Israel, Palestine & Anti-Semitism at MLW

Truly ironic... (9.36 / 11)

... considering how much closer to "their side" I am, politically, historically, when it comes to this issue, that I am feeling far more fucking besieged and pissed off by a few people who claim to care about the Palestinians than I am by anyone who calls himself or herself a Zionist.

For the record, again: I'm against this siege by Israel. I'm against the bombings, I'm against the ground war, and I do not agree with those (sorry, Karmafish) who believe that it would simply stop if "Hamas" would stop firing rockets into Israel.

Hell, is Hamas a quantifiable entity? Christ, I think they're far more like al Qaeda than this so-called "legitimate, democratically elected government" everyone keeps calling them on the one hand, while bombing the shit out of them and justifying it by calling them terrorists -- which is what they really are... And doesn't THAT confuse anyone? Is Hamas a legitimate government... or is it a terrorist organisation?

Anyway. I call bullshit. I think it's just fucking bullshit. Israel is wrong, wrong, wrong, on SO many levels.

That's what I think. What I DON'T think is that since the state of Israel and its political leaders are wrong and are perpetrating great evil, their civilians should therefore be bombed -- and all Jews therefore share in the guilt and should be shouted at and despised and have their heritage and history maligned. And that's what I've just witnessed in a discussion on my blog.

And THAT is fucking idiocy.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:02:12 PM CST

You're shining again, Maryscott. (7.50 / 2)

"I tire of this banal chat...now is the time on Sprockets when we dance." ~Dieter/SNL

---

by: Cheryl @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:12:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Well, ya know, MSOC, (6.00 / 1)

at this point you may very well be right.

Israel told Hamas that if they did not control the firing on Israel then Israel would have to respond.

Hamas didn't and so Israel did.

It was inevitable.  Hamas wanted a war and they got one.

But if Hamas were now to cease firing into Israel it might very well be too late.  Israel is deeply engaged militarily in the strip and the Israeli government seems quite committed to achieving their objectives of undermining the ability of Hamas to continue such hostilities.

So, yes, it is possible at this point that even if they did stop rocketing that Israel might continue the campaign.

I would hope not, but it's certainly possible.

Lord of the Karmafishes

---

by: Karmafish @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:15:11 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You can almost call it blowback (0.00 / 0)

That wonderful term that has been used to explain why we were attacked on 9/11.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:05:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

As bread, water and heat ran out.... (9.00 / 1)

They can't attack the message so they attack the person. Pathetic.

---

by: mattes @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:22:35 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Hamas vs. Hamas (4.00 / 1)

Often overlooked is the fact that Hamas seems to be divided between its ultra-hardline wing, led by Khaled Meshal in Syria, and its very-hardline wing, led by Ismail Haniyeh in Gaza.  It's generally thought that Haniyeh is somewhat more pragmatic, given that he's right there in Gaza and has to deal with the consequences of his actions every day.  

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:41:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

This is like how Hezbollah is allegedly divided (0.00 / 0)

it's a ficticious divide at the end of the day,

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:06:31 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Maybe so (0.00 / 0)

but it makes Hamas very hard to deal with, because anytime there's a hint of flexibility from Haniyeh, Meshal will contradict him and deny that Hamas is willing to compromise.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:14:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Which is why pretending there's a separation (0.00 / 0)

is a fool's errand.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:19:54 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It's a fundamental problem for negotiations (4.00 / 2)

Rule Number 1 of Negotiating is that you always make sure you are negotiating with the decision maker.  You never want the other side to be able to take a second bite of the apple.  That's true in business and it's true in politics.

So with whom is Israel supposed to negotiate?  Abbas speaks for Fatah and the PA, but Hamas refuses to be bound by any promises Abbas makes.  It wouldn't matter if Hamas was a small faction with no real power, but that isn't the case.  

You have 3 different people that purport to speak for the Palestinians -- Abbas, Haniyeh, and Meshal.  That's as fundamental a roadblock to a peace agreement as anything, because even if Israel's leadership wanted to work out a comprehensive peace deal, the Palestinians aren't ready to speak with a unified voice.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:31:59 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Completely agree (0.00 / 0)

the problem lies with giving Hamas credence when they truly do not deserve it.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:35:47 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It's not quite that (0.00 / 0)

Whether we like it or not, Hamas is the chosen leader of a substantial portion of the Palestinian community.  Hamas does speak for the Palestinians...just not all of them (or rather, enough of a majority to make it the party to deal with).  The issue of whether they are a terrorist group is no different now than it was in the 1980s and 1990s when Israel was dealing with the PLO.  Regardless of what's going on on the Israeli side, the Palestinians don't yet have their act together to be able to enter into meaningful negotiations.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 17:32:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

better term.... (6.67 / 3)

may be "MLW émigrés."

"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." -Voltaire
Ah, my dear Voltaire, doubt is an acquired and cultivated taste, like Laphroaig Whisky or fine truffles, and quite as exquisite.

---

by: Madscientist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 16:46:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Perhaps (7.33 / 3)

But exiles is easier to type than some fancified Frenchy word with dueling accents.

Whassamatta with you?  American isn't a good enough language for you?  I read my Bible, and if English was good enough for Jesus to put his words in all them red letters, it's good enough for me.

Sheesh.

Insert witty quote here.

---

by: puzzled @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 19:55:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Your right (7.33 / 3)

to say I'm wrong is not in question, but i'd say, you're right.

Verily, I say unto you, I should remember that the use of foreign words and phrases in the English language is strictly passé.

"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." -Voltaire
Ah, my dear Voltaire, doubt is an acquired and cultivated taste, like Laphroaig Whisky or fine truffles, and quite as exquisite.

---

by: Madscientist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 20:15:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Indeed (8.00 / 3)

Such words, particularly those of French origin, are outré in English communication, and using them would be a real faux pas.

Insert witty quote here.

---

by: puzzled @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 21:21:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Answer to mystery (6.67 / 3)

Is Hamas a legitimate government... or is it a terrorist organisation?

Both.  It's two, two, two mints in one.

Just more evidence that Hamas has Retsyn, and it is determined to use it!

"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." -Voltaire
Ah, my dear Voltaire, doubt is an acquired and cultivated taste, like Laphroaig Whisky or fine truffles, and quite as exquisite.

---

by: Madscientist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 17:42:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It appears (6.00 / 2)

that even thought the Arab world is aware of the Gaza situation, as evidence by these and other protests, it appears that something more important than the plight of the Palestinians has arisen in the Gulf.

People may be dying, but  business is business.

I, for one, was heartened to see at least one pro-Palestinian poster, several days after originally posting his/her essay, admit in comments that both Israel and Hamas are to blame.  That is a big step, which has already been taken by many on the other side of this argument.  Both Paul and Karmafish acknowledge that Israel has handled this and many other situations badly, and certainly shares in the blame for the current state of affairs.  

It appears even the Great Satan is pressing Israel for a cease fire.

But, to prove an earlier point by a poster here, it appears that this invasion is exactly what Hamas wanted after all.....

In Damascus, Syria, a senior Hamas official rejected the U.S. proposal.

The deputy head of Hamas' politburo in Syria, Moussa Abu Marzouk, told The Associated Press the U.S. plan seeks to impose "a de facto situation" and encourages Israel to continue its attacks on Gaza.

This all may fall under the category of being careful for what you wish (proper grammar makes hash of aphorisms).

Sorry for the trouble, Blogmistress.


DA is The Most Interesting Man in the World. - Karmafish

---

by: devilishadvocate @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:20:22 PM CST

From what I read, (4.50 / 2)

I don't see a what I would call antisemitism.  However, it does seem that any critizism of Israel is called anti-semitic but the staunch defenders of Israel.  Therefore, discussion is just about impossible under circumstances that tolerate little criticism of the policies and behavior toward Palestineans.    

Vigilance is the price of freedom. That means us citizens, and not our professional military or its industrial complex bleeding us for every dollar they waste protecting corporate hegemony. That is part of what weakens citizens and puts us in danger.

---

by: Silverbird @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:21:31 PM CST

If you don't consider... (6.67 / 3)

...this...

or this...

anti-Semitism in its most pure, unvarnished, ugly form, then I don't know what you would consider it to be.  Anti-Semitism doesn't always have to be swastikas spray painted on synagoguges.

And you're being disingenous in the extreme with your statement that all criticism of Israel is labeled as anti-Semitic.

The two people who have mainly been on the sharp edge of the one side of the argument--Paul and Karma--have repeatedly and endlessly gone out of their way to condemn Israel's handling of the situation and nothing that it plays into Hamas' hands.  

What do they get in response?

Shit like this:

"Just think of how many thousands of people are finding out the truth about the Zionist Enterprise."

and

"Israel is a rogue nation which does nothing but lies, and is run by systemic terrorists. And the American public has been blackmailed, bribed and brainwashed into supporting genocide.

Even Roseanne Barr has come out and called Israel a Nazi Nation."

The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present...As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country.

---

by: Raybin @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:34:03 PM CST

[ Parent ]

What about this? (6.00 / 1)

http://www.palestinecenter.org...

And  in case no one remembers, the Palestinians have said they could live peacefully with Israel if it would pull back to the original territory of the Partition.  Why don't we hear Israel commenting on this - maybe because it reminds us their claims of victimhood are not a plausible as they wish us to think.  They could have that peace if they actually want peace.

I am not going to argue with you.  Israel gets a pass most of the time.

Vigilance is the price of freedom. That means us citizens, and not our professional military or its industrial complex bleeding us for every dollar they waste protecting corporate hegemony. That is part of what weakens citizens and puts us in danger.

---

by: Silverbird @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:44:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

And I read your cites. (0.00 / 0)

Both are aangry, strong statements.  I don't think either one are anti-senmetic.  That is exactly what I am speaking of.  ANY critizism of Israel is views by the pro-Israel as anti-semetic.  
I am not anti-semetic.  I just don't like what Israel is doing to a weaker occupied people.  There is a difference even if you cannot grasp it.  

Vigilance is the price of freedom. That means us citizens, and not our professional military or its industrial complex bleeding us for every dollar they waste protecting corporate hegemony. That is part of what weakens citizens and puts us in danger.

---

by: Silverbird @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:49:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

STOP THAT. (6.60 / 5)

EVERYBODY grasps the difference. Hell, it's been dragged to death a million times here at this very blog. I made a DISTINCT POINT of saying I am DISGUSTED by Israel's actions.

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST. There IS a difference between criticising ISRael -- strongly, not strongly, whatever -- and using CRITICISM OF ISRAEL as a cover for JEWHATE. Mattes and Proximity have a longstanding HISTORY at this site and elsewhere of  being absolutely BALD in their hatred of Jews. They will pay lip service to the fact that they don't hate ALL Jews... just, you know, the ones who SELF-IDENTIFY AS JEWS.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:52:18 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Maybe you need to read some history too. (11.00 / 1)

I remember that you first came back at a post I made about the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty.  You denied that Israel ever attacked a US ship, until another poster backed up my information.  While some criticism of Israel COULD be anti-semetic, treating every criticism as if it were stops the conversation.  So effectively there is no way to discuss the issue with the people defending Israel, because we are all anti-semites.  It is ridiculous.

Vigilance is the price of freedom. That means us citizens, and not our professional military or its industrial complex bleeding us for every dollar they waste protecting corporate hegemony. That is part of what weakens citizens and puts us in danger.

---

by: Silverbird @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:02:03 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Silverbird, I never denied Israel attacking any ship... (0.00 / 0)

Because until about a month ago I'd never even HEARD of the USS Liberty.

I think you may be mixing me up with someone else.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:11:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Nope, I remember. (0.00 / 0)

You had not heard of the USS Liberty then either.  It was practically the first post I ever contributed here.

Vigilance is the price of freedom. That means us citizens, and not our professional military or its industrial complex bleeding us for every dollar they waste protecting corporate hegemony. That is part of what weakens citizens and puts us in danger.

---

by: Silverbird @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:13:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Was I aware then that it was... (0.00 / 0)

pretty clear from surviving American military personnel's reports that Israel attacked?

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:26:55 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The case of the USS Liberty (6.00 / 1)

is one of those that I really do not know what to make of.

Israel always claimed that it, somehow, was an accident.

Those who wish to demonize Israel use it as an example of Israeli aggression against the US.

But what I can't figure out is that if it was not an accident, what would motivate Israel to attack the US?

I mean, Israel's relationship with the US is obviously very important to it, so why would Israel intentionally hit a US warship?

Makes no sense.




Lord of the Karmafishes

---

by: Karmafish @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:33:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You know what I make of it? (0.00 / 0)

It's something that matters to two groups of people now:

1) Israel/Jew haters; and
2) The people who were on the ship.

The latter there's nothing you can really argue with. If I was on the ship when it happenned, I wouldn't believe it was accident either.

The problem is group 2 has been used by group 1 as a tool to damn Israel for so long that it's completely destroyed any reasonable discussion of it.

The reality is, regardless of what happenned, Israel paid reparations to those involved and the US government ruled it an accident.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:38:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Dipping toe in with info (8.00 / 4)

for those interested.

The Liberty was attacked by Israeli planes and torpedo boates during the '67 war.  A dozen different congressional and military investigations all found it to be a accidental attack, a "fog of war" incident.  However, many crewmen of the Liberty continue to believe it was an intentional attack.

The issue should have been put to rest fairly recently when Capt. Jay Cristol, a US Naval aviator and a federal judge, as part of his doctoral dissertation, litigated a FOIA case against the US, ultimately resulting in the release of audio tapes from US Hawkeye airplanes on the day of the attack.  They did not capture the attack itself, but did capture audio of Israeli helicopter to ground radio.  

In the first transcript they clearly think it is an Egyptian ship.

In the second transcript questions are raised about nationality, and that is when the US flag is first identified.  Note, these are all after the attack.

In the third transcript they are still trying to verify nationality of the ship.

The USS Liberty will always be a tragedy. Unfortunately, it will also always be a prop in the "Israel is evil" conspiracy theorists quiver, even when the evidence clearly shows otherwise.

I hope this was helpful. Again, I am mostly staying away, and certainly keeping out of the I/P Gaza today conversation, for my participation would act to inflame, not inform.

---

by: Zok Tok @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 16:20:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Zok (4.00 / 2)

I appreciate your restraint in this discussion, and please take this in the spirit in which it was intended.

I have seen your defense of Israel's actions in the Liberty incident before, but have never commented, because I avoid I/P like I avoid touching high-voltage wires,
however, I have a very personal perspective on the incident.  My brother was on the ship.

Whether or not it was accidental, I can't say, but there is no way anyone will ever convince him it was anything but deliberate.

Peace to you.

Insert witty quote here.

---

by: puzzled @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 21:27:38 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Very interesting (6.00 / 1)

and my compassion goes out to your brother, and anybody else in such a situation.  I also don't expect the sailors on the ship to ever have any other opinion, being as close to it as they were, and it being as personal as it was.

---

by: Zok Tok @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 21:55:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Found that exchange, Silverbird... (6.00 / 1)

USS Liberty exchange between Silverbird, MSOC and American Dreamer

Yep -- had never heard of it at that point, and promptly forgot about it till about a month ago.

As the exchange plainly shows, I thought you were out of your mind for a minute there, until AD explained the situation. I thought you were referring to the USS Cole. Which freaked me out, because up till then I'd thought you were a normal person...

As you see.

I must say, however, that it doesn't strike me as an "example of Israeli aggression against the United States" so much as an example of someone's incompetence. Someone thought they were attacking someone, evidently... but the U.S.? It makes absolutely no SENSE. Plainly put, with respect to the USS Liberty, I do not believe that Israel was "attacking the U.S." I think Israel attacked, alright... but I don't think they were attacking the U.S. I think the whole thing is a bunch of incompetence and lies to cover up incompetence.

In other words, standard governmental operating procedure.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:44:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

after Isreali jets disabled the Liberty ... (0.00 / 1)

in an attack which carefully first targeted and precisely destroyed the ship's communications equipment, rendering it nearly incapable of summoning help, it also sent high-speed zodiac launches in which commandos armed with AK-47s meticulously shot and killed the Libery's survivors who were floundering in the water.  That act is what sealed any doubt in the minds of the remaining crew.  Shooting and killing in cold blood survivors of a disabled and sinking ship--even an enemy ship---consitutes a war crime and a crime of naval warfare.  But then, when has Israel ever given a FUCKING GODDAMN about war crimes unless Jews were their victims rather than their perpetrators?

 It's a question.  Got an answer?

 The Israelis, using jets from which they'd carefully removed their Air Force markings, repeatedly flew by the Liberty at low altitude, photographing the vessel.  By the way, as you aren't aware, the Liberty was a spy ship, on a communications monitoring mission.  As such, it was not a combat vessel, had nothing more than a single small-bore deck gun for armament and the rifles and side-arms which the crew only broke out once the commander understood that an attack was immanent and sounded the ship's claxon to send the crew to battle stations.

  The attack resembled a heavily-armed professional Mafia hit squad attacking a lone and unprotected baby carriage.

 They murdered sailors in cold blood as they floundered in the water, meticulously picking them out in their automatic weapon's gun-sights.

  This is just another bit of the history of which you are blissfully ignorant, Maryscott.

 Oh, yeah, while the massacre was going on, thousands of feet above, the U.S. Air Force had a spy plane on a separate mission in the vicinity.  Without really appreciating what was happening below it, that spy plane's radio monitoring crew actually interceped and recorded on tape both the Liberty's distress calls AND the radio traffic between the Israeli pilots as they straffed and blasted the Liberty.

 The only thing that caused the Israelis to break off their attack before every last sailor and officer on board or in the water had been surely murdered was the Israelis (mistaken) belief that a U.S. warship, having heard the Liberty's distress calls, decided to send out air support---which was expected to arrive within some minutes.

 In the U.S., ingorance of historical fact is King, the norm; people are actually proud of how fucking little they know.

 So, uh, go figure.

Read - think - speak - doubt; create - explore - give - love.

---

by: proximity1 @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 09:13:03 AM CST

[ Parent ]

A Telling Quote (0.00 / 0)

But then, when has Israel ever given a FUCKING GODDAMN about war crimes unless Jews were their victims rather than their perpetrators?

Well, Darfur.  And Rwanda.  And various other tragedies that Israel has stood up against war crimes in.

Your swaztika is showing.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 09:21:59 AM CST

[ Parent ]

How many Israeli troops are in Darfur? How many in Rwanda? or, ... (0.00 / 0)

for that matter, in the DRC---Democratic Republic of Congo, helping sort out that mess?  Hmmm?

 Now, how many Israelis in Israel's land, sea and air forces are engaged in kicking the living shit out of the civil population of Gaza?

 Hmmm?

 If you weren't morally dead, and if your eyes were open, you'd never have posed such a fucking stupid (and disingenuous) reply.

Read - think - speak - doubt; create - explore - give - love.

---

by: proximity1 @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 09:49:20 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Prox (4.50 / 2)

But then, when has Israel ever given a FUCKING GODDAMN about war crimes unless Jews were their victims rather than their perpetrators?

Actually Prox, he answered your heated and loaded question precisely.  One wonders why you haven't been as vocal over the years about these other war crimes.  Is it possibly because Jews weren't involved?

He's right, your swastika is showing.  Your question asserts that unless Jews are the victims of a war crime, they are the perpetrators.  That says a lot about your point of view.

DA is The Most Interesting Man in the World. - Karmafish

---

by: devilishadvocate @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 09:55:11 AM CST

[ Parent ]

and your views are lamantable and misshapen, about me and other things... (3.00 / 3)

"Your question asserts that unless Jews are the victims of a war crime, they are the perpetrators.  That says a lot about your point of view."

 That's simple nonsense.  My "question" "asserts" nothing of the kind.

 Aren't you able to read better than that!!!???

 My point is quite different from what you've stated.

 Jews aren't, (of course!) either "the victims of a war crime, [i.e. or, if not] they are the perpetrators".

  I'm surprised you's ascribe such bullshit to me.  

 What I argued (and argue) is that where "they" (where "they", for practical purposes, often actually means 'any' Jew, ever, living or dead, in the entire history of human-kind)  aren't the victims, they (that is, by a very large preponderance if not an outright overwhelming majority, or, in other words, "a great many of them") simply are either far, far less interested, concerned, et cetera, or they're practically not concerned at all.  This, by the way, is not, as you'd have already grasped if you were paying attention, something I ascribe to "Jews" in particular.  It's the common trait of most of the crooked timber of humanity.  But, I ask, "So the fuck what?"  It denotes a gross moral failing and one to which I'll no longer  pass over and make nicey face.

 My swastika?

  You're deluded.  Really, deluded.  Cast the beam out of your own eye, mister.  The nearest thing currently to swastika-wearing Nazis today are "serving" in the IDF in and around Gaza, the new Warsaw Ghetto.

  And your moral blindness is truly damanable and disgusting.  There's no such thing as an immortal soul but mortal souls are real and yours is in peril.  If I were you, I worry about that rather than seeing "swastikas" on me.


Read - think - speak - doubt; create - explore - give - love.

---

by: proximity1 @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 10:09:17 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I suggest you look into the groups (0.00 / 0)

that spearhead the Save Darfur movement.

In fact, I suggest you look at who leads most TRUE social justice movements.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 10:17:10 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Prox (0.00 / 1)

your excellent parsing of your question seems to leave out a phrase

rather than their perpetrators?

So, what is your excuse for that?

IMNSHO, it is your anti-Semitism that forced you to include that little jab.

Of course, this is just armchair psychology.  But your question would have been just fine without that last little bit.

DA is The Most Interesting Man in the World. - Karmafish

---

by: devilishadvocate @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 10:22:07 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I cited you _verbatim_!!!! (6.00 / 1)

MY citation of you--- VERBATIM!!!

"Your question asserts that unless Jews are the victims of a war crime, they are the perpetrators.  That says a lot about your point of view."

That's simple nonsense.  My "question" "asserts" nothing of the kind.

 What exactly is "left out" here?

 "rather than their perpetrators" [from an above comment of mine] refers to actual literal case-book examples of war crimes by Israel.  Human Rights Watch, as well as other reputable international rights organizations--including the U.N.'s own Commissions have documented Israeli war crimes.

 They are numerous and revolve around the current goings on in Gaza among other things.

 So, I don't understand what the fuck you think you're talking about.  Israel's practices of war crimes are not in doubt.  They're documented facts.  Is this news to you?

Read - think - speak - doubt; create - explore - give - love.

---

by: proximity1 @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 10:38:33 AM CST

[ Parent ]

The same as there are European and Arab (0.00 / 0)

troops in Gaza-zero.

Not really sure how that proves Israel doesn't care about anyone but Jews.

Maybe if you pulled off your Jew hating glasses for a moment, you would see the world as it is.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 10:08:37 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Maryscott doesn't read history... (0.00 / 1)

unless it's about film, Tee-Vee, movies, film stars, singer-songwriters.

 She would die before she ever picked up and read the sort of history you read.  Reading history would put a serious crimp in Maryscott's stupefying (outside of U.S. society, where it's entirely the reigning norm) ignorance.

 For example, the excruciatingly detailed review contained in Intelligence Wars by Thomas Powers, providing a close review of major histories which include full accounts of the U.S.S. Liberty incident ---or rather massacre---she's never read that account, nor any of the books which are under review in the article.  I've read both the essay and at least one of the books reviewed, one by Gordon Thomas see---and she never will read that book or any other remotely like it.

 Maryscott pieces things together from what she can glean from this and other internet sites and from YouTube, and from movies and pop tunes.  Anything more complicated than that is beyond her reach.

 You could explain stuff to her---indeed you_have_ explained stuff to her!  But, she promptly forgets stuff which is incongruent with her absurd view of things.

  Oh, yeah, did you hear?  She just hates what's being done to the Palestinians in Gaza.  Hates it, you know?  It really steams her up.

  That---her indignation---and a buck fifty will get you a cup of coffee in various places.

  Maryscott's an unread drama-Queen.  Lite on facts and heavy on socially-approved drama and fits and tirades.  But for real understanding of serious matters, she mainly would rather not know.  If she read a history book, her head might explode.


Read - think - speak - doubt; create - explore - give - love.

---

by: proximity1 @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 08:53:08 AM CST

[ Parent ]

well, at least that wasn't a personal attack (7.00 / 1)

without any substantive dialogue or something.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 09:08:50 AM CST

[ Parent ]

You don't give a fuck about "substantive dialogue"... (0.00 / 0)

if you did, you might cite a fact which refutes my assertions.  

Read - think - speak - doubt; create - explore - give - love.

---

by: proximity1 @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 09:17:44 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I cite the fact that the US government (8.00 / 1)

has determined it was an accident.

Now, I'm sure you'll call me a fool for trusting our government, but the reality is there was no reason why Israel would purposely attack on of our ships.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 09:23:20 AM CST

[ Parent ]

An accident? (4.50 / 2)

The crew's testimony---there were SURVIVORS! ---clearly related how the jet's pilots repeatedly passed at low altitude.  On deck, U.S. sailors smiled and waved.  The Liberty's cover mission was that of a maintainence vessel, if I recall correctly.  It was flying the U.S. flag, the weather was bright and clear.  To have mistaken the vessel as something other than a U.S. naval vessel is really simply impossible.  Anyone who claims that is either an utter idiot, or simply unaware of the facts or deliberately lying in the service of the totally false cooked-up bullshit offered in the official account (not of the surviving crew, who contradict at EVERY turn the white-wash job done by the Israelis and the U.S.---which wanted to file the matter and avoid a spectacular international embarrassment: embarrassment of the Israelis, of the U.S. intelligence community, which was so woefully out to lunch and unprepared; of the U.S. Navy and Air Force which, even as the disastrous events were unfolding, struggled to get a fucking clue as to the fact that a U.S. Navy vessel in international waters was being methodically massared by one of the U.S.'s putative allies, the Israelis, in a cold-blooded and deliberate act.

Why would they do that? you ask.  What?  You mean you haven't read this history?  The reasons are spelled out in full.  Why don't you go and look them up?!!!  Or don't you actually want to know?  Do you seriously think that that essential feature would have been left out of the published accounts?  Of course, in the official U.S. and Israeli accounts, the reasons the Israeli pilots attacked the Liberty simply couldn't be admitted, but they're there for anyone with even a slightly open mind to read and learn of for himself.

 On the evidence here, I don't imagine that you possess even such a slightly open mind.

 You've decided what you want to believe and, of course, in this case, it lets Israel and the U.S., Israel's literal partner in crime, off the hook.

 So, that's in keeping with your already demonstrated moral bankruptcy.

Read - think - speak - doubt; create - explore - give - love.

---

by: proximity1 @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 09:45:15 AM CST

[ Parent ]

The crew's testimony is suspect (0.00 / 0)

as who in their right mind would assume people firing on them were doing so accidentally?

If the reasons are so known, why is it you couldn't muster the strength to name a single one?

I mean, if you're going to be a conspiracy theorist, at least have the decency to lay out some theory.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 10:06:27 AM CST

[ Parent ]

You're arguing from near complete ignorance---and I (almost) wonder why... (0.00 / 1)

say, tell us, won't you?:

 Have you read Thomas Powers' book or NYRB article?  Have you read the accounts his article reviews?

 Then on what basis do you claim to know that "The crew's testimony is suspect" ??

 Do your own fucking reading.  It's abundantly clear here that so far you you don't know what the fuck you're talking about and my view is that this is because you've never read up on it and simply don't intend to---ever.  

 That makes you typical of the average American dumb-fuck who don't know and don't wanna know.  So, then, why should I laboriously type it all out for you?, moron.

Read - think - speak - doubt; create - explore - give - love.

---

by: proximity1 @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 10:15:44 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I learned long ago (4.00 / 2)

when someone knows they have no arguement, they will tell you to "go read" something.

You have failed.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 10:19:37 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I have an argument ---not to mention something else, which you lack ... (5.67 / 3)

informed knowledge based on open-minded study of various sources which are open and documented.

  You, on the other hand, have blind prejudice which can't stand up to that knowledge.  So, instead, you demand that I explain it all to you when it's very clear that your puny little uninformed and uncurious mind is made up and closed on the subject.

 You "learned long ago", huh?

 Well, my "learned" know-nuthin'-and don't-wanna-know-nuthin''friend, I learned a long time ago that people like you are as stubborn in their ignorance as they are stupid and uncaring about facts.

 I've "failed" here?  Thanks.  Coming from a joke of an intellect as yours, that's a belly laugh.

  You ought to re-read your farcical participation here sometime and it may come to you who has "failed" spectacularly in this pseudo-discussion you're running away from.

Read - think - speak - doubt; create - explore - give - love.

---

by: proximity1 @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 10:27:33 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Much like your previous attack posts (7.00 / 2)

this one's all fluff, zero stuff.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 10:39:35 AM CST

[ Parent ]

"ANY"? (6.00 / 4)

That line is such bullshit.

"ANY critizism of Israel is views  by the pro-Israel as anti-semetic. [sic]"

No, it isn't. At least on this blog it isn't. Only that which is anti-semitic is viewed as anti-semitic. Of all the lies and gross exaggerations, (like yours) historical fallacies and stupid opinions, the two that both Raybin and Maryscott quoted stood out to me (and obviously them) as anti-semitic. Clearly, much criticism of Israel is both allowed and endorsed here, without any claim of anti-semitism. Indeed, it seems you are the one not grasping the difference.

I am reminded of a former participant here, that often rolled out that pre-emptive canard, "oh nos, now we're gonna get called anti-semites" as a protective measure against spewing vile hate. Eventually, it became quite clear that she is, in practically her own words, an anti-semite.


to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance .  G. Washington

---

by: Kane in CA @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:04:04 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Silverbird, must I QUOTE it? (6.00 / 4)

Israel is a racist, nasty abomination. (0.00 / 3)
Throw in evil and run by sadistic fucks, from day one.
Some things never change. I am waiting.

They can't attack the message so they attack the person. Pathetic.
by: mattes @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 06:50:57 AM PST

What a real progressive site looks like: (0.00 / 0)

http://progressivesforobama.bl...
Instead of a bunch of apologists for genocide and war crimes.

Israel is a rogue nation which does nothing but lies, and is run by systemic terrorists. And the American public has been blackmailed, bribed and brainwashed into supporting genocide.

Even Roseanne Barr has come out and called Israel a Nazi Nation.

They can't attack the message so they attack the person. Pathetic.
by: mattes @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 06:58:17 AM PST

Karma is a liar and hypocite. (0.00 / 0)

He does not want debate, he wants more lies.
And I no longer suffer apologists for the Zionist Enterprise politely.

This is the second time Israelis cause a holocaust in three years with their phosphorous bombs, clusters bombs and warships.

This war, just as the last one is about sadistic revenge, they reject peace every chance they get. Most of the world already knows what Americans are finally figuring out.

They can't attack the message so they attack the person. Pathetic.
by: mattes @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 09:42:12 AM PST

And that's just mattes's comments. The ABSURD crap PROXIMITY came back here to post... well, jesus. I cannot BELIEVE I DEFENDED him for as long as I did in the name of intellectual curiousity. UGH.

(This nonsensical appropriation of the word "holocaust" is done with only ONE intention, by the way -- to try to piss off Jewsish people who have an intense emotional and historical connection to the word. I don't personally give a shit who uses the word and when -- except for the fact that people like mattes and proximity do it DELIBERATELY to provoke others. No other reason.)

"The Zionist Enterprise?" Spare me. Spare me a whole bunch of fucking bullshit. mattes is a goddamned Jew hating hate-filled hatemonger. Period. Any righteous anger mattes actually feels on behalf of the Palestinian people? ZERO CREDIBILITY, my friend, because it DROWNED a LONG time ago in the vat of steaming shit-hate for Jews in mattes's heart that took over.

"Israel," my ass. Why mattes doesn't just call it JEWLAND and get it over with, I don't know. Except I do know -- it wouldn't look nearly as sympathetic to hate Jews openly if you did it without cover of dead Palestinian babies.

I could puke. Over and over and over.

Because, you see, I ACTUALLY DO GIVE A SHIT ABOUT DEAD PALESTINIAN BABIES. I'M not interested in dead Palestinian babies as just another excuse to rail against JEWLAND.

Yuck. I need a fucking bath.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:47:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Angry, not anti-semetic. (3.33 / 3)

There is a difference.

Vigilance is the price of freedom. That means us citizens, and not our professional military or its industrial complex bleeding us for every dollar they waste protecting corporate hegemony. That is part of what weakens citizens and puts us in danger.

---

by: Silverbird @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:54:15 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Okay, SIlverbird... (6.00 / 1)

The only reason I'm calming down right now...

Is because I see in you the me of 2 years ago.

And I totally get it. So. You believe what you wish to believe of these people, and I'll believe what I believe. What I believe I KNOW, after a prolonged experience with them. If at a later date, you change your mind, so be it. If, however, you end up moving more in their direction -- go with god or whatever higher power there may be or not...

But I can see that there will be no "convincing" you to SEE what I see. One has to experience it, I suppose.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:57:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Don't patronize me. (7.50 / 2)

I am not where you were two years ago.

Vigilance is the price of freedom. That means us citizens, and not our professional military or its industrial complex bleeding us for every dollar they waste protecting corporate hegemony. That is part of what weakens citizens and puts us in danger.

---

by: Silverbird @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:04:16 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Let me ask you... (0.00 / 0)

...what would be anti-Semitism?

I know you said you don't want to argue with me and I don't want to argue with you.  So I won't respond to whatever you reply.  But I'm genuinely curious as to what you think the line is vis a vis anger and anti-Semitism.

The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present...As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country.

---

by: Raybin @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:02:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I would say that anti-semitizm is (0.00 / 0)

making up one's mind in advance of a situation about who is what and sticking to preconceived notions of people despite the reality of circumstance and history.  It is a lot like prejudice, where one's mind is made up regardless of the truth.  That is not the way I feel about Israel or the Middle East situation.

If I had stuck to my earliest position and not discovered new facts, I would still be yeah rha, rha for the Ameircan military and everybody we sell weapons to.  I am quite saddened at what Israel has become; there was so much hope once.

Vigilance is the price of freedom. That means us citizens, and not our professional military or its industrial complex bleeding us for every dollar they waste protecting corporate hegemony. That is part of what weakens citizens and puts us in danger.

---

by: Silverbird @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:10:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I think you use a very conveniant definition (1.00 / 1)

specifically tailored so that you can deny anti-semitism exists amongst the anti-zionist rabble.

Methinks you failed.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:16:05 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Silverbird (5.33 / 3)

I'll buy your definition, and say that it proves Maryscott's point.  The key is that one can reliably predict the response of some of the people named no matter what the facts of the situation are.

It lies in the apparent resolve to ignore any circumstance that weighs on the side of an Israeli action.  (In other words, one might see some rationale for their action even if overall one opposes it.)

And it lies in the conflation of Israelis who make policy for that country with Jews in America, something that slips out even on this board.  

I didn't carefully read every entry here, but I'm not sure that anyone accused you of antisemitism.

Anyway, the arguments usually go like this:  The Israel bashers cite some horrible fact and bait anyone they can into answering.  Someone offers some fact that may explain or mitigate Israel's action.  then the accusations fly, the word 'Zionist' is trotted out, and the person replying is accused of being a horrible person who doesn't care about Palestinian deaths.

What is interesting is that if one takes the time period from 1946 to the present, the Kurds have been treated much worse than the Palestinians.  Where are the Kurd supporters?

"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." -Voltaire
Ah, my dear Voltaire, doubt is an acquired and cultivated taste, like Laphroaig Whisky or fine truffles, and quite as exquisite.

---

by: Madscientist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 17:10:19 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Really? So, if I said Palestinians (6.00 / 1)

were racist abominations, what would that be?

Racist or angry?

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:10:16 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Angry, unless you had made up your mind first (0.00 / 0)

before knowing anyting at all about what you were talking about.

Vigilance is the price of freedom. That means us citizens, and not our professional military or its industrial complex bleeding us for every dollar they waste protecting corporate hegemony. That is part of what weakens citizens and puts us in danger.

---

by: Silverbird @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:15:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Uh huh (0.00 / 0)

I'll make sure to note that the next time someone like you calls me an Arab hater or the like.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:17:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I have never called anyone that. (0.00 / 0)

And I accept your appology, in case you do say you are sorry for accusing me of calling names.

Vigilance is the price of freedom. That means us citizens, and not our professional military or its industrial complex bleeding us for every dollar they waste protecting corporate hegemony. That is part of what weakens citizens and puts us in danger.

---

by: Silverbird @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:19:18 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It's not a name (0.00 / 0)

when it's an accurate description.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:39:14 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Angry. (0.00 / 0)

Unless you made up yor mind about that first before you studies the situation.

Vigilance is the price of freedom. That means us citizens, and not our professional military or its industrial complex bleeding us for every dollar they waste protecting corporate hegemony. That is part of what weakens citizens and puts us in danger.

---

by: Silverbird @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:24:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Something keeps happening to my answer to you. (0.00 / 0)

Your remark is an example of what I would call anger.  Racist is making up your mind in advance to suit preconceived prejudices.

Vigilance is the price of freedom. That means us citizens, and not our professional military or its industrial complex bleeding us for every dollar they waste protecting corporate hegemony. That is part of what weakens citizens and puts us in danger.

---

by: Silverbird @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:28:04 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Let me add....I picked up the term Zionist Enterprise FROM ZIONISTS (0.50 / 2)

including IDF officers on Haaretz. THAT'S what they call it!!

The day you embraced Zionism, you lost me.

Holocaust....phosphorous over a civilian population:

http://www.elmundo.es/albumes/...

The websites I posted have plenty of jews on them.

Jewish parents deny Arab girl place in Jezreel Valley daycare

Rattling the Cage: Accept Hamas's offer

Hamas gave Israel a 6 month ceasefire to come to some sort of compromise. Israel continue the siege against Gaza, starving 1.5 million people and continued the land grabs, assassinations in West Bank. Now Hamas offers another ceasefire:

http://www.freespeechzoneblog....

Blood diamonds, billionaires and Jewish Settlements: http://www.freespeechzoneblog....

The Arab-Israeli Conflict: Too Complicated For Our Beautiful Minds
http://www.freespeechzoneblog....

ISRAEL: No civilian casualties in Gaza!
http://www.freespeechzoneblog....

"Do not fuck with the Jews." -Greenwald on Marty Peretz. http://www.freespeechzoneblog....

They can't attack the message so they attack the person. Pathetic.

---

by: mattes @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:16:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Psst..Silverbird..RIGHT FUCKING HERE, YA FUCKWAD^^^ (0.00 / 1)

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:18:05 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Oh, now that is not anti-semetic, right? (0.00 / 0)

That's angry.

Vigilance is the price of freedom. That means us citizens, and not our professional military or its industrial complex bleeding us for every dollar they waste protecting corporate hegemony. That is part of what weakens citizens and puts us in danger.

---

by: Silverbird @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:21:22 PM CST

[ Parent ]

ummm, Maryscott? (7.50 / 2)

Jewland is Miami. ;)

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:23:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Or Holmby Hills n/t (0.00 / 0)

DA is The Most Interesting Man in the World. - Karmafish

---

by: devilishadvocate @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:27:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

each of those (4.00 / 1)

quotes from mattes sounds like angry but accurate description and criticism of Israel and Zionism.  Not a word about "the Jews" and not a word of anti-Semitism.  What you have done exactly illustrates the complaint that criticism of Israel gets denounced as anti-Semitism . . . that's just what you just did.

"JEWLAND" ? ? ? YOU make up what YOU think an "offensive" word, and then accuse mattes (who never wrote any such thing) of THINKING it?  I have to wonder who put that word in your ear, and why you would find it any more offensive than "a Jewish State" even if she had said it.  And I do believe that not that many years ago I saw a map of JESUSLAND right here on MLW . . .

And you find fault with "the Zionist Enterprise" ? ? ?  Take it up with Brandeis . . .

http://www.amazon.com/American...

"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it."    Voltaire

---

by: Deward Hastings @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 20:11:18 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Deward, I disagree with your interpretation of mattes's comments... (5.00 / 1)

And stand by my assessment of mattes and proximity as being essentially anti-Semitic (by which I mean, really none too fond of Jews, period, irrespective of where they call home).

However, I acknowledge the total validity of your other criticisms of my comment. I posted it in a ridiculously impassioned state and, as you point out, my rhetoric is absurd.

The Jesusland Map, by the by, was something to be feared. So, in that instance --

but never mind that now. I want to just let my acknowledgement of the validity of your criticism stand.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 21:36:32 PM CST

[ Parent ]

How Ironic (6.00 / 3)

that I wrote this essay a little over a year ago.

I still think that the EU's description of Anti-Semitism disguising itself as Anti-Israeli rhetoric is an excellent one and I'll repeat it here....

Denying the Jewish people the right to self-determination, by claiming that the existence of a state of Israel is a racist endeavor.

Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the State of Israel.

Applying double standards by requiring of Israel a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.

Using the symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism, for example claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel, to characterize Israel or Israelis.

I personally would include blaming all Israelis for the actions of the Israeli government, but that is just my opinion.

I actually have a little trouble with the double standards line, as we live in a world of hypocrisy, but I don't think it is all Anti-Semitism.

As you can see, by these standards, which have been established by a more non-secular government than either the United States or Israel, have been violated time and time again in I/P discussions at the various blogs.

Some of Raybin's examples are excellent, as is the inclusion of the Ben Heine cartoon among the pictures in the "Happy New Year, Israel" essay.

I myself noted in that essay that I could understand how it could create the fear of Anti-Semitism, although I did not state outright that the essayist was Anti-Semitic, which he later claimed.  

DA is The Most Interesting Man in the World. - Karmafish

---

by: devilishadvocate @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:53:01 PM CST

[ Parent ]

BTW Karmafish, fuck you!!!! (7.00 / 2)

The above is me being reasonable, again!!!

Bwhahahahahahahaha!!!

DA is The Most Interesting Man in the World. - Karmafish

---

by: devilishadvocate @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:01:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thanks for the offer, DA. (7.50 / 2)

But, um, I don't think that Laurie would appreciate me taking you up on it.

Nor, or so he tells me, would Little Snort who, btw, has come out in favor of Likud.

Stoopid Little Snort!




Lord of the Karmafishes

---

by: Karmafish @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:11:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Oh, bullshit, Silverbird (5.00 / 3)

Geez, you people roll out that line like clockwork, everytime one of these discussions pops up.  It's an idiotic cliche, and you can't even come close to substantiating your accusation, so give it a rest.

You know what's actually true?  It's that anytime there's an I/P discussion, someone like you will start blathering about how "any criticism of Israel is called anti-semitic" -- not because it's true, but to chill any attempt to counter the kind of vitriolic nonsense that you folks spew about Israel.  You say it to provide cover, plain and simple.

That shit won't work here, so stop trying it.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:21:33 PM CST

[ Parent ]

See, this is what makes me sick, too: (4.25 / 4)

I am sitting here having to fucking DEFEND... Israel??? By virtue of the people who are most strongly attacking Israel also being disgusting Jewhaters who are USING the criticism of Israel as a COVER for their JEWHATE, I'm finding myself having to attack people who are attacking Israel at the VERY MOMENT WHEN I MOST WANT TO ATTACK ISRAEL MYSELF!!!

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK.

You assholes. You total fucking assholes. Do you not see that you are doing exactly what terrorist shitbags have done throughout history? They have given cover to evildoers... by doing WORSE EVIL THEMSELVES.

And YOU, you douchebags, are doing EXACTLY THAT.

And you don't care, do you? Of course you don't. You're fucking evildoers.  

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:55:37 PM CST

The Key (4.00 / 1)

I am sitting here having to fucking DEFEND... Israel???

When this happens, it MUST be because of the stupidity of the opposition and/or the stupid argument to which you are responding.

It is normally the result of taking the issue in purely black and white terms.


"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." -Voltaire
Ah, my dear Voltaire, doubt is an acquired and cultivated taste, like Laphroaig Whisky or fine truffles, and quite as exquisite.

---

by: Madscientist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 17:00:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Okey doke... time to walk away for a while. (2.00 / 3)

Blood pressure through the roof. And here I sit in safe, quiet Sherman Oaks, California, no bombs raining down on me.

Sigh.

We are doomed.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 14:59:34 PM CST

I think it's that some people (10.20 / 5)

cannot translate reality from abstract discussion.  You know what I mean - discussing a thing for discussions sake - because positing the argument is a fun intellectual exercise.  'Devil's Advocate' types do this all the time.  They may not necessarily agree; they just like to argue.

What they don't see; the 'thing' they cannot translate - is that all this is actually happening in real time.  This is NOT a drill.  People are dying.  I, like you, believe Israel is making a huge mistake here.  There can be only one outcome in the end: everyone will have to agree to peaceably share the same space.  All the violence and death in between is nothing more than a sinful waste.

Saying that doesn't make me on any particular side (not in my mind).  And it's not moral cowardice, as inferred recently by one Kos diarist.  I will say I'm appalled at how this conflict has brought out the worst in people discussing it.  I read those comments too, Maryscott - and was deeply troubled.  It's why I've not really engaged in this discussion - that and to me it's not an academic exorcise, as some seem to view it.  I'm really praying about this.  

Ah well.  There are those of us who get it, I guess.  That's all I can really say at this point.  Pity it's turned into a soap opera.  The subject warrants more thoughtful engagement than that.

Deux ex Machina

---

by: The Fat Lady Sings @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:21:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Hey.... (7.00 / 2)

I'm not going to take offense at that obvious swipe at me.

:)

DA is The Most Interesting Man in the World. - Karmafish

---

by: devilishadvocate @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:25:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I wasn't swiping at you (7.00 / 2)

I was speaking in general terms.  I'm afraid I cannot recall anything particular you've said that would warrant you're viewing my commentary as an attack.

Specifics, please?

Deux ex Machina

---

by: The Fat Lady Sings @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 16:22:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Oh - (4.50 / 2)

The 'Devil's Advocate' remark.  Duh.  Sorry to have missed that.  No - I wasn't referring to you - I was using the terms generally.

God it's been a long day.

Deux ex Machina

---

by: The Fat Lady Sings @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 16:24:34 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Bombing Sherman Oaks (7.00 / 3)

Seems like a waste of good munitions.

In loving memory: Sophie, June 1, 1993-January 17, 2005. My huckleberry friend.

---

by: Paul in San Francisco @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:26:55 PM CST

[ Parent ]

been there, seen there (6.00 / 1)

bombing would improve it . . . (or at least start the improvement process . . .).


"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it."    Voltaire

---

by: Deward Hastings @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 20:16:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

After six years of wading through the bile (4.33 / 3)

online from 'progressives' on this, I've come to the conclusion that there is no hope of changing this.

"Progressives" feel righteous in their right to spew anti-semitic garbage and claim it's just 'criticism' of Israel. But, if you were to change the words "Palestinians" for "Israelis", there'd be bannings and insults and claims of bigotry, OH MY!

Face it-the progressive community as it exists today, especially online, is a mirror image of the extreme right in this country and is only better to those who agree uniformly with them.

The hate spewed by this 'community' is really no better than the right.

And until these hypocritical self righteous douchebags grow the fuck up and stop pretending they're 'better than that', I will hold every single one of them in the absolute utmost disdain.

Rot in hell, 'progressives'./

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:14:01 PM CST

MF I disagree (6.00 / 1)

that the "community" is a mirror image.  I do believe that a vocal group within that community is the mirror image of the extreme right.

As I have common cause with some conservatives that do not fall within that group, I have often called for the calming of the rhetoric against Christians by certain members of the community.  Some of our more creative and loving members have left because of it.

I also believe, in oh so many ways, that we are all hypocrits.

Except of course, me.

:)

DA is The Most Interesting Man in the World. - Karmafish

---

by: devilishadvocate @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:19:32 PM CST

[ Parent ]

But, that's sortof the point (0.00 / 0)

the larger mass of right wingers people lump together really are not all like the most extreme of the lot.

sure, they agree with them on principles, but the reality is few are as strident as you think.

so, if that's so for the right, why do you assume the left is any better?

from my experience, through harsh reality, I have determined they just aren't.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:41:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

On that I agree, (6.00 / 2)

but you just did the same thing by damning the "progressive community."

By lumping them all together, you just added yourself into the same type of group as the Anti-Semites, just picking someone else to slam.

Paul does it above also, by using the unfortunate phrase "you people."

The conversation devolves because activists on both sides dehumanize their opponents.

DA is The Most Interesting Man in the World. - Karmafish

---

by: devilishadvocate @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:48:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Which is why activists truly suck (4.00 / 1)

they have zero ability to see the forest for the trees and in the end, cause more damage to their goals than help them.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 22:46:17 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yup. (6.00 / 3)

I'm a progressive, but when it comes to Israel much of the progressive left is exactly like the conservative right, except inside out and backwards.

On Little Green Footballs, for example, Israel can do no wrong and everything, but everything, is the fault of Islam.  Not even jihadis, but normative Islam.  They see a vast, international conspiracy emanating from the Islamic world to bring about a world-wide Caliphate at the expense of western traditions.

Meanwhile, here, there, and elsewhere on the left we have people promoting the idea that Israel is fascist country and is at the heart of some international conspiracy to gobble up the western, particularly American, media and politicians.




Lord of the Karmafishes

---

by: Karmafish @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:20:16 PM CST

[ Parent ]

On Yups, Yeps and Yips... (9.25 / 4)

Classic Sesame Street - Yip Yip aliens discover a radio

This is what ya'll have driven me to...lol

"I tire of this banal chat...now is the time on Sprockets when we dance." ~Dieter/SNL

---

by: Cheryl @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:34:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Mission Accomplished! (7.40 / 5)

We've officially driven Cheryl bats!




Lord of the Karmafishes

---

by: Karmafish @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:36:30 PM CST

[ Parent ]

25th fuck you... (8.00 / 1)

carry on...

"Fascism is attracting the dregs of humanity- people with a slovenly biography - sadists, mental freaks, traitors." - ILYA EHRENBURG

---

by: durrati @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 15:57:18 PM CST

How much wood would a woodchuck fuck ... (8.67 / 3)

if a woodchuck could fuck wood?


"I tire of this banal chat...now is the time on Sprockets when we dance." ~Dieter/SNL

---

by: Cheryl @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 16:27:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The intellectual discussion (7.25 / 4)

Much as I notice the argument that if people are dying, we should not have intelligent discussions about the reasons, I will make just a couple of points here.

1)  Whetehr one thinks that israel is governed by evil men who will do anything to carry out a long term goal to control the entire territory and rid it of Arabs, or merely thinks that Israel is following a policy they think is pragmatic even if you think it is wrong,l they can do so because the requirements of the UN resolution to return the Palestinian lands have not been met.  Where they have been met (Sinai), the land has been returned.  The UN res calls for 6the borders to be secure before the land is returned.  If rockets are being launched from across the border, if suicide bombers are crossing the boarder to kill Israeli citizens, then the border is not secured.

One can not buyt question the motives of those who would continue to make the border insecure.  With Hamas, their motives are announced.

In a way, it is like your drunken, mean uncle who comes to visdit once in a while.  You have a kid who just loves to come in and kick the uncle in the shin.  Despite warnings from the uncle and you, the kid won't stop.  Finally, the uncle just hauls off and swats him.  The kid cries and demands that the international community in the room do something about it.

I think most of us would frown on the uncle's actions (we may call his respons "disproportionate"), but we would also tell the kid that he had some fault in the matter, and that we didn'[t have much sympathy for him.

Unfortunately, in the actual case, innocents get in the line of fire.

2)  The dreaded hypothetical, sure to be dismissed out of hand.

Lets say that some terrorist group wins control of Baja.  they have in their charter the destruction of the American State, at least so far as it now occupies territory that was once claimed by Mexico.  Suppose that this group notes the growing number of American communities in Mexico.  Suppose they start lobbing missiles into America, and get them as far as LA.  Suppose that some civilians were killed.

What should the response be from America?

We can bet that we would demand some response.  And you can bet that we wold criticize whatever response was made (at least until January 20, when some will cease criticism of the government).  But we will not accept inaction on the basis that the terrorists were elected by the Baja Californians.  We will not accept inaction while, goddess forbid, Maryscott's family uis hit by a rocket, just because to take any military response would endanger innocent BC civilians.  (I'm trying to make this hypothetical more concrete.)

It seems to me that to dismiss this kind of hypothetical is to reveal oneself as someone who doesn't see the Israeli state as having any legitimacy, as one for whom the proper end is the annihilation of Israel.

Now, intellectually speaking, i suppose one can make an argument for that position.  I think that these discussion would be better served if those people who so think would simply so state up front.  After all, if you think that israel should be wiped from the face of the earth then you will have a tendency to interpret everything a certain way, aqs Silverbird notes.

It has been my observation that at least on this board, those who meet her definition of prejudice, those whose reaction to any situation is most predictable, are exactly those who reliably interpret everything as totally the fault of Israel (and America--this extends to other contexts), while refusing to see any contribution to the problem from anyone else.

The fact is that one is not going to find moral clarity in the Middle East.

"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." -Voltaire
Ah, my dear Voltaire, doubt is an acquired and cultivated taste, like Laphroaig Whisky or fine truffles, and quite as exquisite.

---

by: Madscientist @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 17:37:57 PM CST

Madscientist, oh, dear... (9.00 / 1)

I was SO with you... until I remembered that the longstanding oppression of countless Palestinian civilians is somehow a variable we cannot fit into a hypothetical analogy. Why? I dunno... Maybe because in reality the country doing the oppressing is a powerful one and the oppressed one doesn't even have legal standing AS a country -- and the oppressive country also has THE most powerful country in the world backing its play -- no matter, apparently, how heinous its play might be.

As we acknowledge Israel's right to defend itself -- and it does have that right -- let us please not pretend that all of this has happened in a vacuum.

What I don't get -- what I have NEVER understood -- is how there cannot be a fucking SOLUTION to this that doesn't involve bombing the goddamned shit out of thousands of innocent people. On BOTH SIDES, mind you.

BOTH SIDES; I'd like to know why the fuck the Palestinian people haven't risen up against their pitiful "leadership" in all these years and tried something new. I guess that's asking too much of a large group of human beings; considering, after all, that I consider the vast majority of ALL human beings to be dumber than rocks, how the hell are a beleaguered population that's half-starving and suffering near-total depression supposed to have brainstormed their way out of this shit...

Never mind, never mind. I'm just babbling at this point.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 21:47:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

ask yourself (6.00 / 1)

what would happen if the refugees in the Gaza concentration camp simply said, en mass, ENOUGH . . .

and loaded their meager possessions into shopping carts or little red waggons or whatever they have and started walking home.  What would Israel do when they got to the first checkpoint in Gaza.  What would Israel do when they got the the barbed wire.  What would Israel do when they cut the wire and continued into PALESTINE and to walk HOME.

Because that is what it's ALL about.

"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it."    Voltaire

---

by: Deward Hastings @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 22:17:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Actually, you're not babbling (0.00 / 0)

your question is a valid one.

I often wonder why the Palestinians didn't take their fight to the other players in this drama...the Soviet Union (back when it existed), Egypt, Syria, Jordan, all the Arab Countries, even the United States?  Why has there been no 'direct action' against those targets, who have certainly used the Palestinians badly over the years?

Why haven't the Israelis embraced truly liberal political parties?  I mean, they are very liberal when it comes to some aspects of gender equality and homosexual rights.  Why haven't they extended that into their foreign policies?

Why haven't the Palestinians ever understood that following the traditional approach of Haj Amin Husseini for the last 60 years has resulted in nothing but death and disappointment for their cause.

Why doesn't either side try and take the higher moral ground?  To let the other side bog themselves down in the 'bad guy' role?  Why does each side do just enough stupid things to allow the other side to continue to justify doing more stupid things?

If there were no rockets, there is no way that Israel would be allowed to militarily invade Gaza.  Of course, if there were no rockets or suicide bombers, would Israel even bother?  If Israel didn't regularly take out the big stick, would anybody bother to shoot rockets?

American support of Israel has not always been the case.  In fact, early on, the U.S. Government sent mixed signals to Israel.  George Marshall was againt recognition of the state, while Truman supported it.  The delay allowed the Soviet Union to be the first nation to offer de jure recognition of the state.  Although Eisenhower's Administration began aid to Israel, they also forced through the cease-fire and withdrawl during the 1956 Suez Crisis.

Oddly, that great paragon of domstic liberalism, LBJ, was the first wholehearted supporter of Israel.  Even then, military aid was minimal (during the Six-Day War, the Israelis were defeating the multiple Arab Armies with modern French planes, semi-modern British Tanks, and WWII surplus from the U.S. against front-line Soviet Equipment).

It was Rogers, Nixon's SOS who first tried to get the Israelis to withdraw from the territories occupied during the Six-Day War, incluing Gaza, The Sinai and The West Bank.  It was Kissinger who convinced the Israelis not to repeat their pre-emptive airstrikes during the buildup to the Yom Kippur War, allowing the Israel and the U.S. the domestic and foreign cover to airlift military and humanitarian aid to Israel during that conflict.  It was again the U.S. who insisted that Israel not destroy the Eqyptian Third Army which it certainly had the capability of doing.  Mind you, the U.S. was more than pleased to help pull away the Soviet Satellite states in the Mid-East.

And, of course, Carter did host the Camp David talks, leading to the first real peace treaty in the area.

It has really only been the last 28 years (oddly coinciding with American Conservative resurgence) that Israel has gotten whole-hearted support from the U.S. Government.

It is a mess.  And there is no simple solution.  Although it isn't very liberal of us, I tend to agree with you.  Most 'people' are as dumb as rocks.

Present comapny excepted, of course.

DA is The Most Interesting Man in the World. - Karmafish

---

by: devilishadvocate @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 22:21:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

And of course (6.00 / 1)

there are two dates which stand out in infamy, in regards to American and World acceptance of the validity of Palestianian tactics in their ongoing struggle.

6/5/1968

9/4/1972

Tough to come back from press like that.

DA is The Most Interesting Man in the World. - Karmafish

---

by: devilishadvocate @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 22:29:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I should be clearer (11.00 / 1)

when I set up an analogy.  i didn't offer an "in that."  but let me say that one does not judge the use and effectiveness of an analogy by examining where it is not exact.  In fact, if it were exact, it would not be an ajnalogy.  So, saying, "just here, the two compared cases are different" doies not touch the analogy unless the difference defeats the "in that."\

Here, all I am comparing is the stimulus (attacks from across a border) and the response (military action to quell the said attacks).  The reasons for the attacks are not a part of the analogy.  We could take any pair of peoples.  What if Taiwan were to start hurling missles at the mainland?  What if Japan were to start sending suicide bombers and missiles into Russia to protest the Soviet occupation of Sakhalin, which, like the occupied territories of Palestine, Japan lost after its war of aggression?  What if Tibet started doing the same in China?  Certainly they have many of the same claims that Palestinians have, especially since the Chinese government has pursued a policy of relocating ethnic Chinese people to Tibet?

So while it is true that none of this, nor anything else, happened in a vacuum, it doesn't really matter.  In fact, making the rest not matter is exactly what the rocket attacks and suicide attacks do.

And it works in reverse.  After i posted the above comment, I saw a spokesman for Hamas say that, basically, the attacks on Gaza justified the rocket attacks, justified the suicide bombings, and justified the killing of any Jew anywhere!

So, we are back to "he started it" again.  And we can examine who did what to whom in 1967, or 1948, or 1872, or whatever.

So long as blaming is the course, there cannot be peace.  Surely the retaliation and attempt to prevent further rocket attacks stalls peace.  But so do the rocket attacks themselves.

And i cannot but note that while you may not be with me after realizing the persecution that Palestinians have dealt with, the same claims are made by Mexicans and Mexican-Americans regarding the United States.  We stole their land, we occupy it (and you, in particular) illegally, we waged wars of aggression against it, we have used our power to keep Mexico down.  What about that
Texas thing?  If that had happened today, this board would be alive with people who saw through the phony break away new country ruse.  We'd all accuse the US of complicity in an act of stealing territory from the Mexicans.

I worked with a teacher once who had grown up in LA.  He was Mexican American.  His brother was a judge.  But he still remembered how, as a child, he could only swim in the public pool on Thursdays.  That was "Mexican day."  And then they drained and cleaned the pool.

"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." -Voltaire
Ah, my dear Voltaire, doubt is an acquired and cultivated taste, like Laphroaig Whisky or fine truffles, and quite as exquisite.

---

by: Madscientist @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 17:26:11 PM CST

[ Parent ]

In college (8.50 / 4)

A graduate student was discussing the stigma of being transsexual and the person or someone else suggested tattooing a number on the person's arm like the Nazis did to Jews in WW2 (as a conceptual art piece, I could elaborate...). Having grown up with many Jewish friends, I said that Jewish people may find that offensive. It was a stupid comment, and I immediately felt bad about when the professor said that he felt all labels could be painful or oppressive.  I should have realized that the person's pain was just as legitimate as the hypothetical concerns of Jewish people.

I tell the story because, for me, I learned that I had been more aware of being sensitive to anti-Semitism than I did to other forms of suffering.

Knowing the history of anti-Semitism, I can understand why people are sensitive to instances where they feel someone is expressing bigotry towards Jewish people. I do however think it's important to be aware that other perspectives can be equally offensive to people even if there doesn't appear to be a consensus that the behavior or perspective is a form of bigotry or even consciously mean-spirited.

So, I think it's obviously important to be conscious of anti-Semitism, but equally important to be conscious of anti-Palestinian, anti-Arab, anti-most-groups-of-people sentiments both explicitly and implicitly.

If we cheer too hard for one "team" or only care about protecting one "team" and lose sight of how this is affecting the other "team," we lose sight of our common humanity.  (/sap)

-deano

---

by: dknow @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 17:41:48 PM CST

No Deano, you were right (0.00 / 0)

because the suffering of the Jews of the Holocaust, or the Armenians under Turkey, or Cambodians under Khmer Rouge, or many others, are not mere conceptual art. It is not a huge leap of imagination to see your transexual acquaintance standing in line next to an elderly Holocaust survivor, herself tattoo'd, who watched her mother and sisters, her brothers, uncles, grandparents, her father, her neighbors, her friends, all murdered.  "What is that, dear," she might ask in a quavering voice.  "It's conceptual art," your friend answers.  "No," she says, shaking her head sadly, "it is not."  Then she turns away and her shoulders shudder in sobs.

No deano, you were right.

---

by: Zok Tok @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 20:55:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Zok Tok (0.00 / 0)

I'm not sure how to reply to your comment.

You're invoking sympathy for a Holocaust survivor which I obviously have, but I also think this person deserves much empathy as well.

I also couldn't imagine the pain, both physically (bounding her breasts everyday, and cutting herself in her art) and psychologically that this person has gone through for her whole life and existentially day to day. I don't think it's a matter of an empathy war where one person deserves more empathy than another.

The "conceptual art" part I mentioned was not about narcissism or something cute a college student does but a way to express how a person feels, their inner life so that other people can understand them and their struggles--so this person doesn't feel like an alien to the human race even if sometimes treated that way. I recently saw that The Conterfeiters (with my Lebanese father) and learned to further understand the psyche of being in a concentration camp. Art was the medium for that understanding.

Now, if she did a tattoo trying to express how she felt society viewed her, I think her goal would be to communicate that in an effective way. If all she hurt the feelings of a Holocaust survivor that wouldn't be effective. But it's her art and not mine and I can't fully speak to another person's intentions (although I don't think this was ever done and I'm not sure if it was her idea in the first place).

The reason why I said I felt bad was that I may have made her feel invalidated.  My concerns for hurting a Jewish person's feelings I think were valid, I just wish I would have been more mindful of how I conveyed this concern. I felt the way I did it was not accounting for her feelings and struggles. But I do understand your sentiment, why you would feel that way, and think your concern is legitimate.


-deano

---

by: dknow @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 21:35:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thanks for the response (0.00 / 0)

I think we're surrounding a consensus, as much as you can have one with just two people.

I guess the bottom line for me is that I feel absolute compassion for somebody who went through what your acquaintance went through, but can't help but think it incredible narcissism to think that her suffering sufficiently equals that of an Holocaust survivor to make the "art" a reasonable statement. And ultimately, that is what the "artistic statement" is meant to convey.

---

by: Zok Tok @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 21:53:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Actually, it's not a huge leap of imagination to (0.00 / 0)

to see that transsexual acquaintance standing in line... in a concentration camp.

Pre-op, post-op, gay, bisexual, effete -- whatever. Obviously they didn't have the operation during the Holocaust (or did they? Historians?) -- but all the other cases are pretty easy to imagine, because they happened.

And they could happen again, if the "nutcases" get their way.

And by "nutcases" I mean "religious fundamentalists of all stripes."

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 21:51:47 PM CST

[ Parent ]

True that (0.00 / 0)

and I would be 100% behind a pink triangle, which while not accurate in terms of sexual identity, is accurate in terms of what the Nazis would have used.  But that sends a different message than the one I interpreted from the posting, which was more "my suffering is like ..." than "people like me suffered like ..."  Perhaps a reading comprehension problem more than a writing problem, but that is what I read.

---

by: Zok Tok @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 22:33:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Oddly enough (0.00 / 0)

the first nominally sucessful SRS was performed in 1930s Germany, pre-Nazi.  The patient underwent multiple surgeries, expiring after the last one.

DA is The Most Interesting Man in the World. - Karmafish

---

by: devilishadvocate @ Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 22:39:14 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sort of like diplomacy in the Middle East? (6.50 / 2)

The surgery was a success.  The patient died.

---

by: Zok Tok @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 10:55:19 AM CST

[ Parent ]

This is the outcome (11.00 / 1)

Of a dispute that has fundamentally become about framing.

Not the dispute on MLW, but in the Middle East. Words, ideas, frames, worldviews are the key weapons, along with the bombs and rockets and bullets and walls.

Each side is convinced that they can only win by defeating the other's concept of the fight. Hamas wants Israel to cease to exist, Israel's government feels it cannot maintain power and dominance without using a military solution to disputes with Palestinians, on and on and on.

Anti-Semitism will get drawn into it because, hey, that's a tried and true method of winning an argument - dehumanize your opponent! Especially because the US, like most of the world, still has some strong anti-Semitism to it.

It works both ways, of course, as some Israeli government defenders throw the charge of anti-Semitism at any critic of the IDF's butchery.

Ultimately there are only two sides here - those who want peace and those who do not. Those who want peace are a small number, at least among the powers that be. They do not include the Israeli government, the leadership of Hamas, or of Fatah. Nor does it include the US government, nor most American politicians including Barack Obama.

Nobody shooting a weapon on either side or arguing in favor of that action is in support of peace. That is the key point here.

That shouldn't be used to produce a "they're all equally to blame" view of the situation. If Israel's government stopped believing the lie that their nation only exists through warfare they might actually help get somewhere.

Peace has to be built the right way, but to do so means both sides will, in specific ways and at particular moments, have to give up something of their worldview and their argumentative structure. They won't do it. They cannot abide admitting they've been wrong.

And so it becomes easier to resort to anti-Semitism, because hey, why not poison the well if you can't control who'll drink from it?!

---

by: eugene @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 01:21:21 AM CST

I deny outright your claims about the Israeli government (3.00 / 1)

I don't think they have any desire to control the Palestinians, at least not anymore.

I think they'd be quite fine to be rid of the Palestinians permanently (and I'm not talking killing or displacing them).

Even as you make a good point of framing, you too frame things towards the Arab narrative.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 08:11:09 AM CST

[ Parent ]

yes you are (0.00 / 0)

"talking killing or displacing them".

"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it."    Voltaire

---

by: Deward Hastings @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 09:35:24 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Dishonest and despicable (0.00 / 0)

please feel free to cite a comment of mine stating as much.

Or, if you are referring to Israel, please cite a currently serving Israeli official of any substance who states that should be the goal.

I eagerly await your retort.

---

by: ModerateFundamentalist @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 09:43:31 AM CST

[ Parent ]

yes, you are (0.00 / 0)

"Dishonest and despicable".

http://www.israeltoday.co.il/d...

In 1989 Benjamin Netanyahu told students at Bar-Ilan University:

"Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China, when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the territories."

http://israels60thbirthday.com...

You either support a refugee right of return or you support transfer.  There is no middle ground . . .

"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it."    Voltaire

---

by: Deward Hastings @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 10:11:59 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Livni the bald-faced liar (6.00 / 1)

,Netanyahu the unrepentant warmonger and Ehud Barak the Janus-faced joke.  (bush is all of that and more.)  This thrash heap of self-interested politicians each leads one of Israel's three dominant political parties, Kadima, Likud and Labor.  Both Netantayhu and Barak are failed ex-Prime Ministers and Livni, the new face, was a Masad assassin before she entered politics.  There are two reasons, and two reasons only, that Israel invaded Gaza a month before its February elections.  First, Livni, Netanyahu and Barak are all trying to become the next Prime Minister and each is trying to outdo the other as to who is the biggest thug on the block.  And secondly, they all know that Obama would never have permitted them (as bush did) to kill and wound 3000+ Palestinians, most of them civilians, purely for internal domestic political reasons.  Don't the Israeli people deserve better leadership than these retreads and psychopaths?  Peace  

---

by: imhotep @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 09:57:13 AM CST

Deward, as always, your clear, responsible thinking and writing have ... (6.67 / 3)

been a joy to read and to find mylself allied with.

 But, while it's been somewhat "fun" (thanks mainly to your participation), I'm once more tired of this infantile kindergarten of pseudo-debate and am off to other more interesting sites.

 This pathetic place hasn't learned a goddamned thing in the meantime.

  I wish you had more and better company here, Deward.  I find this strained stupidity hard to bear. My sincere best wishes and good luck to you.

 P.

Read - think - speak - doubt; create - explore - give - love.

---

by: proximity1 @ Tue Jan 06, 2009 at 10:45:59 AM CST