I came, I saw, and I won’t be coming back.

I was really getting excited until I noticed that not five minutes went by before you left another set of droppings in my comments section. But anyway my reaction to your statement above: “good riddance to bad rubbish.”

Try not to miss me too much.

Now that’s funny. I’ll miss you as much as I miss the runs.

If you believe that a terrorist and a terrorist HUNTER are morally equivalent, please resign from the Jewish race.

I will on one condition–that you join me with your own resignation first. I’d be resigning as a service to my “race” because your loss from the ranks would greatly improve the quality of our genetic pool.

Yoga would do wonders for your high blood pressure.

I have some advice for you too, but unlike you I do have some standards and won’t provide it here.

Only what I’ve read in your posts and comments stemming from your tired tirade against the Jewish blog awards- but it was more than enough. And like most of the traffic you got thanks to that tirade, I came, I saw, and I won’t be coming back. Try not to miss me too much.

“But why can’t an Islamic Jihad bomber say the same thing to justify his killings of Israeli innocents?”

If you believe that a terrorist and a terrorist HUNTER are morally equivalent, please resign from the Jewish race- we don’t need your kind.

You surely would have won one of those awards had you been nominated. “Best Example of a Blog Whose Title Bears No Resemblance to its Contents” would have been all yours.

You really need to calm down. Yoga would do wonders for your high blood pressure.

…Your term is a misnomer–extrajudicial means “Outside of the authority of a court” or “Outside of the usual judicial proceedings.” In the case of a war or a conflict, combatants do not benefit from judicial review. If you are a combatant intent on causing harm to enemy combatants or civilians, you are a legitimate target.

This is Israeli policy & your justification for it. This is not international law. In fact, Israel in this & other important ways is in flagrant conflict with international law. You might say you don’t give two hankies about that. But an Israeli general came within a hair’s breath of being detained in England several months ago for planning & executing the assassination of the Palestinian militant, Shehadeh, an incident which led to the killings of 18 innocent Palestinians. This case has also been brought before the Israel Supreme Court which has used every possible stratagem to duck it. Perhaps once an Israeli is apprehended (as happened to Pinochet) & charged with war crimes then Israeli justice will realize it has to confront this issue head on.

I do not like collateral casualties but terrorists who operate amongst civilians need to accept part of that responsibility as well.

Palestinian militants do accept the imminent possibility of their own deaths at Israel’s hands. But they do so in the faith that many others will rise to take their place. I’m not glorifying this fact. I wish no Palestinian would take the place of any suicide bomber. But the fact remains that extrajudicial assassination has very little impact other than killing a single man. No doubt, you’ll attempt to argue that this technique has worked because terror is down. To which I’d reply that terror is down because Hamas is, perhaps temporarily, suspending offensive action against Israel. Islamic Jihad has not done so & has had success in perpetrating such crimes (viz. today’s attack)–despite Israel’s best efforts to wipe out their operatives. Such Israeli quasi-terror is palliative at best.

Of course i am vehemently opposed to extrajudicial assassination. I just don’t think that’s what’s going on.

Israel takes it upon itself to be judge, jury and executioner. That’s pretty much the dictionary definition of extrajudicial assassination.

And by the way, were it not for the fact that I am a vegetarian, I may have been at the shwarma place today in Tel Aviv when it was attacked by one of Islamic Jihad’s finest. I passed the place twice today.

I’ve been responding to comments here in my free time and not had a chance to see the news. I’m very sorry to hear of this attack. Though it is little consolation to the injured, some of whom I’m sure grievously so, I’m glad to hear that only the suicide bomber died.

As far as the Green Line goes - it does not represent the final border between Israel and “Palestine.”

I’m not interested in getting into a debate about what UN resolutions say or mean. The Green Line IS the internationally recognized border. Even in the period following the 1967 border, Israel recognized it as such. Subsequent governments decided that it didn’t mean what it meant and decided to create their own “facts on the ground.” I find it interesting that someone who calls himself “liberal” on the I-P conflict refuses to recognize the Green Line as Israel’s international border.

To talk about territorial appetite after the withdrawal from Sinai and Gaza demonstrates a bit of a bias on your part

Not at all, if my view be “biased” I am pleased to say this “bias” is shared with many within Israel too and not the wild-eyed radicals you enjoy so much poking snarky fun at. I just read this powerful denunciation of Israel’s insatiable appetite for Palestinian land (referring to the most recent Hebron settler melee) by an Israeli satirist in the pages of Ynet of all places:

The State of Israel, too, is pretty selective when it comes to using the law before raising a hand to other people’s property.

When the property in question is Arab property – neither title deeds nor land registration documents nor any other official documentation leaves a great impression.

Take tens of thousands of property owners in Jerusalem, Haifa, Jaffa, Acco, Beer Sheva, the West Bank, the Galilee, the Negev, Golan Heights, the coastal region and every other region of the country. They can wipe their bottoms with their proof of ownership documents, simply for the unhappy fact that they are Arab.

Because “Arab property,” we learned a long time ago, is no more than a temporary deposit, until such time as the Jewish owners return to reclaim the property.

Even if we innocently assume that we are speaking about a legal question. In whose name, or the name of what perverse legal logic, do these Jewish Cossacks have the right to stake claims to this property?
–B. Michael, Ynet

I am glad that you feel comfortable being cavalier about Defense issues. Clearly, you didn’t almost get blown up by a suicide bomber today. Sitting in the relative comfort of Seattle, puttering around your lovely garden, playing with Jonah and the twins, what would you know about suicide bombers who don’t give a rat’s ass about your age, status or politics.

CAVALIER?!! You call me cavalier? How dare you. I’m sorry, but you’ve made me very angry. Do you call caring enough about Israel and Israelis to want to see an end of horrible bloodshed CAVALIER?! This is life and death stuff. I know that. You know that. But don’t dare assume that I say the things I say without taking very seriously the consequences of saying them.

You see what I object to so strongly in your point of view and others who say similar things (oh so many have made this accusation against me before) is that only YOUR perspective shows proper love and respect for Israel’s interests. No one who isn’t sitting at that cafe about to get blown up can have enough proper perspective and judgment to appreciate the cauldron you live in. Only Israelis have the right to say what Israel should do. I reject this categorically. I am a Jew. I am a member of Klal Yisrael no less than you. Israel is a reflection on me as a Jew. I feel an obligation to make my voice heard on issues I care deeply about as a Jew & this is one of them, whether you welcome it or not.

I’ve lived in Israel two years. I have close family and friends living there. I’ve made numerous trips & staffed UJA missions there. But that’s all besides the point. Most of all, I care. I care in my way and if you don’t like it or don’t think it’s “good enough,” that’s your own look-out. Not mine.

As for my home, garden & children…did you ever stop to think that it is precisely because I cherish these things so much in my own life that I wish them for all Israelis (& Palestinians for that matter)? It is because those things are dear to me that I deplore this tragic bloodshed. If I did not have such things then perhaps I would be more glib in speaking about the I-P conflict. But I assure you I am in deadly earnest & understand what’s at stake for both sides.

Yet you begrudge us the right to defend ourselves.

Wrong again. I don’t begrudge Israel the right to defend itself. I support the IDF’s struggle to protect Israel and Israelis. After all, the Six Day War is what first motivated me to care about Israel. But there are ways in which a nation can defend and hold its head high as a nation and there are ways that lead a nation to become a pariah among nations. What good is a nation’s freedoms and liberties if it has forfeited it’s right to a seat at the table of nations? Lest you find these views so wild-eyed & radical as to be beyond the pale, you should reread your Ahad Ha-Am. He said virtually the same things over 100 years ago.

Funny that you care more about Palestinians who are ACCIDENTALLY killed when Israel is trying to eliminate terrorists than about Israelis who are INTENTIONALLY killed when Palestinian terrorists INTENTIONALLY try to kill us.

CRAP! What do you know about this blog? Have you bothered to do a search here for what I’ve written about Palestinian terror? No, you haven’t. If you had bothered to spend 5 minutes doing that you’d have found multiple references & entire posts deploring it, deploring Palestinian suicide bombing, expressing condolence to Israeli victims. But the difference between you and me is that I honor the Midrash which recounts that God was deeply angry at His angels who rejoiced at the death of the Egyptians pursuing the Children of Israel into the Red Sea. He says to them: “Hush, my children [the Egyptians] are drowning and you rejoice?? You in turn spurn such human feeling for YOUR enemy.

Of course no one WANTS to kill innocent Palestinians.

And you know what’s in the mind of Israeli intelligence officers who execute such attacks how?? When you do intelligence/surveillance work on a potential target you scope out who’s on the premises. You monitor comings and goings. I’m virtually certain they knew they would kill innocents in advance and they decided to do so anyway. They wanted the “kill” more than they cared about the consequences for innocents.

you’d appreciate the efforts the IDF makes to keep us safe.

I do & yet again have said so several times in this blog. Legitimate efforts at self-defense (that is LEGAL under Israeli AND international law) are perfectly valid. You find a bomber wearing a belt, kill them if you have to. You develop evidence that someone is planning an attack you capture them & bring them to justice. But you don’t drop a 2,000 bomb levelling an apartment house filled with 18 innocent Palestinians including women & children in order to kill a single terrorist (which happened), no matter how dastardly. And if you decide to do so anyway, you assure that you will at some point in the future face the bar of justice, either Israeli or international. I know how you right-wingers hate the concept of international justice since you’re sure it’s simply a mouthpiece for anti-Israel propaganda. But I welcome international justice. A Spanish judge first brought Augusto Pinochet to the bar of justice and now Chile itself is trying him. THe same will occur to those Israeli officers (& Palestinian militants) with innocent blood on their hands.

Ever hear the expression “war is hell”- well, it’s true.

Well, in that case let’s assume the Palestinians terrorists say the same thing. They’re engaged in war against Israel. I admit that their targets are generally far more indiscriminate than Israel’s. But why can’t an Islamic Jihad bomber say the same thing to justify his killings of Israeli innocents?

Your coment on Jesus’ General site stated that I am in full support of extrajudicial assasination. I stated that your term is a misnomer. And it is - extrajudicial means “Outside of the authority of a court” or “Outside of the usual judicial proceedings.” In the case of a war or a conflict, combatants do not benefit from judicial review. If you are a combatant intent on causing harm to enemy combatants or civilians, you are a legitimate target. I do not like collateral casualties but terrorists who operate amongst civilians need to accept part of that responsibility as well. I remain confident that Israeli forces do their best to limit collateral dammage when taking out a terrorist. But i digress. I disagree with your terminology. Of course i am vehemently opposed to extrajudicial assassination. I just don’t think that’s what’s going on. And by the way, were it not for the fact that I am a vegetarian, I may have been at the shwarma place today in Tel Aviv when it was attacked by one of Islamic Jihad’s finest. I passed the place twice today.

As far as the Green Line goes - it does not represent the final border between Israel and “Palestine.” Read SC resolution 242. To talk about territorial appetite after the withdrawal from Sinai and Gaza demonstrates a bit of a bias on your part and a refusal to accept reality when it doesn’t correspond to your notion of what evil Zionists are all about. Anyhow I am glad that you are so concerned about Israel’s international image. I am glad that you feel comfortable being cavalier about Defense issues. Clearly, you didn’t almost get blown up by a suicide bomber today. Sitting in the relative comfort of Seattle, puttering around your lovely garden, playing with Jonah and the twins, what would you know about suicide bombers who don’t give a rat’s ass about your age, status or politics. What would you know about the notion that where you go to eat lunch could be a life or death decision? Thankfully, this is not part of your daily routine. Yet you begrudge us the right to defend ourselves. Nice Mr. Silverstein. Very nice.

Funny that you care more about Palestinians who are ACCIDENTALLY killed when Israel is trying to eliminate terrorists than about Israelis who are INTENTIONALLY killed when Palestinian terrorists INTENTIONALLY try to kill us.

Of course no one WANTS to kill innocent Palestinians. But if you had to worry about a suicide bomber every time you went into a mall or pizzeria, you’d appreciate the efforts the IDF makes to keep us safe. Very easy to sit on your butt over there and make judgement calls.

Ever hear the expression “war is hell”- well, it’s true. Sometimes civilians are killed during war. If the Palestinian terrorists were not trying to blow us off the map, then not even one Palestinian civilian would be ACCIDENTALLY killed.

“Doesn’t it get tiresome to lob the same feeble hand grenades time after time & never hit your target?”

Yes, Richard, doesn’t it?????

That’s interesting. We actually share some views in common. My main quarrel with the views you expressed lies in these areas:

I’m in favor of immediate withdrawal from the Territories or at least a negotiated withdrawal on an expedited basis (something like what Peretz has been advocating–or at least was advocating till his handlers seem to have shut him up). I’m favor of withdrawing from all settlements except possibly the Kiryat Arba area. I am unalterably opposed to the Fence. There is absolutely no reason why it couldn’t run precisely on the Green Line. That it doesn’t points to Israel’s unwillingness to limit its territorial appetite by appropriating Palestinian lands where it can. I utterly reject your approach to extrajudicial assassination. It brings Israel into absolute disagrace in the world community. And it often involves taking innocent Palestinian lives as ‘collateral damage.’ Not only that, but eventually (& I welcome that day) Israeli officials who plan & execute such killings will face a court of justice. I hope it will be an Israeli court (which has so far refused to touch the case). If not, an international court will do. I also believe that Palestinian killers will be similarly called to account for their crimes. And as Dylan once sang: “I hope it comes soon.” Your last statement about the election comes across as a cop out. But it’s your election & your vote to do with as you see fit.

Why don’t you reel off your views about various aspects of the I-P conflict & we’ll get a chance to examine the question?

Fine. I’ll humor you. However one’s views on the “I-P conflict” are not the sole determinants of one’s Libralism. Furtheermore, being a Liberal doess not mean that you must imperil your life.

Where do you stand on the Occupation? End it now? End it later?

End it as soon as it’s feasible. I supported the disengagement from Gaza and I believe that any further disengagements need to be done in the context of a negotiated settlement with duly elected Palestinian representatives willing and able to live in peace with Israel. Absent the existence of a negotiating party, Israel would do well to once again unilaterally disengage from whatever areas they can until such time as an effective negotiated settlement can be made.

Where do you stand on the Fence & the notion of ’separation?’

I hate the fence and ideally it would not exist. However, to whatever extent it protects Israeli civilians from snipers and terrorist attacks, I reluctantly support its existence (since I and my loved ones are Israeli civilians). Said support is bolstered by the fact that the fence is subject to judicial review by the Israel Supreme Court whenever a case can be made that its path causes unddue hardship to Palestinians.

Where do you stand on settlements? Keep them? Withdraw from them? All of them? Some of them?

Given that places like Ramot and French Hill can be considered settlements I believe we keep some and withdraw from others.

Where do you stand on extrajudicial assassinations?

I believe we are in a state of war with Palestinian terrorists. Thus the term “extrajudicial assasination” is a bit of a misnomer. In a war, enemy combatants are not tried in a court of law prior to being attacked. Anyone who seeks to perpetrate terrorist acts against innocent civilians knows the rules of the game. If you seek to kill children you can no longer expect the protection of International law. Having said that, I look forward to the day where any kind of violence is a thing of the past.

Where do you stand on the role of Hamas in upcoming Palestinian elections?

I don’t like Hamas. But it’s not my job to tell Palestinians who they can and cannot vote for. As far as I am concerned, other than theological issues, there is little difference between Fatah and Hamas - except for the fact that the PA is a kleptocracy and Hamas seems to be less corrupt.

How do you view the role of Israeli Arabs in Israeli society?
Israeli Arabs are Israeli citizens and ought to be subject to the same rights and obligations as any other citizens. I have no issue with them and believe that we need to do everything possible to make sure that no inequalities exist between any citizens.

Which party do you support in the upcoming Israeli elections?
I dunno really. I’ll let you know once campaigning here goes into full swing and I know more about the platforms.

So what if you never actually used the words “corrupt” or “dishonest.” You are arguing semantics

Interesting how when you debate the meanings of words they’re life and death issues & misuse of one violates your integrity and good name. But when I discuss the same subject it’s merely ’semantics.’ Got news for ya, ’semantics’ as you call them are very important. What does a word mean? What does a person’s statement mean? How do I understand the use and meaning of this word? Pretty significant stuff.

So don’t insult the intelligence of everyone reading your diatribes and backtrack on the allegation. It is for all to see.

You mean: “it is for me to see.” You see, I don’t see it nor would any “reasonable layperson” to use JIBA’s terms.

As for the comment moderation, I still believe you deleted my comment…

God, you do go on so insufferably. Your comment sat in my moderation queue till I approved it for publication. I can’t know what you saw or didn’t see. Call me a liar. I really don’t care.

Furthermore, you have already indicated that you have little in terms of honesty or integrity.

Yesterday, I noted that you & your friends called me dishonest a dozen times. Make that a dozen plus one. Doesn’t it get tiresome to lob the same feeble hand grenades time after time & never hit your target?

You have NOT ONCE addressed the point that no blog has ever been excluded on the basis of political orientation, and that left blogs have been included.

Dave, either you haven’t been reading what I wrote or you conveniently missed it. In both my posts and these comments, I’ve said many more than once that yes, no blog has been excluded (you see Dave, I believe you when you say that–too bad you can’t grant me the same courtesy). But that’s merely because JIBA’s marketing through blogs like yours and J. Post don’t reach the types of Jewish and Israeli blogs, bloggers, and their readers who you might feel compelled to disqualify if they were nominated. As someone commented in a thread at Jewschool–the reach of JIBA & the Post is to the 10% of world Jewry who adhere to its political viewpoint. I haven’t done a poll but I’d say that’s about right. So let’s give you the benefit of the doubt and say that JIBA & the Post reach 20-30% of world Jewry and Jewish bloggers. I’ll go even further, what if you reach 50% (which is a WILD stretch)? What about the rest?

I’m about to publish a post here listing the Jewish/Israeli blogs I think should be nominated in a true & fair competition that wished to be reflective of the broad range of Jewish opinion. You might want to look at them to see just how far afield they are from your own little world. I think some of them wouldn’t make the Dave-cut. Maybe I’m wrong. In which case, I’d give you credit for being far more open-minded than you’ve demonstrated here.

As for “left” blogs being included. Sure, there are roughly two, perhaps three in the two categories I mentioned. Out of how many? I’m guessing the ideological slant is 95% conservative to 5% liberal/left. So you want credit because you’ve “allowed” a few extremists into JIBA? BTW, that’s roughly the same balance between progressive & conservative bloggers in Pajamas Media. You guys really do revel in overwhelming numbers don’t you?

I am glad you admit that you are out to impugn my name and my blog. I will allow readers to decide what kind of person you really are, on the basis of your comments.

I thought better of what I originally wrote about impugning your name. I don’t know what impugning someone’s name means. I don’t mean to impugn your name. I don’t know you other than through what you write. But if that’s what you think–hey, go for it. As for your blog, I did impugn it in my post on Pajamas Media. So I’ll accept that though I really don’t care much about your blog one way or the other. As for JIBA, that’s a different story. You’re expanding your reach beyond your blog & attempting to sell it to the Jewish world under the guise of “we reflect Jewish and Israeli blogs.” I’ll impugn that claim any day as long as JIBA doesn’t change.

This really has been swell, Dave. But now I must go. As you’ve promised earlier you were “done” with me and my blog, I’m going to hold you to it. No more comments on these three JIBA threads. We’ve just about exhausted everything there is to say to each other and are now repeating ourselves ad nauseum. I’m closing up shop as far as you’re concerned. Feel free to comment on future posts if you choose or not. But our discourse here is ended. And if you still have urge to argue with me, please do it at your own blog & not here.

Whatever strain of liberalism it is that you adhere to, it is one I doubt I’d have any interest in. I’m thinking Finkelstein and Chomsky

Again, betraying your ignorance of a political term to which you claim to adhere. Chomsky and Finkelstein “liberal???” Yikes, they’d scream a fit if you tried calling them that in their presence. They detest “liberals.” You can call them a lot of things. But if you care about accuracy (which I have my doubts about), you’d know better.

And no, I don’t adhere to either’s views on the Mideast. Both are non-Zionists (anti-Zionists, whatever term you wish to use). Though I value their analysis of events as shedding light on the inequities of the current system. I don’t embrace it, but I value it. I hope you grasp the distinction. In fact, both of them would prob. deplore my own views on the conflict as being hopelessly favorable to Israel.

I am indeed liberal. You can laugh that off all you like but really, you haven’t demonstrated that i am not liberal.

Why don’t you reel off your views about various aspects of the I-P conflict & we’ll get a chance to examine the question? Where do you stand on the Occupation? End it now? End it later? Where do you stand on the Fence & the notion of ’separation?’ Where do you stand on settlements? Keep them? Withdraw from them? All of them? Some of them? Where do you stand on extrajudicial assassinations? Where do you stand on the role of Hamas in upcoming Palestinian elections? How do you view the role of Israeli Arabs in Israeli society? Which party do you support in the upcoming Israeli elections? That’s a good start & will give us a chance to examine your claim with more specificity.

Bottom line? I am no big fan of sites like LGF.

That is possibly the only statement you’ve ever made here which I agree with (though I’d put my feelings quite a bit stronger on the subject).