tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post1730563114168807055..comments2024-03-01T08:19:54.547+00:00Comments on BobFromBrockley: Counterpunch: for the recordbobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15439386754907203808noreply@blogger.comBlogger24125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-31119648814058482342011-04-02T21:47:02.677+01:002011-04-02T21:47:02.677+01:00As for Pham Binh's article, recommended by Ski...As for Pham Binh's article, recommended by Skid, I remain unconvinced. The point is not that those who oppose intervention are supporters of Gaddafi. Some are (Healeyites, McKinney, Galloway, etc) but many are critical. Rather, the point is that by opposing intervention without proposing any alternative, meaningful form of concrete solidarity, they are objectively abetting the slaughter of the rebels. This is the point I try to make in my more recent post ("The case against liberal interventionism") so I won't argue that point further in this thread. In relation to Counterpunch, it's also relevant to point out that they also publish people who are subjectively pro-Gaddafi.bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15439386754907203808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-17429771653103702352011-04-02T21:40:38.687+01:002011-04-02T21:40:38.687+01:00I have to say, I did enjoy Gabriel Ash. I liked th...I have to say, I did enjoy Gabriel Ash. I liked this: "Juan Cole is a liberal. I don't think he would disagree with that. He claims to be able to chew gum and walk at the same time. Maybe he can. The real questions that he hasn't addressed are, walking to where, and which gum to chew." And I liked this: "Fox News of the Left, a.k.a. Alexander Cockburn of Counterpunch". <br /><br />Although I quite liked Cockburn's joust at liberal academics ("Liberal academics have not the slightest interest in the Constitution, since the document doesn’t address issues of tenure and preferment. They evince similar loathing for the jury, putting their faith in “good judges”."), Ash is right to point out the kinship between Cockburn and the tea party philosophy. (Cockburn is also a gun rights advocate, a climate change denier and sympathetic to the Militia movement. All of these positions come out of a common philosophical grounding with the tea party: I guess you'd call it classical liberalism, or Jacksonian republicanism or something. Which is not in itself a bad thing necessarily, but worth emphasising for leftists who think of him as One of Us.)<br /><br />And Ash is of course right that Cockburn's mode of argument is ad hominem attacks over actual reasoned criticism - although Cockburn has at least elevated ad homs to a high artform.bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15439386754907203808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-6015742170054035182011-04-02T19:18:27.120+01:002011-04-02T19:18:27.120+01:00And here's an article on Counterpunch, specifi...And <a href="http://jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com/2011/04/graphomaniac-of-week-alexander-cockburn.html" rel="nofollow">here's an article on Counterpunch</a>, specifically Alexander Cockburn, by Gabriel Ash that Bob et al might enjoy.levi9909https://www.blogger.com/profile/10553481056544494411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-17140635229138061562011-04-02T09:55:40.319+01:002011-04-02T09:55:40.319+01:00Here's a Counterpunch article that once again ...Here's a <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/bihn03282011.html" rel="nofollow">Counterpunch article</a> that once again shows that opposing intervention doesn't mean backing Gadaffi {as long as to read the author's words , not those you might wish to say he's written).skidmarxnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-2220808866328974742011-04-02T00:56:25.314+01:002011-04-02T00:56:25.314+01:00Bob _ I hear what your saying. I might return to w...Bob _ I hear what your saying. I might return to whether or not that list has made bad faith allegations of antisemitism. I'm fairly certain they have but possibly sensibly not in so many words. I think innuendo may be the favoured tactic but I'm tired now.levi9909https://www.blogger.com/profile/10553481056544494411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-33582041138976649992011-04-02T00:46:18.323+01:002011-04-02T00:46:18.323+01:00Thank you for that Goodwin. There's quite a di...Thank you for that Goodwin. There's quite a discrepancy between "Auschwitz and its discredited gas chambers" and "the gas chambers of Auschwitz are 'discredited'". The former allows for no ambiguity whereas the latter could be part of a statement by Raul Hilberg if he preceded the quote with "the original estimates of the number of people murdered in...."<br /><br />We're in an area where mistrust on both sides is a major characteristic. Accuracy is all important, especially if you want to persuade people of the importance of what is being alleged. Paraphrasing has its place but only if it conveys the only the only possible meaning of what was originally said.<br /><br />Sorry to sound so pious but I wouldn't want to defend a holocaust denier any more than I would want to falsely accuse someone of holocaust denial.levi9909https://www.blogger.com/profile/10553481056544494411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-72242865455101591202011-04-01T23:28:35.172+01:002011-04-01T23:28:35.172+01:00The Nimmo quote:
"Now that the “Notorious Ho...<a href="http://www.thejudeosphere.com/?p=157" rel="nofollow">The Nimmo quote</a>:<br /><br />"Now that the “Notorious Holocaust Denier,” as the New York Times characterized David Irving, has pleaded guilty and faces three years in an Austrian prison for the crime of deviating from the official, Zionist-sanctioned and imposed history of the Second World War, we can expect triumphant ballyhoos from the Zionists, a screaming and obnoxious declaration of victory for the small outlaw nation of Israel and its endless blackmailing of millions of people who had nothing to do with Auschwitz and its discredited gas chambers."<br /><br />There is a long sequence in some Socialist Unity thread where Roy Bard does whatever he can to avoid answering the question, 'Was Nimmo right to call the gas chambers "discredited"?' until his avoidance itself became creepily obvious. <br /><br />And <a href="http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Local/UkModerationAtzmon" rel="nofollow">here</a> is FTP on the Nimmo quote, as queried by someone quite angry who gets the name wrong and calls him 'Greg Nimmo' but expresses deep concern about the way Bard waves away Nimmo's Holocaust denial.goodwin sandsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-44769155856252750552011-04-01T23:01:26.286+01:002011-04-01T23:01:26.286+01:00The latest delight from 'Counterpunch' is ...The latest delight from 'Counterpunch' is this revolting piece by William Blum, who I last recall writing apologias for the Khalq regime in Afghanistan. Apparently, Qadafi is as innocent of crimes against humanity as Milosevic was:<br /><br />http://www.counterpunch.org/blum03302011.html<br /><br />I'm surprised Counterpunch don't give skidmark a column, given his support for Rwanda genocide denial.sackcloth and ashesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-10907828169813607052011-04-01T22:35:27.742+01:002011-04-01T22:35:27.742+01:00I am aware that you, Mark, and Tony Greenstein wer...I am aware that you, Mark, and Tony Greenstein were hip to Counterpunch from relatively early on, as should be clear from my quotation from Tony's JAZ open letter in the post. Indeed, Tony has also written specifically against Kurt Nimmo at, I think, Socialist Unity, when Bard was promoting Nimmo. This was why I was flabbergastered to see you appear to be defending Nimmo, which is what angered me into semi-retracting my semi-retraction on the other thread.<br /><br />I can't remember the whole Nimmo quote, and I can't find it from a quick google now, but I know I read it in the past, I think in a longer quote in one of Tony's posts. Surely the phrase "the discredited camps" is enough to know he is beyond the pale? <br /><br />I totally disagree that the trigger-happy antisemitism accusations of the likes of the ADL "neuter" the antisemitism claim. It is about what we chose to take seriously. CAIR and MCB are trigger-happy with accusations of anti-Muslim and anti-Arab racism, but I take it seriously when I hear the accusation. The Lee Jaspers of this world ditto with anti-black racism, but I take it seriously when I hear the accusation. That is how anti-racists behave. You take the charge seriously. (Just as anyone with moral sense takes a charge of rape seriously, regardless of whether it is against someone who appears to be a free speech hero or is made by someone someone else said is a CIA agent.) To not take it seriously is the moral failing of the one who doesn't take it seriously. Counterpunch, and arguably huge swathes of the anti-Zionist milieu, always presume the charge is false. (See the Atzmon debate, and the refusal by certain anti-Zionists to take that seriously.) <br /><br />P.S. I strongly believe, by the way, that I have not ever presented examples of legitimate criticisms of Israel as antisemitic on this blog, and nor has Adam Holland, Contested Terrain, the CST, Engage or Greens Engage. (It is probable that Harry's Place has, but rarely. I know ZWord has, but rarely.)<br /><br />P.P.S. "most of [Counterpunch's] stuff is sound" - I would phrase it as most of their stuff is not offensive! Some of it is sound. It genuinely pains me to see Paul Buhle or Peter Linebaugh in the company of Rizzo and Shamir.bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15439386754907203808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-38842607929359204482011-04-01T22:12:27.407+01:002011-04-01T22:12:27.407+01:00Bob - anyone coming to your comment cold would thi...Bob - anyone coming to your comment cold would think that you were responding to someone who was trying to justify antisemitism in Counterpunch. It is indefensible on the part of intellectuals, journos and academics. I simply don't know Nimmo and I don't know the complete sentence that the "Auschwitz" comment comes from, do you? I told you I know Blankfort is antisemitic and I suspect you know that I have been the target of antisemitic abuse from Mary Rizzo, Israel Shamir, Gilad Atzmon, Sarah Gillespie and Roy Bard because I have complained of their antisemitism.<br /><br />My point is the persistence and prominence of the bad faith allegation of antisemitism has given the real thing traction that it otherwise wouldn't have and that has made it difficult to oppose. That is, we are in a boy who cried wolf situation and it is not helped by the many blogs that lay out lists of incidents, articles and individuals that deliberately mix genuine instances of antisemitismm with genuine examples of principled criticism of Israel and its official ideology.<br /><br />It does not compare to bad faith allegations of other forms of racism or even islamophobia because there are no states that claim to represent the whole of an identity group targeted by racists in the way the State of Israel purports to represent all of the world's Jews. And there are no states with an army of propagandists who, bereft of a case for the state, smear the opponents.<br /><br />Remember the bogus working definition of antisemitism is the only definition, emanating from the EUMCXR/FRA or to my knowledge from anywhere else, of any form of racism that claims that a form of racism COULD, SUBJECT TO CONTEXT manifest itself with regard to queries and comments about the behaviour or ethno-religious structure of a state.<br /><br />As it happens, just so you know, I noticed and blogged about antisemitism in Counterpunch back in 2004. It was about one of the articles in the book, The Politics of Antisemitism, by the Christisons. In fact, I'm surprised you say that most of their stuff is sound. I agree with the literal interpretation of what Skidmarx said of Counterpunch, ie, a curate's egg, which I understand to be good in parts but where the bad is so bad as to spoil the whole thing.levi9909https://www.blogger.com/profile/10553481056544494411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-26084045400724535782011-04-01T21:28:34.952+01:002011-04-01T21:28:34.952+01:00The new Atzmon essay on Lipstadt is simply grotesq...The new Atzmon essay on Lipstadt is simply grotesque. Atzmon couldn't make it plainer that given a choice between the deniers and Lipstadt, his sympathies are completely for the former over the latter. David Irving could have written the piece. You'd have to be either a first-order ninny to defend it, or be Roy Bard.goodwin sandsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-91612776755032244912011-04-01T17:56:49.728+01:002011-04-01T17:56:49.728+01:00Talking of wkipedia, it's nice to note that Em...Talking of wkipedia, it's nice to note that Emma Brockes entry now has the mddle paragraph restored that for some reason vanished for a while:<br /><br />In 2005, a profile by Brockes of Noam Chomsky published in The Guardian sparked controversy over Chomsky's comments on Bosnian war crimes. Chomsky described his treatment by Brockes and the Guardian as "one of the most dishonest and cowardly performances I recall ever having seen in the media."[1]. The Guardian later published a partial apology to Chomsky.skidmarxnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-37957554672519498152011-04-01T13:31:34.052+01:002011-04-01T13:31:34.052+01:00Dissident Voice: yes, I put them in pretty much th...Dissident Voice: yes, I put them in pretty much the same category as Counterpunch. They publish moonbat anti-imperialist antisemite James Petras, for example. It regularly publishes material from the 9/11 Truth Cult (although not its wackiest fringes), e.g. Jeremy R. Hammond, Anthony Lawson, etc. Look at this appalling example: http://dissidentvoice.org/2010/04/who%E2%80%99s-afraid-of-911-conspiracy-theories/bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15439386754907203808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-3108654507458472852011-04-01T13:10:16.576+01:002011-04-01T13:10:16.576+01:00God, just looking at Counterpunch now. I didn'...God, just looking at Counterpunch now. I didn't realise how frequently they publish Shamir. Among his recent sribbles is http://www.counterpunch.org/shamir03142011.html which uses WikiLeaks to claim that antisemitism is declining in Russia and the Putin government is doing its best to eradicate it. We can argue about whether this chimes with reality or not. Shamir says it contradicts what the mainstream US media sez, coz 'Journalists in Moscow are catering to the prejudices of their employers'. Hmm. In relation to the Jackson-Vanik Amendment, which, as Cockburn puts it, 'forbids the US government to extend "Most Favored Nation” status to countries with poor human rights records, particularly in the area of emigration'. Cockburn inserts this editorial comment: 'Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson authored the Jackson-Vanik Amendment to the Trade Reform Act in 1974, as part of his vain quest for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1976. <b>Jackson was chasing the Jewish vote</b>.'<br /><br />In another post, Shamir continues to retail his nonsense about the Assange case, claiming that Karl Rove is responsible for the rape claims. He continues, along with cockburn, to press the baseless allegation that Anna Ardin is a CIA agent, based on the fact that she associated with Cuban dissidents, as if only a CIA agent could want to see Castro fall. (Castro, incidentally, is regularly published by Counterpunch, including his recent ranting claim that NATO is "fascist".)<br /><br />Not to mention crackpot Diana Johnstone, among whose latest offerings are claiming that Bernard-Henri Levy is the shadowy instigator of the war in Libya, and rather obscenely equates him to Gaddafi. In another set of inappropriate comparisons, she writes this: 'As “the new Hitler”, the man you love to hate and need to destroy, Slobodan Milosevic was a neophyte in 1999 compared to Muammar Qaddafi today. The media had less than a decade to turn Milosevic into a monster, whereas with Qaddafi, they’ve been at it for several decades. And Qaddafi is more exotic, speaking less English and coming before the public in outfits that could have been created by John Galliano (another recently outed monster).' In other words, Hitler, Milosovic, Gaddafi, Galliano - not bad people, just demonised by, you know, Them.<br /><br />And I have no idea what to make of porn queen Susan Block's alt. purimshpiel:<br />http://www.counterpunch.org/block03182011.html<br />'But the 8-letter word is “genocide”. Sorry, this part of the story isn’t so sexy, but sometimes life isn’t just a barrel of orgasms. This wouldn’t be the first, nor would it be the last, time the “Jewish people” have been threatened with extinction, but it might be one of the most melodramatic…<br /><br />Mordecai stages a protest outside the harem. He puts on “sackcloth and ashes” and roams by Esther’s window wailing, “Oy gevalt! They’re gonna kill us all! <b>AND they’re gonna clean out our bank accounts!” </b>Esther’s eunuch comes out to see what the racket’s about. Mordecai gives him the bad news, adding that it’s up to the new Queen Esther to change her king’s mind.'Bobhttp://brockley.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-83150315498603529962011-04-01T12:31:28.190+01:002011-04-01T12:31:28.190+01:00Bad faith accusation of antisemitism exist, but th...Bad faith accusation of antisemitism exist, but these do not for one second excuse actual antisemitism, nor give anyone just cause to relax their vigilance or even assume bad faith, as would be the case for all other forms of racism too, and bad faith accusations have not been absent in relation to anti-black racism or Islamophobia either. <br /><br />Rizzo, Blankfort and Nimmo cannot be defended by anyone with an ounce of moral sense. The "gas chambers of Auschwitz are 'discredited'" IS straightforward. That is not a grey area. There are legitimate areas of debate around numbers and dates and so on, but there is no credible historian who has "discredited" the fact of gas chambers, and of well over a million people industrially slaughtered in them. Even suggesting this is a grey area is disgusting. <br /><br />Counterpunch also publishes a number of fine writers. The antsemitism, the conspiracy theory, the climate change denialism, the ex-Reaganite cranks, the 9/11 Truthers, the Holocaust deniers, etc are probably a minority of the output. But they crop up again and again. This post only mentions a tiny percentage of the filth that Counterpunch has published; I could have mentioned plenty of others. <br /><br />On publishing Shamir a year ago being merely a very, very bad idea. This would be the case in other outlets, but Counterpunch cannot claim ignorance. Shamir was exposed <br />a long time ago. Ibish's letter about him was written in 2001, and surely reached Counterpunch editors. Tony Greenstein wrote to Cockburn about Shamir in 2005, when Counterpunch was publishing Atzmon and Rizzo. Counterpunch had all the facts to hand long before the Wikileaks thing has made Shamir's vileness mainstream knowledge. Yet they continued to publish him. They either don't care, or actually endorse this. How someone like Uri Avnery can bear to be in that company, I have no idea. Shame on him for not parting ways, and shame on Vijay Prashad, Boris Kagarlitsky, Peter Linebaugh, and other otherwise apparently sane writers who ought to know better. <br /><br />Finally, re Mod on Wikipedia censorship. Thanks for the extract on your blog, but I disagree with your characterisation here of this as "censorship". Wikipedia does not censor anything; editors make good and bad decisions, for good and bad reasons, and those get reversed, for better or worse, and amended again. I recommend people learn how to work with Wikipedia to be vigilant against the acts of the bad editors. Wikipedia also maintains the history of every revision of every page, easily trackable and attributable, so we don't need to rely on waybackmachine - this is one of the things that keeps it transparent and accountable, despite the problems.Bobhttp://brockley.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-84377147819986481182011-04-01T10:39:04.405+01:002011-04-01T10:39:04.405+01:00woops, forgot to tick the email box againwoops, forgot to tick the email box againlevi9909https://www.blogger.com/profile/10553481056544494411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-36075409342615186182011-04-01T09:58:56.642+01:002011-04-01T09:58:56.642+01:00I am surprised that there is no mention, in a long...I am surprised that there is no mention, in a long and detailed post, of the fact that Uri Avnery is a Counterpunch regular. Here's his 2002 article "<a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/avnery1002.html" rel="nofollow">Manufacturing Anti-Semites</a>".<br /><br />A major problem with countering antisemitism expressed as Palestine solidarity is that the charge of antisemitism has been neutered by overuse and bad faith allegations as Avnery says in the article I've linked to.<br /><br />Even issues like the "gas chambers of Auschwitz are 'discredited'" and "the Nazis had no plan to kill Jews" in the third reich, aren't straightforward. I know nothing of Kurt Nimmo but the numbers said to have been killed at Auschwitz were revised to take account of more than had been known of being killed by Einsatzgruppen. Also, the question of when the nazis planned to kill the Jews is still debated among serious historians. Is Blankfort saying that there was never a plan? If he is, then he is wrong and I know he is antisemitic but to blithely hurl allegations around with no acknowledgement of the harm that bad faith allegations of antisemitism have done is itself harmful.levi9909https://www.blogger.com/profile/10553481056544494411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-83524072193059647582011-04-01T03:16:37.601+01:002011-04-01T03:16:37.601+01:00Just looking at Dissident Voice again, there's...Just looking at Dissident Voice again, there's an article by Gilad Atzmon on Deborah Lipstadt's latest book on the Eichmann trial.Rebeccahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17626228106192215280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-89713242117269217592011-04-01T02:35:23.281+01:002011-04-01T02:35:23.281+01:00Counterpunch is also noted for publishing the Holo...Counterpunch is also noted for publishing the Holocaust denier Daniel A. McGowan, who published a disgusting attack on Elie Wiesel there. Another venue for this kind of antisemitism is Dissident Voice.Rebeccahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17626228106192215280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-14667876320298198182011-04-01T00:43:06.048+01:002011-04-01T00:43:06.048+01:00Bob,
Excellent post, the censorship of the critic...Bob,<br /><br />Excellent post, the censorship of the criticism of CounterPunch by Wiki is really silly.<br /><br />There is a copy of it on the way back machine.<br /><br />I have extracted the pertinent text, as a matter of public record and put it together as a post.ModernityBloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06354254639321208955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-78770224268006574692011-03-31T22:48:47.628+01:002011-03-31T22:48:47.628+01:00Let me also add that Cockburn and St Clair publish...Let me also add that Cockburn and St Clair published in 2003 an anthology called 'The politics of Anti-semitism', including essays from Kurt Nimmo (who calls the gas chambers of Auschwitz 'discredited'), Jeffrey Blankfort (who thinks the Nazis didn't have a plan to kill Jews), and the troofers Bill and Kathy Christison.<br /><br />It seems their title was rather more descriptive than they intended.goodwin sandsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-36444268297965942072011-03-31T22:44:27.661+01:002011-03-31T22:44:27.661+01:00(My computer confusion seems to have sent my previ...(My computer confusion seems to have sent my previous attempt to reply into the ozone. Sorry if this is a duplicate.)<br /><br />It's marginally possible to have excused publishing Israel Shamir a year ago, but now that his Holocaust denial has been the subject of headlines, it takes a special perversity to continue to do so. Yet Shamir's latest Counterpunch entry is only two weeks old.<br /><br />Re Mary Rizzo: yes, mad as a bag of snakes with muscle cramps. There is an astonishing thread on Socialist Unity from a few years back in which she attempted to justify the Holocaust with reference to rich Jews, Ferraris, and Prada bags.goodwin sandsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-50811182611528973092011-03-31T22:18:31.501+01:002011-03-31T22:18:31.501+01:00A year ago it would have been marginally possible ...A year ago it would have been marginally possible to excuse publishing Shamir as merely a very, very bad idea. But in the interim his Holocaust denial was exposed with considerable fanfare in Guardian headlines &c, although his most recent article up on Counterpunch is only two weeks old, and the editors continue to defend Shamir as being merely 'controversial'.<br /><br />A decade ago Cockburn and St Clair put together an anthology called 'The politics of anti-Semitism', including essays from Kurt Nimmo (who thinks the gas chambers of Auschwitz are 'discredited'), Jeffrey Blankfort (who thinks the Nazis had no plan to kill Jews), and troofers Bill and Kathy Christison. Atzmon hadn't yet made a notorious arse of himself 2003, so he isn't included.<br /><br />Re Mary Rizzo: merciful heavens, what a bottle of crazy that one is. And, like Israel Shamir and Gilad Atzmon, a full-blown Jewish anti-Semite; see <a href="http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=1707" rel="nofollow">this thread</a> on Socialist Unity to see her justification for the Holocaust (hint: it involves rich Jews, 'authentic Prada handbags', and Ferraris; she posts as 'thecutter').<br /><br />It almost goes without saying that Atzmon and Rizzo are comrades of the regrettable Shamirite Roy Bard, as the same thread reveals.goodwin sandsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-60586745899907554472011-03-31T20:53:55.861+01:002011-03-31T20:53:55.861+01:00I can't believe any website with any credibili...I can't believe any website with any credibility would publish something by Mary Rizzo. I remember a piece by her that was quoted on HP. She came over to defend it and was a crazed, frothing, anti-Semitic loon. She's totally disgusting.Rosiehttp://www.rosiebell.co.uknoreply@blogger.com