Talk:Justin Raimondo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

Contents 1 Sexuality 2 Real name Dennis? 3 Jeremy Sapienza and hyperlinks 4 Explictly rejects 5 Quotes 6 Views on 9/11 7 Let the edit war begin 8 this article needs a photo 9 9/11 10 Raimondo is watching you wiki-vandals

[edit] Sexuality

I have no idea what Raimondo's sexuality is, but if you're going to list him in an LGBT category you need to make clear in the article (through provable evidence, of course) that he is gay/bisexual/whatever. Treybien 14:57 1 November 2006 (UTC)

We have him in category:anarchists but is Raimondo actually an anarchist? I mean, in the sense that Rothbard or David Friedman are? - Nat Krause 11:38, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It depends on how broad your definition is... he calls himself one, at the very least.

Well, that's just the thing: I don't think he does call himself one. - Nat Krause 03:34, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No, he definately does... I've heard him.

Raimondo is not an anarchist. If you look at old Radical Caucus publications it is clear that he considers the entire anarchist-minarchist debate to be irrelevant and annoyingly abstract.

Considering the anarchist-minarchist debate to be irrelevant doesn't neccesarily preclude one from being an anarchist... in fact it probably helps.

Due to the discussion on his forum it seems like he is a Minarchist more than a Anarcho-capitalist, allthough his mentor was is Anarcho-capitalist. Filing him in that category. A human 06:36, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Real name Dennis?

Is his first name really "Dennis", and is "Justin" just a nickname? If so, does anyone know the reason why he chose "Justin"?

His legal name is Justin Raimondo. It was Dennis at one point, but he had it changed sometime in his early 20's

[edit] Jeremy Sapienza and hyperlinks

From article: "He [Raimondo] was also one of the first internet pundits to make maximum use of the linkability of the web ... He has claimed this tendency as a strength in several columns, even hiring Jeremy Sapienza as senior editor in 2004."

The implicit conection between "Jeremy Sapienza as senior editor" and "extensive use of hyperlinks" is very unclear to me, even after taking a look at Jeremy Sapienza. Can anybody clarify this? -- 19 december 2005

[edit] Explictly rejects

• Raimondo often condemns the country and government of Israel though he explicitly rejects anti-Semitism.

Scanning through a Google search I see where Raimondo complains that the term "anti-Semism" is used too broadly,[1] but I don't see where he "explicitly rejects" it. What's our source? -Will Beback 21:16, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

The following came from this source. Dick Clark 21:42, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I have respect and great affection for the Jewish people. My mentor and teacher, the late Murray N. Rothbard, was Jewish – along with virtually every major libertarian theoretician in modern times. For this reason, the Foxman letter makes me so angry that, for once, I can't even express the depth of my resentment and outrage. What galls me is that this liar has the nerve to sign off with "Sincerely"! I am ceaselessly attacked by real anti-Semites for not facing up to "the Jewish question" – and now I am being smeared by the ADL (and the extremist Jewish Defense League) for supposedly providing "fodder for anti-Semites." That's a pretty good indication I'm on the right track, as far as I'm concerned.

According to the antisemitism article, the term is defined as hostility toward or prejudice against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group, which can range from individual hatred to institutionalized, violent persecution. Given Raimondo's claim that he has "respect and great affection for the Jewish people," it seems that the above source is a clear disavowal of antisemitism by Raimondo. Dick Clark 21:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Given the source, maybe it'd be better to write, "he rejects the charge of being anti-Semitic, saying that he has 'respect and great affection for the Jewish people.'" "Rejecting anti-semitism" alone doesn't make it clear what about the term he is rejecting. -Will Beback 21:55, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Will, I concur with your take on this. When I inserted that text, I was reverting to the previous wording. I think your suggestion makes sense given the content of the above source. Dick Clark 22:08, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Cool. -Will Beback 22:40, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quotes

I added a large number of quotes to this section. It gives a good cross-section of the recurring themes of his articles the past several years and also shows off his writing style. DarthJesus 02:36, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Quotes belong in our sister project, Wikiquote. A rule of thumb is no more than five quotes in an article here. I'll add the link to the Wikiquotes page to this article so you'll know where to put them. Cheers, -Will Beback

Ive re-added some of the quotes to the article since it seems they have all been deleted from Wikiquote. My, I wonder how that happened? DarthJesus 06:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Regardless, they don't belong here. Please re-create that article rather than posting them back here. -Will Beback 05:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Why dont they belong? "A rule of thumb is no more than five quotes in an article here." Well there are five quotes here so why wouldn't they belong? What rule says you can't have quotes in a regular wikipedia article? DarthJesus 15:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Views on 9/11

I added the following text which was later deleted: With respect to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Raimondo believes the Israeli government had foreknowledge of the plot and has written extensively on the issue; he even stated that Israel was behind the attacks. His views have been harshly criticized by such individuals as Bill Herbert, Patrick Devenny, Stephen Schwartz, Damian Penny, Stefan Sharkansky, Chris Morris, Abraham H. Foxman, Glenn Reynolds, Richard Poe, Ben Johnson, and others. He has been accused of anti-Semitism and 9/11 conspiracism. Raimondo replies that his anti-Zionism and opposition to Israeli government policies does not entail anti-Semitism and that he supports Jews. Raimondo's critics counter that he conceals his anti-Semitism under the guise of anti-Zionism.

I believe that there is no good reason to think that his belief in Israeli foreknowledge and complicity in 9/11 is irrelevant for this article. I believe that the text I added is in accordance with NPOV because it simply describes the POV of Raimondo and others. I also added a FrontPage Magazine external link to an article critical of Raimondo because I believe both sides of the story should be represented. I am neither a propagandist nor a troll (71.131.25.75) but a Wikipedian wishing to make positive contributions to this encyclopedia. -- Huysman^talk 16:13, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Your bias comes through in this phrase: "he even stated that Israel was behind the attacks." Where? When? How?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.131.25.75 (talk • contribs) .

My bad. I used to read a lot of Raimondo's work and must have confused him with Michael Rivero or someone like that. -- Huysman^talk 21:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Also: attributing anti-Semitism to Raimondo is obviously biased, and is also demonstrably untrue. As for the Frontpage piece, it is so obviously over-the-top that it doesn't represent an example of credible criticism: caling Raimondo a "neo-fascist" is just bonkers. There is a lot more criticism out there, however, that might prove credible, if only you would do the necessary work and go find it.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.131.25.75 (talk • contribs) .

I did not attribute anti-Semitism to Raimondo; I said that others consider him anti-Semitic, including the national director of the ADL. This is just stating the facts and does not involve any analysis or opinion on my part. -- Huysman^talk 21:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Let the edit war begin

I dont know about the rest of you but I for one and up for a good revert battle. Let the edit war begin!! DarthJesus 16:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

     Come on 71.131.43.223 at least sign in so we know who you are. DarthJesus 21:05, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

This is how "DarthJesus" describes his wiki-activities: "Just a newcomer to Wiki, who only has interest in a few areas. I am an ex-Army member with 4 years of service, with 1 year spent in Iraq." Yeah, his "interest" seems to extend only to this one Wikipedia entry, and his POV is pretty obvious. We don't need a "revert battle" -- and you, Darth, need to temper your obsessions and maybe get some help.

Uh-oh! Looks like I struck a nerve. Man I cant tell you how much it pains me to know you disapprove of my work Mr. 71.131.43.223. I mean I dont think I can go on knowing what you think of me. Oh, by the way, the quotes I chose are "very" notable. They give a good cross-section of his mindset and how Mr. Raimondo writes. DarthJesus 21:05, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Why are the quotes I selected POV? Raimondo said them, he meant them, if you asked him today he would say the same thing. He actually wrote an entire book about his believed Isreali connection to 9/11 and he has long stated that Palestinian attacks against Isreal soldiers and settlers are justified, he even explains why in the recent quote. So, I ask again, why are these quotes POV? DarthJesus 16:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

You insert your opinion by saying Raimondo "justifies" murder, for one. Secondly, a notable quote gives some indication of the author's views on a variety of issues -- not the narrow focus you've chosen. And, last but hardly least, "man," since you have already declared a "revert war," it doesn't seem likely that you're amenable to mediation, or even reason.

I insert my opinion? What else would you call saying: "and the settlers are clearly involved in an act of aggression, i.e., dispossessing Palestinians of their land." but justification for attacks upon Isreali settlers? A narrow view? These selections give his views on 9/11, the Isreali-Palestinian conflict, and the nuclear bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I would include more but the administrator Willbeback above had advised me earlier there should be no more than five. But dont worry I restarted the Wikiquote article where I have a huge number of quotes on a wide range of Raimondo's ramblings. Feel free to add to them if you want. And one last thing Mr. 71.131.43.223 (if that is your real name) you are the one hurling personal insults by saying I'm obsessed and need help, not me. DarthJesus 18:32, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok Mr. 71.131.43.223 Ill meet you half-way. I removed the murder comment and deleted some of my quotes and added some of yours. Why don't we just call a truce here, ok? I apologize if I've acted rudely towards you. DarthJesus 03:52, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] this article needs a photo

Anyone know of a wiki-usable photo of Justin?--Mcasey666 12:14, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 9/11

Raimondo has written repeatedly that Mossad had advance knowledge of 9/11. The Carl Cameron report has nothing to do with Justin Raimondo so it shouldn't be in the article. If people want to read the citation and find out why Raimondo believes what he believes then they are free to do so. We don't have to go through and list the justifications for every single belief that Raimondo has, we just have to link to the article where he says it. DarthJesus 18:44, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. However, it is factually inaccurate to say that Raimondo thought that "Israel" had foreknowledge. Raimondo is anti-collectivist, so wouldn't attribute knowledge held by the government to the whole nation. It would be more correct to say that he believes that some members of the Israeli government had foreknowledge. Dick Clark 19:18, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

The Carl Cameron report has absolutely nothing to do with Justin Raimondo. Nothing. He did not help write it, he did not do research for it, he did not speak with Carl Cameron before it aired, and his name is never mentioned in the report a single time. It does not belong in this article. The article linked there already has a link to the Cameron report anyway, so we don't need it here.

And he does not say that the Isreali's MAY have had knowledge of the attacks, he says they absolutely did: "Let’s see: a nest of Israeli "ex"-special forces, electronic interception and explosives experts are holed up blocks away from Mohammed Atta and his fellow hijackers. Is it even credible that the former didn’t know about the existence of the latter? Certainly not. And, just as certainly, the Israelis – let’s just call them what they are: spies -- had the means at their disposal to not only detect the presence of Al Qaeda operatives, but to find out what they were up to. And that, my friends, is the very least we can surmise…."

How can you read that and say Raimondo thinks that Isreal MAY have had knowledge of 9/11? DarthJesus 05:31, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Raimondo is watching you wiki-vandals

It appears that Raimondo himself is keeping track of this article. And he even mentions me by name! [2] DarthJesus 16:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

have you noticed that the "conspiracy theorists" category added by the vandal greg72 is still there? i haven't read justin raimondo's writings, but i suspect that should be removed? Tjenare 16:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)