Just emailed to New Matilda
Dear NM proprietor and editors,
Recently you published an anonymous review of a just published book which purports to be a collection of anonymous statements by former IDF soldiers set in a racist narrative that leaves no room at all for a Jewish state between "the river and the sea".
Leaving aside the obvious racism of this enterprise how does this square with your publication policy as follows:
New Matilda publishes anonymous material only under exceptional circumstances but if essential, anonymity will be protected.
If any of these accounts are genuine, and I must say some have the ring of truth about them (others are petty or obvious bullshit), then there is no reason these honourable men and women could not tell their stories openly anywhere in the West and especially in Israel. At the very least report it to the authorities. That would be the honourable thing to do.
Are you seriously suggesting this is a case where anonymity is essential? Even for yourselves?
Would you kindly explain how?
Because frankly this sounds like an antisemitic conspiracy theory to me just dripping with moral cowardice
Or is it just "antizionist"?
These questions will be put to you in public at my blog. Please feel free to answer there.
Please feel free to explain what publication policy my comment apparently breached as well. Especially given the comments you did publish.
Let me guess.
Under no circumstances will NM publish the self evident truths that antizionism is the new antisemitism and that in the West it is the left that has facilitated the rehabilitation of this vile racist bigotry under the guise that Middle East Jews, most of them refugees from Muslim lands, must be vilified and robbed of their human rights.