Wow. Did Vox Political’s writer just endure an anti-Gentile attack?

Amazing. I’m not entirely sure, because the other person seemed a little deranged, but it seems This Writer just endured a quite prolonged attack on Twitter for daring to question the actions of Jewish people.

I don’t mean all Jews, but any Jews at all – for any reason.

After I made it clear that I did not accept this person’s argument, it appears my Twitter account suffered an attack of some kind and I was forced to change my password. I can’t prove it was this person who hid behind the pseudonym “Porky Scratchings”, but it seems a huge coincidence.

Here’s how this person self-identifies on Twitter:

160529 Porky Scratchings

I’m going to publish the conversation below. See if you sympathise with this person, as they complain about me persecuting them and their people.

Porky Scratchings: I am tired of hearing nonJews tell me the Labour Party isn’t antisemitic. You don’t get to decide.

Vox Political: No indeed. We have evidence and facts for that.

PS: It’s like sexual harassment If a woman feels sexually harassed, she has been. Jews define anti-Semitism

VP: No. There has to be an empirical definition, otherwise it is wide open to corruption.

PS: Is sexual harassment open to corruption?

VP: Yes of course – if someone wants to get someone else in trouble and call ‘sexual harassment’ on them.

PS: If a woman claims to have been sexually harassed…there is no defence…can’t claim a different intention

VP: There is certainly a defence if she is lying.

PS: And are you accusing Jews of making corrupt claims of antisemitism? Do you have evidence?

VP: I know false claims have been made recently. Whether by Jews or not is of no interest to me.

VP: Quoting historical facts about the actions of Jews is not anti-Semitism, even if it shows them behaving poorly.

VP: I’ll help you out. Historical fact is fact. It doesn’t hold prejudices because it has no opinion. It is fact.

PS: That statement is de facto antisemitic…work it out

VP: No, it is not. You need to go away now and think very hard until you understand why it isn’t.

VP: Objecting to the behaviour of Jews isn’t necessarily anti-Semitism, if the Jews are behaving badly

PS: “Jews behaving badly” is an antisemitic trope Think about the implications of what you write

VP: Are you really trying to tell the world that no Jew ever behaved poorly? Think about what YOU are implying.

PS: If a person breaks the law, they are judged on individual merits It is not a pretext for group critique

PS: Try replacing the word Jew with Black “you can criticise Jews, if Jews behave badly” Endemic Labour racism

VP: Of course you can criticise a black person if a black person behaves badly.

VP: You can criticise anybody else if their behaviour falls short of the acceptable standard.

PS: Individually, as a person certainly But you seek to attack Jews as a group

VP: I don’t think I want to carry on with this conversation. YOU are clearly falling short of acceptable standards.

VP: No I don’t.

PS: That is precisely what you did the endemic antisemitism in Labour is so ingrained You are in denial

VP: No, I’m not. You talk about anti-Semitism in broad terms but you don’t have a single example.

VP: If it isn’t reasonable to tar all Jews with the same brush, why are you trying to do exactly that to Labour?

PS: “You can criticise Jews if Jews behave badly” this is your stated position

VP: Yup. Just as you can criticise Tories, or Americans, or blog writers. You wouldn’t be attacking ALL Americans.

VP: Look, I’m very sorry but you are coming across as a little unhinged.

PS: Aha Jews who oppose antisemites are unhinged The Labour defence Do you say the same things to black people?

VP: Go away. You are deliberately misinterpreting my words.

VP: I am not anti-Semitic. You have no proof and are merely throwing it at me to justify your own prejudice.

PS: your words “You can criticise Jews if Jews behave badly” would you dare replace the word Jew with black?

VP: Yes of course.

VP: I just told you why.

VP: If you don’t understand, you need to go away and stop bothering me.

PS: I am merely quoting your own words to you You write about Jews in ways you would not dare so do about others

VP: No, I write about people.

PS: I can’t understand how you are denying your own words…your own words!

VP: I’m not denying my words. You are twisting them.

VP: I think I’ve made myself very clear. Won’t be blocking you because I may use your tweets in a future blog.

PS: Please see EUMC working definition of antisemitism and then consider your comments in its context

VP: Maybe I will. I think your problem is you think opposing the actions or words of a, or many, Jews is wrong, simply because it is opposing a Jew. That’s not anti-Semitism. It’s some kind of race supremacy idiocy

PS: Again, it is advisable you refer to EUMC working definition before digging yourself into an ever deeper hole

VP: I just did, and I’m happy to report that I don’t do, and haven’t done, any of the things that are listed.

PS: If you use the term Jew as the basis of criticism, it is antisemitic. Period.

VP: It’s a good thing I haven’t done that, then. YOU have!

[This of course is true. ‘Porky Scratchings’ had taken my words and misinterpreted them to refer to all Jewish people instead of a limited number, so that their Jewishness became the focus of criticism rather than any behaviour that fell short of acceptable standards.]

PS: What have I done?

VP: You have referred to my words as being attacks on all Jews, when they were not. You clearly have prejudice.

PS: you attack an entire racial group? would you dare write what you did replacing the word Jew with Black?

VP: Are you trolling me? I’ve already answered you

PS: If you check the third bullet point on this first list you will see that is exactly what you have done..

[The third bullet point on the list is “accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews”. Let’s have a look at what I wrote, again: “Objecting to the behaviour of Jews isn’t necessarily anti-Semitism, if the Jews are behaving badly”. I was very clearly writing about the behaviour of a certain number of Jewish people, not the entire Jewish race. It seems clear that this person had been trying to get me to write something approximating an attack on the entire Jewish people so he/she could leap in and call me an anti-Semite, and the entire Labour Party by extension, because I am a member of Labour. Do you think that is reasonable?]

PS: What was your answer?

VP: Okay, you ARE trolling. Waste your own time

PS: Another name for the Chanukah list

The conversation was then abruptly terminated when my screen blanked and I received the following message from Twitter:

Your account may have been compromised by a website or service not associated with Twitter. We’ve locked your account to keep it safe. In order to log back in, you must change your password.”

By the time I had done all that, ‘Porky Scratchings’ had blocked me.

Let’s go back to that person’s Twitter avatar. “I am a Zionist“, it proclaimed to the world.

If that’s Zionism, it is to be opposed.

This person deliberately tried to lure me into unacceptable behaviour and then twisted my words to try to make them fit his/her interpretation. They lied about me.

This person claimed that any criticism of any action by any person who happens to be Jewish is anti-Semitic. I can’t support that. It’s an attempt to set one people up above everybody else. Nobody can support that. It is, as I said in the article, race supremacy nonsense.

And when I refused to accept this person’s claims, my Twitter account suffered an entirely unusual attack. That’s too much of a coincidence for my liking.

I consider this to be an act of racism against me. I – a Gentile – dared to debate whether another Gentile had committed an act of anti-Semitism, so I was to be slapped down. It’s a racist act – anti-Gentilism, if there is such a word.

It is shocking that individuals such as this are being allowed to carry out such attacks in the name of Zionism and Judaism as a whole.

They bring both the movement and the religion into disrepute – the kind of which they hypocritically accuse others.


Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:


27 thoughts on “Wow. Did Vox Political’s writer just endure an anti-Gentile attack?

  1. Christine Cullen

    Probably “deranged” is a good description. And more than “a little.” 🙂

      1. Mike Sivier Post author

        Give me a break. The guy contacted me out of the blue with an assertion I couldn’t allow to pass.
        Are you the second wave, trying to undermine me for bothering to engage with that person, so I’m damned either way?
        On your bike.

  2. lanzalaco

    well if language is the game, then better just play it, because it looks like with Israel being so unpopular and on its back foot internationally, there will be a push on to control behavior elsewhere. Putting a plural is clearly open to misinterpretation.. so something like “if a given section of people with jewish origin are behaving badly” .

  3. shawn

    Mike, you did well not to fall into a trap that was repeatedly set for you.
    It’s hard to comment on the twitter take down/attack, in that precise details are not available. That noted various possibilities can be set out. One is that if that person, or friends of, got access to your twitter account they could have inserted their own response to ‘I’m a Zionist’s prompting, which would have made it appear you had given an anti-Semitic response.
    This quite clearly shows how easy it is to get trapped and why others may have been so lured.

  4. lanzalaco

    refer to zionists when going plural. Jews as a whole are too diverse in regards to their political stance. At any given time maybe half of the jewish world population dont identify with israel.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      Tell that to Benjamin Netanyahu!
      Seriously, I agree with you. That’s why the last few paragraphs of the article appeal for Jewish people to put their house in order and stop people like ‘Porky Scratchings’ from bringing them into disrepute.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      For the benefit of other readers, I’ve known Rick here and elsewhere online for several years now and am happy to trust his advice on this issue.
      I didn’t accept that any of the definitions on this now-discredited description of anti-Semitism were relevant in any case, but it’s good to know it wouldn’t have mattered.

  5. sp4mf15h

    Yes he clearly making assumptions and purposefully twisting your words against you with his claim you mean’t all jews.
    However after pointing this out you have gone and done the same thing to him by claiming what he said was racist “anti-gentilism”.
    Im sure when you have calmed down from this encounter you will see and agree that this is inconsistant.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      You think his attitude wasn’t racist? He was saying people who aren’t Jewish have no right to criticise any Jews for any reason at all and he was calling me an anti-Semite because of it. To me, that seems a racist standpoint from the get-go.

  6. Claire

    Can I just clarify something? It is my understanding that Judaism and Jewishness is a religion, not a race of people. Just like Cristianity is a religion, as is Islamism, Zoroatrianism, Hinduism, Sikhism etc ect. Why are race and religion being conpounded? You can find people born in different countries such as the USA, UK or any other country for that matter, who are nationals of that country and identify with that country as their home and nationality, who were born into the religion of their parents and their parents choosing but, that still dosen’t make them a race apart. The only separation is the religious aspect.

    The Oxford dictionary defines a religion as the belief in, worship of, obediance to a supernatural power or supernatural powers considered to be devine, or have control of human destiny.

    I think the person may have had a technical point when one criticises someone for wrongdoing if you use the preface ‘Jewish’. However, if you are talking of the Jewish State, as in the governing body, or Zionists then this is not a criticism of a religious belief or people but the politicos who inhabit that area.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      If I recall correctly the Jewish religion was associated with a particular section of humanity that lived and grew in the Middle East, separate from Arabs, for many centuries. While it certainly has converts from other ethnic backgrounds now, anti-Semitism often manifests in insulting descriptions of the physical characteristics that have been associated with that original branch of humanity (for want of a better way to describe it).
      So the race and the religion have been conflated because they have gone hand-in-hand for a long time.
      Of course you can’t help but use the preface ‘Jewish’ to criticise someone if that person’s pretext for wrongdoing is to do with their status as a Jew. Fortunately, with regard to the issues discussed on This Blog from April 28 onwards, they are about the actions of the Israeli government and/or Zionists within the Jewish community. The issue of whether opposition to these acts constitutes anti-Semitism, or whether the arguments used constitute anti-Semitism, is an offshoot from that. This person ‘Porky Scratchings’ claimed that only Jewish people could decide what constitutes anti-Semitism but I clearly didn’t agree.

  7. Simon Tucker

    I watched a video yesterday of a Palestinian youth who had been handcuffed and hooded by the IDF. He was then stood up and shot in the stomach by those Israeli soldiers: they are criminals. Next week I will go and work for a Jewish-run organisation and interact happily with people of all races / religions and none during the course of that work. As far as I am aware, none of the Jews I am working with is a criminal, although one is clearly a racist regarding the Palestinian people.

    I believe the IDF soldiers should be in jail, as their act is clearly criminal. I don’t socialise with the racist, because I despise racism. I work happily with everybody else. Does this make me anti-Semitic?

    As the Palestinian people are, themselves, Semitic, how can supporting the rights of the Palestinian people be defined as anti-Semitic?

    PS is clearly deranged.

  8. David

    There is a kind of crazed consistency in PS’s argument. but it still lacks integrity and logic. I am bitterly opposed to Islamic State and Boko Haram because of the unacceptable actions of beheading helpless and often blameless prisoners or, as in the case of Boko Haram cruelly abducting helpless teenage girls as playthings for Boko Haram soldiers. I do not hate Muslims in general. I disliked the way the US turned itself into a kind of bullying world policeman in the way it acted in Chile, Viet Nam and interfered with other South American countries because the US considered them to be in “its own backyard.” I am not anti-American, though I might be critical of specific, not general things. PS’s argument seems to be that any criticism of a Jew or Jewish state action is a criticism of all Jews. We can be critical of members of our own family without disliking them.

    PS needs a few lessons in logic and critical thinking.

  9. Florence

    I don’t think your Pork Scratching was a little anything. It sounds like a skilled and highly paid interrogator. Just goes to show that you have enough influence to attract the top tier of paid trolling, not the casual or intern usually found on twitter or other boards. It also shows that you are more than their match!

      1. Michelle

        Hi Mike, please don’t let such baiting get at you! PS’s conversation was designed to get you to spontaneously react. Keep calm and rely on your brill ability to apply logic. Judaism and pork don’t even go together, in the Hebrew Scriptures it’s forbidden as an unclean animal – this false character was having some very nasty ‘fun’ at your expense.

      2. Mike Sivier Post author

        I think the pseudonym ‘Porky Scratchings’ was supposed to be some kind of witticism.
        Shame these people can’t write their nonsense under their real names, isn’t it?

  10. Joseph Servi

    I have been searching for a way to contact you; forgive me, if I am being stupid. I should very much like to talk with you. I read your post with some interest and have witnessed such behaviour in broadcast media. I have become incensed by what I have witnessed in recent weeks and would hijack your site, were we to have the discussion here so, if you will entertain me, I would be much obliged.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      I’m sure you wouldn’t hijack the site. Post anything to the comment column; if you don’t want it published, mark it to that effect.

  11. Brian

    I would have to agree with Florence and those that sense a setup. This site has obviously attracted the attention of those that may not benefit from its posts. The subject matter is important, but irrelevant and in my humble opinion designed to discredit you. Conspiracy theory apart this troll does not seem to be acting of his own initiative.

  12. mohandeer

    I think it’s fair to say that the discriminatory element in this deranged exchange is Porky Scratchings!
    I would also further surmise that the exchange was orchestrated by a malevolent source for the purpose of entrapment and has absolutely nothing to do with being a person of the Jewish faith with reasonable concerns. “Reasonable” requires a logic not based on Occam’s razor whereby you start with minimum assumptions and thereafter make the facts fit as this PS was relying on, as do most pig headed fanatics. You did extremely well to dodge his many Ptolemic traps.

Comments are closed.