Raheem Kassam on silencing of Israeli Bedouin diplomat: "Gagging is contrary to freedom of speech"

Raheem Kassam, director of Student Rights, a London-based organization which fights extremism on campus, is appalled. MuzzleWatch surely is not. And we are left with another example of speech actually being muzzled. An excerpt:

Described as a scene “reminiscent of tyrants silencing their opposition,” a student organization has condemned a group of protesters who disrupted a talk at a Scottish university by an Israeli- Arab diplomat accusing them of shutting down debate and free speech.

On Wednesday evening, a group of anti-Israel activists, mainly nonstudents, descended on an event at Edinburgh University where Ishmael Khaldi, an Israeli Beduin diplomat at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, was scheduled to address students.

The protesters surrounded the senior Muslim diplomat and hurled abuse at him. Security officers had to be brought in to contain the situation and the event was eventually canceled.

“This isn’t free speech; it is hatred, it is vandalism,” Khaldi told The Jerusalem Post on Friday.

“These activists abuse the values of freedom and democracy of the UK, they put the seeds of hatred in Europe and they betray the cause of moderate Palestinians who, despite everything, are ready to do everything to reach reconciliation and peace with Israel, toward establishing an independent Palestinian state.”

Israel’s ambassador to the UK Ron Prosor said he was not surprised to see this at a British university.

“Ishmael Khaldi reflects the tolerant and open Israel of 2011,” said the ambassador. “These attempts to suppress his freedom of speech come as no surprise.

Once more a British university views this intimidating, mob-rule as acceptable.”

Raheem Kassam, director of Student Rights, a London-based organization which fights extremism on campus, was appalled by the crowd’s behavior.

“It’s a shame these protesters, many of whom weren’t even students, didn’t feel confident enough to quiz Mr. Khaldi in a rational and academic manner,” he said.

Kassam highlighted that an event with the editor of an Arabic newspaper, Abdel Bari Atwan, at the London School of Economics in December was not disrupted despite radical views that people disagree with.

“Atwan is on record as claiming he would dance in Trafalgar Square if Iranian missiles hit Israel. However, his event was not subject to the disruption that took place at Edinburgh. It flies in the face of those who defend controversial speakers on campuses, if they attempt to silence people they don’t agree with.

“This gagging is contrary to the freedom of speech student groups work hard to defend,” Kassam said.

MuzzleWatch Discovers "Legitimate Expression"

Jewish Voice for Peace, again taking issue with the punishment of students who repeatedly disrupted a speech at UC Irvine by Israeli ambassador Michael Oren, seems to have discovered the concept of "legitimate expression in an open and democratic society." A press release by the organization, quoted in the Los Angeles Times, uses this phrase to describe the planned interruption of a speech by members of the Muslim Student Union.

Looking back through this blog's postings, it seems pretty clear that to JVP (and its subsidiary MuzzleWatch) "legitimate expression" means anything said or done in order to criticize Israel. Meanwhile, the organization continues to regard anything said or done in order to defend Israel against unfair attacks as "muzzling."

Speaking of this LA Times piece, the reporter describes Jewish Voice for Peace as "a liberal group that advocates for peace between Israelis and Palestinians and against Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories." This, I believe, is an inadequately vague description that serves to mislead readers. Because that phase could be used to describe groups like Peace Now and B'tselem, which , faults and falsehoods notwithstanding, belong in a wholly different category than Jewish Voice for Peace. A "liberal group that advocates for peace between Israelis and Palestinians and against Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories" could also describe those who call themselves "liberal Zionists," or even members of Israel's mainstream Labor party.

Again, JVP does not fit in with these groups, and so should not share a description with them. It is, at best, a radical anti-Israel group.

Iranian Embassy Pressure, Anonymous Threats, Forced Cancellation of Film

Now this is an example of stifling free speech. The Ottawa Citizen reported yesterday that

Threatening e-mails and phone calls resulted in the cancellation Tuesday evening of a film that exposes Iran’s efforts to build nuclear weapons and promote terrorism.

The threats followed a formal complaint last weekend from the Iranian Embassy, seeking to stop the showing of the film Iranium at Library and Archives Canada.

It should come as no surprise to readers of this blog that MuzzleWatch, which pretends to care about free speech, had nothing at all to say about this straightforward attempt to muzzle the open exchange of ideas. 

Jung, Yewish and Plod...

Our good friends at Jewish Voice for Peace have unleashed their most fearsome campaign yet: Young Jewish and Proud, the declaration of young Jews that they are mad dag-nabbit, and they don’t plan to take it anymore.

Fortunately, an intrepid dumpster diver who is also a Divest This fan stumbled across an earlier version of their manifesto which I thought I’d post for those who can’t get enough of those intrepid schmendricks of JVP. And so, we bring you:

The Young Jewish Declaration (original draft)...

Jewish Voice for Peace Watches the Muzzlers in the Mirror

This blog has often shown how MuzzleWatch's purported concern over "muzzling" in fact amounts to nothing more than promoting anti-Israel rhetoric while attacking views they don't like. But I've also been forced to correct my views on the group.

You see, I first thought that MuzzleWatch and Jewish Voice for Peace merely "looked elsewhere" when anti-Israel activists attempted to disrupt the free speech of moderate pro-Israel voices. Then I realized that JVP went so far as to "cheer" when the open exchange of ideas was stifled, so long as it's ideas they don't like that are targeted.

Now I know better. JVP, it turns out, actually engages in the very muzzling they purport to watch.

"Hecklers interrupted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to a prominent American Jewish group on Monday," the AP reports. But AP, who exactly were these hecklers?

"The hecklers, members of the Young Leadership Institute of Jewish Voice for Peace, stood up and shouted at different times during Mr. Netanyahu's speech to the Jewish Federations of North America."

Seems that MuzzleWatch should watch itself. Maybe next time members of its parent organization think of stifling the open exchange of ideas, they should take a deep breath, gaze at the looking glass, and sing:

I'm Starting With The Man In
The Mirror
(Ooh!)
I'm Asking Him To Change
His Ways
(Ooh!)
And No Message Could Have
Been Any Clearer
If You Wanna Make The World
A Better Place
Take A Look At Yourself And
Then Make A Change!

Professor Kicked Off Panel; Dissent Not Tolerated at Queen’s University Belfast

Professor Geoffrey Alderman, a historian who has defended Israel, was disinvited from a panel discussion about the Middle East conflict, apparently because the two other invited panelists, Avi Shlaim and Beverley Milton-Edwards, objected to his views.

Shlaim is well-known for his harsh, one-sided criticism of Israel, while Milton-Edwards has argued, in blatant contradiction to Hamas's own charter and repeated statements by its leaders, that the Islamist group "is not anti-peace" nor "anti-negotiation," and are not "anti-Israel" but rather "anti Israeli occupation."

 CiF Watch posted Professor Alderman's statement about the incident: 

On 20 September 2010 I received an email from the Director of the Belfast Festival, Mr. Graeme Farrow, inviting me to join a panel convened to discuss “Conflict in the Middle East” as part of the 2010 Belfast Festival, held under the auspices of Queen’s University Belfast. Mr. Farrow’s exact words were: “I would be delighted if you would join our panel.”

I was naturally pleased to accept this invitation.
The panel discussion is due to take place on Monday evening, 18 October 2010, in Belfast.

On Friday afternoon, 15 October 2010 I was shocked to receive an email from Mr. Farrow informing me that “a mistake” had been made in extending the invitation to me  and that although I could join the audience the event was to go ahead without my panel participation.

In effect, I was being “disinvited.”

In a series of email exchanges with Mr. Farrow I refused to accept this situation, and I have made it clear to him that I intend to travel to Belfast tomorrow and shall expect to participate fully as a member of the panel.< I am frankly appalled at the way I have been treated, for which I hold Queen’s University, Belfast, responsible.

And as of this writing, we hear not a peep from MuzzleWatch. Why? Why don't the purported opponents of this type of "muzzling" have anything to say about this?

Well, that's because MuzzleWatch doesn't really care about muzzling.As thoroughly documented on this site, their purported concern for the open exchange of ideas is no more than a selectively-utilized vehicle for their radical anti-Israel activism — fine china filled with trans-fat. Yum.

The Rarefied Jewish Voice for Peace

Congratulations are in order to Jewish Voice for Peace. The parent company of MuzzleWatch (definitely not to be confused with MuzzleWatch Watch — see below for the distinction between the two) came in 7th place on the Anti-Defamation League's list of top anti-Israel groups in America.

Of course, because the list is alphabetical, we don't know exactly where they stand relative to the others. But we do know they're in some pretty distinguished company. The ADL's list follows:

* Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER)
* Al-Awda
* Council on American-Islamic Relations
* Friends of Sabeel-North America
* If Americans Knew
* International Solidarity Movement
* Jewish Voice for Peace
* Muslim American Society
* Students for Justice in Palestine
* US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation

And as promised above, here's a cheat sheet to help you understand the difference between MuzzleWatch and MuzzleWatch Watch.

MuzzleWatch watches for anything it can find to cast Israel or its defenders in a negative light (See Bad News from...); supports BDS campaigns (including one whose website slurs Israel as a practitioner of apartheid, www.caldivestfromapartheid.com); backs Israel's most extreme defamers (e.g, Ali Abunimah, the International Solidarity Movement), claims that criticism of radical anti-Israel activists is akin to "muzzling," and poo-poos the intimidation of those who support Israel's right to self defense (you can find that type of poo here).

MuzzleWatch Watch, on the other hand, watches Muzzle Watch.

MuzzleWatch's Sister Site Also Muzzling

Like MuzzleWatch, TheOnlyDemocracy is a web site run by the anti-Israel advocacy organization Jewish Voice for Peace. And as on its MuzzleWatch blog, JVP sees no irony in censoring other opinions even while accusing those in the holders of those opinions "muzzling."

TheOnlyDemocracy's comments policy:

We read all comments, but only publish a select few that we believe will contribute to the overall discussion about the struggle for democratic rights in Israel and Palestine.

Interestingly, all articles on the website conclude with the welcoming phrase, "Comments are closed." So in other words, if you email Jewish Voice for Peace, and your email is sufficiently in lockstep with their narrow, fringe viewpoints, they might just publish your email on their blog. Otherwise, shaddup.

Sydney and Omar's BDS Journey

Well it seems that Muzzlewatch finally roused from its slumber after a blissfully quiet slumber.

Before going over what the new Genralisimo of MW, Jesse Bacon, has to say I thought some MWW readers might be interested in this little bit of warped fantasy which stars one of the key players at Jewish Voice for Peace (the puppeteer behind Muzzlewatch). Enjoy:

Sydney and Omar's BDS Journey - Part 1
Sydney and Omar's BDS Journey - Part 2
Sydney and Omar's BDS Journey - Part 3

Right! Right! Right! Right? Wrong.

Check out the introduction to MuzzleWatch's July 16 posting. Anything stick out? (It will, because I'll bold the relevant text!)

Fenton Communications is a well-known liberal, Democratic public relations firm that caught the “adoring” eye of the Israeli Likudnik crowd because liberal Zionist lobby group J Street founder Jeremy Ben Ami is a former Senior Vice President. Back in March, 2009 Fenton signed a contract with the Qatar based Fakhoora campaign to advocate for accountability over Israel’s attacks on Gaza. Accountability and Israel-now that’s a no-no for the pro-settler lobby. But back then, the right wing echo chamber couldn’t do anything with that information, Ben-Ami had left the year before and denied any connection.

Fast forward over a year and The Israel Project and their right wing buddies are after Fenton (and Ben Ami) again. Amazingly, this time, they were successful and Fenton dropped the account. Completely.

Yes, it's the smoke-and-mirrors technique that casts anyone opposed to demonization and other types anti-Israel bigotry as a loyal minion of Dick Cheney. MuzzleWatch's version (though, to be fair, they're hardly the first anti-Israel activists to try this) is a subset of the practice by extremists of all stripes who act as if they represent the sober mainstream while everyone else represents the fringe.

So let's clear something up: The bond between the United States and Israel is unbreakable. It encompasses our national security interests, our strategic interests, but most importantly, the bond of two democracies who share a common set of values and whose people have grown closer and closer as time goes on.

Actually, those aren't my words. They are the words of well-known Likudnik, pro-settler, right wing echo chamber member President Obama.

Republicans support Israel, yes. And so do Democrats. In a January 2009 poll, a convincing plurality of liberal Democrats sympathized more with Israel than with the Palestinians or "neither." Liberal Democrats. During the Gaza War. Over twice as many Democrats of all stripes expressed sympathy with Israel vs. the Palestinians in that same poll.

So MuzzleWatch can pretend that people like me — pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-environment, pro-gay rights and pro-Israel — don't exist. But we very much do. On the other hand, MuzzleWatch types — pro-Norman Finkelstein, pro-Stephen Walt, pro-BDS, and staunchly anti-Israel? Not so much.

Blue and Whitewash

Muzzlewatch seems incapable of letting the whole issue of gay rights go, possibly because they realize what might happen to their self-anointed characterization as progressive heroes if the fact that they are allied with the most murderous anti-gay forces on the planet becomes widely discussed. Alternatively, they may simply be giving the latest term in the anti-Israel lexicon “pinkwashing” a drive around the block.

“Pinkwashing” refers to Israel’s alleged scheme of demonstrating its progressive cred (vs. that of its adversaries including, or should I say, especially, with those forces in the Middle East – such as Hamas - most beloved by Muzzlewatch’s Jewish Voice for Peace masters) by pointing out that Israel is the only place in the Middle East with genuine gay rights.

In the area of gay rights, similar to women’s rights, there is such a glaring contrast between Israel and its neighbors that any direct discussion of the matter must be avoided at all costs by JVP and its allies, and so they come up with creative terms (such as “pinkwashing”) to make the discussion of the reactionary attitudes of JVP friends and allies seem like a nefarious plot.

Under the circumstances, their choice is understandable, especially since their entire endeavor is an attempt to “blue-and-whitewash” the atrocious human rights record of those societies most at odds with the Jewish state. After all, JVP’s pose as humanitarians doesn’t hold up quite so well if they stated honestly that – in their opinion – the rights of gays, women, religious minorities and (in the cases of places like Sudan) ethnic minorities must all be thrown under the bus in favor of their holy cause of Palestinianism, regardless of how many gay (or female, or Christian) Palestinians find themselves forced to flee into Israel to escape death at the hands of their clansmen.

The thing I find most amusing about Cecile’s latest post on the subject is the notion that she and members of the fringe Queers Against Israel Apartheid (QAIA) group they’ve allied with are now involved with “Healing the Gay-Jewish Divide.” After all, there was no Gay-Jewish divide, at least in Toronto, until the QAIA group pulled out all the stops to ensure its divisive message was inserted directly into Toronto’s gay pride parade.

And so the divide they are trying to bridge is one they have created, a conflict they have chosen to cause through their own single-minded, selfish, obsession. And if the rest of the gay community in Toronto has to suffer for JVP/QAIA actions, they can at least comfort themselves with Muzzlewatch willingness to heal the breach they were responsible for opening.

Yoo hoo! Muzzlewatch!

Just a quick thought for today.

Whenever I periodically Google “Muzzlewatch” as part of this or that research project or ego trip, the Muzzlewatch-watch Web site periodically comes up second only to the site we’re watching. And we’ve even gotten above them periodically on the blogsearchers.

I have no doubt that an organization as Web media-savvy as Jewish Voice for Peace (which, despite its despicable nature and program are reasonably good at leveraging Web 2.0 PR to help them punch above their weight) can see these same results and thus is fully aware of the existence of a site that has been taking apart each and every one of their accusations quite neatly for nearly a year and a half. And yet I don’t recall one mention of this fact (even a condemnation) in any of the volume of accusations JVP hurls at its critics on a daily basis.

Now I’m not making the claim that JVP/Muzzlewatch is under any obligation to pay attention to us, or even defend itself in our (still open!) comments section. But it is interesting that an organization that claims to crave debate over every issue it throws out has both shut down its own comments in order to prevent critical voices from challenging their claims and continues to ignore some folks who have offered them exactly what they supposedly desire more than anything else: a debate over the Middle East on their terms.

Sorry for the interruption – back to what you were doing.

Muzzlewatch vs. Consequences

Muzzlewatch’s Commander-in-Chief Cecilie Surasky returns to the issue of the UC Irvine students who decided to shout down Israel’s ambassador to the US, Michael Oren, when he attempted to speak on campus last spring. Having never brought herself to consider the irony of a web site allegedly dedicated to free speech having nothing to say when her allies deny that right to those with whom they disagree, Surasky again chooses to focus on the punishment allotted to the Muzzlers.

At least this time, she’s dealing with realty vs. speculation, although the punishment meted out by the Irvine administration (suspension of the group responsible for the incident – the Muslim Student Union or MSU –for one year, plus a year on probation) could very likely be turned around via appeal or even legal challenge. The ability of the Middle East dispute to generate actual hard costs (in the form of legal bills) to student government is just one more aspect of the expensive chaos that tends to ensue when Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP – the organization that actually works the Muzzlewatch hand-puppet) decides to import the Arab-Israeli conflict into every institution in the land.

When reviewing Muzzlewatch’s selectivity on campus muzzling mattes previously, I pointed out my personal discomfort with campus administrators telling students what they could and could not say while also commenting on the challenges such administrators face when one person (or group) decides that their own free speech rights include the right to harass, intimidate, or put a halt to the free speech of others.

JVP/Muzzlewatch (as usual) also misses a bigger picture in which the type of debate they have dragged into campus after campus has a 100% track record of coarsening conversation, turning student against student, dividing the school along racial and religious lines, leading inexorably to a poisoned college atmosphere that administrators (not JVP) must deal with.

Naturally, Surasky presents “context” for the Irvine decision by pointing out a number of alleged (and undocumented) instances where people with whom JVP does not agree (supports of Israel, Republicans) supposedly behaved in ways Muzzlewatch’s friends always do. (And just as naturally, she hides this unproven set of accusation behind the quote from someone else, in this case the MSU’s lawyer.)

But even presuming these accusations are true, shouldn’t that trigger some spark of reflection on the part of those behind Muzzlewatch regarding the degeneration of discourse on our campuses to which they have contributed so much? When I attend events that require me to run a gauntlet of protestors (or cops), and have to pull myself closer to the stage to hear over protestor’s bullhorns, it depresses me that another place where a conversation could have taken place has been turned instead into an infantile shouting match.

Is there any similar sentiment to be found at Muzzlewatch? Any thought that their activity (including attempts to accuse critics of censorship for having the temerity of criticizing them) might be doing more harm than good? Not a chance. Just the usual self-righteousness and childish attempts to restate their ongoing case which can be boiled down to: “Free speech for me, but not for thee.”

Gay Pride and Prejudice

Time to close out this month’s review of Muzzlewatch misfires with a discussion of their most bizarre accusation to date: that Israel supporters are somehow trying to stifle discussion of “Israel Apartheid” within the gay and lesbian community.

I say “bizarre” because if there’s one issue where Israel’s human rights record shines with supernova-scale light when compared to its neighbors (the folks who, among other things, support and fund Israel=Apartheid campaigns) it’s in the area of gay rights.

After all, it’s one thing to sweep the repression of women in the Muslim world under the carpet with a turn of the head and some feeble muttering about “understanding cultural differences” that implies that it is only the kept, hajibbed women trailing along her owner/husband by ten paces that is truly “free.” But there really is no way to ignore that gay pride parades that take place routinely in Israel would be met with machine gun fire if it took place in Cairo or Tehran (the latter being spared such concerns since, according to the Iran’s President, there are no homosexuals in that country – so much for 1 in 10).

Now I know that within Israel there are Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox individuals groups who rail against homosexuals, lesbians and the "Sodom and Gamorah" of Tel Aviv’s gay scene. But that’s simply because Israel has a gay scene to verbally rail against. And I know that some defenders of Israel with no track record of defending gay rights in the US will often draw a Muslim homophobia arrow from the quiver during political debate. But if only non-black pots were allowed to debate the subject of kettles, well there would be no Muzzlewatch or Jewish Voice for Peace, now would there?

The ludicrousness of trying to use the gay issue as a bludgeon against the Jewish state came home when someone forwarded me a letter begging Elton John to not play a concert in “Apartheid Israel,” claiming that, despite its supposed open-mindedness regarding homosexuality, Israel has in the past yielded to demands of Palestinians families to have their fleeing gay children returned to them. Yes, you heard that right. Partisans of the Palestinian cause now list, among Israel’s crimes¸ the Jewish state’s alleged choice to send gay men and women into the clutches of the very Palestinians these partisans spend their lives fighting for, and then blame Israel when said gay Palestinians are beaten to death by their brethren.

This nonsense makes sense only if you realize that the entire point of Muzzlewatch is as a preemptive strike. Remember, Jewish Voice for Peace wants to be able to say whatever it wants and do whatever it wants, whenever and wherever it wants. Yet it also wants to claim that anyone else exposing its lies or hypocrisy, or battling against its causes (such as BDS) are “muzzlers” trying to stifle debate on the Middle East. This moral inversion can only be accomplished because supporters of Israel actually possess a respect for open discussion and debate that JVP and its friends simply feign. And so, Muzzlewatch hopes that they can get their critics to question their own rights to engage in political activity, leaving JVP et al free to do their dirty work unhindered.

Extending this tactic to a gay pride matter is simply Muzzlewatch’s childlike way to try to preempt the facts stated above, notably that it is Jewish Voice for Peace that unquestionably supports a culture that tortures and murders gay people against an Israeli society that welcomes them. Hiding behind a “Queers Against Israeli Apartheid” splinter group that’s even more marginal that JVP itself is simply their clumsy way of hiding their own opinions behind someone else's.

Now that I think about it, if gay rights are such a vital issue with which to bash the Jewish state, why hasn’t Jewish Voice for Peace taken up this matter with gay leaders in JVP’s own North California stronghold? Could it be that local gay pride groups know how to respond to narrow partisans trying to morally blackmail them into embracing a cause they know is not theirs (with a hearty FU)?

Or perhaps the Muzzlewatchers haven’t gone down this route simply because, as in Tehran, there are no gay people in San Francisco.

Muzzlewatch: Lost at Sea

God how I miss those weeks in May and June when the Jewish Voice for Peace crew were busying themselves with trying to spin the dogshit of defeat of their failed BDS campaigns in California into the gold of fantasy victory. For four blissful weeks, Muzzlewatch stayed silent, allowing me to do something other than shooting their latest “fish-in-a-barrel” arguments.

Alas, four accusations in one week require four responses. One and two can be found in last week’s postings, so today we take on Muzzlewatch’s take on the “Freedom Flotilla” in which a boat load of Turkish mercenaries suffered the fate that inevitably comes to those who bring a knife to a gunfight.

Muzzlewatch has a sticky problem with regard to portraying the recent Flotilla incident as nothing more than Israeli butchers dropping down to peaceful aid ships for Gaza and massacring or beating everyone in sight.

It’s not just that the world has seen video evidence demonstrating what happened before and after Israeli soldiers boarded the Mavi Mavera. After all, JVP and friends can simply rant on about how such evidence was “obviously” doctored (quoting like-minded Web sites as their only source for de-legitimizing overwhelming, clear-cut evidence regarding how violence broke out on that ship). After all, when JVP and its pals act as judge and jury (as they do at Muzzlewatch), it goes without saying any evidence Israel and its supporters provide for the defense will be immediately thrown out of court.

No the trouble for JVP is evidence those participating in the Flotilla provide. After all, there were six ships in that convoy (seven if you include the Rachel Corrie which rode on the wake of the previous week’s mayhem). And on all those ships except one, no one was shot, no one was wounded. Like every other ship that tried to run the legal, legitimate Israeli blockade of Gaza (including at least two gun running ships from Iran), the crew and passengers of all ships that did not go on the attack were brought safely to an Israeli port and sent home.

Israel’s video evidence is not all that’s needed to show the difference between the many blockade running ships where no one was hurt, and the one ship where several people were killed. For once the survivors of Mavi Mavera returned home to Turkey, they were not wailing about how they had been victimized. No, they were bragging about how they had drawn the blood of Israeli soldiers.

In other words, just as JVP and other friends and allies of the Flotilla are painting a picture of pristine victims on every boat that’s sailed towards the Gaza coast, crews full of nuns and orphans who would never lift a finger against anyone, other Flotilla friends (including those that participated) are boasting in national newspapers that attacking Israelis was why they set sail in the first place.

Here you have an interesting example of the dual role proponents of violence and propaganda play in the Arab-Israeli conflict with some parties (like Turkey’s IHH terrorist organization or Hamas) providing the muscle, the blades, the bullets and the rockets that allow the folks at JVP to get off on surrogate violence. In the meanwhile, JVP’s job is to turn the propaganda volume up to 11, trying to turn self-proclaimed warriors into the reincarnation of Martin Luther King, Gandhi and Jesus Christ.

According to JVP and Muzzlewatch, their hands are clean (except, perhaps, for the whitewash).