Is this a known anti semitic site?

[question everything]

http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/

And if yes, should be used as a source on DU?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280191997

Apparently it was alerted more than once but the jury - not surprising giving the location - voted to keep it on.

[Mosby]

1. Yes, its well known

Antisemitic and CT, they are literally partnered with rense.com, look at the bottom of the front page.

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2011/01/06/buyer-beware-veterans-today-and-its-anti-israel-agenda

http://blog.adl.org/tags/veterans-today

Info about duff and barrett.

Eta: here is a recent, good example of Barrett's "work":

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/03/05/forward/

[Behind the Aegis]

2. Known?

That's relative. Those familiar with I/P are going to be more in the "know" as is anyone remotely educated on anti-Semitism, that the "Veteran's Network" is an anti-Semitic cesspool and includes off-the-wall conspiracy theories revolving around "The New World Order", as well as Holocaust revisionism.

When alerting on anti-Semitic sites, it is a crap shoot, but it is advisable to be VERY specific, i.e. give easily identifiable to non-Jews as something anti-Semitic.

As a FYI (and a Sanders supporter), the location is irrelevant as to whether it would or wouldn't be hidden; that is solely the make-up of the jury. Though I find it very troubling that supporters for a Jewish candidate are using an anti-Semitic source.

[question everything]

3. "Make up of the jury"

And we all know that it is heavily tilted toward Sanders.

And since I am banned from the Sanders group - for thanking someone! while identifying myself as Hillary supporter - I cannot even comment or rebut.

[Behind the Aegis]

4. That doesn't mean the jury was full of Sanders supporters.

I can point to many instances of Clinton supporters using anti-Semitic sites here, so if there was any "malfeasance" on the part of the jury, I highly doubt it had anything to do with which candidate the juror supports. Given your length of time here, you should know what I mean.

[MosheFeingold]

5. Had never heard of those sites before

But I perused them. No doubt they are anti-Semitic.

I periodically read this material, just like I read Mein Kampf during WWII -- know your enemy.

This group has a particular revisionist history that George Washington was a Diest and anti-Semitic. That would be news to a man who attended Church several times a week, I suspect. And news to man who wrote the letter shown on this very sub-group recently.

I don't oppose the posting of this material, but perhaps label it for what it is give a "barf alert" or whatnot so people know that it is bad news.

[question everything]

6. I thought that there was a ban on posting from clearly right wing source

but cannot find such a ban.

Still, while looking at some of the rule, was glad to find this:

No bigoted hate speech.

Do not post bigotry based on someone's race or ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion or lack thereof, disability, or other comparable personal characteristic. To be clear: This includes any post which states opposition to full equal rights for gays and lesbians; it also includes any post asserting disloyalty by Jewish Americans, claiming nefarious influence by Jews/Zionists/Israel, advocating the destruction of the state of Israel, or arguing that Holocaust deniers are just misunderstood. In determining what constitutes bigotry, please be aware that we cannot know what is in anyone's heart, and we will give members the benefit of the doubt, when — and only when — such doubt exists.

[MosheFeingold]

7. Not sure how to go about it.

I've had some posts hidden that I was posting merely for the purpose of showing how stupid someone is -- but I was not clear about my intent.

Some of the best anti-Trump stuff comes from what I call the "thinking" conservatives -- National Review and various libertarian sources, and I'd love to post that stuff, but don't want to get myself banned.

Similarly, Hillary has a lot of warts on her that (in my opinion) make her a really poor candidate, and again, those same right-wing sources, are the better choice for information, in that they are not beholden to the DNC Elite.