.jpg){kind=small}
mini.jpg)
I was surfing the web and came across a site that featured the logo of the Jewish and Israeli Blog Awards. I’ve seen the logo before at some sites and never sat down and looked at it in any great detail. Being a progressive Jewish blogger who often blogs about Israel; and being ever-ambitious and hungry for recognition of my blog I thought I’d check it out for myself.
If you take a look at their logo here you’ll notice the two sponsors: the Jerusalem Post and Israelly Cool. A little ideological background is in order. The Post at one time in its history (I know because I read it sporadically when I lived in Israel for two academic years) was a sleepy little Anglo-Israeli paper that took an uneventfully centrist political stance on Israeli politics. That all changed when Conrad Black (does he still have that ‘Lord’ title or do they take it away once you’re accused of a felony??) bought the paper, turning it into the spitting image of his neocon, hardline pro-Likud views.
Now the kleptomaniac buccaneer is gone. Derek Fattal, the Post’s director of internet services assures me that post-Black the Post moderated its politics:
The Post’s position in the local spectrum is now straight center on most issues and I don’t think many informed pundits would currently cast us as right wing.
But that’s what George Will would say about Sam Alito’s judicial philosophy, now wouldn’t he? It all depends on where you locate your center. One could believe the paper has moderated its views. But I don’t believe it will ever fully divorce itself from Lord Black’s political philosophy.
So you have a conservative Israeli daily allied with Israelly Cool. The latter is a hardline anti-Arab blog written by Aussie Dave, an Australian oleh (immigrant) to Israel. I should correct this statement. Dave doesn’t hate all Muslims. He only hates Muslim terrorists. Which Muslims does he have a hankering for?
I hate the Islamic terrorists, and I make a point to distinguish between them and “moderate” Muslims, for whom I have the utmost respect.
Here’s his description of one such individual profiled, where else, in the Jerusalem Post:
…Yunis Owaidah [is] a PLO Arab who is proud of the fact that he “collaborates” with Israel.
The Jerusalem Post have [sic] a fascinating article on him, which I implore you all to read, if you have not already done so. Here is an appetizer:
Owaidah explained that he decided to work with Israel “because of the injustice we saw when we were under Jordanian rule before the 1967 war.”
“When the Jews came to Jerusalem, I saw how they were treating the people in a humane way,” he said. “By comparison, we had been oppressed by the Jordanians when they were here. Look how the Jews have built a modern and democratic state, and look where the Arabs still are.”
Dave, you see, loves the “good” Muslims, those few quislings who exist among millions of Palestinians. And oh how he hates the “bad” Muslims. Those are the really rotten ones who want a state of their own and who detest the Israeli Occupation.
And Dave isn’t afraid of obliterating a few innocent Palestinians if it means the IDF or Shin Bet can bag a Palestinian militant in a targeted assassination:
While I am always opposed to the deliberate killing of innocent people, and saddened by any loss of innocent life, this does not mean that I oppose all targeted killings where innocent people are inadvertently killed.
I guess Dave doesn’t have much use for this famous dictum:
“it is better to let ten guilty men go free than to convict an innocent man.”
I’ve written (see next link) about some of Aussie Dave more lovely characterizations of Palestinians and Muslims (Dave probably thinks ‘Palestinian’ and ‘Muslim’ are indistinguishable terms). Dave is also a member of Pajamas Media, that sterling collection composed of many pro-Likud bloggers founded by Roger Simon and Charles Johnson. I explored the pro-Likud bias of many of PJM’s bloggers here.
Which brings me to Johnson’s Little Green Footballs, a nominee in the Israel Advocacy category. How does a blog written by a non-Jew and non-Israeli get into a Jewish and Israeli Blogging Awards competition? I guess if you really stretch you could say that Charles always is looking to uphold the most extreme right wing viewpoints offered within Israeli politics. So perhaps that rates him an “honorary Israeli” designation. But seriously, one of the main reasons Charles gets nominated is that he in turn invited Aussie Dave to join him in Pajamas Media (see the latter’s profile). So it’s only natural that Dave would return the favor.
Fattal assured me the competition had no ideological bias:
There are nominees of all political types and persuasions. Neither the Post nor Israellycool have any discretion over the voting and awards process…
Notice that saying there are nominees “of all political types and persuasions” doesn’t mean that the competition isn’t dominated overwhelmingly by conservative blogs (which it is–more on that shortly). Jesus’ General has already examined some of the nominees and highlighted some of their more outrageously hateful anti-Arab bile. Most of the quotations cited here come from this terrific post. Several qoutes are from the post I mentioned which I wrote a few weeks ago about Pajamas Media.
I thought I’d take a stroll myself through the field looking for political orientations. If you review the Israeli Advocacy category, you’ll first note the title. “Israeli advocacy” is a code word among Israel’s supporters for pushing the ‘Israel right or wrong’ line in debate about the Israeli-Arab conflict.
Let’s test the hypothesis by examining the blogs nominated. I’ve written about Atlas Shrugged and its wild-eyed search for anti-Semites under every bed in my overview of the participants in the pro-Israel Pajamas Media blog. CAMERA Snapshots is the blog of Committee for Accuracy in Mideast Reporting in America. Those are the folks who are always accusing CNN, the New York Times and Washington Post of being anti-Israel because they cover both the Israeli and Palestinian side of the conflict. For CAMERA, writing a story about Palestinians is tantamount to anti-Israel propaganda. Or how ’bout Joe Settler? Pretty much a given where this guy stands in the political divide. Ditto for Israpundit. You won’t find a dispassionate discussion of the conflict in any of these blogs. Of eleven blogs in ‘Group A’ of this category, one, Dan ‘Mobius’ Sieradsky’s Jewschool, is progressive. Sound “fair and balanced” to you?
Group B contains the aforementioned Little Green Footballs and other gems like MyRightWord (guess which side of the political spectrum it’s on?), Zion Report, Only in Israel, and Soccer Dad. Here’s a pertinent quotation from the latter that Jesus’ General features in his blog post about this travesty of a competition:
Soccer Dad responds to the news that a the family of a brown [Palestinian] child killed by Israeli troops donated his organs to Israelis:
And in what circumstances did those minors die? Ahmed, was carrying a toy rifle in a place where the Israeli army was operating. Hardly a wise decision. And even if Israel apologizes, was it wrong for the Israeli soldiers to shoot first and ask questions later?
Zion Report views the granting of citizenship to Israeli Arabs as a “sign of weakness:”
You consistently hear Israelis brag about how allowing Arabs to hold Knesset seats displays our goodness. I disagree. I think it’s a display of weakness, and I know that our enemies see it as such.
To allow a sworn enemy, who actively supports the destruction of the nation who pays his salary, to maintain his position is suicidal at best.
By the way, did I also say that these chenyuk’s (a disparaging Israeli colloquial term) can’t write?
Only in Israel possesses the proud distinction of being the creator of Rachel Corrie pancake jokes. Corrie was the American ISM member who was murdered by an IDF tractor driver which she was attempting to block from razing a Palestinian home. Did I mention that some of these bloggers strike me as little more than 14 year-old teenagers who haven’t quite been housetrained? They enjoy taking dumps all over the house…even on the memory of the dead. And they wonder why Palestinians perversely celebrate at Israeli misfortune??
Another blog nominee (in “Best Politics & Current Affairs” category), Aaron’s CC takes credit for marketing a mouse pad featuring an image of the armored Catepillar (known as “Cats”) bulldozer used by the IDF to destroy Palestinian homes. He markets it under the title, “I Love Big Cats.”
Oh, yes it’s a fine group of bloggers featured in this competition. A well-rounded slice of Jewish and Israeli life. Derek can make the claim that it’s a democratic selection process. But only because the nominees and those who nominate them are a self-selected group of hard-right pro-Israel bloggers.
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.
A word of explanation, 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. There may be more diversity in some of the other categories. But please forgive me for being skeptical given what I found in my own review of the categories I chose to explore.
Related posts:
- Rabbi Brian’s Blog: New Progressive Jewish Blog
- Technorati Ranks Tikun Olam 38th in World Politics Blog Category
- StandWithUs Director Says I Need “Help,” Claims I Fabricated Blog Comment in SWU’s Name
- When Muslim-Jewish Dialogue Fails, and Other Tales of Jewish Alienation
- Nefesh B’Nefesh Jewish Blogging Conference
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Tags: aussie_dave, blogs, israelly_cool, jerusalem_post, jewish_and_israeli_blog_awards, pajamas_media, pro-israel
LGF Watch is run by someone in the UK, who is a Jew. He was a poster on LGF, and was rightfully banned when 2 posters on LGF researched the hate site you so extol, and revealed that it was the same Dave Ray, who posted away happily at LGF.
He now has a blog in addition to LGF Watch, where he gets about 10 comments in 6 months. Sad. He is a Zionist, but since so many in blogdom now know who he is, re LGF Watch, he is as popular as bird flu.
I doubt that you would be pleased if there was a Tikum Olam Watch, but then you seem in no imminent danger of receiving the accolades that Mr. Johnson has, thus not drawing the jealousy and animus of the Dave Rays of the world.
Enough kvetching already because you were not licked. And again, take a look at the roster of those who are members of PJ media; there are LLL’s in the group, who also happen to have worthy blogs, even if they re liberals, No whiners in the group.
Laya: You clearly haven’t bothered to read this post:
I might add that I was only speaking of Group A which contains 11 blogs. Group B has a similarly sized group & may perhaps have a single blogger somwhere to the left of Jabotinsky. So are you saying that because there is a single progressive blogger that JIBA has covered all the bases of Jewish blogging? This competition in no way reflects the diversity of opinion in the greater Jewish blog world.
Sorry Jack, but you’re misinformed. One man’s canard is another’s truth. See my second post on JIBA here & you’ll find that there are definite ideological criteria for inclusion. If the “raison d’etre” of your blog is to criticize Israel, then you’re out. Derek Fattal of J. Post informed about the criteria himself.
And they claim they’re using the perspective of a “layperson” (whatever that means) with no ideological ax to grind to judge who crosses the line, when in reality that “layperson” is none other than Aussie Dave himself. And he’s not ideological is he?
If you do think it would be great (as you wrote) to create a more inclusive process in which a broader set of ideas is represented in future contests, you should lobby the JIBA sponsors. Fattal, writing on behalf of the Post feels everything they’ve done has been absolutely correct and hasn’t responded positively to this idea or any others I’ve offered to them (not that I’m surprised).
Richard,
You can keep repeating yourself as often as you want but it doesn’t mean that your beliefs are correct, accurate or true. Virtually any blog could have been nominated. It is reasonable and fair that there be a minimal guideline in which blogs that are completely anti-semitic be kept out.
But, let us put that aside for a moment and return to a different question. Have you taken the time to read the blogs in the Life in Israel category? Because it seems to me that you have had a very limited exposure to the JIBs and that your blanket accusation of bias is being issued because of a personal axe to grind.
And just to be clear about something I think that it is important for Israel to be criticized just as I think that it is important for any free society to have an open dialogue among its supporters and citizenry. Without that you risk so very much.
Elena: “Traitors”…such a hysterical word used to hide lazy thinking. Want to taint someone? Just call ‘em a traitor (as so many have done in my comments threads here), then you don’t have to address anything they say.
Yes, the Rosenbergs were convicted and executed. They were spies and members of the Communist Party. Your blather about taking over the government is hysterical overstatement. Whatever the Communist Party’s ideology, they never even took over a school board, let alone a government. They were no more a threat to the existence of the U.S. than my 6 year-old dog is. And the best defense against whatever threat did exist from the Party was maintaining our way of life, our civil liberties and freedoms, our tolerant, open society. We actually shamed and defaced these institutions and values by executing the Rosenbergs. Not to mention the shameful McCarthy red scare era and the poisonous impact it had on American life.
You neglect to mention that Klaus Fuchs gave away the much more important asset–the hydrogen bomb–to the Russians & was never prosecuted. Others who were prosecuted for similar types of crimes (passing on nuclear secrets) were not threatened with execution. In Ivy Meeropol’s terrific documentary film about her grandparents, she interviews a Chicago couple who admitted that they passed secrets to the Russians, were interviewed by the FBI (I think they may even have admitted some culpability though I can’t remember the scene well enough to be sure) and were never prosecuted. Interestingly, I don’t believe the couple was Jewish.
The Rosenbergs were convicted by a jury of their peers, not a court of their peers (actually in a way it was a court of their Jewish peers as the judge, prosecutor, defense attorney, the chief prosecution witness/snitch, and both defendants were all members of the tribe–nice when you the goyim can use a fellow Jew to help fry a “bad” Jew–reminds me of the Jewish capos at the Nazi death camps…but I digress).
Lois: First, what would be wrong with someone posting at a site whose contents he disagrees with, and who owns another site (LGF Watch) which critiques the first (LGF)? Your comment has that breathless tone of “oooh, look we got the dirty spy.” What is it precisely that is so dastardly about what this fellow DID at LGF or was it just that he had the temerity to host his own site criticizing LGF?
One thing I just love about rightists (most of the commenters here have used “leftist” as a smear against my blog so that justifies me using it right?) is their absolute intolerance of points of view even a milimeter to their left.
By the way, I know & admire LGF Watch. If I were doing the site I probably wouldn’t cast so many insults & ad hominem attacks Charles’ way, but I have to admit that he almost deserves them he’s such a twit.
I see you really like to use scientific evidence. How would you know how many comments his blog gets? Did you go through every post and count? And by the way, the number of comments is a factor in determining a blog’s popularity, but not necessarily in determining it’s quality. I know blogs I value very highly which get very few comments (or may even have comments turned off).
Interesting, LGF Watch’s owner is Jewish and a Zionist. Yet somehow he’s still persona non grata in LGFland. My but you are an inclusive bunch over there aren’t you?
I don’t see why anyone would be crazy enough to want to waste hours of their life shadowing my every blog utterance. Charles has earned “accolades?” Do tell. Or are you just speaking of JIBA? If so, all I can do is yawn.
That would all depend on who was doing the ‘licking.’ Really, you do need to do some work on proofreading those comments (two commenters here have already tsk-tsked me for my own less humorous typos). I assume you meant “picked.” Actually, I did not know about the competition until after it was closed.
You folks still don’t get it, though. My readers don’t read the Jerusalem Post (I do very occasionally) nor do most of them read any of the blogs nominated. That’s probably also true of most of the center to left side of the Jewish blog world. So why would they, I or any of our readers know about, care about, or nominate me or any other blog for JIBA?
Gee, there are 4 liberal blogs out of seventy (it was seventy prior to PJM’s rollout, it may be less now). Now that’s real range isn’t it?? Come to think of it that’s about the same “range” as JIBA. Now, I wonder whether that’s a coincidence?
Jack: Now, that’s an interesting imprecision. I wrote in my response to you that they disqualify blogs whose main purpose was to criticize Israel and you transform that into “blogs that are completely anti-Semitic.” Yet you say you’re in favor of allowing criticism of Israel.
What this reveals is that you are conflating blogs which criticize Israel with blogs which are anti-Semitic. An interesting judgment and one I’m sure Aussie Dave would agree with wholeheartedly. Yet another reason why this entire competition is a put up. If you criticize Israel “too much” in your blog you’re anti-Semitic and therefore eligible for disqualification.
Charles at LGF is a well reasoned person who has doubts about people who are not so well reasoned. He can admit his mistakes with humor and humilty. There is something wrong in Palestine and it’s not israel. The cause is elsewhere.
Richard,
It has been nice but you really are not interested in dialogue because the message is unwelcome to you. The truth and reality is that the nomination process was not skewed the way that you claim. The reality is when you used Soccer Dad’s quote you used it out of context but apparently didn’t care because it didn’t serve your purposes to acknowledge that.
And since you are unwilling to read the multitude of blogs in the contest outside of a very small sample you really cannot say what the politics are of the JIBs and the blogs in it.
One more point. If you are a frequent reader of the Jewish blogosphere it is impossible not to have seen the notice about the JIBs. They were publicized everywhere. Next year I encourage you to see that your blog is nominated, even if it is a self nomination.
CK: Your problem is that you like to set up straw men thereby making it that much easier to knock them down. Don’t grapple with a complex argument. Simplify and distort till it means what you’d prefer it to mean and thus all the easier to dismiss.
The site eligibilty rules do not say they specifically and only plan to disqualify sites which espouse Jew hatred. They say they may be used to disqualify sites whose raison d’etre is “criticism of Israel.” That’s a whole lot different than espousing neo-Nazi views. I wouldn’t say my site’s raison d’etre is criticizing Israel, but I’ve asked Aussie Dave whether he’d ban me and have not heard his answer. His standards for defining that term would be far different than mine.
And as sponsor why doesn’t he turn over this job of deciding whose fit for competition to an independent party so as to avoid the suspicion that he might attempt to influence the ideological composition of the contest?
As for the fact that Aussie Dave used his powers “judiciously” as you claim. You wouldn’t know that because as I said the competition was largely self-selected from a relatively narrow collection of like-minded blogs and individuals. So of course JIBA rules have never been challenged because JIBA’s promotion/marketing has never taken it much out of their small world. Unless I’ve become persona non grata at JIBA & disqualified even from nominating blogs (let alone competing) next year I might just nominate some Jewish and Israeli blogs I admire which do criticize Israel strongly & then we’ll really get to see Aussie Dave’s true colors.
I took entire courses and read entire tomes in grad school about irony and I guess I must’ve missed the one which defined the following as an ironic statement:
You’re just oh so subtle a writer & I really should’ve somehow understood the supposed irony intended.
Your arguments against me are high on generalizations & low on specifics. I find anti-Palestinian, anti-Muslim, anti-human sentiments in many JIBA blogs to be offensive to me as a Jew and supporter of Israel. If you’re accusing me of a lack of tolerance for defaming the dead and Jewish racism, I’ll be first in line to plead guilty. But I’m not saying those blogs have no right to be in competition (in which case you could legitimately call me intolerant). I merely say there are almost no opposing views to the bile in these blogs represented among the nominated blogs.
Don’t like you, don’t like your comments, don’t like your attitude. But my we’re getting melodramatic here aren’t we? Why would I ban you or turn off comments? To prevent you from speaking here? Don’t flatter yourself. Then you could whine to your JIBA friends about how I’m such a bad, bad man.
I will say though that my conversation with you on this subject is now over. If your future comments don’t add anything new to the discussion I reserve the right to edit or delete them. If you’d truly like to get yourself banned the rules are clearly inscribed above the comment box…
Another of Chucky’s groupies. “That’s the only thing that there’s just too little of…” We sure need more of you around to spread the love of Chuck.
There certainly IS something wrong in Palestine–and part of the blame lies with the Palestinians themselves and part certainly lies with the Israelis. The fact that this commenter and most of the JIBA political blog nominees agree wholeheartedly with JD’s statement only serves to illustrate the limitation of the JIBA competition.
Jack: Absolutely not true. I am a frequent reader of the Jewish blogosphere (if you bothered to read more of this blog than this post you’d know that as I link to a number of other Jewish blogs) & knew nothing about it till a week or so ago.
And since you seem to imply that you ARE a frequent reader of the Jewish blogosphere could you tell me whether you’ve ever visited the following blogs:
Lawrence of Cyberia
Head Heeb
Pro-Semitism
Cal Tzedek
Israelblog.org
One Voice
SJ’s Blog
Ariga.com
I’ll make you a deal…I’ll examine the Jewish Life JIBA category if you’ll read a post or more from each of these blogs dealing w. the I-P conflict.
And how could you make a judgment that I’ve refused to review any of those sites you recommended based on making the suggestion less than 24 hours ago? Do you expect that I’m at your beck and call & at a moment’s notice? That I have no other obligations in life? Courtesy would imply that you wouldn’t rush to such a judgment w/o giving someone a reasonable amt of time to respond.
First, note the masterful debate style of Aussie Dave. He calls me “Silverstein” in order to show his utter disdain. Ah, a deep stab! Next, note he doesn’t deign to respond to me in my own blog. He refers us all to his own blog to which he hasn’t even provided a link. Is this guy afraid to debate someone on enemy turf??
Ooh, Dave. I’m sure you not “ambitious and hungry for recognition” for your own blog. Of course you are, we all are. And if you do feel that way about your own blog why would you insult someone who felt the same way about their own?
For the umpteenth time in this comment thread, not true. Couldn’t care less. My gripe has nothing to do with that. I didn’t even know about JIBA untill a wk. ago. I care about your pretence to represent the “Jewish and Israeli” Blog world and call it for what it is. You’ll notice that when Aussie Dave really dislikes someone he doesn’t pay any attention to their argument. You accuse them of something they neither said nor feel. And that settles that (at least in that Aussie’s mind–if not for the rest of ours).
Also Richard, you should edit the post
Jack said,
January 15, 2006 @ 12:31 am
at the end where it says:
category
to:
category
if you notice the final tag has a as opposed to a which means that every post after that one is considered to be part of one long giant link description. Which is why everything after that particlar line is colored in the “link” color.
“some text here” is what you use for italics. “description” is what you would use for a url-link. Clearly Jack made a typo with a instead of a
Feel free to delete and ignore this post in your usual cruel and dishonest manner; the way you’ve done with so many others. Yes Richard, people of like mind tend to associate with one another, and they are beginning to comment on your habit.
If you were wise, you would delete this post, the post right above it (you would have my permission so long as you->> ). Reinstate the post I made before these two, and apologize for the way you’ve dealt with others and resolve to stop deleting people who you just don’t like. That would do your point of view a lot more good than arguments you’ve made on this blog.
Furthermore you should apologize to Dave for not crediting him with the corrections he’s made to you. People hate it when you don’t give proper credit. And yes, they remark on it, and nothing destroys a bloggers reputation faster than dishonesty. Stupidity people can put up with, everyone is stupid in some way or another, also stubborness, because all the good bloggers are stubborn. But dishonesty is the kiss of death. You should take that very seriously.
How you act, believe it or not, has a far greater impact than whatever clever arguments you can come up with. And so far, your actions have totally discredited your point of view.
I would be surprised if you took me up on my suggestions, at this point I do not really think you are “all there”. But feel free to prove me wrong and you will get an apology.
-ron
WHile it is certainly true that LGF is neither jewish nor israeli, if someone can point out to me anything which the blog PUBLISHERS have written which is racist, I’d like to see it.
As for commenters, censorship is to be avoided.
PERIOD.
If racists DO post, then let the sun shine on them. However, it would do everyone MORE good to concentrate the light on those who practice the oldest racism on this planet. Those who hate arabs have other problems and will be excoriated as matter of course, because we abhor racism. Common sense dictates that we pay attention to organized systems which have racism as an article of faith, not individuals with massive personal problems.
Rachel Carrie MURDERED? By a driver who couldn’t see her as she played her silly and dangerous games in front of the tractor? The machine is heavily armoured and redesigned by the Israelis, after buying it from Caterpillar, to protect the driver, severely limiting his visibility. Your characterization is unfair and uncharitable to the innocent driver; rather, Carrie’s far-left anti-Americanism and terrorist-enabling politics are much more at fault.
She was more sinning than sinned against, I’m afraid.
Ron: I’ve corrected Jack’s mistake.
As for being “cruel and dishonest,” I only treat those like you in such a way if you treat me that way first. Your earlier banned comment was offensive & earned you my treatment. As you last comment was only marginally offensive instead of full-bore, it’s been published. You can feel free to publish here as long as you stay back from the red-line.
As for “deleting people who just don’t like” me. There’s a plethora of comments published here from people who just don’t like me. But they managed (mostly) to dispute my arguments and not insult me personally, which is why they’re here & your earlier comment isn’t.
As for Dave’s corrections, if he’s made any I’d like to know about it directly from him & preferably in this blog. Not through the mediation of his blog. He’s written me several e mails & never said he made corrections to anything. I’ve asked him to respond substantively to me here several times without success. You may think I’m a cruel brute of a human being. But if anything I’ve said here has caused him or the Post to rethink any of their policies, I’d welcome knowing about it–here.
I do appreciate your sincere concern for my blogging reputation. But if you think for a second that my reputation–in the eyes of LGF, Israelly Cool or the nasty JIBA bloggers who’ve attacked me here–concerns me in the slightest you’d be sorely mistaken. My reputation among those fellow bloggers, Jews and others whose opinion I value & appreciate is quite intact thank you.
What you neglect to understand is that it’s the racist nonsense spouted by many commenters here which tarnishes the pro-Israeli hard-right’s reputation in the eyes of all reasonable people who read this blog. In fact, that’s why I don’t ban more comments. I want people to know how inane, churlish and poisonous some of your friends can be. That’s also why I’ve featured the passages from JIBA bloggers here. We should know the nature of Jewish hate–it’s not that different from Muslim hate or Palestinian hate.
Don’t need yr apology. Don’t want it even if you were willing to give one. As for my actions “discrediting” my point of view. They’re only discredited in your eyes & the eyes of the 2,000 visitors LGF & Israelly Cool sent my way yesterday (thanks btw for sending my site traffic through the roof). But they’re not discredited in the eyes of the 200,000 visitors who read me over a year’s time. Why is it that you’re such a raging egomaniac as to believe that your judgment of me is the objective gold standard of judgments which can’t help but be shared by all reasonable people?
Well, people leave me crude comments all of the time on my blog. I get death threats and what not, but it’s just a comment, so I don’t let it get underneath my skin.
I’ve already provided the link here & in my post to LGF Watch which does little else but point out such matters in the pages of Little Green Footballs. Take a look there & you’ll find a gold mine of anti-Arab hate.
I don’t usually make it a point of telling other bloggers how they should handle thorny issues like how they treat hate commenters. If you’d read some other posts here you’d find that I have published many, many hateful, bileful poisonous comments for precisely the reasons you’ve mentioned. But once you’ve read every possible permutation of “I hate your guts you lying scumbag leftwing raving lunatic” or “you lyiing sack of shit Jew–we’ll be coming for you come the next Holocaust,” etc. you lose interest in making abstract philosophical points & desire more preserving a modicum of civil discourse.
And remember my blog is to do with as I see fit. Yours is to do with as you see fit.
I was with you on some stuff to a point. I am a liberal Jew myself and agree with some of youroints. You are off your rocker ( with all due respect) if you accuse CAMERA of ALWAYS crying anti semitism in asking for fair and balamced coverage,
You maybe want to go to read their stuff and get your facts straight. Much coverage of Israel actually IS anti semetic my friend. Not all, but speaking out against is important when it happens.
Shame on you for failing to see that. With Jews like you, who needs enemies?
And you know what the driver did and didn’t see how? Perhaps you were standing beside him in the cab? Your “account” of what happened that day is one spread by the rabid supporters of the settler movement. There are other accounts which you of course choose to ignore as inconvenient to your propagandistic view of the events.
By the way, what business does the IDF have using a tractor which “impairs” the driver’s visibility in such a situation as this driver faced? Unless, that is, the IDF cared not a whit for the blood spilt. I’d say the driver’s attitude was similar to the callous one you present here.
Sure, blame the victim for her own death. That’s a helpful approach.
Boy, if running over someone in cold blood and killing them isn’t sinning against them then you sure have an awfully deformed moral compass.
Callie: News flash–if you like CAMERA you’re no liberal. It’s easy enough to be liberal and vote for Democrats here in the U.S. But the true test of democratic values and liberalism is how you view Israel. You appear to hang out ideologically with the LGF types. In which case, you’re on the right-side of the Israel political spectrum. Nothing wrong with that. But don’t fool yourself into thinking you’re “liberal” when it comes to Israel. And btw, who would you vote for in the March Israeli elections? That’s a better test of whether or not you’re truly a “liberal” in the Israeli context.
You DO have to be kidding! Calling me off my rocker shows what? Respect? Again, you’re welcome to be rude if you wish, just don’t try to take it back with the empty gesture of “with all due respect” (when you’ve shown none).
Absolutely right, CAMERA wants “fair and balanced” Mideast coverage in precisely the same way that Fox News touts its “fair and balanced” slogan. “Fair and balanced” to hard-right Republicans is Fox’s philosophy. CAMERA’s is “fair and balanced” means a press that ignores Palestinians except when they collaborate with Israel and only saying the nicest of things about Israel and Israelis. Again, nothing wrong with that as long as you admit you are partisan. To pretend that you merely want neutrality is ridiculous as you comment is too.
And maybe I want to do the dentist for a nice root canal job! I’ve read quite enough of that shmata over the 40 years I’ve been interested in this subject. I don’t need your kind advice on how I can brush up my Shakespeare.
“Friend?” Whose friend? We ain’t friends so cut out the veiled sarcasm.
“Much?” By whose standards? Yours? And why should I or any reasonable person accept your standards as the gold standard? Is there anti-Semitic coverage of Israel? I guess there may be some. But what you really mean to say is that this coverage is ‘anti-Israel’ and you don’t understand the difference between the two terms. Or the terms mean one and the same thing to you.
I’ve read some far-left anti-Zionist media sites which I’d say are anti-Israel, even anti-Semitic. I don’t like them. But is the NY Times anti-Semitic because James Bennett writes incisive and thoughtful pieces about Palestinians harmed by the Israeli Occupation, when at the same time other NYT reporters are writing parallel stories portraying Israelis in a favorable light? You say “yes,” I say “no.” The reason you say “yes” is that you want NO favorable coverage of Palestinians; or better yet, no coverage of Palestinians at all. If the Palestinians disappeared from the world media that would constitute “fair and balanced,” now wouldn’t it?
How innovative your sarcasm is. You’re only the 8th commenter to say this in the four years I’ve been blogging. I am YOUR political enemy, not Israel’s. And you’re a fool for not understanding the difference.
Richard,
At no time have I offered you an apology. Nor did I even indicate one in any of my posts, even the ones where I tried to be helpful. In fact I did the opposite and reiterated my dissatisfaction with what you write. It did cross my mind to offer one, but I rejected that as being insincere and unworthy. Of course, if someone can show me that I am in error, you will not just get an apology but a thank you for the correction, However, I do not expect that to happen.
I might have been too blunt when posting in other places regarding you, but I’m not sure I’m wrong in what I wrote either. Rather, perhaps I’ve made some comments too soon or perhaps it is not for me to say one way or another. But I don’t think that’s relevent to what I post here. If I see I’m wrong I’ll apologize, not because you do or do not want me to, but because that is the proper way to act.
Etiquette is not a joke or a convenience. Not if you want to be taken seriously. If you only wish to preach to the converted, that is your prerogative, but even they will take what you say with a tablespoon of salt if you evidence a lack of civility necessary for an exchange of ideas. Which is why I repeated Dave’s criticism of you in another post.
As for your lack of concern for what readers of LGF, etc etc. think of you, well, this is not summer camp, and we are not in “Color Wars” where “blue team” must be victorious over “red team” at the final singing competition.
This is real life, where innocent people are getting murdered, people like yourself call it “misfortune” (my conveniently deleted post illustrated that criticism far better despite your silly over-reaction to it), and families are being destroyed.
The other day I got into an argument with someone on the right. This person refused to even consider the possibility that Arabs have been stolen from, or that it was worthy of consideration, and became very agitated and overly emotional, etc. Much like how you reacted when I harshly (and justly) criticized your writing. The result? I kept quiet for the sake of the friendship, but I no longer take anything he has to say on the subject seriously. The pity of it is that he has no idea that this is my reaction. But this is the reaction everyone has when they are treated poorly or unfairly in an exchange of ideas. If you shut people down, you lose the ability to influence those same people in any meaningful way. Unless of course, they are sheep to begin with, in which case it hardly matters anyway. Note the word “influence” as opposed to “convince”. My experience has been that you will influence far more people than you will ever convince. Somehow that seems more fitting to me and correct to me.
But wasn’t that friend I mentioned silly though? How in the world did it help him or his cause to give me a monologue? Did he think that I would walk away from the conversation with a changed view because he rudely shut me down? There is a time and a place for rudeness of course, just like everything else, but that was neither the time or the place.
You may regard this post as being insulting or disrespectful to you. Maybe it is. Maybe it isn’t. But if you would prefer not to hear what people honestly think of you based on what you write, I can oblige you easily enough.
-ron
Ron: You indicate you may’ve been “too blunt” in what you’ve said about me in other places. In fact, I’d guess that what you wrote in the comment I deep-sixed was probably comparable to what you published elsewhere. Or perhaps it was toned down since you knew I would read it directly. I think you might want to consider the fact that if you thought you were “too blunt” I might find what you wrote (in that first comment) downright offensive. Pls. keep in mind there’s plenty in these comment threads on the JIBA posts that I found insulting and personally offensive. I only axed comments that went BEYOND these in their level of insult. Yours was one.
You seem to have at least two manners of presenting yourself online (or I should say here in these threads). The first version is the one I’ve already noted. And the second is the version you’ve exhibited in your last comment. I’m delighted to be disagreed with by someone who does so civilly without calling me ugly names in the process. And your comment was quite thoughtful & decent. I hope you can see that I am civil with those who, even while disagreeing with me, accord me a minimal level of humanity.
I have also had a civil discussion with a few other commenters here who don’t see things my way. But by and large the commenters here didn’t bother to read what I wrote or if they did they read through the twisted prism of their own ideological viewpoint which refuses to let in light from other sources. The kind of ignorance & intolerance many of those comments represented were responded to by me in roughly the manner their writers offered them.
I’m not going to get into a semantic debate with you over the terms I use to describe Israeli or Palestinian suffering. I see the suffering on both sides and deplore it for both sides. You clearly believe I’m one-sided. I assure you I’m not and there are blog posts here which might persuade you of what I’m saying. But I freely admit that I post about Israel and Israelis more than I post about Palestine and Palestinians. That’s because I’m a Jew, because I spent two years living in Israel, because I’m a fluent Hebrew speaker and student of Hebrew Literature (MA & ABD in the field), and because I’ve studied the I-P conflict for 40 yrs. It’s also because I believe that Israeli attitudes and policies toward the Palestinians are absolutely crucial in resolving the conflict. Not that such Palestinian attitudes are NOT important. It’s just that I have so much less influence over the Palestinian side of things (though I do maintain contact with several Arab bloggers). Aussie Dave’s criticisms of me show a quite superficial knowledge of me, my background, and what my blog really stands for.
But I really don’t care that much. I don’t expect that the thousands of visitors LGF & Israelly Cool sent my way the past few days are going to experience a mass conversion to an alternate view of the Jewish/Israeli universe. In fact, judging by the comments, most of them didn’t even bother to really read what I wrote. But I’m still glad they came. If even one of those thousands has an idea about this conflict which they rejected before they came here, then that’s good enough for me.
Sorry but who made you the deus ex machina of criteria to what a LIBERAL is. Maybe everything you believe brands you as a ‘critical progressive’ and no liberal, or using other self created definintions maybe everyone who thinks democracy in places besides the USA and ISrael then becomes, NEO CONS.Maybe you believe that social justice requires equal outcome and that makes a (domestic) liberal. Who knows?
It’s a stupid label set. If I as someone who worked in civil right in the 60’s, organized anti vietnam protests has a right to that ‘label’ it’s me (and as a democrat who BEFORE 9/11 had NH campaign workers staying in our home for months during primary season).
Guess what, I see few people I would call liberal. This is all funny.Liberal= HHH, liberal = HST Liberal =FDR. Dick Durbin is NO Liberal. Cynthia Mckinney is NO liberal. Juian Bond is NO liberal.
As for Israel so sorry, but to be ANYTHING you first have to be there. As you ought to know MR Silrverstein, the HAMAS charter makes it clear that unless there is going to be a Palestinian Altalena of some kind, there is NOTHING to discuss(Irsael is a muslim waqf..those are not idle words for some negotiating position), and it’s a war of survival,.Nevermind if they actuaslly form a govt. Moreover as you ought to know as well, in the last three years polls have shown that 58% or MORE of the palestinians peolpe believe in HUDNA not peace, just a waystation on the path to NO Israel. These are unpleasant facts. They are not pliable as either liberal, neo or paleocon or progressive. They are. Nothing ameliorates an occupation, and nothing also amerliorates the fact that arabs make laws that jews follow in Israel. The reverse is true nowhere. That’s not a justification, just a fact. If no peace but islamic peace is possible then separation begins to look pretty liberal compared to permanant occupation (which Dayan and Eban called poison pill).
If you think that is going to be accomplished with anything other than rough means (which is neither liberal nor conservative), time to reread Conrad Black (FDR), Davisd Mccullogh (Truman) and Michael Beschloss (The Conquerors), when you’re done, reread Qutb and Azzam.
As far as LGF sorry I missed your links , nor are they obvous to me in a re-read. I can’t see them as anything more than a sarcastic MEMERI with comments. Perhaps you would be kind enough to post them in a comment. I troll by and don’t read everything every day at LGF so it’s possible Johnson posts racist comments, but I’d like to judge for myself. Nothing against your judgement, but for all I know you think Norman Finklestein and Howard Zinn are the creme de la creme (and no they are not liberal).
Your post is 100% correct. Thanks G-d.
Deus ex machina is a feature of Shakespearean plays and not apt in this situation.
And you seem to forget, it’s my blog. I provide my views. You take ‘em or leave ‘em. Several commenters here have claimed to be “liberal.” This is cleary a debating tactic they attempt to use in order to say “I’m a liberal, I know what a liberal is, and you sir, are no liberal.” But those who make this claim are no Lloyd Bentsens either. They’re just propaganda flacks for Israel’s right wing. It is possible that they truly believe they are liberal in a similar sense to those racists who swear up and down there isn’t a racist bone in their bodies. And I have no doubt they’re sincere in this belief.
Just as an example, I wrote a post here criticizing a liberal site, Democrats.com, which supports the Democratic party, because the moderator had called into question my loyalty to the United States because I said that the U.S. should get involved in helping the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. That jerk has the chutzpah to claim that he isn’t an anti-Semite and HE BELIEVES IT.
So just because commenters here who claim CAMERA is God’s gift to Mideast journalism claim they are liberal doesn’t make it so. It speaks volumes to their self-delusion or deliberate deception.
I think you just shot your whole theory that you’re a liberal. You mention in your comment that you volunteered in the New Hampshire Democractic primary. I bet it was for Joe Lieberman. If so, I’ve no wonder that a Joe Lieberman supporter would find Dick Durbin “no liberal.” But I got news for you–Joe Lieberman couldn’t get elected dogcatcher in the national party. So if you’re a “liberal” like Joe is one, it’s no wonder that you’re disaffected from such Democrats. But what you really should be saying is that “I’m a conservative Democrat” or even “I’m a moderate Democrat.” No shame in that. The Democratic Leadership Council is a worthy group even if I don’t agree with much of what it stands for. But don’t go tryin’ to make us believe that you’re “liberal.”
That is one sorry-ass argument. It’s as old as the hills and lost any cogency about the time Truman left the White House.
‘Fraud’ is more like it. My blog has 5-6 posts which quote large sections of polling surveys of Palestinian and Israeli public opinion about these and related issues. They are jointly conducted by the Hebrew University and a Palestinian academic polling organization. I don’t have the energy or time to go and ferret out the statistics. If you really care to know what the polls really found, you may do a search on ‘Israeli poll’ or ‘Palestinian poll’ in my blog search box and read what Palestinians REALLY believe instead of what someone who deeply mistrusts them (or worse) believes. A sizable majority of Palestinians are in favor of a resolution of the conflict that would recognize Israel’s existence. A strong majority reject Hamas’ views on this question. THAT, is fact. What you wrote above is what you THINK fact is.
Again, more questionable ‘facts.’ I’d challenge you to find a single law that an Arab Knesset legislator “made” which Jews follow. What you can legitimately say is that Israel allows “its” Arabs to vote for Knesset and that there are a few Arab representatives who sit there. They are an (unfortunately) shunned minority affiliated with none of the larger Jewish parties. There used to be a few affiliated with Labor but I don’t believe that’s the case anymore.
Mr SIlverstein I thank you for your response.
You have self identified (Lieberman comment) as a critical progressive, who is prima facie evidence of the why the democratic party today at the national level is a REPUBLICAN VOTING MACHINE. MOVEON, George Soros, the idiot from Progressive Insurance, and Dr. Dean couldn’t be more helpful to the Republican party then if they just SENT IN THEIR RAISED CONTRIBUTIONS. Yes I supported Lieberman. I also housed Bradley workers, and Simon workers. But this ain’t then. The very fact that you are correct about Lieberman in the democratic party reveals the horrific truth about the party today. It is dying. Not for the members who become more and more base playing, but for growth. Don’t bother quoting a poll, we have one every 4 years for the only person elected nationally. That is the inarguable objective reality. Unless the election is ALL about domestic policy there IS no chance.
Your response about I don’t have time for this or that belies the truth that you FEAR a ‘battle of sources’ (not for public exposure, but because it is liable to challenge you articles of faith ..I speak with gulf arabs very frequently and as this has affected me, such challenges should enhance not threaten your opinions). The poll I quoted is a palestinian poll. IT’s about 2-3 years old and was the last such poll taken, the 58% is a real number. Your reaction is unfortunately shirkingly TYPICAL of those on the left (NOT LIBERALS) who when faced with reasoned opposition of ideas and alternate ‘facts’ which challenge the opinions they have formed, refuse such debate. Instead they resort to critcisms of style. Your commenton the ‘aptness’ of ‘deus ex machina’ is also de rigeur for such opposition, is signifies nothing regarding facts. I notice you adroitly AVOID HAMAS since there is no solution and no peace possible so long as they exist.
Fine.
BTW the your links just above, AS I STATED EARLIER, regarding LGF refer to commenters NOT posts. The challenge still stands. Find a racist post BY Mr. Johnson. The page you refer to are 100% outside commenters. Are they reprehensible? Have you reasd Kos’s commenters? Is he responsible for gavones posting there? If such a post by Mr. Johnson can be found I have an open mind, and don’t want to be reading racists. But neither am I impressed by smears based on what commenters freely say.
W/rgd to Israel – do arab members OPPOSE all laws voted into existence in the Knesset? Does Russ Feingold not make laws by free participation? He also does not have to worry that his open contribution to lawmaking will not one day come back to find him in the person of a salafi knocking on his door with a sweet little takfir message. How many jewish members in the Iranian parliament speak their mind freely opposing the Pasdaran? Oh wait.. there is no free parliament since the ulema-guardian council determines who is fit to be a candidate.
By the way despising Dershowitz as you seem to may find you one day holding hands with Finklestein and his best bud, mentor and academic supporter Noam…who of course supports the folks (Faurisson et al) who think Ann Frank never existed to write her little book, let alone the 6 million. Careful there. Finkelstein’s raison d’etre is to prove the Holocaust is an exagerrated money raising industry for jews.
Hey Ep,
So when Charles uses a comment at ummah.com he is wrong to use it as a representative view of Islam as a whole? Perhaps you should talk to the ponytailed one yourself, he seems happy enough to castigate Kos and others because of their commentators…..how come his are a protected species?
As for accusing Richard of one day holding hands with Holocaust deniers….well that’s just a step away from the usual cries of anti-Semitism where there is none–a view favoured by LGF, Israpundit and morons like Atlas Shrugs.
DR- Actually, like Drudge, I use LGF for the articles it points out more than anything else. I hardly EVER read the comments (who has time – they are out of control in volume). I PARTICIPATE in Gulf arab forums and need no explanation about any ‘ummah.com’, but the folks I have discourse with are engineers, bankers, and IT people so what is pointed out about ‘ummah.com’ is irrelevant to me, and so is what Kos commenters say, or Democratic Underground, or Freerepuiblic, etc. If LGF rags on commenters elsewhere it’s a big yawn (My comenters are better than yours?). But when they rag on what is said at Al Azhar as being representative of Islam, and it matches what the salafis I talk to say, I know what is real, so sorry. That is different. But his isn;t abotu that, it’s about what LGF POSTS, not what commetners say, or what KOS commenters say.
I make the following points
1) Arabs vote in Israel, and while a minority, DO make laws, and participate every day -to whatever degree THEY wish
2) No peace is currently possible thru any kind of negotiations since HAMAS finds Israel is by quranic definition, IMPOSSIBLE. It is a muslim waqf, and the quran is immutable and the perfect word of god. This doesn’t mean Israel doesn’t try to find a partner, or does things like ‘transfer’ etc. It merely recongnizes the impossibility of peace with palestinians – (who are about to reward HAMAS in the voting booth) – TODAY. Tomorrow is not today.Right now there is no point in giving anything up thru NEGOTIATIONS (not the same as what they did in Gaza which was IMHO- right)
3) Only 2 states can be a solution
4) Since 1936, the arabs who happen to be in the Trans-Jordan, have at every chance to have a peace, rejected it because of what HAMAS stands for. It is RELIGIOUS, not politcal. This makes any long term solution tenuous if possible at all. I OBSERVE this fact.
I didn’t accuse Richard of holding hands with deniers.. I simply WARN him about Finklestein. If he holds the views he claims to espouse he will find Finklestein as execrable as I do. This is apart from anything else. However that Finkelstein and Noam consipired with each other to accuse Mr. Dershowitz of plagiarism etc, and that Noam actively supports Finklestein, and that Noam is not only a supporter of racist morons (for what HE claims are free speech reasons….puuuleeeze) but also believes like MANY critical progressives (Zinn, Ward Churchill, Eric Foner, Hobsbawn, etc) that the USA was monstrous at its inception and thus cannot help but be monstrous thru the ages cannot be argued.They are all what Felix Dzherzinsky would call ‘useful idiots’.
I wish Richard would explain why he ‘despises’ Dershowitz. That is why FInkelstein was mentioned, it mimics exactly the word Finkelstein (a darling of the arabs) uses