring them.
BUT: Nobody is stopping Ms. Edmonds or Mr. O'Cathaill from expressing their opinions. Whether WE provide them with the microphone to do so or not is not a question of "censorship."
David Daniels
February 20th, 2012 at 11:42 am
"And I raised hell about it, and apparently changed enough minds to reverse it, for the moment. "
For that you definitely deserve credit.
But realize, people bitching here may be a pain, but I would bet 90 percent of them are not "kooks" or "retards" etc., but actually care about this website. In other words, it is worth our effort to this point to complain and hope for some changes. There are many who feel this way and it is worth taking notice.
Thomas L. Knapp
February 20th, 2012 at 11:44 am
Ms. Keaton does not decide what articles do or do not get published on Antiwar.com.
Thomas L. Knapp
February 20th, 2012 at 11:48 am
David,
Ever heard of the "excluded middle?"
I didn't exclude it:
"wild theorizing by the mentally unstable, intentional disruption by regime provocateurs, or something in between"
The "something in between" would include everyone who is neither mentally unstable nor a regime provocateur.
Generalissimo X
February 20th, 2012 at 11:57 am
how about taking no side? frankly who even gives a rat's ass about syria? i surely don't. they'll figure it out, or not, and regardless it has no affect on america. we have a massive nuclear arsenal, are protected by oceans and have (despite it's impending collapse) the world's largest economy. whether syria turns into a utopia or a wasteland like somalia makes no damn difference to me. if they've got something to trade, regardless of who's in power fine, if not, good luck to you. the entire problem is that we as a people are not concerned enough about our own house. millions of children starving, people living in cars having lost their home, no healthcare etc etc and i'm worried about syrians? no. assad could murder every person in that country and thats on them, not on us. i'd say try taking a "Side" in what's happening in america and worry about what's going on here.
Thomas L. Knapp
February 20th, 2012 at 12:01 pm
David,
It's not a matter of "credit." To me, it's a matter of getting things right.
I was a fan of, and donor to, Antiwar.com for quite awhile before I started working here. But if you do some Googling, you'll find places where I've been critical of the site and its content.
I do not agree with the current thrust of criticism of Antiwar.com — that we're "in the tank" for US/NATO intervention in the Middle East because we use some sources that some consider unreliable.
And let me be clear here, I believe that some of that criticism — not all of it, but some — arises from ulterior motives.
And, finally, cries of "censorship!" don't move me. It's a big Internet, and nobody, least of all Antiwar.com, is stopping anyone from saying what they want to say. Whether or not we provide the platform is up to us, and not a matter of "censorship."
But, I believe the best way to handle things is head-on rather than evasively.
Deleting critical comments looks like "memory holing." It doesn't work. It makes us look like we've got something to hide. We don't have anything to hide.
Among the criticisms, I've seen allegations of everything from secret Zionism to secret homosexuality (both directed at me — I'm an open Zionist but opposed to all states, so it sort of cancels out; and my sexuality is not especially secret — I'm mostly heterosexual) to secretly working for the National Endowment for Democracy (Ditz) to secretly being funded by Soros (Antiwar.com per se).
IMO, all of those criticisms are stretched to the breaking point for lack of substantive criticisms beyond "you use sources I consider unreliable." So we should get to that particular root of things, and call out the people trying to get the other stuff into circulation.
Generalissimo X
February 20th, 2012 at 12:04 pm
thank you! i lost my job and barely can make my car payment and get gas to run errands. i live in so cal and gas is at 4.28 a gallon for regular. it's gone up 32 cents in less than month. i very much appreciate justin's work, efforts and perspective but i don't need the guilt. i do my best like everyone. and as much as i like this site and its contributors, it prevents nothing. if it did iraq, afghanistan etc would never have happened.
Generalissimo X
February 20th, 2012 at 12:05 pm
talk to the hand? really? the 90's called and they want their lame cliche back.
Mike
February 20th, 2012 at 12:12 pm
I'm not conflicted. My view on Syria is that it is NONE of our business. Simple isn't it? Let's just get the hell out of the Middle East and stop worrying about which form of tyranny over there is better. It will NEVER end.
Mike
February 20th, 2012 at 12:13 pm
Come on. Do they really need to address this? All the critic has to do is READ. Is that such an reasonable request?
Sibel Edmonds
February 20th, 2012 at 12:37 pm
Thanks for your response, Thomas. She had specifically asked me to send my articles/commentaries to her. he said: Garris was no longer taking care of that task. And, as you can see from the archive where you have me listed as a contributor, not a single piece sent to Keaton was published. Despite my numerous attempts to het an answer from her I got none.
I guess I should have asked other at AW. Are you the person handling that division now?
Also, my biggest criticism has/had to do with sourcing here in the last two years or so. Please do me a favor and count: you'll see 50% of the news headlines/links provided are from WP, NYT, BBC. Now aren't these sources considered no longer credible? Aren't they the ones you rightfully bash for bashing Ron Paul?
Anyhow. Please feel free to contact me any time if you have further questions or comments.
Best, Sibel
Thomas L. Knapp
February 20th, 2012 at 12:54 pm
Ms. Edmonds,
Ah, a wrinkle I was not aware of (that you had been told to send your articles to Ms. Keaton).
I don't know how "continuing columnist" material is handled, or by whom, these days, or whether or not that's still your relationship with Antiwar.com — I'm completely uninvolved in that side of things.
When I submit something for publication at Antiwar.com, I send it to Matthew Bargainier (using this link), but it's understood that my submissions are "over the transom," not part of my relationship with the site (I just do the letters column and help with comment moderation).
I respect the critiques of sourcing, but I disagree with them. Antiwar.com presents a lot of material, from many perspectives, but also critiques, contrasts and questions the sources it uses. Better to provide as much content as possible, alongside our own take, and let the readers decide, than to pretend to be a faultless gateway to "the objective sources." It's not like Russia Today, Xinhua, et. al are any less agenda-driven.
But that's just my opinion.
Thomas L. Knapp
February 20th, 2012 at 12:56 pm
Shane,
I feel your pain (yes, really). I contribute to a number of sites, and run my own that operates on contributions as well.
I hope that you can find the odd buck for Antiwar.com, but if not, we still appreciate your patronage and hope you'll tell others about us.
niqnaq
February 20th, 2012 at 1:07 pm
This is turning out fun again. Hats off to TLK. Jeff, in alphabetical order: Aletho News, AntiWar.com, Global Research, Information Clearing House, Iraq-war.ru, and Stop NATO. Aletho is anti-zionist and Iraq-war.ru is anti-Jewish, but I just look for the hard news stories. I usually get sidetracked from one or more of these onto Press TV and Russia Today. Then I turn to the mainstream press, starting with the Israelis: Haaretz, JPost, Ynet, DEBKAfile, and Arutz Sheva/Israel National News. Then the UK broadsheets: Independent, Guardian and Telegraph. Then I have breakfast.
Thomas L. Knapp
February 20th, 2012 at 1:45 pm
niqnaq,
I just rescued your comment from deletion, which I assume was automatic. I'm trying to find out what's causing it so that I can fix it. Sorry for the delay.
niqnaq
February 20th, 2012 at 1:54 pm
The wires must be red hot as the AntiWar team battle in cyberspace.
jeff_davis
February 20th, 2012 at 2:41 pm
Thomas,
You wrote: "I'm an open Zionist"
It seems you are a semi-professional writer. As such you've probably elaborated somewhere/sometime re your support for Zionism. Could you provide a link. You seem a reasonable fellow, a thoughtful fellow, and the fact that you're here at AW.C strongly suggests that you are well-informed across the broad spectrum of political opinion. I would like to hear your reasons for supporting Zionism.
MvGuy
February 20th, 2012 at 2:48 pm
Perhaps Mr. Knapp you at AWC should come up with actual policies, one that the posters can use as a guide.instead of ad hoc acting out, or "programs" to filter out certain comments….. Programs which are syntax illiterate, but "know" certain words………. I have not really had too much trouble with censorship here, but the deletion of some of my comments for no reason that I can fathom does tend to irk me and get me out of the giving mood especially as the economy crashes….. Get a policy for comments that is not so imperious and high handed…
Thomas L. Knapp
February 20th, 2012 at 2:56 pm
MvGuy,
We use IntenseDebate, which is among the better systems out there. Its default policies look for stuff that is probably spam, and those do catch some legitimate comments (I try to find and rescue them).
Our additions to the default filters are mostly aimed at catching Stormfront-style racist and anti-semitic material, which we just have no intention of being a transmission medium for. And THAT in turn is going to catch a lot of legitimate comments on a site that frequently references Israel … once again, I try to find and rescue those comments. And we continually try to tweak/improve the filters to get better at 86ing the stuff we don't want and letting the legit stuff through.
I wish I could tell you that we're on the verge of a perfect commenting system, but we aren't. And if we turned off what we have, there would be several thousand spam comments and dozens of vile racist screeds gumming up the works every day.
Without revealing what I'm paid, let's just say that spread over the amount of time I spend looking for and approving moderated comments that should be allowed, it comes to less than minimum wage (by my choice — they offered me more, but I consider my work at least partially an in-kind contribution).
We'll keep working on it.
MvGuy
February 20th, 2012 at 3:07 pm
Yes, Mr. Knapp, I believe that your pay is surely insufficient for your efforts. And I commend your diplomatic efforts here today. Thank You for all your efforts here. All but one of the commenters are quite supportive, but you do need a more popular policy concerning the content allowed and not allowed….. Thanks again for your attention to my concern
Thomas L. Knapp
February 20th, 2012 at 3:13 pm
Jeff,
Thanks for asking. I've written several things on the subject, but I think this is probably the most recent.
I believe that niqnaq has unpacked and critiqued it on various grounds, so you might want to look up what he has to say.
Guest
February 20th, 2012 at 4:15 pm
How about a terrible fusion between a highly-evolved evolutionary accident like human civilization and an anachronistic concept like “evil” ? Since “the fool has said in his heart, ‘there is no God’ (Psalm 53:1),” we can all watch as your magical Natural Selector (and its unscientific power to make dead chemicals think) saves you, and Anti-War, from this nasty kerfuffle in godless DNA.
Guess Who
February 20th, 2012 at 4:26 pm
I love Knapp's comment about giving people a "microphone…"
What the hell is a comment section for if not to give readers a friggin microphone…?…of course this is the view in the mainstream media and has resulted in a national "debate" that is devoid of any real difference of opinion…a farce in other words…
I am reminded of the apocryphal story of the Soviet visitor who remarked to his American host about the wonderful homogenaity of opinion in the press…"How do you get everyone to sing in such harmony," he wondered…"We try and try back home but are not having nearly as much success…"
If you delete comments because they are critical then it means you have capitulated and recognize a superior argument that you cannot counter with facts…
The only legitimate reason for deleting comments is if they are hate speech, ad hominem attacks, or really foul language…
katallaxxo
February 20th, 2012 at 4:32 pm
100k a quarter might be a little too much for what amounts to Google News searches and a few articles a week.
A little introspection and analysis of your value add to the anti-war community might be a good thing.
Guess Who
February 20th, 2012 at 4:49 pm
I think Sibel's comment is right on the money…!
Look at the Syria coverage from the AWC news dept…everything links to MSM garbage like BBC, NYT etc…
And all they have been doing is sowing the seeds for violence…blatantly fake news disseminated by the rebels…and this is repeated verbatim by the AWC news pieces…
The inevitable result of course is preparing the public opinion for Nato intervention or at the least financial and weapons support for the rebels…
For months many readers here were screaming about this horrible coverage…when the monitors finally went in they made a very good report that corroborated much of what the Syrian government had een saying…armed gangs committing terror attacks against not just security forces but against innocent civilians as well…
This was the other side o the story that was never reported in the MSM or antiwar.com…
I'm sorry but such a blatant omission over such a long time and over the incessant chorus of readers commenting on this site…well that is just not something that can be papered over…
Yet we are ridiculed here by the moderator who says it's all in our imagination…well here is a challenge for you Knapp…why don't you find for me reports from your news department that mention these numerous acts of terror and violence by the so-called pro-democracy opposition…
None as far as I know…in fact Syrian government claims of such wrongdoing by the other side were simply ridiculed…I know I can find plenty of instances of that…
Instead we had an endless stream of regurgitated rebel propaganda, almost none of it actually true…as was verified by the monitors report…
And what about reports of foreign mercenaries being trained and armed in Turkey by US spooks and its Nato sock puppets…?…please find me just a few instances of reports of this kind…come on I challenge you…
Now maybe AWC does not realize this but what your news coverage has amounted to over these past months on the Syria story has been nothing less than misinformation…
And when we have misinformation in the service of promoting regime change and foreign military intervention the that is not information service in the name of anti-war…despite your protestations to the contrary…which frankly are laughable…
Yes, Raimondo waited nearly a year to weigh in and say intervention in Syria is not a good thing…in the meantime his news urchins have been banging the humanitarian catastrophe and Assad demonization bells to no end…
Maybe it is time that antiwar got rid of its so-called news department…what is the purpose if they simply regurgitate the pabulum the NYT is shoving down our throats…as Sibel has pointed out…
But asking us to pony up now to support this travesty is not something that makes sense to me…or judging by the comments here, many others as well…
Generalissimo X
February 20th, 2012 at 5:21 pm
thank you. and i say the same thing and get "minused"..sheesh. forget this freakin site.
here's the plan for american defense. shut down and dismantle every military installation in any and all foreign countries. maintain a small but effective atlantic and pacific naval fleet. this would include our nuclear sub force armed with nukes. maintain a small, well trained and equipped standing army and ensure that each state has a strong national guard presence in keeping with state goals and budgets. ensure our present nuclear arsenal is well maintained and safe. secure the borders of the united states with a well trained and HUMANE border patrol which ensures minimal success for any trying to "sneak in" and of course having the means to detain and remove any who shouldn't legally be here.
and most importantly end every stinking dime of foreign aid. nobody gets one red cent of american taxpayer money. NOBODY. all these pathetic ridiculous tin pot dictators and the israel the welfare queen are finished being at our teet. the entire middle east is on it's own and good luck. mess with america and we'll send every last one of you religious maniacs to meet allah or yahweh. iraq problem solved. syria problem solved. iran problem solved. israeli problem solved. etc. etc. etc.
dan
February 20th, 2012 at 5:25 pm
there is no such thing as a "free market". all markets are dependent on the State Power which controls the space where they operate.
actually, "free markets" is a euphemism for Capitalism, which provides the context, the base upon which the ZioImperialist warmachine operates.
But I feel for you guys, caught between the 1% above and the great unwashed below. Some of you will eventually decide to reach out to the strata below, but most will remain content with their comfortable lives as minor cogs in ZioImperialism, enjoying the privilege of complaining right & left about imperialist wars all they want, because nobody is listening.
There DO seem to be a very few Ron Paul supporters who are urging a Ron Paul/Cynthia McKinney ticket, cf. Facebook, but I doubt they'll get far, or ever be mentioned by AWC:)
Generalissimo X
February 20th, 2012 at 5:27 pm
Ms. Edmonds,
I just want to say that I've followed your writings and works for years on 9-11. To my mind you are one of the great patriots of our time and I appreciate all you have done and exposed. I must say that one of my greatest wishes for awhile now is to know what you know..all of it. I realize that you have been gagged and threatened many times, and maybe i'm way off here, but frankly i've always been of the mind that you know a lot more than you've ever been able to let on. perhaps that's just my own delusional fantasies. in any event thank you for all the risks you have taken and the work that you've done. your comments with regards to this site should be taken very seriously. they've also done a nice job of running off paul craig roberts the second he started talking about the fairy tale story of 9-11. shame on them for that.
dan
February 20th, 2012 at 5:46 pm
niqnaq,
gratifying to learn your before-breakfast reading list isn't that different from my own. but mine includes Dissident Voice, Countercurrents, SF Bayview, Black Agenda Report once a week, James Petras' irregular updates, Raw Story, Glen Greenwald, Electronic Intifada. For MSM I get USA Today & CNN, also watch TV while eating:) Dropped Haaretz, now sub to JTA and Debkafile, Jewbonics and Mondoweiss. I also read a selection of Socialist news services, PSL and WSWS most often. Oh yes, for balance I get the CFR updates:)
AngelaKeaton
February 20th, 2012 at 5:54 pm
Nice homophobia.
AngelaKeaton
February 20th, 2012 at 6:12 pm
I am the Director of Operations at Antiwar.com. I make decisions everyday before anything is foisted upon the editors (who have very exacting standards) at Antiwar.com.
Your pieces were rejected because they are simply not good. Often the articles on your site are substandard and in one case, sub-literate.
Your reputation is also that of a highly difficult contentious prima donna who loathes women and Jews. Over the past years, I have had concluded that is an accurate assessment.
Angela Keaton
323-512-7095
maidhc
February 20th, 2012 at 6:57 pm
With regard to its coverage of Syria, it’s not only sins of omission that Antiwar.com is guilty of. On December 5 last year, its Viewpoints section featured Gene Sharp’s “Choices for Defecting Syrian Soldiers,” in which “the Clausewitz of nonviolence” offered strategic advice to the few who had already defected, suggesting that they “help the regime’s other soldiers also to defect from the Assad regime.” And not only is its news editor a fan of Sharp’s “nonviolent warfare,” but Antiwar Radio also provided a platform for Stephen Zunes, chair of the academic advisory committee for the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict, to claim that the U.S. had “very little” to do with the “really exciting” developments in the region, despite his collaboration with Otpor alumni in training activists in Egypt and elsewhere in nonviolent action (an important fact that was deftly obscured during the interview, unless we count Zunes’ oblique reference to having “met” Syrian activists).
Guess Who
February 20th, 2012 at 7:07 pm
Wow…that is some attack…
I've never seen a cobra spit…but I imagine it is something like this…
Oh yeah…thanks for the knee-slapper about "exacting standards…"
Guess Who
February 20th, 2012 at 7:13 pm
Oh yeah…Gene Sharp…Mr. Fake Revolution…
Oh but it's all for democracy don't ya know…?
So Paul Craig Roberts is out and Gene Sharp is in…that tells me everything I need to know about this website…
maidhc
February 20th, 2012 at 7:20 pm
This is a bit rich coming from someone who told Russia Today that the mainstream media was downplaying the Syrian government’s atrocities because “Assad’s a US puppet.” Now that’s certainly “alternative” news!
MvGuy
February 20th, 2012 at 7:27 pm
THANKS dan for your list of outlets….. Too bad you skipped tellin us their URLs, but I'm sure I can find most of them easily………. Let's not be too hard on AWC…. They perform a valuable service and Mr Raimondo is steadily putting his head into the lions jaws…. His fingering the sudden appearances of Israeli Art Students at manifold and sensitive locations in 911 relevant time frame…. for one. Three good relevant antiwar pieces a week is no small output… I will always be thankful to Mr. Raimondo for making AWC a leading voice for change and sanity…. His steady unflappability and incisive articles are the anchor that keeps this organization from going too far in any, especially counterproductive direction.. He has never been taken apart by any detractor, but has continued to skewer the easy war crowd relentlessly…. He is truly a man for all antiwar seasons……….
Antiwar.com’s ‘Alternative’ Reality « The Passionate Attachment
February 20th, 2012 at 7:47 pm
[...] response to Justin Raimondo’s latest plea for more funds, a lively discussion is now taking place in the comments section. The highlight so [...]
JG
February 20th, 2012 at 7:54 pm
Wildly inappropriate response.
maidhc
February 20th, 2012 at 8:02 pm
My name is Maidhc Ó Cathail.
RobtB
February 20th, 2012 at 8:09 pm
A policy statement on content longer than one line is probably not necessary.
A suitable analogy is the issuance of Corporate Ethics guidlines of telephone-book proportions; unnecessary, really, because most everyone knows what's right and wrong and the ones who actually have a desire, or need, to read the thing are the ones who wish to quibble about whether their obvious and intended infractions are defined within the guidelines. Because defining everything is an infinite task, the stuff of bureaucratic heaven, it's better not to start.
Even with any policy document in force, it's obvious that filters would stll have to be in place. Read your comment twice before you post it, save a copy of the comment, if it's deleted on the site, study it again and you'll probably see the reason why.
If it's a dumb filter mistake, these things can be adjusted.
My personal experience is that I have never had a comment deleted in 20 years of active commenting on the internet.
Mike
February 20th, 2012 at 8:24 pm
"thank you. and i say the same thing and get "minused"..sheesh. forget this freakin site."
You're welcome. And I guess they're simply misunderstanding what you're saying?
I'm just tired of having to play world police and international busybody. Yes, the US government knows best. It is a god and must be worshiped by everyone. To Americans: S*** people, aren't you people sick of this YET? Hey, look:
$15 TRILLION in debt. Hello? Anybody? How much more do we want to spend creating US government friendly dictatorships across the world while our own infrastructure and economy is collapsing over here? Why is this so hard to comprehend?
I know you would agree Generalissimo X.
Whew…I needed that.
Mike
February 20th, 2012 at 8:25 pm
I just made a post and got this:
"This comment has been deleted by the administrator."
Guess I said the wrong thing or something? Oh well.
Mike
February 20th, 2012 at 8:30 pm
there is no such thing as a "free market".
Uh, yes there is, it just doesn't exist anymore. Why do that when we can have the Great God known as monopoly government make everything better? Heh, yeah, as if it has. LOL.
Mike
February 20th, 2012 at 8:34 pm
"I'm an open Zionist but opposed to all states."
Don't see many of those. Hmm….unless I'm missing something that doesn't really make much sense. At least not to me it doesn't.
Sibel Edmonds
February 20th, 2012 at 8:35 pm
You made my case Ms. Keaton. You have been calling way too many people 'anti-Semite.' You are used to ignorantly trashing people.The founders of AW were against people just like yourself. Those who label all Israel and Israel lobby critics as Anti-Semite. Interestingly, whenever I post Raimondo's articles I get attacked for supporting anti-semite writer. Mr. Raimondo is not Anti-Semite. Neither am I. By the way I am a woman, and you accuse me of being sexist? As for writing: I did not put my name up at AW site as one of the writers-contributors. The real 'Antiwar' founders did. And they are not the problem.
I hope the readers-followers of AW see the degradation here. And I certainly hope they encourage the 'real' AntiWar people at this site to get rid of the poison who's been planted here.
I am done here. I tried my best to save AW. I don't have tolerance for disrespectful and hateful people.
Mike
February 20th, 2012 at 8:38 pm
Oh I see. Let me guess. Any criticism of women is "hate speech" right? (I encounter it all the time on the internet and in real life. They never admit this though)
I would like to know what this alleged "loathing of women and Jews" is.
MvGuy
February 20th, 2012 at 9:00 pm
Hey Angela………. Your StormFront manners scare the hell out of me…. Has Mr Raimondo been forced out and the likes of you and Thomas (the Zionist) Knapp are running the policy and submissions shop now……. but still the same window decor ..?? I think I'm beginning to see more clearly now… What ever is going on down there, your little tantrum re: Sybele Edmonds is death to congeniality…. It's not a joke… So, It must be hackers, Either that or Angela Keaton has lost her mind or is drunk or the site being hacked, there can be no other reasonable explanation…if it actually IS angela keaton talking this pigwort trash….. I for one will NOT be not sending a dine until she/YOU apologize to Sibel Edmonds……. This entire episode gives me pause and undermines my faith in Antiwar.com as a trusted source of non-mainstream news and opinion…..
Where is Justin Raimondo when he is sorely needed..???
Sibel Edmonds is the most gaged person in recent American history……. If what she was saying is rubbish, why would the congress gag her so assiduously…???
Someone needs to do a bit of tidying up down there…!!!!
marko
February 20th, 2012 at 9:08 pm
My Invisible Magic Friend can beat up your Invisible Magic Friend.
MvGuy
February 20th, 2012 at 9:21 pm
This is very sad to see such venomous talk, and NOT from crazy commenters, but from the site management…. Who is in charge here, in what is rapidly becoming an asylum…….
niqnaq
February 20th, 2012 at 9:26 pm
The appropriation of "Left" values by people whose editorials routinely engage in red-baiting seems a litte hypocritical.
maidhc
February 20th, 2012 at 9:31 pm
Keaton's Facebook account must have been hacked too:
“One of the joys of working at Antiwar.com is knowing that 98% of your critics are racist garbage cans.”
Thomas L. Knapp
February 20th, 2012 at 10:01 pm
Sorry about that.
jasonditz
February 20th, 2012 at 10:27 pm
That someone overheard something interesting 10 years ago does not mean they have anything worth saying now. I think the slow realization of that fact has been the center of this weird little crusade against us.
Bianca
February 20th, 2012 at 10:36 pm
It would be sad if Antiwar.com suffers due to donator exaustion. And no wonder. Everyone with any concern for our world, for our kids, our old people — OUR country, is deeply worried. Everywhere around us, divisions and disagreements. Everywhere around us, people are falling prey to ideologies, whose simple comfortable "solutions" that get people elected. Every intervention results in chaos and a black hole that lasts for a long time.
Think of the ladies and gents of the old south, that gathered before the battle to have a picnic. They were horrified as the dying fell on their picnic finery. We are them. In no time flat, our world can disappear. And when we emerge at the other end, it will be a different universe, a place we will no longer recognize. Why do we wish that?
MvGuy
February 20th, 2012 at 10:56 pm
Too bad that Angela not Bianca has control…… or is Bianca just playing nice because the CRAZY Angela has shot off her mouth once too often…. Yeah, I wanna apologize to any hackers I may have maligned by saying the CRAZY attack on Sibel Edmonds must be the werk of hackers, Because Angela wouldn't be so crude, stupid and tone deaf in dealing with Sibel….. I was wrong, silly me, I never thought EMPLOYEES here would mount scurrlous personal attacks on knowledgeable contributers to AWC devoid of actual substance.
"Your reputation is also that of a highly difficult contentious prima donna who loathes women and Jews. Over the past years, I have had concluded that is an accurate assessment"
Wow, according to Angela, Sibel is self hating on two fronts…. LOL *** Send Angela for therapy!
"It would be sad if Antiwar.com suffers due to donator exaustion."
Far sadder if antiwar.com suffers due to management inability to behave professionally************
MvGuy
February 20th, 2012 at 11:21 pm
I'm beginning to see the outline more clearly now…..
Now that Jason throws his support behind the bad mouthed Angela…… You two (three??) are starting to make this place look like a neocon MOLE shop with bad manners…..
It is not what Sibel overheard, it was her valor in her attempts to expose the way we were (are) being gamed in the Turkish portfolio and the language section at CIA….. Give us facts, not inuendo…..Eh tu Jason….???
MvGuy
February 20th, 2012 at 11:26 pm
I hope I awake tomorrow and find this all is a bad dream…………….
Ike_Hall
February 21st, 2012 at 7:10 am
Sounds like a plan to me! Wish I could give you a few more thumbs-up for this.
Jeff Albertson
February 21st, 2012 at 8:29 am
Good stress test for the staff. I've seen many office situations deteriorate or fail due to HR traps for the unwary or easily provoked, let alone in a public environment with lots of dedicated and persistent enemies. Stick together, don't feed the trolls, don't lose your cool and don't let them see you sweat. You're doing fine.
One tip if I may; a deleted comment generally attracts more notice than it deserved in the first place.
Your blog, your rules…
jasonditz
February 21st, 2012 at 9:05 am
Sibel Edmonds (2001 edition): Sacrificed her fledgling career as a government translator in an attempt to uncover secrets the American public needs to know.
Sibel Edmonds (2012 edition): Exhorts her tens of readers to launch a wild-eyed crusade against Antiwar.com, on the pretext that we're some pro-war conspiracy.
It seems a tad incongruous.
dave742
February 21st, 2012 at 9:54 am
Yes! Bye bye! And I donated money to this BS site at one point. I want my money back before they go under.
Generalissimo X
February 21st, 2012 at 10:11 am
right on mike, agree 1000% which by definition is impossible. so yeah, pretty serious agreement.
Generalissimo X
February 21st, 2012 at 10:16 am
oh why don't you go censor some comments you fat windbag. f u ditz. seriously, f u twice.
liberranter
February 21st, 2012 at 10:29 am
Boy, THAT response oughta do wonders for donations.
liberranter
February 21st, 2012 at 10:32 am
… and then wondering why the coffers aren't overflowing with generous donors' coin.
liberranter
February 21st, 2012 at 10:34 am
Very true. Just don't be surprised when enough of the current readership decides to contribute to those "other microphones" with time, money, volunteer efforts, and otherwise that this site is left in the dust. Ain't the free market a wunnerful thing?
liberranter
February 21st, 2012 at 10:37 am
The only legitimate reason for deleting comments is if they are hate speech, ad hominem attacks, or really foul language…
"Hate speech" – that most elastic and undefined of terms.
Thomas L. Knapp
February 21st, 2012 at 10:48 am
liberranter,
Yes, the free market is a wunnerful thing — and you state well my exact point in internal discussions at Antiwar.com.
I believe that in the long run, we are much better off being very permissive about commenting, and doing the work of engaging our critics, than we would be with a suppressive comment moderation policy and a policy of trying to ignore our critics and hope that a) nobody notices, and b) that those critics don't just take their case to some place we CAN'T control.
But, none of that is relevant to my narrow claim: No, not allowing someone to use Antiwar.com's comment system as their personal microphone is not "censorship," any more than refusing to buy that someone a Ferrari is "forbidding them to drive."
musings
February 21st, 2012 at 11:50 am
So interesting that we understand how useful 9/11 style attacks can be to war mongers. They even wrote about their desires for a "second Pearl Harbor." Then, when it was thought necessary to make a point about where to direct the war (since Afghanistan was not "target rich" but evidently part of a master plan), Saddam was treated as the terrorist who had sent us anthrax and who could kill millions with his bio-weapons program. That part of the psyop worked to bring about a war with him, but it eventually succumbed to reality. 9/11 has remained the great myth, and it was followed by 7/7 which brought Britain into line with the US war efforts in the Mideast, after their strong antiwar reactions earlier that brought 2 million people into the streets.
So we have every reason to imagine that the need to make Iran the enemy will have some features of the early psyop situations, though it is hard to say what. Underlying the whole story is oil, and it has always been the chief motivation.
But cunningly, it might be as much about making oil harder to get even as it becomes used up in places. Saudi Arabia is reopening old wells and the story is that over thirty years or so these drying wells have had enough seepage back into the channels that they can be exploited at least for heavy crude. If Saudi Arabia is resorting to this, they must feel the easy stuff is in danger of running out. To make such a resource harder to get is to begin to decide who will get it, to interfere with an open market to favor certain parties. Those parties are the ones trying to go to war with Iran. If regime change can be brought about, then the new rulers will owe their position to the West and have to privilege it for getting oil in the future – or else be deposed.
I don't see this as simply a matter of the survival of Israel (although Israel is dependent on outside support from the West, most likely the US and Britain). Israel, however bellicose it becomes, is still the junior partner in my opinion. To act without permission would endanger its livelihood. Things that unfold will unfold deliberately.
smithy1000
February 21st, 2012 at 1:02 pm
Nice post.
liberranter
February 21st, 2012 at 1:43 pm
Regarding your last sentence, I never made such a claim. If you re-read my post, you'll see that what I clearly said was that if enough of your regular readers decide that your "microphone" isn't worth paying for because it doesn't broadcast the opinions that they prefer to air, or that the content they seek from your "loudspeakers" differs little from the Establishment outlets that they're trying to avoid, they will take their "business" elsewhere. No doubt there are, or can be built, other sites that offer "microphones" that actually satisfy these readers' criteria for broadcasting opinions and "loudspeakers" that broadcast real truth from sources outside of Establishment organs. Perhaps one or a few of these regular readers might even build a new and better "microphone" and "loudspeakers" than what are offered here.
As a libertarian, I couldn't very well have heartburn with AWC ownership/management's censoring/filtering/otherwise controlling visitor comments and feedback in any way they see fit. All I am saying is that they shouldn't be surprised when many of those regular readers (not a small number of whom have been regular contributors as well) whose views differ from those of your editorial staff and who feel in some way ill treated for such views, who are displeased with the direction your site has taken over a certain period of time, or are upset at how the site chooses to treat certain long-time contributors who have made invaluable contributions to the AWC cause (not to mention costly personal or professional sacrifices) decide not to contribute their precious money for those reasons. To use an analogy, would you continue to patronize a retail store whose staff, after many years of stellar service and sales of quality products, suddenly began treating you in a surly or demeaning manner while offering substandard merchandise? Any reasonable person would immediately take their business elsewhere, and would probably assume that this establishment either no longer cared to stay in business, had new ownership whose agenda was something other than its customers' well-being and satisfaction, or that the majority of the customers were spineless masochists. All well and good if these customers choose to stay loyal; but don't count me among them, or ask for any more of my money.
Thomas L. Knapp
February 21st, 2012 at 2:02 pm
liberranter,
OK, I see where you're coming from.
Let's go directly to this:
"To use an analogy, would you continue to patronize a retail store whose staff, after many years of stellar service and sales of quality products, suddenly began treating you in a surly or demeaning manner while offering substandard merchandise?"
No, I wouldn't.
On the other hand, I don't believe that Antiwar.com is offering substandard merchandise.
And on the third hand, surliness or lack thereof can be a two-way street.
At some point amid allegations to the contrary, I am almost always going to suggest, perhaps less than completely politely, that the fact that I haven't publicly fellated Bashar al-Assad or burned a synagogue this month is not evidence that I'm a neocon mole.
Delbert Grady
February 21st, 2012 at 4:36 pm
"if we continue at the present rate we are going to have to start winding down Antiwar.com, and – yes – even close up shop"
It'll be no great loss, at least not for those interested in truth, and not disinformation and half-truths.
Armageddon Approaches | The Occidental Observer - White Identity, Interests, and Culture
February 21st, 2012 at 4:36 pm
[...] “This is going to be the Big One,” says Justin Raimondo, “a war that will make the invasion of Iraq look like a dress rehearsal for Armageddon.” [...]
Do you believe in Antiwar.com’s ‘angels’? « The Passionate Attachment
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:04 am
[...] may not convince too many readers to part with their hard-earned money this time, however, as comments such as this one [...]
Armageddon Approaches « The Ugly Truth
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:26 am
[...] “This is going to be the Big One,” says Justin Raimondo, “a war that will make the invasion of Iraq look like a dress rehearsal for Armageddon.” [...]
Armageddon Approaches | Beyond The Yew : Saying NO to Globalism!
February 22nd, 2012 at 12:27 pm
[...] “This is going to be the Big One,” says Justin Raimondo, “a war that will make the invasion of Iraq look like a dress rehearsal for Armageddon.” [...]
Attack the System » Blog Archive » Armageddon Approaches
February 25th, 2012 at 7:55 pm
[...] “This is going to be the Big One,” says Justin Raimondo, “a war that will make the invasion of Iraq look like a dress rehearsal for Armageddon.” [...]
What Israel and US can expect if they bomb Iran
February 28th, 2012 at 2:29 pm
[...] [...]
30.06
March 2nd, 2012 at 9:37 pm
HANDS OFF IRAN !! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACzYJ9IGlTg
Armageddon Approaches | Pakalert Press
March 3rd, 2012 at 1:58 am
[...] “This is going to be the Big One,” says Justin Raimondo, “a war that will make the invasion of Iraq look like a dress rehearsal for Armageddon.” [...]
BOINNK!!! | En de klok tikt door!
March 3rd, 2012 at 3:06 am
[...] “This is going to be the Big One,” says Justin Raimondo, “a war that will make the invasion of Iraq look like a dress rehearsal for Armageddon.” [...]
MoT
March 3rd, 2012 at 5:11 pm
The only time in recent memory, and the only site I can ever recall that deleted a comment of mine, was many years ago on FreeRepublic. I evidently said, on my very first and only comment on that site populated by bloviating lunatics, and not anything in the slightest that could be construed as being a problem, was "disappeared" overnight. Clearly I said something that managed to upset the troglodytes who operated the site. Even follow up questions as to why I'd been deleted received no response. I simply got a big digital finger in the face for my troubles. Needless to say I never went back and let the loons sing to each other in their padded cell. Here? If a comment vanished I'm not aware of it and I've said some pretty angry things in the past. No place is perfect because we are in the end imperfect humans.
MoT
March 3rd, 2012 at 5:16 pm
Well, as I've set up web sites, forums, and commenting systems in the past I can tell you from experience that people will never cease to amaze me in their brazenness. Lies, damn lies, and comments! You get phony users who plant advertising throughout sites ( you hear me Rotten Tomatoes ? ) with pitches for handbags and other counterfeit goods. Mostly Chinese garbage and you'd have to be a damn fool to believe it. Still, why were they there in the first place if they hadn't been allowed to spam away? And the dreck sits there for what seems forever. Are they either that lazy or that stupid to allow it? I like the interaction that a healthy commenting system allows but sometimes it just appears to be one great case of mental masturbation.
ENGLISH Darkmoon on the disaster of attacking Iran; words “husband’ and ‘wife ” offend militant homos in Britain
March 21st, 2012 at 3:34 am
[...] Without a doubt, the Iranians have marked out every firing spot along the Persian Gulf coast. Locating these hiding holes with low-flying attack helicopters will not be easy. Helicopters can be shot down. Equally impressive is Iran’s missile range: 1500 miles and growing. Hostile Bahrain and Qatar can easily be hit by the longer-range versions of the Sunburn or Onyx. So can the Saudi oilfields. Indeed Israel itself, though further away, could suddenly find itself under a shower of deadly missiles, not only from distant Iran, but from Hezbollah just across the Lebanese border. “This is going to be the Big One,” says Justin Raimondo, “a war that will make the invasion of Iraq look like a dress rehearsal for Armageddon.” [...]
ENGLISH Tesla, mind control and free energy without any wires or cables; humanimals on parade; Darkmoon on the disaster of attacking Iran; words “husband’ and “wife” offend militant homos in Britain
March 21st, 2012 at 5:49 am
[...] Without a doubt, the Iranians have marked out every firing spot along the Persian Gulf coast. Locating these hiding holes with low-flying attack helicopters will not be easy. Helicopters can be shot down. Equally impressive is Iran’s missile range: 1500 miles and growing. Hostile Bahrain and Qatar can easily be hit by the longer-range versions of the Sunburn or Onyx. So can the Saudi oilfields. Indeed Israel itself, though further away, could suddenly find itself under a shower of deadly missiles, not only from distant Iran, but from Hezbollah just across the Lebanese border. “This is going to be the Big One,” says Justin Raimondo, “a war that will make the invasion of Iraq look like a dress rehearsal for Armageddon.” [...]
» ARMAGEDDON APPROACHES, by Dr Lasha Darkmoon » Antizion
April 16th, 2012 at 3:54 am
[...] “This is going to be the Big One,” says Justin Raimondo, “a war that will make the invasion of Iraq look like a dress rehearsal for Armageddon.” [...]
Via Islamica » Blog Archive » Armageddon Approaches Dr. Lasha Darkmoon
April 24th, 2012 at 11:56 pm
[...] “This is going to be the Big One,” says Justin Raimondo, “a war that will make the invasion of Iraq look like a dress rehearsal for Armageddon.” [...]
Common Fallacies About Anti-Interventionism « Attack the System
May 11th, 2012 at 10:20 am
[...] however, those long-silenced voices of dissent have been revived. Two unwinnable wars and a third in the making have provoked a reaction, on the right as well as the left, and the Establishment is once again up [...]