Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Flame Wars – What Kinda Nation is This?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU
 
Violet_Crumble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 06:03 AM
Original message
The Flame Wars – What Kinda Nation is This?
For many years, that darling of the left liberals, The Nation, has been publishing ads by FLAME which deny the existence of the Palestinian people, their expulsion by the Israelis, the fact of continuing Israeli occupation and the oppression that has accompanied it. I long ago gave up subscribing to the magazine because it defended their running of the ad along the lines that we see below, although they would refuse to run an ad that denied the Jewish holocaust which is equivalent to what FLAME does with the Palestinian experience. Since it is fairly well known that the majority of the Nation's readers are liberal Jews, the magazine's editors are well aware what would be its fate if they would run the equivalent ad denying the Jewish experience at the hands of the Nazis. There would be a boycott. So, under the present circumstances, may I suggest it's time for us to boycott the Nation?

Here is some sample texts of some of these ads:

An unwarranted request. There is no such thing as a "Palestinian people." That is a concept that, by the drumbeat of incessant propaganda, has been foisted on the world. The so-called Palestinians are the same Arabs that live in Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. Never at any time in history did the "Palestinians" have a homeland, nor did they ever demand one.

The proclivity to war and to terror on the part of the Arab-Moslems has nothing or little to do with Israel. It is the result of their culture and of their history. It is a symptom of a crisis of identity and of confidence. For centuries, the historical Moslem empires of the Middle East were confident societies, which long led the despised Christian West in terms of science and economic well-being, as well as in military power. But then a lasting reversal and decline set in, in which the loss of Spain and the ascent of the West and its towering achievements in every human endeavor played a key role. This thirst for war against each other and against the hated infidels — foremost among them the Israelis — and the lust for terror will not end until Arab-Moslems come to terms with the West and accept its predominant role. But that may take a very long time – in fact, it may never happen. "… the lust for terror will not end until Arab-Moslems come to terms with the West and accept its predominant role."

This is what The Nation wrote in response to a complaint:

"I was forwarded your letter regarding the FLAME ad and want you to know that the 1/23/06 issue contains this note from our editors:
The inside back cover ad by an anti-Palestinian group called Flame, which appeared in our January 9/16 issue, sparked a flurry of "How could you! " (or worse) e-mails from our intelligent readers. The ad, which purports to expose propaganda myths circulated by the Palestinians (the most blatant of which, according to the ad, is that these non-existent Palestinians have a legitimate claim to the land that eternally belongs to Israel), is of course historically inaccurate, mendacious and racist. It purveys one of the most destructive myths of Israel’s right wing, namely that the Palestinians have no legitimate national rights., and they should be ignored rather than negotiated with. This myth has long been a drag on efforts for a peaceful solution. So how, you might ask, can we run such an ad? We run it because The Nation’s policy on advertising acceptability starts with the presumption that "we will accept advertising even if the views expressed are repugnant to those of the editors." (And let’s be clear: the editors find the views of Flame quite repugnant.) We do impose limits on commercial advertisements, barring, for example, those that are false, lurid or patently fraudulent, illegal or libelous. However, ads that present a political point of view are considered to fall under our editorial commitment to freedom of speech and, perforce, granted the same latitude we claim for our own views. But we do reserve the right to denounce the content of such ads, just as our editorials denounce ideas we abhor. And that is what we do here.

Please do not judge our magazine too harshly as the advertising policy is a very "liberal" one and we re-visit it often to make certain that it is still in keeping with our values as an independent opinion journal.

Sincerely,
Ellen Bollinger Vice President Advertising
The Nation

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m19595&l=i&size=1&hd=0

Here's a link to the ad:

http://www.adc.org/PDF/ArabianFables.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 06:06 AM
Response to Original message
1. Ah, 'Facts and Logic About the Middle East' Ma'am
A foul and dishonest bunch, that....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Violet_Crumble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 06:11 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. I'd not heard of them before this...
They're pretty nasty critters, that's for sure. I'm in two minds as to whether I agree with the Nation's policy of publishing ads like that one...

Violet...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 06:16 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. They Have Been Around At Least Thirty Years, Ma'am
Probably longer, advertising then and since in the glossy and political magazines regularly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Englander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 07:00 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. I first heard of these characters last week.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. Funny, though the Nation finds this group racist and repugnant, DU
posters are free to quote them, to follow their "logic", and still be considered part of the DU "progressive community." Even though the rules are that racist sites are unwelcome here. Even though we are expected to be liberal or progressive.

Did i miss something?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Violet_Crumble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. No, you didn't miss a thing...
The main reason I posted this was because what was said in that ad has been said many times here by DUers who have the nerve to accuse others of not being progressive or liberal. At least the Nation admits that those views are repugnant...

Violet...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Englander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 06:58 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. They certainly are.
All this has happened before, as well, found via Google;

Political Ads Shot Down
Arab Americans See U.S. Media Bias
by Cynthia Cotts
February 27th, 2001 11:00 AM

>snip

As Jahshan fights for control of the narrative, one of the groups he competes with is FLAME, a/k/a Facts and Logic About the Middle East, a San Francisco-based nonprofit. For the last decade or more, FLAME has been placing inflammatory ads that blame everything on the Arabs. The group's latest ad is a defense of Ariel Sharon, lauding the new prime minister as a "hero" who is "desperately" needed by Israel.

The ad in question occupied a quarter-page in the Times' front section on February 21. "The media is mounting a campaign against Ariel Sharon," it reads, "describing him as an out-of-control warmonger, a man on a perpetual warpath, someone who, if elected, would not hesitate to use troops against the Palestinians and all other Arabs." According to the ad, Sharon could not possibly have prevented the massacre of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon in 1982, because he didn't know about it. (Sharon is widely faulted for not preventing the massacres.)

This sort of slipperiness isn't news. In 1990, Times columnist Anthony Lewis denounced a FLAME ad as a "sorry evasion of reality," and in 1998, FLAME ran an ad calling the Islamic religion "virulent" and blaming Islam for promoting violence against the U.S. and Israel. When a reporter pointed out the overt bigotry, FLAME's Gerardo Joffe said, "All Arab Muslims may not be a bunch of fanatics, but I've never met one who isn't." Both U.S. News & World Report and The Nation have come under fire for running FLAME ads, prompting Nation publisher Victor Navasky to write a defense of his ad philosophy.

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0109,cotts,22648,6.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 06:12 AM
Response to Original message
3. they didn't read the content before putting it in?
''Please do not judge our magazine too harshly as the advertising policy is a very "liberal" one and we re-visit it often to make certain that it is still in keeping with our values as an independent opinion journal.''

i have no sympathy for that kind of myopic attitude from ''liberals''.

sigh -- i have no faith that there can ever be a balance on this issue -- no matter what -- one group is seen as more inherently ''right'' than the other here in the u.s.
i see no sign of that changing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coastie for Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 09:54 AM
Response to Original message
7. Counterpoint
Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


and

Free Speech:
Freedom of speech is protected in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights and is guaranteed to all Americans. Since 1920, the ACLU has worked to preserve our freedom of speech. Learn more and take action to protect the right to free speech.
Historically, at times of national stress -- real or imagined -- First Amendment rights come under enormous pressure. During the "Red Scare" of the early 1920s, thousands were deported for their political views. During the McCarthy period, the infamous blacklist ruined lives and careers.

Today, the creators, producers and distributers of popular culture are often blamed for the nation’s deep social problems. Calls for censorship threaten to erode free speech.

The First Amendment exists precisely to protect the most offensive and controversial speech from government suppression. The best way to counter obnoxious speech is with more speech. Persuasion, not coercion, is the solution.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. This is very funny, really.
The Nation taken to task for publishing advertising for propaganda (for a fee).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coastie for Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. What is even funnier
is that the ads also appeared in The New Republic, and that some progressives see only a First Amendment with an ideological band pass filter. The First Amendment is an amplifier and transducer - not a band pass filter (which is also a band stio filter)

I would recommend a reading list:

1.

2.

3.

4.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Now, if there was a refusal to print something, because of its content,
or an attempt to charge exorbitant rates to certain advertisers,
then I could see a 1st Amendment issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomClash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Yes, the First Amendment protects speech against Government censorship
What does that have to do with The Nation magazine, FLAME and any potential boycott for publishing their ads?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coastie for Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Public marketplace of ideas. NT
Edited on Wed Jan-25-06 07:47 PM by Coastie for Truth
A hallmark of the true progressive and liberal is that all ideas - short of crying fire in a crowded theater - are open.

Let me tell you, there's a heck of lot of stuff from both sides that isn't worth the time to read - or the disk space to archive - but in the market place of ideas and colloquy it is brought out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Violet_Crumble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. You wouldn't be opposed to ads denying the Holocaust?
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coastie for Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. I supported the ACLU on a similar question....
I was a member of the American Civil Liberties before, during, and after these events - continued to pay my dues and otherwise support the ACLU.

-
Controversies and tragedy

Skokie is also the traditional home of Chicago's Jewish population, although in recent years the town has significantly diversified and much of the Jewish population has moved to other suburbs. In 1977 and 1978, members of the National Socialist Party of America (Nazis) attempted to march through Skokie. Because of the large Jewish community in Skokie, it was believed that the march would be disruptive, and the city refused to allow it. The American Civil Liberties Union intereceded on the behalf of the NSPA, and the march was permitted to proceed under court order but they were not permitted to show or wear the swastika. Nevertheless, the Nazis failed to march on the appointed day possibly because they did not have enough members to carry through with their intention and because of anti-fascist counterdemonstrations.


So, that's as close to a non-hypothetical, actual response.

Your point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 08:02 PM
Response to Original message
13. The problem with the Nation's argument is that they are not consistent.
Edited on Wed Jan-25-06 08:41 PM by Tom Joad
Because they are perfectly willing to bar ads for Holocaust deniers, even though this is also a political view, (that is repugnant, and despicable, certainly nothing i would put in a magazine I was putting out) but it is a political point of view. So why is this decision to allow one repugnant view and not the other.

reminds me of selective enforcement of rules... where have i seen that before??

On the other hand...I should point out that the Nation, to its credit, has carried many articles (that are probably actually read and taken seriously by its readers, unlike these idiotic ads) that have added much to the general knowledge of what is happening in Palestine. Edward Said was often a contributer.

So one can say Flame helped spread the word for justice in Palestine? I probably would not go that far. Still, it is Flame racists who you think might be questioning the decision of its own leaders to subsidize a publication that often is directly at odds with its racist agenda.

Maybe the last laugh is on the idiots at Flame.

However, I do think this so goes over the edge with racism, with myth-making, that it should be rejected like the holocaust-deniers ad.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coastie for Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 08:33 PM
Response to Original message
15. Best evidence? Credible evidence?
Is what has been presented in the OP the ? So, was Ellen Bollenger’s response a letter to an individual – or an editorial? Why is the “best evidence” a writing by Jeff Blankfort of PeacePalestin appearing in Uruknett?

My second question. Why is “best evidence” of the offending ad an Adobe Acrobat file from the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee, and not from the original source – www.factsandlogic.org? At www.factsandlogic.org/ad_64b.html and www.factsandlogic.org/pdf/ad_64b.pdf?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Violet_Crumble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Since when is this a court case?
Is there some particular reason that you think the ad is a fake? Asking pointless and stupid questions may give the impression that you support the facts and logic bunch of raving bigots and what they are saying...

btw, the ad is what was on their site, so what's yr point??

Violet...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coastie for Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. I am just protecting you and Blankfort from charges of
"Creative Photoshopping."

BTW - your question/assertion
"Asking pointless and stupid questions may give the impression that you support the facts and logic bunch of raving bigots and what they are saying..."
goes back to some post we had about conflation.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lithos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-25-06 11:59 PM
Response to Original message
21. Locking
Uruknet is a portal site that has an extremely soft editorial policy by freely posting and promoting articles from noted anti-Semites such as Kaminski and others. As such it is considered biased and extremely unreliable and thus unusable here on DU.

Please also note that FactsandLogic is considered an extreme RW vanity site and also not considered reliable except in the current context.

This thread may be restarted by using the original link:

http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2006/01/flame-wars-what-kinda-nation-is-this.html

Lithos
I/P Forum Moderator
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 03:37 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC