42 thoughts on “Pajamas Media’s Tilt Toward Israeli Right – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
task-attention.png
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.
 

  1. Good post, Richard!

    The hasbara crowd has been very adept at getting its point of view out on the web. They all link to each other and they seem to spawn new sites every day, basically echoing the same tired arguments. But their sheer numbers get them high Google ranks etc. Look at the (speaking of the Sifrys) Technorati incoming links of some of these sites.

    What’s sad to me is that we over here on the left can’t seem to mount an equivalent coordinated strategy. We probably will never have the money behind us that Johnson, etc. do. But when people like you try to organize a collaborative project, half the left-leaning israel-plaestine bloggers don’t even answer your emails.

    I don’t mean to sound a sour note – rather, I’m hoping that by making this observation, I’ll provoke some discussion. Should we have our own pajama party? In other words, would there be an interest in a similar sort of collaborative site that’s more progressive? Would other bloggers be willing to participate?

  2. Greetings, brilliant post. I am struck by the fact what we believe, here in America, to be pretty mainstream in Israel, i.e., the thinking of the like of LGF and Ledeen, etc., is actually not so.

    In other words, from reading blogs that have some Israel compnent (LGF, Atlas Shrugs, Protein Wisdom), one would think that all Israelis wish to exterminate Palesitnians or that all Israelis react to criticism of Israel with shrieks of “Anti-Semite” or that all Israelis believe “moderate” Muslims to be a myth.

    The question then is, why haven’t progressive Israelis also made their voice heard. Why is there not a counter to the hate that emanates from these blogs? The progressive blogosphere in the States is light years ahead of the conservatives in terms of readership,

  3. It’s “protein wisdom,” you self-congratulatory windbag.

    And you know nothing about my site. Nothing. So using it as a data point in your ludicrous conspiracy narrative is laughable.

    Incidentally, for someone who so self-righteously expresses a desire for peace and reconciliation to write, without even a hint of irony, “I wonder how [David Corn and Marc Cooper] can stand to be in the company of some of these [pro-Israeli] bloggers” — well, I think that speaks to the black little smudge in your own hyper-judgmental soul, don’t you, Dick?

  4. Indeed, you’re right, Andrew. When you & I first thought of http://israelpalestineforum.com/ I found that most of the progressive Jewish bloggers I approached never replied, which mystified me. But we all know how hard it is to organize among progressives. They’re like a herd of wild elephants w. ea. having a diff. perspective or agenda.

    You’re not striking a sour note. You’re merely speaking the truth. I wish it were diff. but it isn’t.

    As I already wrote you in a private e mail, I’m game for this. Dan Siedarski of jewschool has already thought of the idea. I don’t know whether he wants to do this on his own or with partners. If the latter, I’ve volunteered myself. We’ll see how this goes. Dan already has multiple blogs with advertising so he’s a good one to start this thing.

    I wonder how wide one would cast the net? I’d vote for a wide net. I think Dan’s perhaps thinking of a specifically progressive Jewish blog group. Personally, I’d like to include progressive Palestinian & Arab American bloggers too (or at least add a blog section for them since we don’t hear their voice enough either in the world or on the web). I’d also like to include non-Jewish progressives who blog about Jewish issues or the Mideast. I’m thinking of someone like Juan Cole (just using him as an example). What do you think on this question?

    Another issue here is that someone (or “someones”) has/have to sit & choose which posts are featured at the main site, which requires some extensive reading through multiple blogs to find the best ones. And that could be time-consuming. Not to mention all the technical issues that may be involved in getting this to work. An interesting set of issues/opportunities…

    I think I’ll write a separate post about this to see if I can generate some discussion.

  5. I know I am not the only Jew that looks twice when a non-Jew proclaims himself a great friend of Israel and the Jews. And when these hate filled bloggers post Israeli flags on their blogs, it truly scares me. With friends like that….

  6. I was wondering how long it would take for Charles & his minions to discover this post. The answer…not very long!

    Jeff Goldstein is right about only one thing in his comment. I did misspell his blog name due to writing this post at 2 AM. I guess Jeff never makes any mistakes in his blog.

    As for my being “self-congratulatory” in my post. I think Jeff’s getting carried away with his rhetoric. The post doesn’t congratulate me or anyone else. It casts a critical eye at bloggers like Jeff and, poor boy, he doesn’t like that.

    As for criticizing Corn & Cooper for wishing to affiliate with scoundrels like Michael Ledeen–what person with moral grounding would feel comfortable being associated with someone who states:

    “Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show we mean business”

    …Not to mention all the hate-spewers I’ve featured in this post.

  7. It’s all tied up in one thing: soap. You heard me right, simple hand soap. The insidious conspiracy works like this: As people read what’s on PJM, they invariably end up feeling filthy. They all come away saying they need to take showers. So Simon, Chuckie, Ledeen and his radical right Israeli backers take out enough call options on Unilever and other soap mfgrs to corner the market. Kaching! They mop up on all the sudsing going on.

    Me, I’s stocking up on Zest NOW.

  8. Oh sh*t.

    Well, there is anger and disappointment. A feeling that the world twiddles, while militant radical Islamists dream of death and destruction. And fear that doing nothing will allow greater death. Is the threat real? Is alarm unwarranted? Well, certainly some of the 9/11murderers did appear as blip/s on radar screen/s. And nothing was done.

    The volume of Middle East media, daily pounding intolerance and hatred of Israel and Jews. Could only be denied, by someone either not wanting/caring to see, or unable to see. And in plain view, it grows in isolated segments in America.

    I can very much agree, that the strength and circularity of thought exhibited stateside by the right. Can at times exponentially crowd out all other thought. All other views. Entire. And certainly one could argue, that in and of itself, is a sign of a lack of sophistication.

    I don’t know what people thought and felt during wartime in the 1940’s, here in the U.S., or in Europe. I know today, waiting idly to counter possible threats can have the gravest of consequences. Ones not wanting to be imagined. Heretofore unknown. Does this mean that peace is alien to the right, the word being lifeless, possibly.

    But idealism, may be the greater gamble. Many on the right feel betrayed by the continuing
    inability of those holding guns in Gaza, and the West Bank, to simply lay them down. When they too, like me, once believed in the word peace. Once holding it dear.

    There is a time for war. Arguing about arguing about it? KInd of weird. Yet it seems many do it. Strange that.

    Peace will get here when it gets here, Elmo.

  9. I wonder how wide one would cast the net? I’d vote for a wide net. I think Dan’s perhaps thinking of a specifically progressive Jewish blog group. Personally, I’d like to include progressive Palestinian & Arab American bloggers too (or at least add a blog section for them since we don’t hear their voice enough either in the world or on the web). I’d also like to include non-Jewish progressives who blog about Jewish issues or the Mideast. I’m thinking of someone like Juan Cole (just using him as an example). What do you think on this question?

    Would never, ever work.

    These things inevitably turn into 1950’s style communist party infighting with everyone denouncing everyone else for a range of thoughtcrime.

    I read ALEF mailing list sometimes and I will go away amazed at who fights with who and over what. It’s a forum that inevitably degrades itself away from it’s main purpose and finds within itself a nearly biological reaction where the topic turns away from the subject at hand and into an anti-anti-semite snipe hunt with people looking for ideological cover by pointing at someone else and saying “That’s an anti-semite, not me”.

  10. The volume of Middle East media, daily pounding intolerance and hatred of Israel and Jews. Could only be denied, by someone either not wanting/caring to see, or unable to see. And in plain view, it grows in isolated segments in America.

    You see it because you have sawed your skull open,scooped out your brains and replaced them with “news” ” you (used to) get at LGF that has about as much to do with reality concerning Muslims as Der Angriff did about Jews in the 30’s.

    That’s about the only WWII concern I see going.

    Other than that, the wildly insane idea that doing “something” including killing a (insert really big number) of random Iraqis is not only self-defeating it’s morally repulsive and at the heart of it, terrorism.

  11. Marc Cooper responded to questions about his participation in PJM by saying that he was bringing a left-wing perspective, and with his usual brand of huffiness implied that anyone who raised an eyebrow was being closed-minded. He’s a bud of Roger Simon’s, and loves to bash the left, so his signing on didn’t surprise me. But Corn? ? I really can’t imagine being willing to put one’s name and credibility into something Charles Johnson runs and that includes Michael Ledeen. And whose ideological ‘center’ appears to be Michael Totten! But, hey, let a hundred flowers bloom…

  12. Nice of you to spell it out for me, Silverstein. Shame you can’t even spell the name of my blog

    Also lovely how you corrected your post based on my comments, yet did not inform anyone of the updates. Maybe you are not aware of “blog etiquette”, but that is kind of dishonest.

  13. Ah, some more of the pajamas-party folks comin’ outa the woodwork. Nice to meet you here, Dave.

    Actually, you raised some valid pts. in yr diatribe about my post & I made corrections where they were warranted. I don’t mind if people whose views I oppose actually point out errors whose correction would actually improve my argument. So again I thank you.

    As for spelling your blog name wrong, that’s been corrected even before I read your comment. Comes from writing the post at 2 AM. But you know what’s funny, Dave? The fact that I’m sure you’ve never made any similar mistakes in yr. own blog. How do you & Charles have such typoless blogs? Do you proof read each other’s copy?

    you corrected your post based on my comments, yet did not inform anyone of the updates. Maybe you are not aware of “blog etiquette”, but that is kind of dishonest.

    What’re you smokin’? “Updates?” What updates? “Dishonest?” What’re you on about?

    When you write a blog post attacking something I’ve said here (as you did) do you “update” me? Of course you don’t nor do I expect you to. And if God forbid, you should make a mistake in such a post which I note & which you correct–I wouldn’t expect you to update me nor would I call you dishonest for not doing so.

    Get a life!

  14. Let me spell it out to you since you are obviously having difficulty with the concept. If you correct your original post, you point out the updated parts. You don’t just rewrite the original post. That is what is meant by “updates”. Look at my post for an example.

    As for your new paragraph on me, you are once again far off. Apparently, you have to be a Muslim-hater to support Israel. As for my supposed “utter ignorance” on the palestinians, I challenge you to argue on the facts. I assure you I know a great deal more than you on the topic.

  15. Thanks for the laugh Ed. No, really.

    I remeber a wmv that used to be on the net (if anyone has a current link?). An Israeli woman, talking in the company of her kindergarten age daughter. The child can be seen in the background, fidgeting a little bit during the interview of her mother. The girl covered in those special bandages, used for burn victims. She having been set on fire by an intentional attack on her, via a molotov cocktail.

    Her mother speaks of peace. Peace with the Palestinians. As being the only way. I used to watch that video a lot. It always made me cry. The strength of that woman’s belief in the process.

    Someone please tell
    Abu Sayyaf
    Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade
    Ansar al-Islam
    HAMAS
    Hizballah
    Islamic Jihad
    Army of Mohammed
    Jemaah Islamiya
    al Qaeda

    Enjoy your pre-sweetened powdered drink mix.

  16. I certainly can get behind Elmo’s message in his above comment. It sounds like a moving video.

    However, let’s also remember that the suffering is not one-sided. THere are thousands of Palestinian mothers with children similarly bandaged. Both peoples suffer for the callousness of their respective leaders and those who wield the weapons whether it be Hamas or the IDF.

  17. Apparently, you have to be a Muslim-hater to support Israel.

    Not at all, though many of the PJM bloggers are. I am a supporter of Israel and do not hate Muslims. I can already hear the derision. But the problem with your views regarding Israel is that there is only one level of support that is legitimate: unconditional. Nuance is not allowed. It’s the same really with neocons like Ledeen regarding the war in Iraq and other issues. You’re either a patriot or a traitor. But that’s certainly not my view.

    As for my supposed “utter ignorance” on the palestinians…I assure you I know a great deal more than you on the topic.

    Whoa! You’re seriously out there. But I’ll level a challenge for you. Since I’ve already spent some time reading through your blog & know where you stand on a lot of issues, why don’t you spend say 30-60 minutes reading through my blog posts about the Palestinians. Only then would I even be willing to entertain your contention that you know more about the Palestinians than I.

    Oh & by the way, could tell me which Palestinian newspapers, websites, books (anything really) you read (please omit any websites or books written by Israeli “collaborators” like Walid Shoebat, etc.)? Surely, you must do serious research to make the claim that you know & understand the Palestinians? Oh & neither LGF nor your own site qualify as sources for this purpose.

    In order to “know” the Palestinians you would have to have some minimal level of understanding of them, the way they live, their aspirations, their culture, etc. Only then, are you entitled to make generalizations about them. Your own generalizations betray the utter ignorance I referrred to earlier. And when I spoke above about having some level of understanding of them, I didn’t mean that such study would lead you to empathize or advocate for their position on the IP conflict. You could study them and still be critical (as I am). What you can’t do is make sweeping judgments informed by nothing other than your own prejudices.

    As for updates, so you’d like me to maintain my original mistake and have my correction read something like this:

    “Isreallycool [Update: Israeellycool]”

    If so, you’re really stretching. The styles of bloggers concerning updates are entirely personal & subjective (though I do often add Updates to my posts–just not here). There is no sense of “etiquette” concerning them as you claim. If you’d like to create a new standard you’re free to post it on yr site (maybe you could even make it a rule for all Pajamas sites). Then we’ll see how quickly its embraced by the rest of the blog world.

  18. As for your new paragraph on me, you are once again far off. Apparently, you have to be a Muslim-hater to support Israel. As for my supposed “utter ignorance” on the palestinians, I challenge you to argue on the facts. I assure you I know a great deal more than you on the topic.

    Whatever you know or don’t know, hailing an Israeli collaborator as a “moderate muslim” would be analogous to calling calling say Israel Shamir a “moderate Jew”. If you aren’t drinking the kool-aid it looks batshit crazy because it is no matter if you are an encyclopedia of real, and many most likely fabricated Palestinian crimes.

  19. “But the problem with your views regarding Israel is that there is only one level of support that is legitimate: unconditional”

    Baloney. Let’s add “my views” to the long list of things you are totally ignorant of.

    “But I’ll level a challenge for you. Since I’ve already spent some time reading through your blog & know where you stand on a lot of issues, why don’t you spend say 30-60 minutes reading through my blog posts about the Palestinians.”

    No thanks. I don’t see why I should be punished for rebutting your original post.

    “In order to “know” the Palestinians you would have to have some minimal level of understanding of them, the way they live, their aspirations, their culture, etc. Only then, are you entitled to make generalizations about them.”

    I have lived amongst them and spoken with them. Pray tell, what sweeping judgments have I made? If you have read my blog, as you have claimed, you would have seen that I distinguish between the terrorists and the ordinary civilians. The only generalization I do make is in relation to their status as a clearly distinguishable people, as opposed to the Arabs of neighboring countries.

    “As for updates, so you’d like me to maintain my original mistake and have my correction read something like this:

    “Isreallycool [Update: Israeellycool]”

    If so, you’re really stretching. The styles of bloggers concerning updates are entirely personal & subjective (though I do often add Updates to my posts–just not here). There is no sense of “etiquette” concerning them as you claim”

    I’ll leave aside the fact that your attempted “update” contains another spelling mistake, as well as the fact that you altered much more of your original post. The point is that if someone rebuts a post of yours, correcting the original post directly means that there is no record of the one rebutted. Then there is no scope for discourse. You merely cover up your errors and that’s it. Perhaps you are not so familar with the blogosphere, but this is not how things are done. At least not amongst bloggers unafraid to admit when they have erred.

    Ed Marshall,

    What palestinian crimes have been fabricated? I suppose it is really Jews getting on buses and blowing them up?

  20. No, I really have no doubt that Palestinian Arabs have blown themselves up on Israeli buses.

    I have no idea what you believe or don’t believe but I can take a really, really, good guess that it hews closely to the standard Israeli narrative which is for the most case ridiculous and self-contradictory.

  21. Dave: If conditional support for Israel is legitimate as you seem to say, pls. point me to an instance in which you’re either criticized Israeli policy toward the Palestinians or supported someone who has.

    I have lived amongst them and spoken with them.

    Well, that’s a start. But what does it mean that you’ve lived amongst them [Palestinians]? In their homes? In their villages? Or (as I suspect) in settlements adjacent to Palestinian villages. If the latter, that does not constitute living amongst them. It constitutes living apart fr. them.

    As for having spoken with them: what does that mean? That you spoke with a food vendor while ordering zatar in the Old City? Or that you actually know a Palestinian well enough to converse on a substantive topic or issue?

    If you have read my blog…you would have seen that I distinguish between the terrorists and the ordinary civilians.

    If you truly do distinguish between them, then tell me whether or not you’re opposed to targeted Israeli assassinations that kill innocent civilians such as the killing of Shehadeh, in which 15 civilians and an entire Gaza apartment building were levelled by a huge bomb in order to kill a single militant. If you were in favor of this action then you do not distinguish between civilians and militants. If you are opposed to it, them I’m delighted and grant that the statement quoted above is correct. But I’m fairly certain of your answer & if I’m right then you in fact do not distinguish between the groups.

    No thanks. I don’t see why I should be punished for rebutting your original post.

    I spent several hours reviewing the Pajamas Media sites which I reference in this post in order to understand their perspective on the Middle East conflict. But when I ask you to spend 30 minutes reading my blog posts about the conflict so that you’d get a taste of an alternative view to your own–that is poison to you. There in a nutshell you have the problem with neocon type thinking regarding the IP conflict. Each of the PJM bloggers has a closed view of things in the Mideast. I’ve read none of them who are open to ideas other than the ‘pre-approved’ ones represented by LGF. And that’s fine for all of you if you like this way of approaching reality. But you can’t make a pretense of understanding your enemy if you won’t even engage him or her. I note that you are silent in terms of telling me what Palestinian references or resources you use in your blog in order to understand what they believe. So I assume you don’t use any. This (if true) is further proof of your close-mindedness.

    The point is that if someone rebuts a post of yours, correcting the original post directly means that there is no record of the one rebutted. Then there is no scope for discourse. You merely cover up your errors and that’s it. Perhaps you are not so familar with the blogosphere, but this is not how things are done. At least not amongst bloggers unafraid to admit when they have erred.

    You are entirely wrong in saying “there is no scope for discourse.” We’re having discourse of a sort right now (though I’m not sure either of us in doing much in the way of persuading the other). If what you mean that there is no record of my typos, and you have a need of seeing them in black & white so you can point to them in such a way as to denigrate my argument–well, then you’re right about that.

    But I’d like you to answer me this…do you, every time you correct a typo lv. a record of the original mistake? That seems ludicrous to me. But if that’s what you do–hey, hakol l’fi ha-taam (“each according to their taste” as they say in Hebrew).

    I have been blogging far longer than you & so don’t need any lessons in the ways of the blog world, thank you. And I’d hardly say that correcting spelling errors in the titles of 2 blogs constitutes “covering up error.” You’re really grasping at straws here.

    As for being “unafraid to admit they’ve erred” I corrected typos and said so here. So much for unafraid to admit I’ve erred. And you’ve also not answered my question about whether you’ve ever erred in your own blog. So just who’s the one whose not admitting errors?

    Finally, I have neither made, nor had to correct any substantive errors regarding the content of the PJM blogs featured here. Neither have you nor your fellow pajamas partygoers noted any. I’d welcome you or anyone pointing any out.

  22. What I really want to know is what is the problem with this kind of blog. If you buy into the whole “market place of ideas” there is little to no reason why sites like this shouldn’t be allowed.

    For that matter I haven’t any problem with sites that mimic my beliefs or antagonize them. If you don’t like it you can ignore it, construct your own or spend time there refuting what they say.

    Kind of a silly argument here if you ask me.

  23. Jack: No one’s saying the site shouldn’t be “allowed” (wouldn’t that be presumptous?). As someone said above: “let a hundred [I think Mao’s original said “a thousand] flowers bloom.

    But you miss an essential element of both the Israeli Palestinian conflict and the nature of discussion in the blog world. The guiding principle is not: “you do your thing & I’ll do mine.” A discussion about the ME conflict in the real world or in a blog does not exist in a vacuum. It exists only in relation to other points of view–some agreeing and others disagreeing.

    So this debate that you find “silly” is really essential if we are to work through the issues and ever come to some kind of resolution. What we are doing here is a microcosm of what Israeli & Palestinian leaders will have to do if there is ever to be peace. The fact that there is so much disagreement and messy argument here isn’t surprising considering how much hate there is between Israelis & Palestinians.

  24. The guiding principle is not: “you do your thing & I’ll do mine.” That is a niece concept, but it doesn’t always translate real well. When doing your thing is hurting me I am not real interested in listening to you.

  25. On Dave’s site, he replies that he has no problem with the killing of civilians to bag a terrorist:

    “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. It depends on the situation.”

    And with that, I believe Dave has lost any moral authority he claims to hold. “It is better that ten guilty men go free then to let one innocent man be convicted.” I should hope that the threshold for killing innocents is greater than that for simply jailing innocents.

  26. Thanks for pointing that out, In Vino Veritas. Indeed, Dave has forfeited any moral authority.

    Thanks also for visiting his site to point out this howling statement. I just couldn’t get myself to spend the time going over to his site & reviewing his statements. If he’d been willing to take me up on my suggestion that he spend even 30 mins. here taking a look at how others view the conflict, then I would’ve done so. But he feels that would be poison, then I can’t in good conscience be bothered to spend more time than I already have there.

  27. I love when leftists, jews or otherwise, get offended by my support for Israel and my opposition to khalifah/wahabbist/qadrist/salafist groups. because it’s obvious that if you believe in free markets (and are otherwise “conservative” in economic terms) you’re actually an anti-semite who’s using jews for some other purpose.

    It can’t be that supporting an honorable people who have been harrowed throughout history and are under siege by groups that proclaim that they want to exterminate jews and drive every jew in israel into the sea is an honorable position. That you are doing it as a mitzvah following along the work of your grandfathers. That you are tied into the jewish community through school, work, love, and community.

    No, right wingers are both arab/muslim hates as well as being secret anti-semites. The only true friends of the jewish people are to the left. Despite the actual history of the world, with the wonderful treatment meted out by communist and socialist regimes (Sovs, Arab nations, etc), and by leftist leaders (you know who, and his italian compadre).

    You are also libeling the firm, by maintaining that they have some secret backer and are not what they claim to be. I’d have my lawyers ready. But then given your politics, you shouldn’t have any assets or income to attach.

  28. I find comments like one from the Stealth commenter, ‘Hey’, above to be delicious. First, because they’re over the top, histrionic, melodramatic, chewing the scenery ridiculous. Second, because they show the commenter for the wild-eyed right-winger he is.

    You’ll notice that he or she’s not man (or woman) enough to admit their own identity or provide a link to their blog. What are they afraid of–coodies? Are they afraid I or one of my readers will stalk them? Pls. we’ve all got better things to do. Or are they perhaps just a tad paranoid about their opposition?

    My hunch is that this is Martin Solomon’s work since he waxes so elegantly & disingenuously about his Love For Israel–but again who can tell.

    I love when leftists, jews or otherwise, get offended by my support for Israel…

    No, it’s not yr support for Israel. After all, one can be moderate politically or a progressive Zionist & support Israel. It’s the hateful attitudes you express in conveying that support. Yes, you love Israel in your way. But that “way” leads you to hate myriads throughout the world who you perceive (much of the time incorrectly) to be Jew-haters or anti-Semites. There is a way to love Israel and not hate Arabs or any of the other myriad purported anti-Semites you folks find hiding behind trees & under bushes.

    I’m not saying there are NOT anti-Semites in this world who are worth opposing with all our might. But you, sir, go far beyond the realm of reason in unmasking alleged enemies of Zion.

    …harrowed throughout history…
    …under siege…
    …they want to exterminate jews and drive every jew in israel into the sea…

    Yeah, the Arabs are going to throw the Israelis into the sea, another Holocaust is coming, etc., etc. Don’t you guys ever tire of this out-of date-dreck? Ah, but you need such hysterical paranoia in order to hold to the extreme beliefs you have regarding Israel. If you saw the conflict as one that could be resolved by two semi-rational (at least at times) parties expressing a modest commitment to compromise, then you’d have to become semi-rational yourself & admit that the conflict can actually be solved. And you’re so much more comfortable in your hysteria.

    I don’t agree that those on the Right must perforce hate Arabs though you appear to hate them (you’ll notice the commenter’s identity prevents us all from even being able to view his site to research his views on this subject). I’m certain there are conservatives who respect Islam and its adherents. But clearly none of the PJM partners do as I’ve proven here in this post.

    And I certainly never said that “the only true friends of the Jewish people are on the left.” There are enemies of the Jewish people on the Right & the Left. Just as there are friends of the Jewish people among both political camps.

    Despite the actual history of the world, with the wonderful treatment meted out by communist and socialist regimes…

    Gee, you must’ve slept through your high school or college world history class when they taught about the Nazi slaughter of 6 million Jews. That is unless you’re counting Hitler as a socialist merely because he used the word in the name of his party. No, the Nazis were right-wingers through & through & just as much despots as the Soviets.

    You are also libeling the firm, by maintaining that they have some secret backer and are not what they claim to be. I’d have my lawyers ready.

    This is too rich! Me, I’m shivering in my boots with my trembling hand dialing my lawyer’s phone number! In case you hadn’t noticed dumbo, I reported that Micah Sifry indicated there was such a sugardaddy for the project. I didn’t originate the statement. And Sifry has confirmed privately to me that he has this information on good authority. So I have a good faith belief that the information is true. As for the lawyers, bring ’em on. We’ll have a real donnybrook & my site traffic will skyrocket. Maybe you’ll even break my blog into the pages of the NY Times or Washington Post for the first time? What a nice thought.

  29. So, either Charles Johnson has created a serious business venture which just so happens to have enlisted many of his dagger-wielding cronies in the “Israeli Right or Wrong/anti-Semites Behind Every Tree” blog community; OR he and his sugar daddy have created a venture designed to promote Israel’s far Right and dressed it in a fig leaf of ‘divergent’ blogging opinions (by including Cooper and Corn).

    Then I must be some very odd sort of cover. Mine is a fairly unknown blog in most circles, so I don’t bring any kind of big name balancing credibility. I don’t really discuss Israel unless it has something to do with Central Asia somehow. I certainly wasn’t quizzed on my politics coming into the venture.

    I agree that most of those affiliated share political views. But I think that if some liberal bloggers started such a venture it’d skew heavily left too at the outset. And for the exact same reasons–already existing loose networks coalescing and conservative aversion to having anything to do with “such horrible people.”

    Personally, I took it as an opportunity. The liberals who are going to hate me already do, and the hardcore lefties who like me aren’t going to stop for this. My politics are my own, and being part of PJ won’t get me to start posting on Israel, the Middle East, or even US politics. To chalk this whole venture up to some kind of conspiracy and characterize folks like me as dupes is just silly.

  30. I reviewed all the blogs featured at the PJM site including Nathan’s. I found his to be the only one I could actually take seriously. From my brief review, it appeared that he had a serious scholarly/journalistic intent. Plus, as he says above he doesn’t write about Israel or Palestine. That’s why I chose not to include his blog in my review.

    But I assure Nathan he is the exception to the rule. And I’d also guess that Simon/Johnson et al see Nathan’s participation (like Corn’s and Cooper’s) as a feather in their cap since his blog has 1,000% more authenticity and sourcing than their own.

    Nathan: there already is a liberal-counterpart to PJM called the Huffington Post. I don’t find overly ideological progressive hacks there as one does find [the obverse] at PJM.

    And as Nathan admits, he’s more of a peripheral member of PJM & I’m sure not privy to whatever arrangement financial or otherwise which Roger Simon & Charles Johnson might’ve made with other parties (i.e. a sugardaddy). In order to find out more, we’ll have to wait to see if Micah Sifry’s reveals more about what he knows about PJM’s backing.

  31. From my understanding of my role, PJ is not at all like the Huffington Post. If there are going to people doing exclusive blogging at PJ, I’ve not heard about it (but I’ve not paid much attention). I may be receiving a check from the company, but I still consider myself to be self-employed as it were. They get to use my content and advertise on my site, and I get some green.

    I’d love to see more out of Sifry than “I’m guessing it’s someone who believes x, y, and z backing the operation.” But still, it doesn’t worry me all that much. I can think of plenty of institutions I like though I think their backers are absolute political loons.

    All of the talk of a big, evil conspiracy is just getting a little tired, especially where it’s getting rubbed off on everyone involved. And though you mentioned that some of us are just peachy, that’s the way these posts always come off. (Especially when Michael Totten gets thrown in there. I know the guy. I’m slightly conservative myself, and I’d have to place him noticeably to the left of me.)

  32. The only “out-of-date dreck” I am tired of is you, Silverstein.

    Gee, Dave is back. Too bad all he has to offer is tired one-liners instead of substance & discussion of issues.

    If you’re tired of me buddy no one made you come here. You can go back & play with your pajama partygoers over at yr place & never have to hear a word that dissents from your comfortable self-enclosed world view.

  33. All of the talk of a big, evil conspiracy is just getting a little tired,

    Nathan: I didn’t use the word “conspiracy,” you did–TWICE. Perhaps you’re thinking of someone else who’s raised some objections to PJM. But you should be more accurate before you sling criticisms at me.

    I said that many of the PJM bloggers featured at its site were extreme right wing pro-Israel types. I quoted Sifry who said that he has a source claiming there is a sugar daddy who deliberately wants pro-Israel bloggers included as part of the project. That’s it.

    That being said, I certainly think that Johnson has an agenda & wants to advance his strident right-wing anti-Muslim/pro-Israel views & he sees this project as an excellent way of doing so. It may be that there will be a few bloggers at the site worth reading. I’m not saying the site will be all-Sharon all-the-time. But it will have a distinct tilt in that direction deriving fr. those blogs I feature above.

    If you say Totten is to your left then you are considerably more than “slightly” conservative (though your conservatism is much more calibrated than some of yr other partners). The posts of his I’ve read are apologias for Bush Mideast policy (& I’m not talking about his Israeli-Palestinian policy which at times is cogent & creditable).

    I’m certain that you know of Michael Ledeen & what scum he is. Can you honestly say you feel good about sharing a site with him?

  34. Nathan: I didn’t use the word “conspiracy,” you did–TWICE. Perhaps you’re thinking of someone else who’s raised some objections to PJM. But you should be more accurate before you sling criticisms at me.

    Richard, we’re not dancing, so there’s no need to prance around this way. You strike me as a sharp guy, so I can only assume you are trying to get me to back off in the face of some sleight of tongue. I’m simply being concise in distililng down a series of your charges. You suggest that someone of a particular ideological bent is funding the site presumably to get out a particular message. You further argue that I and a handful of others on the site were brought on as cover–that we are dupes. Forgive me for boiling this down to you thinking there’s a secret plot involving a few individuals in the offing.

    I’m certain that you know of Michael Ledeen & what scum he is. Can you honestly say you feel good about sharing a site with him?

    As comfortable as I am sharing a country with being on the same radio show as Kos tonight. Or as comfortable as I am sharing the country with folks I disagree with. What I don’t go in for is treating people like lepers for their political beliefs. Ledeen, like many ideologues, is not my cup of tea. But I generally don’t call people I disagree with “scum.”

    If you say Totten is to your left then you are considerably more than “slightly” conservative (though your conservatism is much more calibrated than some of yr other partners). The posts of his I’ve read are apologias for Bush Mideast policy (& I’m not talking about his Israeli-Palestinian policy which at times is cogent & creditable).

    Like I said, I know him. When I say he’s to the left of me, I’m talking about the totality of our political opinions. You apparently only take into consideration one’s foreign policy views. I think you’re misreading Michael, but I’m not going to convince you otherwise.

    Personally, I think Roger and Charles are looking to make some money. As I’ve already pointed out, this isn’t like HuffPo where we will be logging in and posting exclusive content (at least I’ve heard nothing of the sort). The content will reflect the members’ content. If more people came in from the left, the content would reflect that.

  35. for my being “self-congratulatory” in my post. I think Jeff’s getting carried away with his rhetoric. The post doesn’t congratulate me or anyone else. It casts a critical eye at bloggers like Jeff and, poor boy, he doesn’t like that.

    Actually, I could care less that you cast a “critical eye.” But that’s not what you’ve done. Instead, you’ve selectively quoted. Sure, I’m pro-Israel. But I spend very little time commenting on it. Instead, I spend a lot of time doing satire or linguistic / rhetorical analyses.

    I suspect you looked at my name and figured I fit your sad little narrative.

    Listen — you want to be critical of me, fine, do it. But do it honestly. Instead we get an ill-conceived post that likely won’t convince anyone other than those who are predisposed to thinking the world is made up of Jewish conspiracies — an who like to cite Jews saying such so that they can claim they’re not anti-semitic.

    You’re a useful idiot, Dick. That’s it. And I just ask that if you want to engage me on on a particular issue, do so, rather than try to use me a piece of some grander conspiracy of which I am not a part.

  36. Nathan:

    Richard, we’re not dancing, so there’s no need to prance around this way.

    Geez, I hope I don’t “prance” when I “dance,” not a pretty sight.

    You appear to have an academic background in central Asian studies while my own is in literature. So you’ll have to forgive my focus on language, words & their meaning. It’s important to me. I make no claim that I’m the most precise, thorough or brilliant thinker in the world. But those things [language, etc.] are important to me & you’ll have to bear with that.

    I can only assume you are trying to get me to back off in the face of some sleight of tongue.

    I don’t follow. You used the term “conspiracy” & made it appear as if I was accusing PJM of being one. I pointed out that I never used the term & then clarified what I did mean. I have no idea what you mean by “sleight of tongue.” If you mean that I want you to back off using the term “conspiracy,” I merely ask that you be more precise when you attribute ideas or attitudes to me. As far as I’m concerned, using the term “conspiracy” is not precise or “concise.” It may characterize your true feelings & that’s fine. But look for some other PJM critics who’s actually called it a conspiracy & vent your feelings at them or else vent your feelings at me based on what I actually said.

    You further argue that I and a handful of others on the site were brought on as cover–that we are dupes

    Again, I did not say you were a dupe. I said that Charles Johnson and his cronies were taking advantage of the participation of more serious bloggers as a sort of window dressing which allows them to say (as they have disingenuously) that their enterprise has no particular ideological slant and contains divergent views.

    Forgive me for boiling this down to you thinking there’s a secret plot involving a few individuals in the offing.

    Now you’re being too cute by half. I said nothing about a “secret plot.” Now, you’re implying that you were not off base in “boiling down” my thinking to that phrase. Again, if I want to “boil down” my thinking I’ll do it myself. I’d ask you not to do it for me especially if you distort my intent.

    You clearly know very little about Michael Ledeen–who he is and what he’s done. Either that, or you don’t care about his egregious deeds. Just a smattering of his statements are available above. Do you mean to tell me you’d say there’s no difference between Kos & Ledeen? As far as I know, Kos has not advocated “beating up” on countries smaller than our own just for the hell of it (seems we were doing a bit of that at Abu Graibh now weren’t we?). Kos hasn’t been in the middle of negotiating sleazy international weapons deals for rogue nations. Kos hasn’t been an ardent advocate for one of Iraq’s sleaziest–Ahmad Chalabi. I could go on.

    “Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show we mean business”

    You probably chalk this brutish talk up to a guy who’s being overly dramatic. If this and Ledeen’s other depredations don’t disturb you, then I hate to say it but it sounds to me as if you have very little moral perspective on the suffering that ideas like this cause to real people. In that case, the two of you will be very happy together.

    I generally don’t call people I disagree with “scum” either. But in this case, it’s a description Ledeen so richly deserves.

    The content will reflect the members’ content. If more people came in from the left, the content would reflect that.

    Have you asked Charles & Roger who they’ve invited “from the left” besides Cooper & Corn? The only way the content can become diverse politically is if the founders decide they want it to be. I see no evidence that they’ve made a serious attempt to have any balance. They don’t have to–that’s their perjogative. But if their choice is to have the balance they currently have, then they can’t credibly argue that they have no ideological slant.

  37. Jeff: I’m not sure what Jeff’s accusing me of. I went to his blog & reviewed a number of posts he’s written about Israel and found the passage I quoted. Did I misquote you Jeff? Is there some context I was missing? If so, go ahead & tell us. Instead all you can muster is: “Actually, I could care less that you cast a “critical eye.” But that’s not what you’ve done. Instead, you’ve selectively quoted.”

    I didn’t “selectively quote” you. I quoted an entire passage leaving nothing out. If you’re all lathered up about it maybe you should’ve thought first before you wrote such a gross and offensive “humorous” take on “exploding Arabs.”

    I spend a lot of time doing satire…

    Yes, the passage I quoted from you is “satire” all right. Satire that is patently offensive to the majority of human beings (though not to you because when you were born God must’ve forgotten to hand out seychel (“judgment”).

    Oh & I guess calling me “Dick” is meant to be satire too when that is not the name I go by? Funny, funny. If I called you “Jeffie” or “Goldy” what would that prove other than that I hadn’t gotten emotionally much beyond the 6th grade and that I was an ass. Since you have attempted such assinine “satire”, what does that make you?

  38. Well, two of us distill your broader comments to posit there being a conspiracy here. I appreciate your desire for precision in language. I share it. I don’t think that my characterization of… well, your entire post… to mean that there’s a conspiracy. Perhaps you can just chalk it up to an unfortunate consequence of our wicked conservatism, but Jeff and I both seem to agree that you are positing a conspiracy though avoiding the word. (And I’m sorry, but I really do take you to be charging that those of us not interested in Roger’s and Charles’s purported political objective in the business to mean that we have been duped. After all, to be quite clear, I was not “invited” in any sense I understand the meaning of the word.)

    As for Kos and Ledeen, I take them both to be ideologues who, on occasion say reprehensible things. We could go off into a whole discussion of my views on foreign policy (boils down to morals being something we should shoot for while realizing moral perfection is a childish myth), but why go off on a tangent. But don’t underestimate the impact of Kos’s ideas on people. Your post, while I would never dare to trace it back to Kos himself, is part and parcel of a disturbing attitude in modern American liberalism as practiced by Kos–a gleeful embrace and championing of political apartheid. But, my point is that, as distasteful as I find Kos, I don’t find my having been on the same radio show as him this evening to reflect on me personally any more than Ledeen and I receiving a check from the same company does.

    As far as membership goes, from what I understand as someone whose contact with PJM has been more or less reading emailed updates and sending in forms as requested, the desire right now is to prove viability. As I mentioned before, no one sent me a personal invite and the initial members are to a great extent self-selected. As a somewhat conservative person (or someone who cares about making money) myself, I wouldn’t hold up the launch of my business until I achieved what those who despise my beliefs to be proper ideological balance.

  39. Hey, I care about making money too (though I don’t make much). Does that make me “conservative?”

    Kos and the big bloggers are making money as well & they’re not “conservative.” I’d be a tad more careful with the labels…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *