Jewish and Israeli Blog Awards, Ideologically-Slanted? « Tikun Olam-תיקון עולם: Make the World a Better Place

Jewish and Israeli Blog Awards, Ideologically-Slanted?

You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Jewish and Israeli Blog Awards, Ideologically-Slanted?”.

Tags: aussie-dave, blogs, jerusalem-post, jewish-blogs, pro-israel

This entry was posted on Saturday, January 14th, 2006 at 3:40 AM and is filed under Blogs-Tech-Science, Jews & Judaism, Mideast Peace. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

71 Responses to “Jewish and Israeli Blog Awards, Ideologically-Slanted?”

ck says:

January 14, 2006 at 8:26 AM

Richard wrote:
“there are MANY categories in the JIBS. I haven’t had time to explore every one. I selected the categories dealing with Israeli politics and examined them.”

You really hardly explored anything. Your post, which ostensibly represents a succint “critique” of the JIBS is merely a warmed over version of patriotboy’s post on the same subject – including most of the same graphics. You gleefully make Aussie Dave out to be some raving genocidal racist. I bet you could barely contain yourself when you added in that nice (sic) to your cherry picked quote to! You know, standardss on the Internet are not the same as those in the print world!

BUT there are some standards. For instance, it’s Dan Sieradski not “Siedarsky.” Also Mobius would blanche at the notion that he runs Jewlicious. Dan runs Jewschool. Time to feed your fact checkers Richard.

Finally, anyone can nominate any blog for the JIB Awards. Your accusation that Aussie Dave’s ideological orientation has created a bias or something is just plain…. misinformed.

Reply
OnlyInIsrael says:

January 14, 2006 at 3:06 PM

Boy oh boy, are those grapes sour.

The JIB awards are an online competition, it’s not supposed to be objective, or balanced. It’s not a law, or a bill, or a court rulling, it’s an online competition, you’re overreacting.
You chose to take your anger out by badmouthing the newspaper that hosts the awards (which, I agree is quite right leaning, but your wild attack on it is uncalled for), and the bloggers who participate in it.

I’m not ashamed of making Pancake Corrie jokes. I believe that anyone stupid enough to willingly enter a warzone which he isn’t a part of, and then stand in front of a running bulldozer, and not move away, deserves to be laughed at, no matter if he’s dead or alive. Specificly in Pancake Corrie’s case, her being terror enabler, whose favorite pasttime was teaching foreign kids how to burn the flag of the country that raised her, it’s even more enjoyable.

It’s one thing to be left leaning, or even anti-Israeli. It’s completely another thing to back the ISM and the kinds of organisations that back terrorists, give them hiding, and support their activities. Positioning yourself behind the ISM does not demonstrate any special set of political beliefs, but rather being either misleaded or a very hatefull person towards the very notion of Israel.

Also, just so we compare between me, the “non-housetrained” blogger and yourself. I’m an IDF soldier. I spent the last 2 and a half years serving my country and fighting for what I believe in. What have you done to make your beliefs come true? What have you done for your tikkun olam?
That’s what I thought.

P.S. I’m housetrained, thank you very much.

Reply
Jack says:

January 14, 2006 at 7:04 PM

Richard,

If I were to take selected quotes from your blog I could easily paint a skewed picture of who you are. Try really reading Soccer Dad. Read the whole post that your excerpt came from and see if you see the same thing.

As for the JIBs I would highly recommend that you spend more than two minutes to make a determination about whether there is a political slant. I would also strongly urge you to read the blogs that are in the Life in Israel category and I think that you’ll see things differently.

Beyond that I would also suggest you look at the procedure for nominating a blog and you will see that any blog could be nominated. You could have nominated your own blog for the category you have so much angst over.

It is an open and transparent process. You don’t have to like the blogs. You don’t have to read them and you are welcome to blog about all of them and I would encourage you to do so. But I would also encourage you to look deeper than you have because you are doing yourself and others a disservice.

Reply
Tovya says:

January 14, 2006 at 8:04 PM

I agree with Jack.

With my site in particular, you are making it sound as though I hate Arabs… which I certainly do NOT.

I love Arabs, but I expect them to be loyal to the country that provides them their livelihood. The Arab members of the Knesset says things that are nothing short of treason. To actively call for the destruction of a nation that you work for is disgusting and intolerable.

You act as though we should expect our leaders in the Knesset to hate those that they represent. You call this “progressive thinking”?

What could be more backwards than to invite your enemies into the camp to slaughter you? It’s absurd!

If an Arab wants to live in Israel, and they love our nation, I will stand behind that Arab with all of my strength. I love that Arab.

But if that Arab wants to actively support the murdering of Jewish children, he needs to go to a nation that support his twisted ideaology. Tell what is so absurd about Jewish survival?

Reply
Richard Silverstein says:

January 14, 2006 at 11:32 PM

It looks like the little ideological clique represented by the JIBA nominees is attempting to pile on here.

Let’s take ‘em one at a time starting with CK:

You sir, don’t read very carefully. First, I noted at the conclusion of my post that I was primarily judging the Awards based on two categories that were most important to me. I write a blog mainly about politics. I analyzed the two categories of the Awards dealing with politics. Why would I want to analyze the Jewish culture blogs if the entire point of my blog post was to discuss the ideolgogical slant of the political blogging categories? Or should I be looking at the ideological slant of the aforesaid Jewish culture category or all the categories for that matter? And to what purpose?

I guess when you read you miss a lot of nuance. While I did quote some of the excerpts Jesus’ General discovered in his research on the JIBA political blogs , what’s wrong with that. I noted my reliance on his work. You mean to say that academic researchers never rely on or quote the work of others? And of course, you couldn’t be attempting to imply that I added nothing to the discourse on the subject now, could you? Because if you did you’d be dead wrong. No blogger who’s blogged critically about JIBA has noted Aussie Dave’s involvement and the potential impact it could have on the nature of the Awards. In addition, my post used quotes from other JIBA blogs which I myself researched in an earlier post I wrote about PJM. But you see you didn’t read my post carefully enough to notice any of that material & its origin, now did you?

You’re wrong again about my choice of graphics. You’ll see in my post the JIBA banner, a photo of Aussie Dave and the “I Love Cats Mouse Pad.” NONE of those items are in Jesus’ General’s post. Even the mouse pad image is entirely different than the one he chose. Of course, as you say I did get the idea for including that particular image from JG (though I chose a different one). But really, it so damns that particular blogger for being the cold, callous & juvenile person that he is–it was too good to pass up.

You say I “make Aussie Dave out to be a raving genocidal racist.” Not quite. He’s certainly racist and he does rave a bit. But he’s not genocidal, at least not yet. You see, he’s only in favor of killing innocent Palestinians when the IDF is targeting militants for assassination. But he’s opposed to the “deliberate killing of innocent people.” So he has some standards, vague as they might be. But I suppose one could ask the fellow to list a single incident in which he felt the murder of a Palestinian by the IDF was unjustified. I wonder if he’d come up with one?

As for your corrections, they’ve already been pointed out to me by another and corrected. You could’ve saved yourself the hot air it took to write your snarky words. I guess you’ve never allowed any typos or similar such mistakes into your own blog?? Glad to know that at least one of us is perfect.

Reply
Richard Silverstein says:

January 14, 2006 at 11:55 PM

You chose to take your anger out by badmouthing the newspaper that hosts the awards (which, I agree is quite right leaning, but your wild attack on it is uncalled for), and the bloggers who participate in it.

“Anger?” I don’t think so. Anger is too strong a word. “Badmouthing Jerusalem Post?” We must be reading two different posts. I didn’t badmouth the Post. You yourself say it is “right-leaning.” I merely pointed out that a right-wing blog and a right-wing newspaper have collaborated to create an Awards competition that also is right leaning (at least in its political categories. So how is that a “wild attack?”

What I love about all you guys (& gals) is that in your eagerness to set up a straw man to attack you melodramaticize my own words and arguments, atributing to me emotions like anger which I didn’t feel and “wild attacks” which never were. Maybe you can’t take anyone criticizing you or your sponsors? Skin getting a little too thin perhaps?

Your disgusting paragraph in your comment here about Rachel Corrie only cements your status as a human lout of the lowest and foulest order. On the basis of what you’ve said you’ve earned your banishment from this blog.

Positioning yourself behind the ISM does not demonstrate any special set of political beliefs, but rather being either misleaded or a very hatefull person towards the very notion of Israel.

Lies, distortions it’s all the same to you, isn’t it? I don’t think I’ve ever even mentioned ISM in my entire blog so how would you know that I “position myself behind ISM??” Does saying that I find jokes defiling the dead to be in the most execrable taste define me as a supporter of ISM? If you believe that then you’re an even bigger idiot than I thought.

In fact, I neither support nor oppose what they do. They have a right to do what they do. That is, they have that right if Israel wishes to claim it is a democracy. The fact that you apparently would deny them that right indicates that if you are in favor of democracy it’s only Jewish democracy you favor. Or perhaps you’d like to muzzle Jewish or Israeli opposition to the Occupation as well? Then, we’d see that you’re not even in favor of Jewish democracy.

As to your stupid remarks about serving in the IDF…So, I see–if I haven’t served in the IDF then I have no right to speak about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? That’s idiotic (if it’s what you do believe). And what specifically makes your service in the IDF mark you as a special order of human being who possesses superior insight and wisdom to discuss selfsame subject? I suppose you’d argue that IDF service somehow advances tikun olam as a moral concept? How did you “heal the world” through your service? By running armored tractors over young American protestors?

Reply
Jack says:

January 15, 2006 at 12:09 AM

No blogger who’s blogged critically about JIBA has noted Aussie Dave’s involvement and the potential impact it could have on the nature of the Awards.

And this is meaningful because of what. The nominations were open. Any blog could be nominated by themselves or by others. Your strawman just blew over.

While I did quote some of the excerpts Jesus’ General discovered in his research on the JIBA political blogs , what’s wrong with that. I noted my reliance on his work. You mean to say that academic researchers never rely on or quote the work of others?

Again another strawman argument. There are endless examples of academic research that has proven to be false and has been debunked as junk. Any time you rely upon another for quotes you place yourself in jeopardy of being embarrassed because of quotes taken out of context or just misquoted.

Reply
Richard Silverstein says:

January 15, 2006 at 12:11 AM

Jack: You wrote–

As for the JIBs I would highly recommend that you spend more than two minutes to make a determination about whether there is a political slant.

“Two minutes??” You’ve got to be kidding. That post took more like nearly four hours to write. A considerable portion of that time was spent reading the blogs nominated. In addition, I’d already researched some of these blogs for a previous post I wrote about Pajamas Media. So I feel I’m quite familiar with what they contain. How much research do you do? If you did a good deal you would never have made such a glib statement.

If you want me to read more of Soccer Dad you’re welcome to send me a link to material there that represents a different point of view than what’s quoted here. The few hours I spent exploring these meretricious blogs last night in writing this post was more than enough for me. I’m not about to wade back into the muck. But as I said I’ll read a link should you wish to send me one.

…You are doing yourself and others a disservice.

How is quoting material that a blogger publsihed doing a “disservice” to them or JIBA? Are you saying that the authors of the horrible things quoted here didn’t mean what they said? Or that subsequent material they’ve written has contradicted what’s quoted here? Sorry to say, but that’s hardly likely.

Reply
Jack says:

January 15, 2006 at 12:31 AM

Richard,

I am saying that I don’t believe that you spent as much time doing your research as you claim that you did. I am saying that I can pull an excerpt from any post and make it sound horrible.

I am saying that you clearly did not spend any time reading anything outside a very small section of the JIB nominations but that you took that small sample to try and smear the rest.

I am saying that your insinuation that the nominations were skewed to only include a certain political POV is patently false and inaccurate.

Furthermore I will go out and say that I think that you probably are a good guy and that you have a good heart and good intentions. But good intentions are not enough to prevent people from going astray.

I would ask that you spend some time reviewing the blogs in this category and see if you come up with the same claims about ideological slant.

Reply
Richard Silverstein says:

January 15, 2006 at 12:35 AM

Tovya, Tovya, what can I say? You’re entirely self-deluded. You “love Arabs??” Could you tell me how you love Arabs?

I guess you’ll next be telling me some of your best friends are Arabs. Like your cleaning lady & the fellow who built that new addition to your apartment, etc. Or you’ll be telling me that you know Arabs because you’ve lived among them (Aussie Dave tried that one on me once). To which I’d ask: do you mean you lived among them because you lived in a walled settlement alongside a Palestinian village?

But seriously, how much do you know about Israeli Arabs or Palestinians? How many have you met? How many are truly friends? What do you really know about them? What books have you read about them or their culutre? And if you do not know them how can you say anything knowledgeable about them? About what they believe or don’t believe?

The passage quoted from your blog in this post advocates that Israeli Arabs should not have Knesset representation. This in turn means you’re in favor of disenfranchising 20% of the Israeli population. And if you take away the vote then you’re essentially denying them citizenship. Is this what your real intent is? No doubt you’ll reply that you’re not in favor of disenfranchising ALL Israeli Arabs, only the disloyal ones. Pray, how would you determine that? Would you make them take loyalty oaths?

As for Arab Knesset members who purportedly argue for the destruction of Israel…why don’t you feature a quotation here & let me be the judge of what they’re really saying. Sorry, but I don’t trust you to filter their views for me.

But what’s really interesting is that you seem to have a real problem with democracy. I’d like to ask what your view is of Kach and Meir Kahane. I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but your views as I’ve read them don’t diverge much. But I’d be glad for you to point out how I’m wrong if I am. You seem to believe people should be allowed to say what they think as long as they don’t cross some ill-defined line, going over which constitutes treason. You do realize this is precisely the type of thinking that led in the 1950s to the rise of McCarthyism and the execution of the Rosenbergs? Is that the type of society you really wish to live in?

In fact, I’d argue that the danger of any Israeli Arab doing serious damage to the State of Israel is far less than the danger inherent in your inherently anti-democratic views. Totalitarianism, authoritarianism, whatever you want to call it is the most serious threat to democratic values. No Israeli Arab no matter how disloyal scares me half as much as that.

Reply
Richard Silverstein says:

January 15, 2006 at 12:52 AM

Jack:

I wrote:

No blogger…has noted Aussie Dave’s involvement and the potential impact it could have on the nature of the Awards.

You wrote:

And this is meaningful because of what. The nominations were open. Any blog could be nominated by themselves or by others. Your strawman just blew over.”

It’s terribly meaningful. It means that Aussie Dave and his right-wing blog network dominate the proceedings because of their “reach.” Look, I have no problem if you called this the Jewish Right-Wing Blog Awards. Then you’d know what you were getting. But what’s objectionable about the Awards is that their title might lead an outsider to believe that all or most Jewish bloggers represent the same narrow set of views. If you want your competiton to truly represent “Jewish and Israeli Blogs” as their name indicates, then you’d think they’d want to ensure Jewish and Israeli blogs of other stripes were more represented.

Clearly neither Aussie Dave nor the J. Post have made any attempt to do this nor has any interest in this. They’re happy to operate within their tight-knit little coterie of the like-minded. They like it that way. That’s fine. But just don’t try to sell me that this competition represents anyone other than a self-selected group of right-wing bloggers.

There are endless examples of academic research that has proven to be false and has been debunked as junk. Any time you rely upon another for quotes you place yourself in jeopardy of being embarrassed because of quotes taken out of context or just misquoted.

You’re arguing from a generalization, which is intellectually dangerous in such discussions. You’d best point out an example in which either Jesus’ General or I misquoted or took out of context any of the quotes included here.

And there are not “endless examples of academic research that has proven to be false & debunked as junk.” You clearly haven’t spent much time in academia. In fact, it sounds like you have an axe to grind against it. There may be some fraudulent academic research (witness the Korean cloning research). But the vast majority of academic research performed at reputable colleges, universities or research institutes is without blemish.

I spent five years at two undergraduate institutions, two years at the Hebrew University and earned graduate degrees at two other research universities. I know something about this subject.

Reply
ck says:

January 15, 2006 at 3:04 AM

Richard said: It looks like the little ideological clique represented by the JIBA nominees is attempting to pile on here.

Heh. Nice one Richard. Are you including Jewlicious in that grossly overgeneralized statement? We’ve been attacked by both the right and the left so I figure we’re doing something, ahem, right.

You said: You sir, don’t read very carefully. Au contraire mon ami, I read very carefully. You seek to spin your post as a mere examination of only two political categories that matter to you – that would be Israel Advocacy and …. uh…. well, never mind. I digress. The title of your post reads “Jewish and Israeli Blog Awards, Ideologically-Slanted?” not “Jewish and Israeli Blog Awards Israel Advocacy category, Ideologically-Slanted?” You thus imply that the entire affair is some cynical excercise in political manipulation. Sorry. Did I say imply? Let’s see:

I replied to Derek that when the Jerusalem Post severs its relationship with Aussie Dave and really attempts to recruit a broad cross section of Jewish and Israeli blogs, then it will be worthwhile for other types of blogs and bloggers to participate. Until that time, this competition is rigged for the right.

The competition is rigged. RIGGED! Yes because the long nomination period, open to one and all, was sneakily set for when all the left wingers, except for Jewschool and Dov Bear, were uh… out busy harvesting their patchouli crops. That sneaky, sneaky eliminationist aussie and his “tight-knit little coterie of the like-minded.” The JIBs were well publicized on well trafficked Web sites of every ideological persuasion, so unless you and your pals really were out harvesting patchouli, or para-sailing, or tending to your garden or whatever, you have no case.

Anyhow, that’s enough snark and hot air for today. I am eagerly looking forward to more whoring for votes, posturing and attention-seeking on both sides. Yay JIBs!!

Reply
Richard Silverstein says:

January 15, 2006 at 3:26 AM

I’m not your ami, buddy so cut the cutsey pie crap.

I’m getting grossly tired of your tedious arguments. I’ll address yr. last comment & be done with it. I’d suggest that if you have more to say in the same vein you do it at your own mouthpiece.

Two categories of the competition are slanted. I’ve got news for you–that makes the Awards worthy of being called slanted. Sorry if you don’t like it. How ’bout you write your own headlines & I’ll write mine? If you don’t like mine no one asked you to.

And if you doubt that JIBA is rigged you should read my latest post in which the Post admits there is an ideological criteria for exclusion from the competition AND that Aussie Dave is arbiter of who is eligible and who disqualified. Of course, the Post says it knows of no one whose nomination was rendered treif for that reason. But there is still a distinct possibility that he could disqualify any blog whose “raison d’etre” was to criticize Israel (whatever that means). You clearly feel terribly comfortable allowing him to make those decisions. You’ll pardon me but I don’t.

Which brings me back to my original contention that this is NOT a transparent competition much as you & its organizers would like believe.

BTW, calling Dov Bear “leftist” is laughable. Shows how little you know about the center or the left of the political spectrum. I like Dov Bear and appreciate both his religious and political perspective. But he’s no “leftist.” To folks like you anyone left of Jabotinsky is a “leftist.”

that’s enough snark and hot air for today

You said it, not me. But allow me to agree with the only accurate thing you’ve said among all the meretricious wind you’ve blown here. I’m tired of snark. You want snark, go elsewhere.

Reply
One Among Many says:

January 15, 2006 at 3:42 AM

I’m amazed nobody that’s taken time complaining about Richard’s post has defended the inclusion of Little Green Footballs (neither Jewish or Israeli….but co-owner of Pajamas Media), Roger L. Simon (another co-owner of Pajamas Media), Powerline (mmmm Pajamas again?), Protein Wisdon (don’t tell me….Pajamas Media right?), Cox and Forkum (closely linked to PJM and LGF….and also disgusting racists) and finally Winds of Change (Not Pajamas Media, but was asked….also predominantly right wing) as best ‘Mega’ Blogs?

No one yet has defended that. I wonder why?

Reply
ck says:

January 15, 2006 at 4:40 AM

So the JIBs are ideologically slanted because Aussie Dave may eliminate a blog from the competition. He hasn’t of course, not ever, but he may. Thus the whole thing is biased in favor of right-wing blogs. I see. Have you ever stopped to consider that due to the wide open nature of the nomination process, anyone can get nominated. And by anyone I mean sites like Jew Watch or StromFront etc. Giving the guy that runs the awards the power to eliminate from the competition sites that are totally inappropriate seems like a reasonable thing, especially since all evidence shows that Dave has used his power judiciously / not at all.

I’m glad you picked up on the ironic designation of Dov Bear as a leftist. Oh wait. You didn’t:

BTW, calling Dov Bear “leftist” is laughable. Shows how little you know about the center or the left of the political spectrum. I like Dov Bear and appreciate both his religious and political perspective. But he’s no “leftist.” To folks like you anyone left of Jabotinsky is a “leftist.”

Heh. To the right wing nutters we’re anti-religious anti-Zionist scum. Just goes to show though, that you and the people you’re criticizing are cut of the same ideological cloth. Sure they come from a different political orientation, but y’all have the same un nuanced view of the world as one of extremes. “You’re either with me or you’re against me.” You also show the same lack of tolerance for dissenting opinions. If you don’t like my comments, then ban me or turn off your comments section and stop pretending that you are interested in dialog and open-minded discourse. Your understanding of our political affiliation is laughable. Left of Jabotinsky… heh. Such cluelessness.

Reply
Aussie Dave says:

January 15, 2006 at 5:43 AM

Silverstein,

Shame my site is currently down, because I responded to your absurd conspiracy theories. Once again, your level of ignorance and lack of correct information is astounding. When my site is back up, you can read my response. I don’t intend to repeat it now.

But I will say this: you gave your motivations away in your first paragraph:
“and being ever-ambitious and hungry for recognition of my blog I thought I’d check it out for myself.”

You’re just pissed you weren’t nominated. Shame you just didnt nominate yourself.

Reply
Laya says:

January 15, 2006 at 6:26 AM

Dan “mobius” Sieradski (you might want to correct that on your page already) has openly called Israel “an apartheid state” on Jewschool, just for example. Yet Jewschool is nominated for no fewer than five JIB’s. “Apartheid state” seems just a wee bit left of Jabotinsky, now doesn’t it? Sorry dude, but I just don’t think your bitter little argument here holds water.

Reply
Ed Marshall says:

January 15, 2006 at 9:55 AM

I know at least one Jewish blogger who didn’t bother to continue when he read that anyone who didn’t acknowledge Israel’s “right to exist” as mentally ill and ineligible. Israel’s “right to exist” is a loaded phrase but say it wasn’t. Now I’ve heard many times that an inability to seperate Jews and zionism is a symptom of the new anti-semitism. So Chazmo is an honorary Jew for his “support of Israel” which largely consists of demonizing Muslims generically, but Jews can be excluded for insufficient zeal concerning the Israeli state. My, oh my. That’s how insidious this infection is. The New Anti-Semitism has reached it’s tentacles into the Jerusalem Post and Dave.

Reply
Kenneth S. Besig says:

January 15, 2006 at 10:13 AM

I’ve read a lot of misinformed rants by a variety of people. But as a Jew and an Isaeli I usually expect a somewhat higher level of discourse by my own People. This blog has so many problems on so many levels it’s hard to know where to begin. First of all, the Jerusalem Post has a pretty wide selection of writers, secular, religious, Arab, Christian, and Jewish. Secondly, for all it’s real faults, it is the paper which is read by diplomats, consuls, foreign business people, and pretty much anyone who reads English and lives abroad. The Hebrew Israeli papers are widely read here, but only here, practically no one but native Israelis and other Hebrew readers bother with them. And you can bet that the Hebrew papers really are biased and tenedentious, with badly written articles almost always pushing a Left wing Israeli hating agenda.

Reply
Peter Shalen says:

January 15, 2006 at 10:53 AM

You are entitled to your opinion about the situation in Israel and the territories. But when you refer to a Palestinian Arab who has “collaborated” with Israel (presumably in preventing terrorist attacks) as a “quisling,” you are implicitly comparing Israelis to Nazis. So who exactly is the extremist here?

Reply
Lois says:

January 15, 2006 at 11:07 AM

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=62000

Charles Johnson, of LGF, as the above article shows, is a far more dedicated, true friend of Israel than any left-wing Jewish shanda is. He has earned his kudos, and while the Jewish left sits around singing Kumbaya, Mr. Johnson raises awareness of what is happening to Israel. One Charles Johnson is worth 10,000 lefty Jews.

Still got your knickers in a knot over Blathergate, and Mr. Johnson’s big part in exposing it? Jealousy really is so unbecoming.

Quite Freudian the use if green ink on this sad little blog.

BTW, if you would look at PJ Media, you would see that there are slao quality left-leaning bloggers included…I stress the word ‘quality’.

Reply
Max L says:

January 15, 2006 at 11:35 AM

WoWWW. These JIB awards are causing more controversy than any real controversy out there. From reading all this Jewish blog infighting and arguing and name calling, I have grown a new respect for all Jewish bloggers. WHile my friend Tovya at Zion Report(a man of the right) is battleing it out with many a Jewish site on the left, I have gained new respect for those sites like Jewlicious and a few others. It’s one thing to write a rant on your site every week like I do, but it’s another to actually argue and try to gain calrity with the entire internet. Much respect to all those holding their ground both on the left and the right of the Jewsih scene. I would not have the paitence. I went through my site and editied out all the ultra-controversial stuff before the JIB awards started.

My site is at a comfortable 1% of the vote and that’s where I am ahappy to stay. All the best to all the JIB nominees looking for clarity and understanding with each other. As Jerry S would say, “Good luck with allllllllll that.”

Reply
Jewschool » Blog Archive » Why Online Israel Advocacy is Fux0r3d in ‘06 says:

January 15, 2006 at 11:37 AM

[...] Wow. People sure are going batty over The General’s remarks about The JIBs. And even battier over Richard Silverstein’s remarks over at Tikun Olam. Let alone over at Dov Bear’s. [...]

Reply
Shep says:

January 15, 2006 at 11:40 AM

“…and also disgusting racists.”

I’ve seen F&C political toons before and I’ve never noted anything remotely racist. Care to elaborate? LGFs gets the racist tag for focusing on Middle-Eastern madness, but I have to say I feel that’s unfair as well.

Reply
Richard Silverstein says:

January 15, 2006 at 1:26 PM

Shep: If you’re seriously interested in this subject you can view my post about Pajamas Media which contains a passage about LGF; or better yet, there’s an entire site, LGF Watch, devoted to rebutting Johnson’s calumnies. You might find things that give you pause. But then again if you’re as open-minded as the scores of other commenters campaigning here on behalf of JIBA, Isreally Cool & LGF, then it might leave you unmoved.

I should say “scores of commenters who’ve tried to publish here. I don’t take kindly to orchestrated or semi-orchestrated campaigns against this blog. All new commenters are moderated. If all you intend is to repeat ad nauseum things already said in this thread, don’t bother. It’s all been said before & no one needs to hear more. Commenters like Shep who ask questions which seem genuine and somewhat open-minded will get published. Propaganda won’t.

Reply
Mr. Spock says:

January 15, 2006 at 2:02 PM

I’ve seen F&C political toons before and I’ve never noted anything remotely racist. Care to elaborate?

———————

Cox & Forkum’s political scribblings share many points of thematic and aesthetic similarity with 1930s era German political cartoons, e.g., the depiction of domestic opponents with heavy, lidded eyes, thick lips & hooked noses, etc.

For a side-by-side comparison of Cox & Forkum cartoons with the political “cartoons” of he nazis, please see this slideshow.

Plagiarism? Doubtful. But in case after case, the resemblance is eerie enough to make one wonder if perhaps Der Sturmer was an unacknowledged influence.

Reply
José Josephs says:

January 15, 2006 at 2:04 PM

Perhaps all this wrangling is just so much wasted effort. Has anyone thought to think of the consequences of Russia arming Iran to help it obliterate Israel? Israelis had better let go of the endless arguments about right and wrong, and start packing. Russia will gladly do a Marshall Zhukov and let Iran flatten Israel in order to gain hegemony over Iran’s gas supplies. When Iranians start saying “Look, Russia is a friend of Islam because they’re helping us with our nuclear weapons program” . . . look out! By that time, nobody will care whether Israel’s few friends are Jews or not. The missiles will be inbound, and the Jews will still be arguing about the ethics of survival.

You’re right. It’s none of my business. I think I’ll return to the Christian church and focus on something else. The survival of Israel is simply a minor distraction when faced with the much bigger problem of ensuring reliable supplies of Iranian gas in Europe.

Reply
Steve Kelso says:

January 15, 2006 at 2:23 PM

For a look inside the dark soul of Little Green Football, go here:

http://lgfwatch.blogspot.com/2006/01/pajamas-media-commentators-on-hajj.html

Reply
Jack says:

January 15, 2006 at 3:17 PM

It’s terribly meaningful. It means that Aussie Dave and his right-wing blog network dominate the proceedings because of their “reach.” Look, I have no problem if you called this the Jewish Right-Wing Blog Awards. Then you’d know what you were getting.

No, it really isn’t meaningful unless we allow you to spread the canard that you have to have had a particular political POV to be nominated and it is clear that you did not. You are promoting a fallacy.

But what’s objectionable about the Awards is that their title might lead an outsider to believe that all or most Jewish bloggers represent the same narrow set of views.

That is part of a very reasonable argument about the behavior of Jews. Does one Jew represent all Jews. It is a good discussion and one that doesn’t have a clear answer, but it doesn’t negate the reality that a left/right or middle blog could have been nominated.

If you want your competiton to truly represent “Jewish and Israeli Blogs” as their name indicates, then you’d think they’d want to ensure Jewish and Israeli blogs of other stripes were more represented.

That would be great.

You’re arguing from a generalization, which is intellectually dangerous in such discussions. You’d best point out an example in which either Jesus’ General or I misquoted or took out of context any of the quotes included here.

My position is far less unstable than your own in which you assume that the general didn’t misquote anyone. It is not my job to run around pointing out sloppy work, but if you go look and Ezzie’s post on this I think that he did the leg work for you.

You clearly haven’t spent much time in academia.

And you know this because of what? Because you have seen my resume, spent time speaking with me on the telephone or are clairvoyant. You can criticize me all you want but just remember that you really don’t know my background.

There may be some fraudulent academic research (witness the Korean cloning research). But the vast majority of academic research performed at reputable colleges, universities or research institutes is without blemish.

You hope and you think that this is true, but you really do not know for certain. It is one of those things that we like to believe. I certainly hope that you are right and operate from the assumption that most research is conducted ethically, morally and in a scholarly manner. There was an article written last year in which they discussed just how many problems there are with scientific research and how many scientists acknowledge this.

I spent five years at two undergraduate institutions, two years at the Hebrew University and earned graduate degrees at two other research universities. I know something about this subject.

Congratulations on being educated. I worked in several universities, conducted reseach and helped many doctoral students with their doctoral theses. I don’t think that either one of us are interested in a pissing contest about who knows more.

As I said I think that you are a good guy who is pulling for the same things as myself, but are doing so from a different direction.

I still encourage you to review those other blogs and see what you find.

Reply
Elena says:

January 15, 2006 at 4:30 PM

“You do realize this is precisely the type of thinking that led in the 1950s to the rise of McCarthyism and the execution of the Rosenbergs? Is that the type of society you really wish to live in?”

Uh, the Rosenbergs were proven traitors by a court of their peers and the information gleaned from the former USSR after the government fell. And just so you know: There were communists trying to take over the govt. back then.

What are you trying to say, then?

Reply