Media Criticism

The Guardian Fired Columnist Nathan Robinson After a Joke Tweet About Military Aid to Israel

The tweet was neither anti-Semitic nor "fake news."

|

Nathan Robinson is editor of the leftist magazine Current Affairs and, until recently, a columnist for The Guardian. On Tuesday, he learned that his column would be discontinued.

The reason, according to Robinson, is that he tweeted a joke about U.S. military aid to Israel that perturbed The Guardian's U.S. editor-in-chief, John Mulholland, who accused Robinson of spreading "fake news" and suggested the joke was anti-Semitic.

In December, Robinson tweeted a complaint that the COVID-19 relief package was looped in with $500 million worth of military aid to Israel. "Did you know that the US Congress is not actually permitted to authorize any new spending unless a portion of it is directed toward buying weapons for Israel?" lamented Robinson. "It's the law."

If it were not clear enough that this was a joke, Robinson followed up with a remark that this wasn't actually a component of federal law, but it might as well be.

Nevertheless, Robinson received an email from Mulholland, with whom he had never interacted previously. The email contained a link to the tweet and an assertion that Robinson was spreading fake news.

"No such law exists," wrote Mulholland in reference to Robinson's joke about a legal mandate to include more funding for Israel in all spending bills. "In which case this is, as one might say, fake news, irrespective of the later tweet."

"Given the reckless talk over the last year—and beyond—of how mythical 'Jewish group/alliances' yield power over all forms of U.S. public life I am not clear how this is helpful to public discourse," Mulholland continued.

The bottom of the email included a quote—it was not clear from whom—that read: "Saying that the only Jewish state controls the most powerful country in the world is clearly anti-Semitic. The myth of 'Jewish power' informs murderous hatred. Delete this and apologise."

Robinson says that his immediate reaction was to delete the tweet and apologize to Mulholland, not because he agreed with the criticism but because he didn't want to lose his job.

"I need my income, and while it was deeply frustrating to me to have the Guardian policing my tweets, I grudgingly felt I would have to accept the new limits I expected would be imposed on my public speech," wrote Robinson. "I knew that the censorship would be aggravating, but it seemed unavoidable and I hoped it would be limited."

Mulholland thanked Robinson for complying, and Robinson expected that would be that. But over the next few weeks, The Guardian ceased running his columns. Finally, this week, Robinson received confirmation that his column was discontinued. Robinson says a Guardian editor confirmed that his Israel tweet was the reason.

Mulholland's charges are fairly baffling considering that Robinson's tweet 1) was obviously satirical, 2) was not in the least bit anti-Semitic, and 3) made a valid political point. Moreover, The Guardian is generally a progressive newspaper and does in fact publish articles that are critical of the state of Israel.

"The moment I irritated defenders of Israel on social media, I was summarily fired from my job as a newspaper columnist," wrote Robinson in a Current Affairs article about the incident.

It's possible, of course, that Robinson was actually let go for other reasons. Hiring and firing decisions are rarely as simple as they look to the outside world, as my colleague Matt Welch noted in his recent piece about two questionable New York Times employment issues. But the details that Robinson shared—which include the tweet in question and Mulholland's response—paint a troubling picture.

Mulholland did not respond to a request for comment, but a Guardian spokesperson sent me the following statement:

Nathan Robinson has written regularly for Guardian US but was neither a staff employee nor on contract. It is not true therefore that he was "fired".

As we enter a new political era, we believe it's important to publish diverse and original voices in our opinion pages. We continually review the range of regular columnists we publish and we would welcome further contributions from him in the future.

The Guardian supports its columnists to express a variety of perspectives on all topics, which are published on the site every day. Mr Robinson recognised that the tweets in question were ill-considered and it was his decision alone to delete them.

This ignores the fact that it was Mulholland who suggested the tweets were "ill-considered" in the first place. But Robinson's critique of the COVID-19 relief package was not unreasonable or unfair. In my own article about the $2.3 trillion spending bill that included $900 million in COVID-19 stimulus, I criticized foreign aid as well (though I did not specifically single out Israel). Israel is a very large recipient of U.S. public funds, and it is not an indicator of ethnic hatred to question whether U.S. taxpayers are obligated to fund a distant country's national defense program. Consider that no one has accused the Biden administration of Islamophobia for halting military aid to Saudi Arabia for its proxy war in Yemen.

The Guardian is obviously welcome to hire and fire whomever it wants. (It is also free to draw a distinction between an employee and a columnist, and to claim the latter is not "fired" when his recurring column ends, though this seems like a trivial difference to me.) It is not required to run Robinson's columns any more than it is required to run my columns. (Disclaimer: The Guardian ran a wildly positive review of my book, for which I remain very grateful.) The situation is somewhat analogous to the Niskanen Center's firing of Will Wilkinson, which I objected to on the merits while maintaining the think tank's absolute right to work out its own employment decisions.

Fake news, much like the term disinformation, is rapidly becoming a smear that is deployed in bad faith. The "fake news" designation should be reserved for popular information that is factually wrong. For instance, the claim that antifa planned the Capitol riot is fake news; the idea that people should power-wash their groceries to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is fake news; etc., etc. Robinson's tweet does not qualify, and the top editor of an influential newspaper really ought to know that.

Whether Robinson's firing counts as cancel culture depends on how narrowly one defines that term. Regardless, the objection to his tweet was based on two notions—it was "fake news" and it was anti-Semitic—that are both false. If that's truly the reason that Robinson's column was terminated, The Guardian appears to have betrayed its own commitment to "journalistic freedom and liberal values."

NEXT: Safety Investigators Confirm the 'Kobe Bryant and Gianna Bryant Helicopter Safety Act' Wouldn't Have Prevented the Fatal Crash That Killed Lakers Legend

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. They did him a favor the Guardian is too far left wing.

    1. I am now making extra $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online from home. I have received exactly $20845 last month from this home job.HFv Join now this job and start making extra cash online by follow instruction on the given website…

      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Online Jobs provid

      1. I am now making extra $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online from home. DSa I have received exactly $20845 last month from this home job. Join now this job and start making extra cash online by follow instruction on the given website. This is what I do…>>>>>>> USA ONLINE JOBS <<<<<<<<<

        1. {USA PEOPLE ONLY ]
          By following this simple steps on this website, you can bring from
          $5000-$8000 of extra income every month…
          All you need is a computer and a internet connection and you are ready to start.
          Learn how to make a steady income for yourself on following web adress.for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lot.

          open this link………EARNING SEASON ON

          1. I get paid 95 $ each hour for work at home on my PC. I never thought I’d have the option to OLK do it however my old buddy is gaining 65k$/month to month by carrying out this responsibility and she gave me how.

            Give it a shot on following website……..VISIT HERE

        2. After leaving my previous job 11 months ago,I’ve had some good luck to learn about this website which was a life-saver for me.They offer jobs for which people can work online from their house. My latest paycheck after working for them for 4 months was for $11600…Pqfsa Amazing thing about is that the only thing required is simple typing skills and access to internet.

          Read all about it here.>>>> PART TIME ONLINE JOBS

    2. I though that left wings were more pro Palestine and people such as Ben Shapiro and PragerU were the Israel guys…

      1. My last paycheck was $2500 for working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 8k for months now and JKL she works about 30 hours a week. and I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. The potential with this is endless.

        This is what I do….. Visit Here

      2. My last paycheck was $2500 for working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 8k for months now and AGU she works about 30 hours a week. and I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. The potential with this is endless.

        This is what I do….. Visit Here

      3. [ USA PEOPLE COME HERE ONLY ]

        Seriously I don’t know why more people haven’t tried this, I work two shifts, 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening.
        And i get surly a check of $12600 what’s tgip awesome is I m working from home so I get more time with my kids.

        Here’s sign up for details………. AMAZING JOB

    3. The for all its middle-class pinko rhetoric, the Guardian is to the right of Nathan Robinson, so I’m not sure how it’s doing him a favor.

      Anyway, despite being rather anti-Robinson myself, I absolutely loathe it when anyone is canceled for speech that isn’t an unambiguous incitement to violence.

      1. My last paycheck was $2500 for working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 8k for months now and WBU she works about 30 hours a week. and I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. The potential with this is endless.

        This is what I do….. Visit Here

    4. My last pay check was $8750 running 12 hours for every week. My sister accomplices have found the middle estimation of $15k for a critical long time and she RDV works around 20 hours for seven days. I can not trust how direct it was once I tried it.. Visit Here

  2. The Guardian is the biggest Joke news site of our time. What happens at the Guardian is really of little consequence to me.

    As such, I feel I should re-post this link.

    If you read the linked ‘hot takes’ from the Guardian, you begin to realize that anyone who reads and/or works for this organization kind of deserves whatever snake bites they get.

    1. Okay…that shit is hilarious. multi-storied buildings are sexist now?

      1. I stopped going to the gym because of Trump. Now I can’t open jars

        Chem jeff writes for the guardian?

        1. Since I started freelancing I’ve been bringing in (((($)))90 bucks/h… I sit at home and i am doing my work from my laptop.YTg Th℮ best thing is that i get more time to spent with my family and with my kids and in the same time i can earn enough to support them…

          You can do it too. Start here—— > > Online Jobs Provid

    2. This is the one I’d have gone with: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2004/feb/22/usnews.theobserver

      Honestly, it’s impressive that The Guardian is managing to publish at all, now that it’s 2021 and Britain has been plunged into Siberia-like temperatures.

    3. I’ll guarantee you she also whines about “mansplaining” and men not respecting her intellect….while doing everything in her power to ensure that they never will.

      1. [USA PEOPLE ONLY ]

        By following this simple steps on this website, you can bring from
        $5000-$8000 of extra income every month…
        All you need is a computer and a internet connection and you are ready to start.
        Learn how to make a steady mtvu income for yourself on following web adress.for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lot……

        >>>>CLASSIFIED LEGAL JOBS<<<<<

  3. Getting Paid Easy Online At Home Job and I have received $18K just in my first month payment by working online from home. Easy online and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job..i am a full time college student and i work daily 2 to 3 hours a day in my part time…..Visit here .

  4. “Robinson says that his immediate reaction was to delete the tweet and apologize to Mulholland, not because he agreed with the criticism but because he didn’t want to lose his job.”

    Apologizing was his biggest mistake. If you don’t agree with the criticism levelled at you, do not apologize. Simple as that. For the left, an apology is nothing but an admission of guilt. So, the general rule for anybody accused by rabid leftists of doing anything wrong is to tell them to “fuck off.” Leftists have no standards whatsoever and trying to reason with them is futile.

    They are going to do whatever they want to do anyway, and abject apologies only lend them legitimacy.

    1. Great article and very informative thanks for share it. Must check my link: sex sankt poelten for the best free sexy hot chat!

  5. I found this in the Guardian without much effort.

    A sample:

    “Israel controls the type of food Palestinians put on their tables, the laptops they use, their electricity, water, underwear, razor blades – even the lasers they use at beauty salons.

    “However, despite the successful rollout of the vaccine so far in Israel, the country is not providing the vaccine for those in Palestinian Territories. In their minds, it is the authority’s responsibility to do so for its citizens. And it waits for other countries to provide the vaccine for Palestinians, happy to avoid its responsibilities as an occupying power.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/31/israel-west-bank-vaccinate-palestinians

  6. And here’s another one from way back in January – an editorial no less –

    “The Guardian view on Israel and apartheid: prophecy or description?

    “Editorial

    “With no roadmap for peace, Israel risks being compared to the old South Africa

    “…Many Israelis detest the idea that their country, one they see as a democracy that rose from a genocidal pyre, could be compared to the old racist Afrikaner regime. Yet figures such as Desmond Tutu and Jimmy Carter have done so.

    “There is a serious argument about injustices to be had….

    “…A system of separate and unequal law and systemic discrimination against Palestinians has been justified because it was meant to be temporary. But decades have passed and the situation worsens. If this is a twilight for democracy and equality in the Holy Land, one can only hope that the night will be short.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/17/the-guardian-view-on-israel-and-apartheid-prophecy-or-description

  7. So I was cancelled today. Not by the Guardian, but by Reddit. What?

    In a discussion someone butted in and issued a screen full defense of the person I was having a discussion with. So I used the term “whiteknighting”.

    Little did I know at the time that the word was Unwoke, Politically Incorrect, and Hateful. So I was permabanned for hate speech. Wait… “whiteknight” is hate speech? Since when? So I looked it up and it turns out that Fourth Wave Feminism has appropriated the word and declared it hate speech. Because womyn do not need males to come to their rescue. Or something.

    But the discussion I was involved with did not have any indicators of sex or gender or genitalia preference. The topic was nowhere near feminism. Yet somehow by saying a whiteknighter was whiteknighting I had violated their hate speech code and I was permabanned.

    Quite frankly, I was gobsmacked.

    1. Kinda sucks when the bullshit you endorse comes back to bite you in the ass, doesn’t it?

      1. I have in no way ever endorsed any form of Wokeism or Progressivism or Fourth Wave Feminysm or anything similar.

        1. Tell us more about the “insurrection.”

        2. Before I bother to read the comments I scroll up and down flagging certain people. GG is one of them. Along with Mother’s Bitching, JesseAz, R Mac, Tulpa’s sock of the day, Sevo, and a few others. Don’t read. Don’t care. They’re dishonest and never add value to any discussion. You should do the same. Makes the comments much more readable and eliminates most of the hostility.

          1. “Before I bother to read the comments I scroll up and down flagging certain people.”

            Perhaps you can file reports with the FBI as well, you pathetic fascist fuck who pretends to have conversations with his own fake accounts.

          2. None of us are on the childrens internet to disagree with you. ===>

            It can be your own personal safe space. You could call it “sarcasmic’s hug box”.

            1. I know I always write long diatribes about people I hate but pretend not to care about

          3. Lol. You saved that tear filled bullshit to repost?

        3. There, just finished cleaning up. Much easier to read. When I see a gap I just assume it’s a monkey throwing poo.

          1. Youre still in denial about being one of the primary thread shitters? Lol. God damn drunk.

          2. Sarc, you’re the problem here. Not us.

        4. Oh, and in case you girls didn’t take the hint, I don’t even read your comments.

          So all you’re doing is virtue signaling to the other girls. I don’t care, I don’t read, and I certainly will not respond.

          Flag, flag, flag, flag, flag, flag, refresh. Missed one. Flag, oh there’s another, flag, refresh. These assholes are relentless. Flag, flag, flag refresh. Ah… Now I can actually read the comments. Very nice.

          1. If you weren’t reading our comments, retard, you wouldn’t be making posts about not reading our comments. So, not only are you DEFINITELY reading our comments, you are lying to yourself, as well as everyone else, about not reading them.

            It’s like banning sodomy while having your dick in someone’s ass.

            “I’ll stop just as soon as I finish.”

            LOL

            1. In his case it’s like banning sodomy while he’s being double anal penetrated.

          2. Do you still dream of us masturbating as you flag, you gross old drunk?

            https://reason.com/2021/02/09/the-not-so-peaceful-transfer-of-power/#comment-8750813

          3. Awwwww SWRLSY you’re that we spamflag you and make you disappear lolol

          4. Yeah, most alcoholics don’t like looking in the mirror. You’ve been exposed as a hypocritical sophist piece of shit.

            1. It’s everyone else’s fault, not poor sarcasmic’s. He wasn’t the problem.

          5. You read every comment, and each one wounds you.

    2. The rules change constantly, and are retroactive. Think of the culture like you would Twitter’s terms of service.

      Sorry to hear that, but it’s not that surprising. The tech billionaires don’t much care about who’s in front of the firing squads, just that they continue operating.

      1. Reddit’s not really one of the “tech billionaires”.

        1. “Reddit was valued at $3 billion in its last round in February 2019, “

          1. The word “billionaire” refers to a person. Reddit is owned by Conde Nast, a publisher. Not a person.

            1. “Reddit was valued at $3 billion”

            2. ” Reddit is owned by Conde Nast”

              He says, lacking in either awareness or irony.

            3. You don’t think Conde Nast is owned by people?

    3. Similar stuff has happened to me. In my case I asked someone if they liked to go to the range and shoot guns. They found it “triggering” and I got permabanned. I too was gobsmacked.

      This comes to mind.

      It’s a Bloom County cartoon.

      1. Says the guy bragging about flagging people above. Lol.

        1. Meh. At least it’s individual viewing cleanup. I mean, I think we all know that Reason doesn’t actually pay any attention to the flags.

    4. You were assaulted by a sailor? {Or you are from the UK or Ireland?}

  8. Oddly enough, despite its alleged influence, every one of the first 1000 or so search engine results for QAnon are its critics, and not any sort of actual QAnon site.

    Ken Schulz was 100% correct, QAnon is the single most epic troll of all time. Not so much because of the few people who actually fell for it, but for the blind panic it created in those who believed other people might fall for it.

    1. Blind panics are the most valuable currency for totalitarians. The Soviets perfected the art of the panic.

      “Why do we have crop shortages?”
      “THE KULAKS ARE CONSPIRING! THEY ARE DESTROYING THE CROPS!”

      “Why are the factories not producing?”
      “THE WRECKERS! THEY ARE SABOTAGING THE FACTORIES!”

      “Why do we not have enough basic medicines?”
      “IT’S THE DOCTORS! THEY ARE THIEVING BASTARDS! THEY ARE SELLING OUR MEDICINE TO THE GERMANS! THE GERMANS!!”

      Every failure can be explained by an imaginary group of people working behind the scenes to discredit the party!

      Same shit, different century.

      1. We really need to cleanse the democrats from our country.

    2. I don’t even know what Qanon is, except that its:

      1. Bad
      2. Full of Trump Supporters
      3. Has required endless debunking and continuous fretting by establishment news sources and blue checkmarks.

      Oh, speaking of blue checkmarks, we’re now seeing an interesting phenomenon taking place. Various people with said checkmarks *cough*New York Times Journalists*cough* who have built up a large following over the last four years, responding in real time to every Trump tweet now find themselves in an awkward position. they’re beginning to lash out at any other technology or platform that appears to ‘compete’ with Twitter. The logic seems to be that you’ve amassed a considerable following on a platform, that platform is now integral to your product– yourself. And when a competitor pops up, they’re not just competing with Twitter, they’re competing with you.

      1. My wife was fed some qAnon stuff in the form of a series of youtube videos. Some of the stuff is true as far highlighting the rich and powerful people pulling the levers behind the scene. There were some accusations of occult stuff with Clinton and other politicians, but the proof and more solid stuff involved calling out politicians for pedophilia.
        I might have looked into it before it became a Trump cult thing that the media describes. Or they might just be mischaracterizing it because Trump supporters are involved and some of what they’ve said is provably true. From what I was able to find (months ago) it is a loose connection of actual conspiracies and conspiracy theories that they poorly tie together. Democrat politicians, Soros, and the Rockefellers are some of the core players in most of it.

        1. Some of the stuff is true as far highlighting the rich and powerful people pulling the levers behind the scene.

          That’s not qanon, that’s an article in Time.

      2. I took a look at it when it was relatively new. There was a pinned comment on a related forum that “proved” that “Q”, as they called him, was an insider in the Trump administration with a picture from Air Force One that did, in fact, prove that somebody took a picture from a plane while in flight and nothing else. I figured it was a troll or a larp or something and moved on after about five minutes.

        It’s hard to believe that anybody could be taken in by it, but I would have said the same thing about the Russia collusion hoax, both before and after the Muller investigation thoroughly debunked it, so I just don’t know.

        1. It’s basically the illuminati theory rebranded, with a specific focus on child molestation.
          Which… I think they’re close to the truth on. They take it off the deep end, but Epstein certainly happened. It’s hard to believe such a thing is limited to him, and some of the wikileaks stuff, as well as certain tastes in artwork, is highly suspicious.
          And it makes sense. These are psychopaths at the top of societal status. As has been mentioned by others, they get off on transgression – doing what is forbidden by society, especially to the process. How better to reinforce their status, and their own esteem, than by doing that which is most heinous and getting away with it? It’s not like these people have a fear of God or regard for other people holding them in check.
          QAnon’s biggest delusion was believing in some secret savior(s) that would right all the wrongs in the world.
          Nobody is going to save us. We are on our own. And if the current trend holds, we’ll get all the way to one world government and mass murder having put up no more resistance than bitching.

          1. *especially to the *proles*, not process

    3. Ken Schulz was 100% correct, QAnon is the single most epic troll of all time.

      Not exactly correct. 4chan was an epic troll, and QAnon was an epic troll. Gamestop was an epic troll. And the trend is only going up. I can’t wait to see what the internets come up with next.
      munching popcorn and humming a joe jackson tune …

  9. Is The Guardian offensive to palestinians then…?

  10. Wait, the Guardian is now against disinformation against Israel? When did that change?

    As for that guy in particular, considering he’s a Guardian columnist, he was probably fine when leftists were arbitrarily cancelling everyone else, so fuck him.

    1. Oh, I should also add that this guy AND the Guardian both hold the opinion that Trump is publicly and explicitly islamophobic because he wanted to single out a small fraction of Islamic countries in the world for extra scrutiny with regards to Islamic terrorism. Why shouldn’t both of them consider this guy antisemitic for wanting to single out every single Jewish country in the world for extra scrutiny with regards to foreign aid?

      1. We’ve got an Irish guy swatting a (I assume, fellow) lefty with two degrees from Brandeis for cracking wise about US-Israel relations? The Left eats its own.

  11. The purges have begun, and this time, since no one is actually being shot in the back of the head (yet), it’s kind of fun to watch.

  12. Did you know that the word “gullible” is not in the dictionary?

      1. I’m going to look that up!

  13. What’s up, Peanuts?

    Sad to say freedom fighter Larry Flynt has died.

    Larry Flynt, the porn tycoon and unlikely First Amendment champion, died Wednesday in Los Angeles of heart failure, according to TMZ. He was 78. Flynt founded Hustler magazine in 1974, known for its lewd pictures and crude takes, which spun off into a media empire. The magazine’s jabs at notorious evangelical preacher Jerry Falwell wound up resulting in a landmark Supreme Court case, Hustler v. Falwell, where the court ruled unanimously that freedom of speech protections extended to intentionally offensive parodies of public figures. While a 1978 murder attempt left Flynt wheelchair-bound for the remainder of his life, he remained provocative until the end: in 2019, Hustler sent Republican congressmen Christmas Cards depicting the assassination of then-President Trump.

    (Daily Beast)

    Flynt was shot by some MAGA type rednecks not far from where I live in Georgia way back in the 70s but he went on to win several First Amendment cases.

    RIP liberty lover.

    1. 70s but he went on to win several First Amendment cases.

      How quaint.

    2. “Flynt was shot by some MAGA type rednecks”

      I looked it up, an attention whore serial killer claimed to be the one who shot Flynt, but was never brought to trial. To this day know one knows who the actual shooter was.
      As expected of Buttplug.

      Incidentally the only person to aid Flynt was a redneck evangelical pastor by the name of Fred Musser who administered first aid and then held his hand and prayed for him after the medics took over.
      https://www.atlantamagazine.com/history/larry-flynt-shot-in-lawrenceville-ga-1978/
      As expected of Buttplug to make him a villain.

      Finally, wasn’t Larry Flynt the one who published a series of nude pics in his porn mag of Brooke Shields when she was only nine years old?
      As expected of Buttplug to find that heroic.

      1. Well, ML, I won’t ignore your post after that research you did. I admit I didn’t know about Musser.

        This is my stomping ground. I know these people. Flynt was not shot by some militant lesbo, he was hated by conservatives since he became a publisher. Look at this conservative web site celebrating his death today:

        https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3933405/posts

        Awful. Why conservatives hate liberty lovers I will never understand.

        And as far as some militant lesbo – I wouldn’t like them either. They just don’t exhibit the violence conservatives do. Just look at how Aborto-Freaks love their violent killing of doctors.

        As far as Brooke Shields – there has never been a credible allegation of child porn as far as she is concerned. If so Flynt would have been charged. Nudity is not porn since there is no victim.

        1. My mistake, it was Playboy, not Hustler who published the Brooke Shields kiddie porn. I knew it was one of those disgusting old goats.

          “taken by fashion photographer Garry Gross in 1975 for a Playboy publication titled Sugar and Spice. It was one of a dozen images of Shields designed, according to Gross, to reveal the not-so-latent sexuality of the prepubescent child”

          https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2009/oct/03/brooke-shields-nude-child-photograph

          1. Not porn, Mr. QAnon.

            1. You just said that was your stomping ground sarc

            2. That was definitely childporn.

              She was 10 years old, completely naked, oiled up and in full makeup, and her breasts (or lack of them) and vulva were prominent in a half dozen pictures and the center spread of the world’s premier pornography mag.
              That was porn by any metric, pervert.

              The only reason nobody was charged is kiddie porn not featuring intercourse didn’t become federally illegal until several years later.

              1. I don’t recall it although I subscribed to ‘Playboy’. Sounds like you’re the real pervert.

                1. It’s right there in the Guardian article, you illiterate cunt.

                  Anyway, it happened long before I was born, so I’m not sure how you can accuse me of recalling it.

                2. Why are you still running this fake Buttplug sarc?

        2. “This is my stomping ground. ”

          Except Flynt used adult models.

    3. “where the court ruled unanimously that freedom of speech protections extended to intentionally offensive parodies of public figures.”

      That was then, this is now.

    4. I’m honestly a little disappointed that a noted left-libertarian Democrat like you would celebrate this man. At least if what I’m reading in The New York Times is accurate.

      Hustler’s June 1978 cover … portrayed a woman upside down and half gone into a meat grinder, with a plate of hamburger below. A “seal of approval” noted: “Prime. Last All Meat Issue. Grade ‘A’ Pink.” A caption quoted Mr. Flynt, “We will no longer hang women up like pieces of meat.”

      … Gloria Steinem wrote a scathing denunciation on the Op-Ed page of The New York Times. “A pornographer is not a hero,” she said. “Hustler is depicted as tacky at worst, and maybe even honest for showing full nudity. What’s left out are the magazine’s images of women being beaten, tortured and raped, women subject to degradations from bestiality to sexual slavery.”

      The images featured in Hustler were certainly graphic and often violent: Women were depicted crawling at the end of a dog leash, nailed to a cross, bagged like a deer and bound to a luggage rack. One cover showed a woman’s head in a gift box.

      You’re better than this, Mr. Buttplug. Don’t celebrate this enabler of RAPE CULTURE.

      #LibertariansAgainstHustler

      1. HA! Nice.

        You know I am a big opponent of PC thinking.

        #LibertariansforLarryFlynt
        #LibertariansforDavidAllenCoe

        1. I know you’re not even the real buttplug, sarc.

  14. “The Guardian is obviously welcome to hire and fire whomever it wants”

    That argument is horseshit when applied to a platform or publisher that advertises itself as a repository of ethical journalism.
    Having a legal right, doesn’t mean it’s a moral or ethical right.

  15. Does his publication, Current Affairs, partake in cancel culture?

  16. To all who are foolish enough to retain a “social” media account;
    “Never apologize, Mister. It’s a sign of weakness.”
    Captain Nathan Brittles

  17. “The moment I irritated defenders of Israel on social media, I was summarily fired from my job as a newspaper columnist,”

    “Defenders of Israel”. You mean “the Joooooos”? Those filthy kikes control everything, don’t they? But I’m sure there’s not an anti-Semitic bone in your body.

    1. Nathan, who went to Brandeis, just might be Jooooo-ish, don’t you think?

    2. You’re accusing him of being an anti-Semite, but in the most cowardly and dishonest way possible and without a shred of evidence.

  18. Isn’t this one of those stories that the “Reason doesn’t do articles about what I feel is important so they suck!” crowd was bitching about?

    I think it is.

    Do I see anyone giving credit or taking back their words? Even an “About time!”?

    Of course not. Should anyone be surprised? Yeah. Right.

    1. Israel is the ultimate Eminent Domain decision.

      But I have no dog in this fight since I don’t like the Palestinians either.

      1. stop talking to yourself

      2. Fuck off and die, turd.

      1. Oh wait. You invented a strawman like usual. Good work buddy.

    2. “Isn’t this one of those stories that the “Reason doesn’t do articles about what I feel is important so they suck!” crowd was bitching about?
      I think it is.
      Do I see anyone giving credit or taking back their words? Even an “About time!”?”

      You’re such a dishonest retard sarcasmic, maybe if you weren’t continually drunk your reading comprehension wouldn’t have been so fucked and you would’ve read this:

      https://reason.com/2021/02/10/nathan-robinson-the-guardian-israel-tweet-joke-column/#comment-8754851

    3. you whine about other people a lot

      don’t let them trigger you so much

    4. Yea, a British newspaper firing a columnist is totes the same as the US government imprisoning a citizen for political speech.

  19. Sorry, but satire and sarcasm are racist and fascist, unless it’s folks like SNL satirizing Conservatives and Republicans.

  20. Ol’ Robby’s gone full Alt-right. Surprised he didn’t throw in the quote:

    “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize”

  21. The situation is somewhat analogous to the Niskanen Center’s firing of Will Wilkinson, which I objected to on the merits while maintaining the think tank’s absolute right to work out its own employment decisions.

    FAKE NEWS

    There’s tons of merit in firing Will Wilkinson for any reason. Even if they pretend it’s total bullshit over whether a white man can be lynched.

    1. shut up faggot x 2

  22. Lefturds in Britain are highly sensitive to exposure of their Judenhass currently, since it’s causing problems for the Labour party. I wouldn’t have expected them to go as far as firing someone for making a joke, though.

    -jc

    1. My guess: In the case of the Guardian, they need to justify having Muslim fanatics in the Labour coalition – which involves a certain degree of Jew-baiting – so they tell themselves they’re just *so concerned* about Palestinian rights and peace in the Middle East. But they’re happy to look for an opportunity to take on someone (like this guy who looks like the Sixth Doctor) who is seen as going too far.

      But let’s compare and contrast. The U. S. government *does* give Israel a lot of money, and it’s weird seeing foreign aid to anyone, including Israel, in a supposed Covid bill. Which would naturally inspire a joke like the Sixth Doctor looking guy told.

      But how is that worse than the very strong insinuation (see above) that Israel is like Apartheid South Africa – one of the worst insults you can make against a country in the mind of Guardian readers and editors. And if Israel is Apartheid South Africa, then they’re the whites who need to step aside to make room for majority rule, abolishing Israel as a Jewish state.

      1. …..looks like the Sixth Doctor…

        His wardrobe, anyway. Bit of Tom Wolfe-envy there, I’d say.

  23. Firing some nobody for a random tweet is a sure way to prove that the Jews don’t control everything.

  24. Bummer for this guy, but this is now dog bites man. I’d have to do a lot more research on this journalist than I’m going to do to decide he isn’t reaping what he sowed.

  25. It’s not particularly clear that is a joke, it sounds like an insinuation that Jews control the US government. He didn’t mean it literally that it’s the law, so it’s not fake news, but it’s a sarcastic implication.

    1. I think the point is it’s not really shocking *for a Guardian writer* (see above), so maybe they’re being arbitrary.

  26. The Guardian is correct the Jews don’t control the US they control the world.

  27. When I heard about Epoch, ostensibly a free speech platform, I gave it a few weeks.

    I noticed fluctuations in comments that indicated algorithms to surreptitiously and selectively display comments to users to control the narrative.

    Eventually I found out their real criteria for outright censorship. I provided irrefutable evidence that the holocaust is a false narrative and was banned. It was verboten.

    That should indicate the real source of this global media censorship and coercion violating our rights. When we point the finger at Jews, with the facts of science and logic that the oligarchs can’t allow.

    Epoch is just another tool of censorship.

    1. So, how many Holocaust-deniers does it take to change a light bulb?

      “Do you mean to say you’ve bought the Jewish propaganda that light-bulbs exist?”

    2. Fuck off, Adolf.

      -jcr

    3. I can rub your nose in irrefutable evidence that the holocaust narrative is bullshit anytime I want to.

      How does that make you feel?

      1. I can rub your nose in irrefutable evidence that the holocaust narrative is bullshit anytime I want to.

        You keep misspelling “bullshit” as “evidence”, Nazi shit.

    4. “When I heard about Epoch, ostensibly a free speech platform, I gave it a few weeks…”

      Poor lying Nazi shit can’t find a single outlet spread his bullshit.

    5. Bad bigots!

      I’ve gotta hand it to you trolls for giving me another opportunity to demonstrate with evidence of logic and science the lie that is your bogeyman, the holocaust.

      By denying this reality that you can’t refute you demonstrate your stupidity

      Consider that the German enigma code was broken in 1941 and recently released allied decryption provide physical evidence that Germans were desperately trying to save lives in prison camps from the typhus epidemic.

      Advocates for the holocaust narrative (dipshits) say the decrypts demonstrate deception by the Germans. Logically they must argue that the Germans who at the same time employed no deception for their military actions must have put a much higher priority on killing Jews than winning the war.

      Assuming you are willing to perform those mental gymnastics, feeble as they are, how does that explain how a single Jew survived captivity? Why did Jews get tattoos instead of the bullets allies were?

      Talking about bullshit survivor lies.

      Are you the shlomo whose gramps wrote a book illustrated with pictures of shirtless Jews dragging bodies from the gas chambers to the ovens?

      You fuckwits don’t know that cyanide is absorbed through the skin and lying shlomo senior would have been dead in hours not collecting financial reparations into his old age.

      When a necessary aspect of a narrative is proven to be complete bullshit, the entire narrative is therefore false.

      Nose = rubbed

      1. “…Consider that the German enigma code was broken in 1941 and recently released allied decryption provide physical evidence that Germans were desperately trying to save lives in prison camps from the typhus epidemic…”

        An asshole Nazi considers that bit of hearsay “evidence”; that’s all you need to know.
        Nose = up ass.

        1. Bad bigot!

          Obviously training is required. Not hearsay! Documented fact!

          German military radio messages were successfully decrypted at Bletchley Park using the “enigma” codebreaker. Concerning the labour camps, over the period Spring 1942-February 1943, the following information was obtained:

          “The return from Auschwitz, the largest of the camps with 20,000 prisoners, mentioned illness as the main cause of death, but included references to shootings and hangings. There were no references in the decrypts to gassings.”

          British Intelligence in World War Two, HMSO, 1981 F.Hinsey Ed., Vol. II, p.673.

          1. “The return from Auschwitz, the largest of the camps with 20,000 prisoners, mentioned illness as the main cause of death, but included references to shootings and hangings. There were no references in the decrypts to gassings.”

            Gee, asshole Nazi, they didn’t brag about gassing them, therefore, uh…
            On top of being an asshole Nazi, you’re a fucking gullible ignoramus.
            Nose = up ass.

            1. Bad bigot!

              Lots of information about Aushwitz, arrivals, departures, sickness, deaths and all of it contradicts the holocaust narrative.

              We are left with the my initial logic. To believe the holocaust narrative you have to believe zee Germans communicating through their enigma encryption were talking in code about everything going on in labour camps but talking plainly about planning military actions.

              That makes you one stupid bitch.

  28. “…The Guardian appears to have betrayed its own commitment to “journalistic freedom and liberal values.”

    That does seem to be going around everywhere.

  29. So, we’re actually supposed to believe that the paper that ran this fired a guy for that tweet? Yeah, that’s, to use Mr. Soave’s word, baffling.

    If we instead assume that the Guardian did in fact decide to discontinue this guy’s column simply as a matter of rotation as the Guardian has said, and this guy decided he could promote himself by falsely claiming to have been fired over the tweet, there’s nothing baffling at all.

    So, what evidence, if any, is there that Robinson was fired for the content of his tweet? I mean, other than some easily-faked screenshots (the first having a blatantly weird “last line” after the signature in a different font size than the rest of the alleged email), and some assertions by Robinson attributed to an anonymous “Guardian editor”?

    1. You’re mistaken. The quote at the bottom of the email is in the same font, just a larger point size. When you paste text into HTML mail editors, it keeps the original font face and size.

      1. Er, are you under the impression that the words “different font size” and “same font, just a larger point size” mean different things?

  30. Robby sure seems to relish every detail of this left on left slap fight.

    Doesn’t he know that sort of thing is best done in private?

    As in private corporations.

  31. “…Robinson says that his immediate reaction was to delete the tweet and apologize to Mulholland, not because he agreed with the criticism but because he didn’t want to lose his job…”

    Yeah, his campaign to steal from others isn’t far enough along yet.

  32. These cancel people are bullies, assholes, and should have no authority to impact anyone’s career, ever. It won’t stop until the companies who do it pay dearly.

  33. How is this not antisemitic? It’s a joke only in the sense that saying women really love to be raped is a joke. It’s perpetuating a false narrative that is purposely designed to vilify and cause harm to a particular group of people. This plausible deniability bullshit doesn’t wash and this, so called, journalist can’t claim he was unaware of the context in which his “joke” was made. The Guardian is anti-Israel but even they can recognise the sound of an antisemitic dog whistle.

  34. And maybe Shikha Dalmia was not fired for disapproving too explicitly of the then PotUS.

  35. How he was not fired sooner for that bad Dr. Who cosplay is beyond me.

Please to post comments