Racist Thug, John Wight, Attacks Blog.

No, not mine.

I am fairly immune to threats legal, physical or otherwise. But a small worth while blog, Left Luggage, has been threatened by that well-known anti-Jewish racist, John Wight.

Left Luggage had posted an article by John Wight on the Left and its problems.

I pointed out some of Wight’s unsavory views, some time after enter stage right, John Wight threatening to “citing your website as off limits to anyone interested in serious debate on the left.” given that Wight has posted from a Holocaust revisionist site he has a bloody cheek.

All in all my comments concerning Wight were fairly moderate. Factually based on Wight’s own words, his praise of the GDR, use of the Far Right lingo “International Jewry”.

Readers can make up their own minds, part of the exchange is posted below the rest is on Left Luggage’s blog.

The web has a long history of bullies. More recently, the Barclay brothers and the Chinese state, ultimately they fail, the web and blogs won’t be censored and certainly not by the likes of John Wight.

For more information on John Wight’s views, see

1. Wight posting from a Holocaust revisionist site, see

“John Wight posted on February 02, 2008 at 09:42:59 PM
…
Reply:

Jewish Opposition to Zionism – codoh.com/zionweb/ziondark/zionoppdex.html “

2. Wight’s bare antisemitism, which could have been taken straight from some extreme right forum:

“John Wight posted on February 04, 2008 at 05:45:35 PM
…
The state of Israel is a hydra-headed monster, comprising Zionist ethnic cleansers, US imperialists, and Arab collaborationist regimes.”
…
As soon as the scales fall from the eyes of international Jewry with regard to the racist and fascist ideology that is Zionism, the world will begin to emerge from the iron heel of war and brutality in the Middle East.

The academics at Engage discuss John Wight’s racism.

3. John Wight’s reaction to Muslim Council Of Britain To Commemorate Holocaust Day, in the comments box:

“8. I think the decision is a mistake. The Holocaust is undoubtedly manipulated by Israel and their friends and supporters to justify the continued occupation and ehtnic cleasning of Palestine. By pandering to the exceptionalism of the Holocaust, supported by the British Government, illustrates a lack of political awareness on the part of MCB and, I have to say, Salam, for whom I have a lot of respect.

Tactics should flow from principles and this is not a decision rooted in principle. Rather, it has been motivated by a fear of calumny by the British government and uninformed opinion within society.

The MCB’s previous position of advocating changing the name of the commemoration to Genocide Memorial Day was entirely reasonable, politically relevant, and they should have stuck to that position.

This is a sad day for the Palestinians and all those who understand the true nature of the aparheid state of Israel. It is also an insult to the victims of the Holocaust, among them homosexual, gypsies and communists, whose slaughter has been used to justify crimes against humanity.

J

Comment by John W — 22 December, 2007 @ 2:35 pm “

Antifascist readers will remember how the Extreme Right uses the argument that about “the exceptionalism of the Holocaust” too.

4. Here John Wight considers suing Engage for revealing his views.

David Hirsh reply pulls the ground from under Wight’s feet:

“David Hirsh Says: March 27, 2009 at 8:46 am

Yer right. You went to a lawyer. You told her that you’d written:

“The state of Israel is a hydra-headed monster, comprising Zionist ethnic cleansers, US imperialists, and Arab collaborationist regimes. Arrayed against this monster are the forces of human progress.”

and

“As soon as the scales fall from the eyes of international Jewry with regard to the racist and fascist ideology that is Zionism, the world will begin to emerge from the iron heel of war and brutality in the Middle East.”

“The … comment re Israel being a hydra-headed monster I stand by.”

http://www.engageonline.org.uk/blog/article.php?id=1627

You asked your lawyer if you could sue David Hirsh for characterizing these comments as antisemitic.

Your lawyer told you: “Of course John, sue him. You’d be bound to win. There is no way that these comments could be characterized as antisemitic. But it would be expensive.”

And so you decided not to sue.

You’re priceless John.”

5. John Wight pushing LATEST STATEMENT FROM HAMAS.

6. More of John Wight’s borderline guff can be seen by using the search facility on SU blog.

7. Wight’s strange view of the GDR:

8. Engage contains varied discussions with Wight and about the theme of antisemitism on the Left, please use their search facility to examine these issues in more detail.

——————-

The comments from Left Luggage (some were removed after Wight’s email threat):

“I was disappointed to see that after posting my article ‘The Right Is Winning The Battle Of Ideas’ you then saw fit to allow a known troll on the left blogosphere, Modernity Blog, to wade in with an unanswered attempt to smear and slander me.

“This is not the right way to conduct meaningful discussion or debate. Please remove the offensive posts in question or allow me the right to reply.

“If not, I’ll have no choice other than to post a reply on SU Blog, citing your website as off limits to anyone interested in serious debate on the left.

“Fraternally,

“John Wight”

So, Wight attacks Left Luggage for merely repeating the following:

“6. modernityblog said

May 31, 2009 at 12:26 pm

aye right enough, John Wight as a political sage?

Would that be the same bloke who praised the GDR?

http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=3834

or the same bloke who rants on about “International Jewry”** ?

http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=1687

—
** Readers might remember that is an extremely loaded term, having been used by the far right since the 1930s.”

In the original exchange Left Luggage had replied:

“It seems so, Mod. I can’t account for his other statements, but on this issue he is largely spot on.”

My reply:

“8. modernityblog said

May 31, 2009 at 7:38 pm

Well, if you think that praising the GDR and ranting on about “International Jewry” are in any way acceptable, then that might account, in a small way, as to why the British Left is so small?

Put it another way, re-fried Stalinism didn’t work after 1956 and surely isn’t going to galvanize new generations now, is it?

In the past, Wight’s conspicuous use of the Far Right lingo would have put him beyond the pale, but seemingly no longer?

Maybe that’s another reason why parts of the British Left have a problem getting over their ideas? Just a thought?”

To which Left Luggage replies:

“I haven’t followed John Wight’s career on the far-left, or his various statements on comments boards in the past. In fact, I hadn’t come across him before this article on Socialist Unity.

I don’t claim that the comments you’ve highlighted are in any way acceptable. It is true that the language the Left uses, and the symbols it wraps itself in, are vitally important in how it relates to ordinary people. I think the approach of the Left in these respects is part of a general failure in which cause and symptom are difficult to unentangle.

In any case, we were not using Wight’s article uncritically, nor simply reproducing it. We used the article (posted on one of the most popular Left UK blogs) to highlight some salient points regarding the position of the Left today, which is of obvious interest to this site. And we engaged with it critically, pointing to what we see as some of the deficiencies in its analysis.

It is for these reasons that I see no problem in commenting on the points raised in Wight’s article, regardless of his comments elsewhere. No one is aligning with Wight’s strategy, his vehicle, or “re-fried Stalinism” here; the article is merely an attempt to understand a little more by taking a critical glance at his article.”

Update 1:

John Wight left a comment on this blog. Helpfully he used his email and as with neo-fascists, I feel no compunction to respect the privacy of anti-Jewish racists, such as John Wight, or their neo-fascist friends.

That same email can be seen commenting on the Holocaust here:

“From: Jscotlive@aol….
Subject: [Marxism] FW: Howard Zinn for the Committee for an Open
Discussion of Zionism
To: marxism@list…
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=”US-ASCII”

Adam writes:

Much as I agree with the intent, this is disturbingly reminiscent of
the “Committee for an Open Debate on the Holocaust.”

Reply

:

And what of it? We do need an open debate on the Holocaust, as there are a few serious and historical questions that need answering. Such as:

1. Where is the evidence that the Holocaust ever took place – in Palestine?

2. If there is no evidence that the Holocaust took place in Palestine why have the Palestinians been condemned to pay the price for it?

It is time to tackle head on the weapons used by these Zionist ethnic cleansers to justify the continued colonisation and savage occupation of the Palestinians. The first is the notion that to be anti-Zionist or anti-Israel is to be anti-Semitic; the second is to run for cover as soon as the word Holocaust is mentioned.

The only fitting tribute to those millions of victims of the gas chamber in Europe then is to campaign for Palestinian human rights today. I urge you to read Finkelstein’s ‘The Holocaust Industry.’ ”

[I have tidied up the pagination to make it more readable]

Readers will remember Wight pasting in a Holocaust revisionist site, CODOH, a real nasty bunch of fascists, and to the question:

“this is disturbingly reminiscent of the “Committee for an Open Debate on the Holocaust.”

Wight’s email replies:

“And what of it? We do need an open debate on the Holocaust, as there are a few serious and historical questions that need answering.”

Most antifascists will know that there *is* an open debate amongst scholars on all aspects of the Holocaust and Nazi crimes from WW2, but the argument for an “open debate on the Holocaust” is normally the Far Right’s scheme to introduce nasty Holocaust revisionist filth and put their neo-Nazi inspired propaganda on the same level as quality, scholarly works of history.

David Irving and his friends use these arguments as shown by this cached copy from the IHR, that infamous neo-nazi outfit:

“In an important victory for free speech and open debate on the Holocaust issue, Australia’s Federal Court on September 16 unanimously overturned an earlier decision by immigration authorities to reject the visa application of David Irving. Any decision about a visa application by Irving, the high court ruled, must now be reconsidered “by law.” There now appears to be no legal bar to visits by the bestselling British revisionist historian, who immediately announced plans for a six-week lecture tour.”

Update 2: Silly me, I had forgot that I have covered Wight’s disgusting views before.