Right-Wing Flame War! (LGF!!1!)

[Scurrilous]

<snip>

"Charles Johnson has been writing a blog for almost as long as the word “blog” has existed. A bearish, gentle-voiced, ponytailed man who for three decades enjoyed a successful career as a jazz guitarist accompanying the likes of Al Jarreau and Stanley Clarke, Johnson has always had a geek’s penchant for self-education, and in that spirit he cultivated a side interest, and ultimately an expertise, in writing computer code. His Web log, which he named “Little Green Footballs” (a private joke whose derivation he has always refused to divulge), was begun in February 2001 mostly as a way to share advice and information with fellow code jockeys — his approach was similar in outlook, if vastly larger in its reach, to the guiding spirit in the days of ham radio. His final post on Sept. 10, 2001, was titled “Placement of Web Page Elements.” It read, in its entirety: “Here’s a well-executed academic study of where users expect things to be on a typical Web page.” It linked to, well, exactly what it said. The post attracted one comment, which read, in its entirety, “Fantastic article."

The next 24 hours would transform his blog and, ultimately, his career. “I grew up in Hawaii,” Johnson told me recently when we met in his Los Angeles home, “but I was born in New York. After I moved away at age 10, I would read the news stories about how the World Trade Center towers were getting closer to finishing. When they were attacked that day, that really hit home for me in a way that reached back into my childhood. I’ve always been kind of a voracious reader, and when I saw the attack happen, I was probably one of the first ones to make a connection with Osama bin Laden, who’d declared war on America a few years earlier. It was like a huge light bulb going on over my head about this stuff, and I wanted to really learn about it, so I started posting everything I could find.”

Those searching the Web for information on the attackers soon found Johnson. “Many of us felt guilty that we didn’t even know who had invaded this country,” says Pamela Geller, an early Little Green Footballs reader and a former associate publisher at The New York Observer, who now writes a blog of her own called Atlas Shrugs. “The media had been, I think, somewhat derelict in terms of describing our mortal enemy. Charles Johnson was covering the global jihad in an in-depth and comprehensive fashion that nobody else was. That’s where I was getting my best news, from Little Green Footballs.”

By virtue of his willingness to do and share research, his personal embrace of a hawkish, populist anger and his extraordinary Web savvy, Johnson quickly turned Little Green Footballs (or L.G.F., as it is commonly known) into one of the most popular personal sites on the Web, and himself — the very model of a Los Angeles bohemian — into an avatar of the American right wing. With a daily audience in the hundreds of thousands, the career sideman had moved to the center of the stage.

Now it is eight years later, and Johnson, who is 56, sits in the ashes of an epic flame war that has destroyed his relationships with nearly every one of his old right-wing allies. People who have pledged their lives to fighting Islamic extremism, when asked about Charles Johnson now, unsheathe a word they do not throw around lightly: “evil.” Glenn Beck has taken the time to denounce him on air and at length. Johnson himself (Mad King Charles is one of his most frequent, and most printable, Web nicknames) has used his technical know-how to block thousands of his former readers not just from commenting on his site but even, in many cases, from viewing its home page. He recently moved into a gated community, partly out of fear, he said, that the venom directed at him in cyberspace might jump its boundaries and lead someone to do him physical harm. He has turned forcefully against Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, nearly every conservative icon you can name. And answering the question of what, or who, got to Charles Johnson has itself become a kind of boom genre on the Internet."

more

[MadMaddie]

1. This right wing movement proves over and over again that

they are viiolent and they will persecute anyone who gets in the way of their extreme "Christian Taliban" movement. These people are just as dangerous as Al Queda....I said it because it's true. Timothy McVeigh is a perfect example of the extremist tendencies of this movement. Killing abortion doctors, threatening gays, threatening minorities, threatening anyone who doesn't share their Neo Christian religious domination of America.

[HillbillyBob]

4. I find the Kreestian right even more dangerous than the muslims

from overseas, who actually have real grudges and reasons, not that I excuse the violence to innocent bystanders. We buy oil and opiatesamong other resources and raw materials) from their rulers who keep a bootheel on their throats and keep them impoverished. Then there are the wack clerics who inspire them.
The truth is there are really few of the extremists in all of that population even if they do extraordinary damage with few malcontents operating and yet our CIA armed and trained them for the most part then turned their backs on their tools.

The kreestians are more dangerous because they can be your next door neighbor, they have easier access to you, your family, like McVeigh who killed how many civilians including children.
They also have access to weapons every day, and their rhetoric is acceptable by so many Americans.
I have had attempted murder and arson among lesser things like vandalism to my home and car, I have been and had friends who were beaten bloody by family and strangers, some murdered, raped and a couple who were literally butchered.

The only thing that stopped them from burning my home down with a woman and 15 month old African Americans, myself and my then partner inside because,
To quote "It's bad enough you Godam fags moved in here and now you bring N----- in" I offered her a temporary place to live while she got her violent soon to be ex husband off her back and out of her life. I had to defend my home from these kreestians with 12 shotgun..I don't think anything less would have done it since I had had to deal with a months long campaign of harassment from them that ratcheted up to terror tactics.

[WCGreen]

2. I have read two full pages on the NYT and still can't figure out what

happened.

If you could sum it up...

[Scurrilous]

3. Short version:

For years littlegreenfootballs (LGF) was the go to site for Muslim bashers and assorted other rightwad a-holes.

Now the owner (Charles Johnson) has banned and blocked many of his old followers and sort of switched sides.

The fallout has been pretty nasty.

[Ken Burch]

5. The term "Little Green Footballs" has been used for dexedrine capsules.

Which could mean Johnson was either implying that Muslims were speed freaks, or that the anti-Muslim crazies on his own site were.

[azurnoir]

6. Seems like Charles "blows with the wind"

what the NYT article did not say was this given the make up of LGF's posters was it possible that Charles did not want to receive the very special and most likely constant attention of the Secret Service, which IMO was the real reason for his "change of heart"

[ConsAreLiars]

7. Damn, one less site for some here to look to for finding compatible values and supportive

"reasoning." First reply here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x243111

Out of curiosity I checked the site of the blogger who that poster often clips from, but cites only indirectly (attempting to disguise the source by linking to reprints). This "source" was indirectly cited to "prove" that the Gazans murdered were not really dead and almost all deserved to be slaughtered anyway and it was really a humanitarian act. That supremacist blogger still has LGF listed as a favorite link. That poster might want bring this news to that blogger, so he can update and replace it with another reich wing hate site.

[shaayecanaan]

8. Somehow I knew that the poster you were referring to

was that particular poster.

I have previously raised the eclectic reading habits of that poster in a discussion that I had with him/her. I was verily informed by the said poster that he/she "reads those articles for the facts, not the opinions".

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x297251#297882

Nothing wrong with that, of course. I myself like nothing more than to curl up on the couch and read the latest tract from neo-fascist far-right websites. Not for their despicable opinions, of course, but merely for their impeccable research and analysis.

[shira]

9. would the 2 of you (or anyone else) like to really discuss RW/LW views on I/P?

...if so, I'll come out of my "semi" retirement specifically for this one and nothing else.

Just a couple things first...

1. Why are LW Jews like Rabin, Perez, Barak, etc... considered 'RW' in your view on I/P? Or is this just some "jew" thing? I ask because I mentioned other progressive Jews I read frequently (Meretz supporters in Israel)......
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x297251#297941

Ami Isseroff is yet another...
http://www.zionism-israel.com/log/
http://www.zionism-israel.com/israel_news/

Here's David Harris, a liberal supporter of Obama...
http://cgis.jpost.com/Blogs/harris/

Alan Dershowitz has some character flaws but to label him "rightwing" is laughable.

Barry Rubin frequently describes himself as liberal.

All the people mentioned above would rather shoot themselves than vote conservative or rightwing.

Going in another direction, there's Ray Hanania. What makes his views closer to "rightwing" than left?



2. On Richard Landes' blog right now, the leading post is an article he wrote in 2005 titled "The Progressive Case for Israel, the Arabs and the Global Community". Does that sound neo-fascist far-reich wing?

[shira]

10. part II

3. Most US congress democrats (and all Jewish democrats) voted against Goldstone. Are they therefore "rightwingers" on I/P?

4. Carlo Strenger posted a scathing attack on radicals who you believe are the true liberals/progressives in all that is I/P. Does that make him more "rightwing" or left on I/P?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jul/28/israel-free-speech-middle-east

5. Pat Buchanon wrote "A win, but at what cost". Look it up. Does that content count as "leftwing" or rightwing in your view? Forget who wrote it. If some "leftwinger" wrote it, it would be kosher - right? Speaking of Buchanon, he doesn't give a shit about Hamas killing Fatah supporters, Hamas use of human shields or child combatants, their antisemitism, the way they treat women and gays, etc. Buchanon is a rightwinger, so that's not surprising. The problem is "leftwing" types like yourself who are supposed to care for those things don't. What's "leftwing" or "progressive" about that?

[LeftishBrit]

11. I don't think that one's opinions on I/P in isolation are enough to label one as RW or LW

except in extreme cases (e.g. 'I don't care if Iran bombs the shit out of Israel' and 'If I were in power in Israel I would depopulate Gaza' are both very RW statements, and both have been said on this forum, though not by regulars.)

There is, however, a tendency on ALL sides for people to sometimes quote from RW sources if they appear to support their 'side' on I/P.

Pro-Palestinians have sometimes quoted from xenophobic-isolationist sources, or implied that RW-ers are OK if they support Palestine. Most worrying are people who may or may not be pro-Palestinian (I suspect that in most cases they aren't), but who make the truly VILE allegation that Israel or its Jewish supporters control America/the world and are responsible for other countries' wars. Anyone who holds such views is, in my opinion, not a progressive. Such comments are rare on this forum, but have occurred elsewhere on DU.

Pro-Israel people have sometimes quoted from Islamophobic or culture-warrior sources - occasionally from right-wing Israelis (the one time in my 5 years on DU that someone implied that I was an antisemite was when I said that I didn't consider Israel National News as a reliable source!), but far more often from RW American sources. Most worrying are people who may or may not be pro-Israel but imply that Europe is allowing itself to be 'overrun' by Muslim immigrants, and who take exactly the same attitude to Muslim immigrants that antisemites do to Jews (in fact, a large number of RW-ers do both). Some combine all this with a hatred for the 'secularism' and 'leftism' of Europe (Thanks, Pipes, Steyn et al, you helped to convert me from my previous left-wing Euro-scepticism by showing me starkly what is really at stake, and the sort of thing that Europe must unite to oppose!)

As far as I am concerned, NO right-wing argument or viewpoint is EVER valid. This is not the same as saying that 'no argument voiced by a right-winger is ever valid'. Nor does it mean that all right-wing individuals are bad or stupid people. Nor does it mean that it is never necessary for left and right to compromise on an issue for pragmatic reasons (though this is often overdone). However: an argument that is based on harshness or xenophobia, or one that justifies right-wing policies because they seem to support 'your side' is invalid. I have heard the argument that one should not dismiss right-wing views out of hand, and that 'the left/liberals have no monopoly on the truth' just a little too often for my taste, from pro-Israelis, pro-Palestinians, and most of all, those who are opposed to certain vaccinations(!) Of course, sometimes a generally right-wing person or government acts in a progressive fashion - as when Begin and Sadat (both right-wingers) made peace at Camp David or when Nixon went to China. And sometimes a generally good liberal does something viciously right-wing, as when FDR interned the Japanese-Americans. But that does *not* mean that right-wing views are sometimes better than left-wing views. It just means that politicians, like the rest of us, are not always absolutely consistent about being right or left.

Thus I will never think that Hamas or other Muslim-Righties are Good Guys. But I will also never think that because they are bad guys (they are), it is really a kindness to the Palestinians to punish them for voting for Hamas; or that the Palestinians are a fundamentally bad culture.

As regards the people whom you mention: I would consider both Hanania and Strenger as on the left, though I think you sometimes oversimplify their views by taking certain statements out of context. Rubin appears to me to be right-wing - perhaps not extreme-right but certainly right - and not *only* on the basis of his I/P views. Buchanan is of course far right, and I have hated his guts ever since he defended LePen in 2002.

(edited because my paragraphs somehow got in the wrong order!)

[shira]

12. I agree with most of that...

1. You mentioned non-progressives who claim Jews control this and that, foreign policy, etc. Does that go for the writers of the "Israel Lobby" (Walt, Mearsheimer) and those here and in the "progressive" blog world who believe that? Because if so, you've targetted a good chunk of regular DU'ers here who IMHO have regressive viewpoints on I/P.

2. WRT Carlo Strenger, the fact is he is closer with his views on I/P to you, me, Pelsar, Petra Marqardt-Bigman, Ami Isseroff, Richard Landes, and Barry Rubin than he is to some of the more radical leftists here (the SLES) who think they are the progressives on I/P. One problem, as I see it, is that there are some here and elsewhere who believe that unless your views are aligned with radicals like Uri Avnery, Gideon Levy, and Avi Shlaim - you're not progressive on I/P, and therefore "rightwing". Barry Rubin is certainly not as leftist as Carlo Strenger, but he's closer to Strenger in views than Avnery, Levy, or Shlaim are. I think Pelsar put it best the other day when he mentioned there's a big center in Israel, both left and right, and then there are the nutcases in the far extremes who are dangerous and shouldn't be part of any peace process. Maybe most Jewish democrats here in the USA who are not as "progessive" as they should be on I/P - according to some - would really be part of that big center in Israel. Maybe Rabin, Perez, and Barak are part of that "center" (left of center) but aren't as progressive as they should be? I haven't totally figured out Ray Hanania yet, but it looks like he's not as "radical" to many here as he should be (IMO, he's the most 'progressive' of anyone running for a leadership position in that part of the Arab world). I'm wondering why his message isn't being heartily embraced by the so-called "progressives" here. Any thoughts?

3. As to dealing with Hamas, what do you propose Israel does that will be somewhat effective without hurting average Palestinians? Hamas' rockets constituted collective punishment on Israelis for 8 years (starting before the blockade). What could Israel have done differently to spare Palestinian civilians and prevent the collective punishment of their own? And is it too much to expect "progressives" on I/P who are critical of Israel's blockade to be equally critical of Egypt's own blockade of Gaza?

[Violet_Crumble]

13. Of course you would. LB was incredibly understated in her criticism of you...

I've read yr constant attacks on other DUers where you label them RW, extreme, annd where you try to hide yr ultra-nationalistic and quite bigoted views behind other DUers like pelsar and LB, who are nothing at all like you. You want to know, so here it is. There are some who have posted in this forum who hold views that are conservative sounding and not the slightest bit left-wing. They don't support a meaningful peaceful two-state solution, because to them *peace* is something where Israel is the dominant victor over a people who are obligated to live forever after in submission to them, doing menial tasks and being grateful for being allowed to stay in their homes. They claim because they agree on something with someone who is considered LW, that rubs off on them. Bullshit...

You are one of the very few participants in this forum who has never expressed any political views on other issues outside of the I/P issue. I'd like to know what yr views are on things like the environment, women's rights, unionism, and a whole barrage of other things where I see others in this forum posting about upstairs. What you said to Shaay in that other thread where you justified citing extreme RW sites by saying you don't read it for opinion but facts was so incredibly silly considering you've sat here in this forum and tried to paint other DUers with a nasty brush because they merely say something that you decide some RWer somewhere has said. What you do that none of them do is regularly defend posters who end up being tombstoned because of their blatant bigotry against Arabs, post links to really stinky extremist sites and then feign ignorance when someone points it out to you...

As for point #3, I and quite a few others have been critical of Egypt. But then again I'm not a progressive, I'm a left-winger...

[shira]

15. why do you say you're not a progressive, that you're a left winger?

I've read yr constant attacks on other DUers where you label them RW, extreme, annd where you try to hide yr ultra-nationalistic and quite bigoted views behind other DUers like pelsar and LB, who are nothing at all like you.

When your views are not significantly different than Pat Buchanon's on I/P, I'd say your views are extreme and RW. He couldn't give a shit about Hamas on Fatah violence, Hamas using children as combatants and human shields, Hamas treatment of women and gays, etc....all he knows is to demonize Israel. But Pat has an excuse. He's a filthy rightwing piece of shit. What's your excuse?

I'm not "ultra-nationalistic" or bigoted. And I won't allow you to smear me in order to stifle debate.

You want to know, so here it is. There are some who have posted in this forum who hold views that are conservative sounding and not the slightest bit left-wing.

I know what you mean, see above WRT Buchanon.

They don't support a meaningful peaceful two-state solution, because to them *peace* is something where Israel is the dominant victor over a people who are obligated to live forever after in submission to them, doing menial tasks and being grateful for being allowed to stay in their homes.

Who here believes this crap? I supported Barak's offer in 2000 and I'd have no problem with Palestinians ending the conflict by agreeing to Olmert's 2008 offer. So WTF are you spewing about? And what more should Olmert have reasonably offered - that Israeli leadership still deserves your vitriol while you cannot bring yourself to criticize Abbas for turning down a very reasonable and fair offer? On this and almost all other things I/P, you're completely irrational and totally one-sided in your 'criticism'.

They claim because they agree on something with someone who is considered LW, that rubs off on them. Bullshit...

Ironic, b/c that's how I see you guys. You claim to be leftwing and for progressive principles but you couldn't give a shit what happens within Palestinian society regarding Hamas on civilian brutality. If it were left to you, Gaza would turn into another Iran or Afghanistan with zero human rights. It's pretty fuked up for you to claim you're for Palestinian human rights but not really against perpetual Hamas rule. And let's say you do really care....are you sad to see that none of your fellow radical leftwing comrades and organizations are working to ensure a civil society in Gaza, instill democracy and human rights, etc? Point me to some leftwing organizations you admire who are really stepping up for Palestinian HR's against Hamas oppression. How about just one?

You are one of the very few participants in this forum who has never expressed any political views on other issues outside of the I/P issue. I'd like to know what yr views are on things like the environment, women's rights, unionism, and a whole barrage of other things where I see others in this forum posting about upstairs.

I'm with the liberal democrats here in the USA on all the issues you mentioned, whether socially, economically, domestically, or internationally. Now what is your view on almost ALL congressional liberal democrats being against the Goldstone Report? Why hasn't Obama fulfilled your wet dreams on I/P yet? Oh yeah, they must all be "rightwingers". The Lobby got them! :eyes:

What you said to Shaay in that other thread where you justified citing extreme RW sites by saying you don't read it for opinion but facts was so incredibly silly considering you've sat here in this forum and tried to paint other DUers with a nasty brush because they merely say something that you decide some RWer somewhere has said.

I explained that particular instance. I googled "settlements with legality" and came up with an article that looked credible to me. I have no idea what else is on that site, nor do I care.

What you do that none of them do is regularly defend posters who end up being tombstoned because of their blatant bigotry against Arabs, post links to really stinky extremist sites and then feign ignorance when someone points it out to you...

Who have I defended that's been tombstoned? And I defend blatant bigotry? GTFOH! Also, who are you to point out blatant bigotry against Arabs? Why doesn't your hyper-sensitivity to racism and bigotry against Arabs apply to Jews? You damned well know the difference (or think you know the difference) between rational criticism and irrational demonization when it comes to Arabs or Arab/Muslim societies. Why not against Jews and Israel?

[Violet_Crumble]

18. Because the term 'progressive' seems to be a bit of a wanky American term....

..and I don't hear it used here in Australia, that's why.

Well, thanks for doing exactly what it was that people have been trying to point out to you that you do. I'm not familiar with, and have little interest in knowing about Pat Buchanan's views, and what you just went on a froth-fest about with him aren't indicative of my views at all. You have a terrible habit of trying to portray people you disagree with as RW extremist types by saying they agree with some RW extremist type on one thing and then forgetting that you've just labelled yrself a RW extremist type because there are things that RW extremist types would say that are in line with what you say....


The problem with you is that you don't think in normal Left/Right terms. I see you as apolotical and only having an interest in Israel and the Jews. And anyone who agrees with you, no matter what it is yr saying, is labelled by you as left-wing and anyone who disagrees is labelled right-wing. Anyone who doesn't adore Israel to the same mindbogglingly nauseous leg-humping level that you do is a hater of Israel, and anyone who thinks Israel rawks, no matter if the reason for that is because they like how Israel is giving it to them darn towel-heads, is very left-wing. The reality of what's actually Left and Right doesn't matter, and Nutty becomes a progressive type who only wants to find peace with an intransigent foe who goes on and on making excuses that building settlements on Palestinian land is some big deal that needs to stop ;)

I'm not "ultra-nationalistic" or bigoted. And I won't allow you to smear me in order to stifle debate.

Actually, yr posts have on many occassions expressed such views. You've defended extremist settler attacks on Palestinians, and you've been the only person in the forum to condone discrimination against non-Jews in Israel. I don't call support of such revolting views 'debate' and you need to lay off the overheated drama...seriously. What LB said earlier today to Cons also applies to you. I have never tried to supress anyone's views and while I find yr stances quite disgusting, disagreement and disgust is not smearing or trying to suppress you.


You have such a short memory, btw. I hope yr not going to try claiming you didn't try to defend Sezu and their bigotry against Muslims and Arabs?

As for the rest of yr incoherent dribble. Unlike you, I speak out against bigotry against both Jews and Arabs. And it's my dislike of bigotry against Arabs that's caused me to feel such revulsion for yr posts over a long period of time here at DU. Don't you worry. I feel the same level of contempt for those who are bigoted against Jews...


You wanted to know what people thought of you. Don't fucking whine when I tell you what I think...


on edit: I'm absolutely gobsmacked by the way you justify citing extreme RW sites by saying you only read them for the facts, not opinion. Claiming you just googled and didn't notice isn't an excuse at all. Especially when you've been pinged more than once linking to those sort of sites. You need to look at the context of the site yr linking to, and if it's an extreme site, you need to see if you can find the same things on legitimate sites. If you can't, then it's not worth posting. If you insist on posting it knowing what sort of site it's coming from, that says a hell of a lot about you. Anyway, I hope never ever to see you chiding anyone for posting links to sites, as that would be absolutely hypocritical of you, given the slap-dash way you operate when you google...

[shira]

22. why exactly is 'progressive' a wanky term in your opinion?

1. Your false accusations against me are nothing but ridiculous personal attacks and there's no point responding to them. Besides, you really don't want me to get started on you.

2. Back to leftwing vs. rightwing, why do you think it is that most US congressional democrats vote pro-Israel, are against Goldstone, etc.? Is Obama a "rightwinger" for failing to meet your expectations regarding I/P? Am I "rightwing" for having confidence in the vast majority of liberal democratic politicos here in the USA on matters regarding Israel - and if so, how do you figure?

3. Please explain to me what is leftwing about "pro-Palestinian" people who don't care how Palestinians in Gaza live under Hamas management (women's issues, no freedom of speech, Hamas use of child combatants and shields, sharia law, antisemitic brainwashing, incitement to kill, celebrating the murder of Jews)? All of that Hamas behavior is extreme RW religious behavior, so why is it that "leftwing" types such as yourself cannot be bothered to do or say anything about what Hamas is doing to destroy the Gazan population? You're not quiet about Palestinian HR's when it's Israel doing the violating, but you could care less when it's Hamas doing much worse. How is that some "leftwing" virtue people should respect? Can you name just one true "leftwing" organization that promotes your values and is committed to Palestinian human rights under Hamas rule? One that is equally critical of Egypt's blockade and that advocated against the collective punishment of Israelis for the 8 years prior to OCL when they were being rocketed daily? Name just one organization please.

[Violet_Crumble]

27. Because it's fucking wanky, that's why...

1. There's no disputing that yr posts contain fair dollops of bigotry against Muslims and Arabs. Whine all you like, but they're right here in this forum and yr habit of defending DUers who are later tombstoned when they were saying bigoted anti-Muslim stuff is right there as well. I notice you didn't thank me for reminding me of yr stirring defence of the now banned Sezu and its poisonous stuff about Muslims :)

2. Why is it that you totally ignore what gets said to you and you behave like some automated thing that's working off a script? As you don't appear to have spotted what I said about left vs right and the prism you see it through, I'll repost it. This time read it, okay?

'The problem with you is that you don't think in normal Left/Right terms. I see you as apolotical and only having an interest in Israel and the Jews. And anyone who agrees with you, no matter what it is yr saying, is labelled by you as left-wing and anyone who disagrees is labelled right-wing. Anyone who doesn't adore Israel to the same mindbogglingly nauseous leg-humping level that you do is a hater of Israel, and anyone who thinks Israel rawks, no matter if the reason for that is because they like how Israel is giving it to them darn towel-heads, is very left-wing. The reality of what's actually Left and Right doesn't matter, and Nutty becomes a progressive type who only wants to find peace with an intransigent foe who goes on and on making excuses that building settlements on Palestinian land is some big deal that needs to stop .'

3. And here's another problem with you. Despite the fact I've made it very clear on more than a few occassions that I despise Hamas, you invent some mindless crap that's the complete opposite of what I think. Yr problem is not that people like myself do criticise Hamas, but that we also criticise Israel, something you can't tolerate happening. Yr problem is that for you it's about nothing else but blaming the Palestinians for everything, but the conflict is a lot wider than that and criticising Hamas for what they do doesn't in any way absolve Israel of responsibility for what it does wrong.


btw, welcome back from that predictably short retirement of yrs. I actually had money on it that you wouldn't last a week, but you didn't even last 48 hours. I'm impressed! ;)

[shira]

28. you're avoiding my questions with your obfuscation and personal attacks

until you answer, there's no point continuing.

Here they are again...

2. Back to leftwing vs. rightwing, why do you think it is that most US congressional democrats vote pro-Israel, are against Goldstone, etc.? Is Obama a "rightwinger" for failing to meet your expectations regarding I/P? Am I "rightwing" for having confidence in the vast majority of liberal democratic politicos here in the USA on matters regarding Israel - and if so, how do you figure?

3. Please explain to me what is leftwing about "pro-Palestinian" people who don't care how Palestinians in Gaza live under Hamas management (women's issues, no freedom of speech, Hamas use of child combatants and shields, sharia law, antisemitic brainwashing, incitement to kill, celebrating the murder of Jews)? All of that Hamas behavior is extreme RW religious behavior, so why is it that "leftwing" types such as yourself cannot be bothered to do or say anything about what Hamas is doing to destroy the Gazan population? You're not quiet about Palestinian HR's when it's Israel doing the violating, but you could care less when it's Hamas doing much worse. How is that some "leftwing" virtue people should respect? Can you name just one true "leftwing" organization that promotes your values and is committed to Palestinian human rights under Hamas rule? One that is equally critical of Egypt's blockade and that advocated against the collective punishment of Israelis for the 8 years prior to OCL when they were being rocketed daily? Name just one organization please.

[Violet_Crumble]

30. Says the person who can't answer questions it's asked...

Or address anything that's said to you either, for that matter. Listen, I find yr obsessive attempts to control 'discussion' to be incredibly stupid. You don't pay attention to anything anyone says to you, and I'm not sure why first you say yr putting me on ignore and then didn't do it, and then announce a retirement that must have lasted all of five minutes. Is there anything you say at all that can be believed?

btw, pointing out that far too many of yr posts have contained bigotry against Muslims and Arabs isn't a personal attack. Get over yrself and cut down on the drama. It's stupid and drags this entire forum down...

[shira]

33. and you're still avoiding the questions

As to putting you on ignore, I did do that but found I couldn't post any news articles or op-eds in response to your OP's. You see, there's an option to ignore your replies and there's a separate one to ignore new articles you post.

As to retiring, I came out especially for this topic and no other - as I explained already. But you're not really interested in discussing leftwing vs. rightwing on I/P, so why do you bother?

[Violet_Crumble]

34. No, I'm not playing yr stupid control-freak games, that's all...

Huh? I didn't start this thread, so if you'd put me on ignore, you wouldn't be able to see or reply to my posts in this thread. Goddam, you don't even make sense when yr talking about mundane stuff like the ignore feature...

I posted twice now my thoughts on the left and right and how it applies to you. The second time I even bolded it in the hopes you might actually read it. I'm still waiting for any sort of reply that's related to do with anything I've actually said. Maybe you should just continue making up stuff about me? It's not like you need anyone here but yrself to have the 'discussion' you want to have...

Oh, okay. Welcome back from the very short and partial retirement! See you in the next thread! ;)

[shira]

36. last chance...

2. Back to leftwing vs. rightwing, why do you think it is that most US congressional democrats vote pro-Israel, are against Goldstone, etc.? Is Obama a "rightwinger" for failing to meet your expectations regarding I/P? Am I "rightwing" for having confidence in the vast majority of liberal democratic politicos here in the USA on matters regarding Israel - and if so, how do you figure?

3. Please explain to me what is leftwing about "pro-Palestinian" people who don't care how Palestinians in Gaza live under Hamas management (women's issues, no freedom of speech, Hamas use of child combatants and shields, sharia law, antisemitic brainwashing, incitement to kill, celebrating the murder of Jews)? All of that Hamas behavior is extreme RW religious behavior, so why is it that "leftwing" types such as yourself cannot be bothered to do or say anything about what Hamas is doing to destroy the Gazan population? You're not quiet about Palestinian HR's when it's Israel doing the violating, but you could care less when it's Hamas doing much worse. How is that some "leftwing" virtue people should respect? Can you name just one true "leftwing" organization that promotes your values and is committed to Palestinian human rights under Hamas rule? One that is equally critical of Egypt's blockade and that advocated against the collective punishment of Israelis for the 8 years prior to OCL when they were being rocketed daily? Name just one organization please.

[Violet_Crumble]

37. You really don't bother paying attention to what's said to you, do you?

Go back and read very very slowly. If you need to get someone else to read it out loud for you. I don't know how much more fucking clear I need to be. I also don't understand why you've totally ignored what I wrote about the left and right. See, any other poster here would have addressed what I said instead of ignoring it and then firing off a bunch of 'questions' designed to control the 'discussion' the way you did...

Have I been clear enough for you? If not I can get very blunt and incredibly clear even if it will mean saying things which will lead to my post being deleted.

[shira]

38. so you'll answer me once I answer you?

let's start slow....you ask any one question, I answer, and then you do the same.

Deal?

[Violet_Crumble]

40. No, that's not what I said...

Do you need me to translate what I've said several times now very bluntly for you?

[shira]

42. LOL...you're so predictable

[Violet_Crumble]

43. Yeah, I'm always predictable about making sure people aren't twisting what I say...

Stick to what I actually say and you'd have been right. If you'd done that you would have noticed what I've been saying to you repeatedly and not totally ignored it...

[Violet_Crumble]

45. Actually, those 'questions' range from plain weird to outright bizarre...

Being bored and overtired, I thought I'd go through them one by irritating one, even though every 'question' in #3 is based on the outright false assumption that I support Hamas. Why would you claim something like that when I've said here constantly that I am totally opposed to Hamas?

Anyway, the questions in #2 are pretty strange and don't seem to have anything to do with what I said to you about left and right and the prism you see the I/P conflict through, but maybe this will tire me out so much I'll be able to get to sleep

Back to leftwing vs. rightwing, why do you think it is that most US congressional democrats vote pro-Israel, are against Goldstone, etc.?

Probably many reasons. Sheer stupidity, reaction to lobbying, thinking they're catering to their voter-base, and a few more that I can't be bothered continuing to list...

Is Obama a "rightwinger" for failing to meet your expectations regarding I/P?

Well for a start, you appear to have no idea what my expectations are regarding the I/P conflict, and it's no good telling you yet again what they are, as you deliberately ignore what I say anyway. But, no, I've never seen Obama as a rightwinger and don't understand what this has to do with me strongly believing that yr views on who's left and who's right is based solely on whether you agree with them or not when it comes to the I/P conflict...

Am I "rightwing" for having confidence in the vast majority of liberal democratic politicos here in the USA on matters regarding Israel - and if so, how do you figure?

No, I think yr views are veering to the rightwing side of things for other reasons. There used to be a poster here long ago called Muddle Of The Road, who insisted he was a democrat, but who unlike you, posted regularly upstairs on other issues, and there wasn't a single issue where he wasn't sounding RW. If I could see you discussing other issues, I'd have more of an idea of where you stand, but because you NEVER post about anything but the I/P conflict, I conclude that yr actually apolitical apart from this one issue and it's that one issue that for you divides people into LW or RW....

About #3 - Do you want me to pretend I'm like a massive fan of Hamas so I can pretend to answer those really weird questions?

[shira]

46. thanks for answering #2

Although in doing so, you slammed the vast majority of leftwing, progressive, liberal American politicos. Do you realize this view puts you OUTSIDE the mainstream American left view on I/P? So besides being outside the mainstream leftwing view in both America and Israel, you still believe you're the expert on leftwing views regarding Israel?

As for Obama, what do you expect him to do on I/P in order to live up to his own leftwing credentials?

I've already explained my political views. I'm completely with the democrats on women's issues, gay rights and marriage, abortion, gun control, universal healthcare, taxes, against the Iraq invasion, etc. What else do you want to know?

As to #3, that has nothing to do with you being some "fan" of Hamas, only that as someone who purports to care for Palestinian human rights, you're extremely reluctant to speak out about what Hamas does to the human and civil rights of Fatah members and ordinary Gazans. You can't say you care for Palestinian HR's but ignore what Hamas does to Palestinians. That's a complete contradiction and I want to know what's leftwing about such a viewpoint.

[Violet_Crumble]

47. No, don't recall slamming anyone...

I tend to remember when I'm slamming someone, btw. This may have escaped yr notice, but I'm not an American and not too interested in where I fit in with the US mainstream. Why would I? Also, yr already making a false accusation in the first bit of yr post. I don't claim to be any expert on LW views regarding Israel.

As for Obama, what do you expect him to do on I/P in order to live up to his own leftwing credentials?

I don't expect him to do anything in order to live up to his own LW credentials. What I would like him to do is to do what he promised, which is to bring about a solution to this conflict. I'd like him to remember that Nutty is a RW extremist and it's time to start talking tough and if talking tough doesn't work to start waving the big carrot and stick...

I've already explained my political views. I'm completely with the democrats on women's issues, gay rights and marriage, abortion, gun control, universal healthcare, taxes, against the Iraq invasion, etc. What else do you want to know?

I said that I'd like to see you have posted about any of those issues here at DU, but you haven't. Saying you agree with the democrats on them is kinda vague and anyone could say that. btw, didn't most of the democrats support the invasion of Iraq? ;)

As to #3, that has nothing to do with you being some "fan" of Hamas, only that as someone who purports to care for Palestinian human rights, you're extremely reluctant to speak out about what Hamas does to the human and civil rights of Fatah members and ordinary Gazans.

See, yr doing it again. Despite the fact that I've expressed my strong dislike of Hamas quite a few times here, and that I'd only just told you in another post that I'm strongly opposed to Hamas, you still sit there and pretend that I don't criticise them. Like I said before, yr problem is much more that I also criticise Israel, and you can't tolerate that criticism at all. In yr world, only Hamas should be criticised, and that criticism should run constantly 24/7 with no time to think about criticising Israel...

You can't say you care for Palestinian HR's but ignore what Hamas does to Palestinians.

Uh, that's because I don't ignore what Hamas do. See above paragraph and please try paying attention to what I say I believe, not what you want to think I believe...

[shira]

53. you called the vast majority of progressive, pro-Israel leftist democratic politicos "stupid"

...or at the very least - tools bought off by lobbies and/or their voters. So they're either stupid or weak and will not stand up for what you (or they) believe to be the correct leftwing view on I/P. You slammed them. There's something definitely wrong with most leftwing, democratic, pro-Israel American politicos in your opinion.

The fact is, you are on the outside looking in with regard to both the American and Israeli leftwing mainstream. Your views are too extreme for the vast majority of Israeli and American leftists. IOW, your views on I/P are incompatable with the mainstream left in both countries. It's beyond ludicrous to claim that the majority of leftwingers in America and Israel are a little too "rightwing" or conservative, so why do you attempt to go that route with me?

It's ironic that you bring up my lack of posting upstairs, as if that shows I'm really not so leftwing. The irony is that you're even more "silent" WRT condemning Hamas' use of child shields and combatants, treatment of women and gays, incitement to kill Jews followed up by celebrating those murders (Sami Kuntar hero worship), Egypt's blockade and stopping all aid to Gaza, etc. And you shed no tears for the fact that no trusted leftwing organization or group that you know consistently stands up for Palestinians against their own regressive Arab leadership (which makes Nutty look extremely liberal in comparison). For some reason it doesn't bother you that in effect - even if not in intent - far leftists like yourself only contribute to more Palestinian suffering and play into the hands of local Arab leadership which is largely devoted to the Palestinian cause (at the expense of the Palestinian people). You're playing their game, doing the demonizing for Hamas and Fatah, even if you don't see it that way - keeping the pressure largely off them and always on Israel - like the Goldstone Report.

As for criticizing Israel, there is plenty of rational leftwing criticism out there (Carlo Strenger, David Hirsch, Amos Oz, etc..) and then there are far leftwing defamers who go way beyond criticism and into demonization. You're well aware of the difference between criticism and demonization (when it comes to anti-Muslim bigotry), so do you think it would be fair to label you as someone who is against any criticism of Muslim (or Arab) leadership? Would it be fair to say you can't tolerate legitimate criticism of Arab leadership at all, without labeling it bigotry? In your world only Israel should be criticized, and that criticism should run constantly 24/7 with no time to think about criticizing Arab leadership....?

[Violet_Crumble]

57. No, that's not what I said. Why do you insist on twisting what people say?

Here's what I actually said

Yr question: 'Back to leftwing vs. rightwing, why do you think it is that most US congressional democrats vote pro-Israel, are against Goldstone, etc.?'

My answer: 'Probably many reasons. Sheer stupidity, reaction to lobbying, thinking they're catering to their voter-base, and a few more that I can't be bothered continuing to list...'

I'd ask you to stop trying to twist what I say into something I didn't say, but I know from past experience that you've got no intention of stopping.

The fact is, you are on the outside looking in with regard to both the American and Israeli leftwing mainstream. Your views are too extreme for the vast majority of Israeli and American leftists. IOW, your views on I/P are incompatable with the mainstream left in both countries. It's beyond ludicrous to claim that the majority of leftwingers in America and Israel are a little too "rightwing" or conservative, so why do you attempt to go that route with me?

Yr not interested in what my views actually are. You've shown that time and time again. Also, yr making up stuff again. I have NEVER claimed that the majority of leftwingers in America and Israel are a little too "rightwing" or conservative.


It's ironic that you bring up my lack of posting upstairs, as if that shows I'm really not so leftwing.

No, yr still not bothering to read what I said. I said that yr lack of comment on any issue other than the I/P conflict makes you look apolitical, and that you see left and right through a prism where if someone agrees with you they're left and if they dont they're either right or extreme left.


The irony is that you're even more "silent" WRT condemning Hamas' use of child shields and combatants, treatment of women and gays, incitement to kill Jews followed up by celebrating those murders (Sami Kuntar hero worship), Egypt's blockade and stopping all aid to Gaza, etc.

How many times do you have to be told that I've spoken up about all those things? I'm not sure what you think yr achieving by repeating the same false accusation over and over again.

Would it be fair to say you can't tolerate legitimate criticism of Arab leadership at all, without labeling it bigotry?

Actually, anyone with a bit of awareness of what goes on around them would have noticed that I do criticise Arab leaderships, so yr question is particularly silly...

Would it be fair to say you can't tolerate legitimate criticism of Arab leadership at all, without labeling it bigotry?

See above. Also, why don't you do something new and actually take the time to read my posts?


In your world only Israel should be criticized, and that criticism should run constantly 24/7 with no time to think about criticizing Arab leadership....?

See above again.


on edit: I came back to reread what you said about my supposed silence about the release of Samir Kuntar for example. Uh, just a suggestion so you won't get so much egg on yr face in future, but how about you take the few seconds needed to do a search of the archives? You just look silly when you come out with such ridiculous and easily disproved accusations...

[shira]

62. yeah, right

1. The fact remains your viewpoints on I/P are out of the leftwing mainstream in both the USA and Israel. Do you agree?


2. Just to be clear, you speaking up for Gazans against their Hamas masters is like Goldstone speaking up against Hamas in his stupid report. As Dershowitz just recently wrote, Goldstone's report "is far more accusatory of Israel, far less balanced in its criticism of Hamas, far less honest in its evaluation of the evidence, far less responsible in drawing its conclusion, far more biased against Israeli than Palestinian witnesses, and far more willing to draw adverse inferences of intentionality from Israeli conduct and statements than from comparable Palestinian conduct and statements."

http://www.goldstonereport.org/pro-and-con/critics/517-alan-dershowitz-the-case-against-the-goldstone-report-a-study-in-evidentiary-bias-270110

Goldstone's report is awful, in part, due to "1) its failure to investigate seriously the problem of Hamas embedding its war effort in the midst of civilians in order to draw Israeli fire and then accuse Israel of war crimes; 2) its astonishing credulity concerning all Palestinian claims, contrasted with a corresponding skepticism of all Israeli claims; 3) its harsh judgments on Israelis for war crimes (i.e., deliberate targeting of civilians), contrasted with its resolute agnosticism concerning Hamas intentions. The result is that Goldstone actually participates in Hamas' strategy and encourages the sacrificing of their own civilians."

http://www.gloria-center.org/meria/2009/12/landes1.html

Just as Goldstone is begrudgingly "critical" of Hamas, so are you. To say that Goldstone is equally critical of both Hamas and Israel is a sick joke and disingenuous to the extreme.

So to get back on topic, I fail to see what is so pro-peace, pro-Human rights, leftwing, progressive, liberal....about such a reluctance to hold Hamas accountable for what they have done and what they are being allowed to get away with (especially WRT their own Gazan victims who suffer most of all due to this enabling).

[Violet_Crumble]

63. Answer the question you got asked. It's right in the title of the post you replied to...

You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on the bum. You have no idea of and even less interest in what my views actually are. Keeping on pretending you do is just making you look like a complete idiot. Yr not making any sense. My views are my own views and I don't have to march in lockstep with US politicians on any issue to be left-wing. Maybe you should give this really silly routine a bit of a rest?


Ah, so now you've switched from claiming I don't speak up about the things you listed to I do speak up but I'm not doing it 24/7 and when I do, it's ever so fake? Heh, okay. Whatever you say. Yep, I was doing a happy jig when they released Kuntar, but just to trick those here at DU who aren't as smart and savvy as you are I just pretended to be disgusted by what he'd done to that little girl and be opposed to him ever being released. Do you realise how pathetic you look accusing people of holding views they don't hold? btw, that's a rhetorical question, not that you ever bother answering any questions you get asked...

[Djinn]

87. to second VC

Progressive is not generally used in Australia except sometimes in a social sense. Most people who would be considered progressive and/or liberal in the US would simply refer to themselves as left wing here. Where we live left wing is a term with far less baggage than in the US. For example we didn't have to listen to deafening screams of "COMMIE!!!" when we instituted national health.

It is perfectly possible to be progressive in the Australian sense but not be left wing. In general (although scarily it's changing) our right wingers aren't held to ransom by ridiculous sky god believing lunatics and therefore (mostly) have little problem being both right wing (which is an ECONOMIC distinction about ones beliefs in the distribution of wealth and power) and small L liberal in terms of gay rights, gender equity etc.

In the US the political discourse is so debased that as long as one is nice to gay/black/female people then one is 'left wing' regardless of their heinous views on wealth & power distribution. People in power have done that on purpose to hijack the left wing agenda so it looks like what the Dems advocate - ie bugger off on EFCA but yes to ending 'don't ask don't tell' (a laudable goal but not an inherently left wing one)

Most (if not all) US politicians are right wing REGARDLESS of their views on I/P because of their views on economic issues.

I have to take issue with your view of life in Gaza, have you ever been there? I assume not as you seem to have a highly distorted view of life there. Are you aware that there were FEMALE Hamas candidates (and at least one Christian one also). Are you aware that many women in Gaza work (including in high level HAMAS government positions, do not wear the veil, have equal voting rights etc

I have no love for Hamas (nor anyone that bases any of their views on some ridiculous ancient sky god myth - fundies settlers, fundie Muslims and fundie abortion provider murderers can ALL go jump as far as I'm concerned) HOWEVER I DO understand why the Gazan population, mostly, supports them. Do you have any understanding of why Hamas have so much support, why women support them in droves...hint it's got very little to do with fundamentalist Islam.

[shira]

89. so LW congressmen and senators in the USA are really RW'ers due to their views on economic issues?

The argument isn't that the US mainstream is RW but that it's LW is not LW enough.

I'd comment on life for women and christians in Gaza, but if I remember correctly from past discussions you're a true believer whose views are impervious to facts.

[Djinn]

91. not a "true believer"

but I am someone who doesn't make sweeping judgments that are patently obvious to disprove.

Hamas are not a group I support, but then again I don't support YOUR government either, lucky for me I don't have to live in either the US or Gaza and therefore acknowledge that perhaps I don't have all the relevant facts as to why people choose the governments they do. I'm also someone who looks beyond simple platitudes and moronic media pronouncements. Hamas are not the Taliban, their views on womens rights are a LONG way from mine (then again YOUR government has views a LONG way from mine on that same topic) however your ERRONEOUS belief that they enforce Taliban style no education/no work for women is DEMONSTRABLY false. Care to admit you're wrong on that?

Oh and yes American politicians are right wing. Left and right are (as I said and you ignored, either because you simply don't acknowledge anything that challenges your beliefs or you don't actually know what left wing and right wing MEANS) political descriptors relating to ones views on the distribution of power - it has NOTHING to do with ones views on Israel/Palestine. Nothing at all.

When I see US politicians advocating even for the passage of EFCA let alone the redistribution of wealth and power to the hands of those that produce then I'll believe they're left wing.

If you're going to have an argument about left/right then you should know what it means.

You CAN'T comment on life for women and Christians in Gaza because you know NOTHING about it. Would you like to try and dispute the FACT that Hamas stood BOTH women and Christian candidates? That women and christians hold government positions UNDER a Hamas government? No of course you wouldn't because you'd have to admit you were utterly IGNORANT of it

[shira]

95. you're attributing false views of Hamas to me

I never claimed Hamas enforces "Taliban style no education/no work for women". And Gazans did not vote for Hamas to rule over Gaza, toss out Fatah, overthrow the PA....but even if more than half did vote for Hamas to rule over them, what about the rest who didn't, their civil rights? Oh well?

You should know that no matter what you've read or what you believe, women and christians (gays, reporters, etc..) are fearful of speaking out against Hamas. Have you read about Hamas' recent declaration of crucifiying christian offenders? More head coverings for women? They're on their way towards Sharia Law, so what are proper leftists like yourself doing to counter all that? Amira Hass mentions this to some degree here...
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1141085.html

Fact sheet for christians under PA rule...
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/talking/59_ChristiansPA.html

========

As for LW vs. RW, see my last post to LB in post #94.

[Djinn]

97. what I believe is based on knowing people who live there

working with Palestinian and Israeli based NGO's for decades and going there myself - heading to both Gaza and the West Bank in March - wanna come? Nah having knowledge beyond reading would be far too controversial.

Do you actually KNOW any women living in Gaza? do you know any Christians living in Gaza? I do, and have for a long time. My interest in the realities of Palestinian life and the Israeli/Palestinian conflict in general means I actually take the time to see it for myself and to actually give a shit about what the people living it think. (Oh and before you start on your tawdry antisemitism accusations that includes visiting Israel as well, meeting with Histradrut, B'tselem & ICAHD amongst others. Hate to tell you but there are thousands of Israelis who would find your views ignorant and offensive).

No need to check any of your rambling posts, you have zero idea of what left/right wing refers to. You're not alone there, political neophytes are quite numerous in your part of the world

[shira]

99. so next time you're in Gaza...

...kindly ask for women and christians to speak their mind against Hamas. What do they have to fear? What are their thoughts on Hamas' move towards sharia law? Their thoughts on Hamas boobytrapping homes, schools, using mosques for weapons storage, kids as combatants, indoctrinating children to be antisemitic haters, celebrating murder of Jews?

I'll await your report when you get back.

[Violet_Crumble]

105. I've seen you attack the only poster here who has family in Gaza...

..because she doesn't confirm yr very simplistic vision of Palestinians being joyous and grateful when Israel kills a whole bunch of them and spending 24/7 (only a minority and only women and Christians of course) sitting reading CAMERA and nodding sagely in agreement with everything it or you say...

Just as you proved in this thread that you've got no interest in what my actual views are and prefer to invent views you'd like me to have, the same goes for yr views of Gazans. Djinn is right. You have no knowledge and no interest in knowing what life is like for Gazans...

[LeftishBrit]

93. By the standards of many countries, they are at any rate not LW

It's an undeniable fact that most Democrats are on most issues to the right of mainstream left-wing parties in many other countries. Very few if any, for example, would describe themselves as even moderate socialists. This doesn't make them 'right-wing'; but it also doesn't mean that non-American left-wingers are dangerous radical extremists.

I am not sure how relevant this is to views on I/P in any case. E.g. in Israel, Shas are quite LW economically and extremely RW on issues relating to relations with the Palestinians.

[shira]

94. thanks - back to the topic - what makes most Democrats views of I/P not so leftwing?

For that matter, what makes the ADL views on I/P not very LW? Kill 2 birds with one stone, as it's obvious most Democrats in the USA respect the views of the ADL on Israel. Here is a cache of the ADL's Israel page, as I can't access their normal one now...
http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:Bvaub_0VLZcJ:www.adl.org/main_israel.asp+adl+israel&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=safari

Lastly, do you believe the Goldstone Report represents mostly a LW view of I/P? I ask because if it's not really leftist, why are the "true" LWers here (on I/P) so reluctant to question or criticize it?

[LeftishBrit]

96. I simply don't understand the point of some of your questions...

'Lastly, do you believe the Goldstone Report represents mostly a LW view of I/P? I ask because if it's not really leftist, why are the "true" LWers here (on I/P) so reluctant to question or criticize it? '


What are you trying to say here? I know you don't like the Goldstone Report, so are you trying to argue that it IS leftist (and that makes the left a bad thing), or that it ISN'T (and that therefore the left shouldn't support it)?

As regards your first question I think that most American politicians' views of ANY aspect of foreign policy are not very LW, because they tend to think of it in terms of how it affects America's strategic interests, more than in terms of what other countries need. Thus, most American politicans are pro-Israel, because Israel is an ally, and Palestinians are seen as in league with the 'enemy': the Soviet Union in the past, Iran now. American politicians who oppose Israel generally also do so because they see this as in America's interests; e.g. by enabling closer alliances with oil-producing Arab states, or by escaping all 'foreign entanglements'. Other countries also think of foreign affairs mostly in terms of their own interests, but it has more impact from America than many countries, because it has more influence and power in the world.

I certainly think that Obama is much more progressive on I/P than Bush as he is trying to establish a peace agreement, to a more serious extent than Bush was.

[shira]

98. (edited) point of the Goldstone question...

I'm saying the Goldstone Report is really not leftist (liberal) so the left shouldn't support it.

As for LW/RW in general, do you think it's better to label American Democrats liberals or progressives rather than leftwingers? Maybe it would be more helpful to use a scale from 1-10, with Hamas being graded a "1" for being very disgusting rightwing, Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson being 2-3, good leftwingers being 8-9 and hard leftist Stalinists at 10. Where would American or Israeli liberals rank on such a scale?

[LeftishBrit]

100. Hard to label internationally...

Firstly, I would put Pat Robertson right there at 1 with Hamas! Identical nasty theocratic religious-right attitude to life. Robertson fortunately isn't running the government and doesn't have direct access to weapons, so he hasn't murdered people directly - but his influence has been extremely dangerous and ultimately deadly - e.g. by getting people to support Bush's wars and think that they were 'God's will'.

I would put Stalin at 10 for economics, and 1 for everything else!

As regards where I'd put other people:

Britain:

Attlee: 8

Thatcher: 2

Blair: 3

Brown: 6

Harold Wilson: 7

Macmillan (very moderate Conservative): 5


American politicians, in comparison with these

Bush: 1 on foreign policy, 2 on other things

Reagan: 2

Obama: 5-6

Sanders: 7-8

McCain: 3 at one time; goes down lower for selecting Palin

Bill Clinton: 4-5


I find it difficult to rate Israeli politicians, as generally LW politicians are often more right-wing on foreign policy than on economic issues (and much more LW on the *latter* than Dems); and also the *form* that RW attitudes take is often of a different sort than the predominant sort in Britain or America. Most American and British foreign-policy hawks are neocon-imperialists; they love some foreigners who are 'useful' to them, hate others, want to go out there and influence things at the point of a sword. A smaller number - Pat Buchanan, Ron Paul, LePen, the late Enoch Powell - are xenophobic-isolationists: they are generally suspicious of foreigners and the outside world; are not interested in going off and being conquerors; but are likely to react with extreme violence to anything perceived as a possible *nearby* threat, and are often hostile to groups whom they perceive as 'enemies within' their country. Overall, Israeli far-right politicians tend to be more of the latter sort, more like Buchanan than Bush, which makes them harder to compare with a mostly-different sort of American right-winger.

[shira]

101. thanks, this is very helpful

It's interesting you find Blair to be a 3, Bill Clinton 4-5, and Obama a 5-6. I take it you believe most American liberals, whether elected or not, are somewhere around the '5' range?

How about Norm Geras and the Euston Manifesto gang?

David Hirsch?

Alan Dershowitz?

Norm Finkelstein and Seth Freedman?

Perhaps most of the Israeli 'left' that became disenchanted by Intifada 2 and the aftermath of Gaza 2005 are really liberals in the '5' range?

Just asking.

Who's your favorite leftist, btw, and where do you rate yourself?

-------

Lastly, where does the Goldstone Report rank on the leftist scale?

[LeftishBrit]

102. Errmmm

some of these are really impossible. I don't think there *is* a linear scale, as people can be at very different points for foreign policy, economics, civil rights, civil liberties.

But of these, if I have to:

Norm Geras: once 5, but by now demoted to 2-3, because to this *day* he appears to think that Blair made the right decision to invade Iraq. (I will give *some* leeway to people who supported it at the time because they believed the WMD hype; but anyone who supported it after, say, the end of 2004, cannot get more than a 4 on my scale, and anyone who still supports it is seriously RW. I'm not a single-issue person on most things, but I am on that.)

David Hirsch? Don't know his work that well, but I like what I've read. 7-8?

Seth Freedman: 8? Though I don't know all his views on the UK, which makes it difficult to form firm judgement.

Norman Finkelstein? 2-3. Not left wing at all. His views on the 'Holocaust Industry' are basically a mean-spirited ' the whole thing is suspect because some people cheat the system' attitude - not that unlike the Thatcher-Reagan view of welfare.

Alan Dershowitz: Not sure. I keep hearing/reading rather contradictory things about him. I know that he can't be ALL bad, however, as Melanie Phillips, one of my most-hated people, has ferociously criticized him, mainly for supporting the eeeevil leftist Obama!

Favourite leftist? Anywhere? Possibly Nelson Mandela. In the UK? Well, I revere the memories of Attlee and Nye Bevan, who died before I was born. In my own time, I really liked Michael Foot, but he was not a good campaigner. I like the Scandinavian mainstream left leaders; the name that springs to mind is Gro Harlem Brundlandt, former PM of Norway, but there are plenty of others.

My self-rating? About 8. Wouldn't go up to 10, as I think that a mixed economy is best, and there is a role for the private sector; but I certainly think that our recent leadership (UK) has gone too far to the right. (My important issues locally tend to be economic ones, public services, plus opposing 'mob spirit' against immigrants and other minority groups, plus NOT preemptively invading other countries!)

Goldstone Report? Well, I don't think that a report is exactly left or right. I would agree with Goldstone insofar as thinking that OCL was wrong. I cannot comment on every detail of the report, however, as I have not read it carefully; and I have not read it carefully *because* I don't think it's going to make a lot of difference. People will continue as they did. Israel will reject it; so will very pro-Israeli people; Hamas will support what it says about Israel while ignoring the criticisms of themselves; others will continue to hold all the views that they held already.

[shira]

103. thanks again

I'm going to have to research some of those names I've never heard of before. :)

This helps me realize why people here believe my views are RW. I know I'm very liberal but in the worldly sense that puts me no better than '4-5' on your scale (not a leftwinger) although I really like David Hirsch who you rate an '8'....and btw, there's simply no way I would rate him the same as Seth Freedman....if Hirsch knew of this, he would be as insulted as you were when I mentioned you in the same sentence with Barry Rubin. Sorry about that, btw. Freedman's demonization of Israel puts him on the RW of the spectrum IMO and even if he's a "10" that just puts him in the same company with the "1's" who share in his hatred (new left meet old right). To rate yourself the same as Freedman is an insult to you, IMO. You and Hirsch, sure, but Freedman doesn't belong.

Still wondering about the bulk of the Israeli "left"....I'm thinking they're no better than "5" considering how the Israeli left peace movement has "died" in recent years. Looks like they're liberals, not leftists, if we use your methodology.

ETA....
Goldstone covered for Hamas (rated "1" on the scale) and demonized Israel quite deliberately. On Israel alone, Goldstone is a "1", so I don't see why those in the "7-10" range see Goldstone as one of their own, unless they're "7-10" on all but Israel. :eyes:

[LeftishBrit]

104. Just to clarify that of course I realize that LePen is not British or American! I was citing him as

an extreme and well-known example of a particular type of attitude.

[shira]

107. LB, see if you agree with me that Goldstone has no use for Israel's left

Some examples...

1. Breaking the Silence. Goldstone used their testimony against Israel but Goldstone ignored/minimized it when that testimony was bad news against Hamas (and also exculpatory evidence in favor of Israel).

 Picking and choosing its sources for political effect. At times even the same source is regarded by the Report as reliable insofar as its criticism of Israel is concerned but is discounted to the extent that it indicates wrongdoings by Hamas. The group of Israeli soldiers, "Breaking the Silence", for example, is quoted authoritatively throughout the report for its criticisms of Israel (¶ 457, 725, 800, 949, 996, 1022, 1088 – this last paragraph admitting "the soldier does not appear to have been a direct witness to the incident, but rather heard it from others ", 1089, 1183 and footnotes 362, 558), and yet the statements of the group are given no weight when they confirm that Hamas booby trapped civilian buildings11. (¶ 460)

Needless to say, other testimonies reported by Breaking the Silence providing accounts of soldiers caring for injured civilians, and commanders even forbidding their soldiers from sitting on the sofas of the homes they entered, are not deemed worthy of inclusion in the Report.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Hamas+war+against+Israel/Initial-response-goldstone-report-24-Sep-2009.htm

2. David Forman of Rabbis for Human Rights doesn't go quite as far as Dershowitz in calling Goldstone a traitor and evil man, but he goes pretty far in his criticism of both Goldstone and Carter...

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:S13_dNKdbhoJ:www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite%3Fcid%3D1259831449470%26pagename%3DJPost%252FJPArticle%252FPrinter+david+forman+jpost+goldstone+carter&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

3. Jessica Montell and Yael Stein of Btselem also have major issues with Goldstone...

Montell:

"THE GOLDSTONE Report is unsettling. I was disturbed by the framing of Israel's military operation as part of "an overall policy aimed at punishing the Gaza population for its resilience."

Stein:

“Virtually no one in Israel, including the leaders of Breaking the Silence and the human rights group B’Tselem, thinks that the Goldstone accusation of an assault on civilians is correct. ‘I do not accept the Goldstone conclusion of a systematic attack of civilian infrastructure,’ said Yael Stein, research director of B’Tselem. ‘It is not convincing.’

4. David Kretzmer (Btselem, UNHRC, etc) slams Goldstone too...

"Let me state from the start that I don't agree with the report." He said he thinks the report is flawed because it confused fact finding with political analysis, consistently gave Hamas the benefit of the doubt and made statements that were not factually accurate.

==========================

Do you think any of the above leftists (I'm assuming you agree they count as leftists) really believe Israel's response in OCL had nothing to do with Hamas rockets - and that those rockets were only an excuse Israel used in order to punish Gazans? :eyes:

2. In the eyes of the authors of the Report, Israel's operation in Gaza had nothing to do with the 12,000 rockets and mortars fired by Hamas over eight years on towns and villages inside Israel, nor with the fact that close to one million Israeli citizens had to live their lives within seconds of bomb-shelters because they were in range of Hamas attacks. Nor, in their view, did it have anything to do with the smuggling of weapons and ammunition to terrorist groups through hundreds of tunnels under the Gaza-Egypt border. Indeed, neither the right to self defense nor the smuggling of weapons into the Gaza Strip are even mentioned in the Report.

3. Rather, the Report advances a narrative which ignores the threats to Israeli civilians, as well as Israel's extensive diplomatic and political efforts to avoid the outbreak of hostilities. In this narrative self defense finds no place – Israel's defensive operation was nothing other than a "deliberately disproportionate attack designed to punish, humiliate and terrorize a civilian population" (¶ 1690(2)1).

===========================

Do you believe the above leftists would agree with Goldstone on the effects of rockets on Ashdod...

 Minimizing the impact of terrorist attacks on Israel. The Report seeks to limit the scope of a State's response to terrorist threats by downplaying and minimizing the effects of such attacks. For example, describing rocket and mortar attacks on the Israeli town of Ashdod, the Report describes the impact as "a brief interruption to economy brought about by the temporary displacement of some of their residents"(¶ 107), simply ignoring the death and injury to Ashdod's residents caused by missile attacks.

===========================

Lastly, what kind of leftist recognizes or excuses Hamas' right to terror when it has nothing to do with self-determination?

 Justification for terrorism. The Report supports the so-called "right" of Hamas to use force against Israel in the name of self-determination (¶ 269), while ignoring the consistent approach of Hamas – as evident in its Charter and the statements of its leaders - which not only rejects the peace process agreed by Israel and the PLO but explicitly calls for the destruction of Israel. The Report describes the rocket attacks from Gaza, including those which immediately followed Israel's withdrawal of all forces and civilians from the area, as “reprisals” (¶109, ¶1662-1665(2)),

================================================================================

Here's the point:

Goldstone isn't even trying to work with Israel's left. His report describes an Israel that leftists in BreakingTheSilence, Rabbis for HR, and Btselem do not recognize. Goldstone uses leftist Israeli criticism of Israel much like Iran, the PLO, or Syria uses it - in order to demonize Israel - while disregarding everything else that either implicates Hamas or exculpates the IDF. If anything, Goldstone should be working with Israel's left and not against it, not using it to bash Israel like Iran, Syria, etc.

Judging by your replies earlier, it appears you don't believe Goldstone's Report to be "leftwing" (I wonder whether you believe HRW and AI's reports to be leftwing since many of their conclusions match Goldstone's - and they endorse his report). So why do you believe so many "true" leftwingers here (whose views are rightwing if they also have no use for Israel's left) are so reluctant to question or criticize the report?

[LeftishBrit]

14. Comments...

'You mentioned non-progressives who claim Jews control this and that, foreign policy, etc. Does that go for the writers of the "Israel Lobby" (Walt, Mearsheimer) and those here and in the "progressive" blog world who believe that? Because if so, you've targetted a good chunk of regular DU'ers here who IMHO have regressive viewpoints on I/P.'


I was not meaning people like Walt and Mearsheimer here, though I certainly wouldn't consider them as progressive (and doubt that they would ever claim to be), and think that their writings are very flawed. But I was referring to people who describe Israel blatantly as 'our masters'; who use the slogan 'No More Wars for Israel!' or who state that Israel 'should fight its own wars' (when has it done anything else?); or who link to antisemitic CT sites such as WhatReallyNeverHappened, Serendipity, or WakeUpFromYourSlumber.




'WRT Carlo Strenger, the fact is he is closer with his views on I/P to you, me, Pelsar, Petra Marqardt-Bigman, Ami Isseroff, Richard Landes, and Barry Rubin than he is to some of the more radical leftists here (the SLES) who think they are the progressives on I/P. One problem, as I see it, is that there are some here and elsewhere who believe that unless your views are aligned with radicals like Uri Avnery, Gideon Levy, and Avi Shlaim - you're not progressive on I/P, and therefore "rightwing". Barry Rubin is certainly not as leftist as Carlo Strenger, but he's closer to Strenger in views than Avnery, Levy, or Shlaim are.'


Um? I think you have a bit of a misapprehension about my views, and perhaps about some of the other people you mention. Perhaps because I have a somewhat 'soft-spoken' writing style (at least until someone either (1) recommends 'bombing the shit' out of the other side, or (2) implies that vaccinations and other aspects of modern medicine will create a 'culture of dependency' on medicine and turn us all into 'wimps'!), I am often regarded as less radical than I actually am. I am in fact extremely left-wing, though in an 'ultra-peacenik' rather than hardline revolutionary sense. On I/P, I am an extreme radical tempered by a degree of pragmatism. I am a great admirer of both Avnery and Schlaim, though my pragmatic streak makes me realize that some of their views may be more idealistic than realistic at this stage. If I am not as keen on Gideon Levy, it is for rather different reasons than you: not his radicalims but his pessimism. He tends to start with an assumption that nothing can be done about the evils that he mentions. Which may or may not be true, but assuming that it must be is not a very constructive place to start IMO.

I have no idea who Petra Marquart-Bigman is. I have read only a little of Ami Isseroff or Richard Landes, and tend to like the first but not the second; though I'll admit I don't know their work well enough to make strong judgements. As to Barry Rubin - could you PLEASE not mention him and me in the same breath again?!!!! (though I admit that gave me a bit of a laugh as well as a shock).

'I think Pelsar put it best the other day when he mentioned there's a big center in Israel, both left and right, and then there are the nutcases in the far extremes who are dangerous and shouldn't be part of any peace process. '

This doesn't sound exactly like what Pelsar said. He does say that fanatics are dangerous, but I think he means by fanatics 'people who demonize others of different views and consider that all who are not with us are against us' rather than the extreme left or right. I think he is more tolerant than most of us here of those who disagree with him, either from the far left or far right, so long as they don't have a quasi-religous attitude that those of different views are 'the devil'. I may have got his views wrong; if so, I am sure he will say so.

Maybe Rabin, Perez, and Barak are part of that "center" (left of center) but aren't as progressive as they should be?

I would certainly say that Barak is not as progressive as he should be.


"I haven't totally figured out Ray Hanania yet, but it looks like he's not as "radical" to many here as he should be (IMO, he's the most 'progressive' of anyone running for a leadership position in that part of the Arab world). I'm wondering why his message isn't being heartily embraced by the so-called "progressives" here. Any thoughts?"

I consider him as fundamentally very radical. That's why I like him. Just as that's why I like Avnery, or Freedman, or Derfner. As to why he isn't heartily embraced by most pro-Palestinians, it's probably the same reason as why Derfner isn't heartily embraced by most pro-Israelis.

Most politicians and political writers, whom I like, anywhere, are minority tastes, and I am quite used to that!



'3. As to dealing with Hamas, what do you propose Israel does that will be somewhat effective without hurting average Palestinians? Hamas' rockets constituted collective punishment on Israelis for 8 years (starting before the blockade). What could Israel have done differently to spare Palestinian civilians and prevent the collective punishment of their own? And is it too much to expect "progressives" on I/P who are critical of Israel's blockade to be equally critical of Egypt's own blockade of Gaza?'

I think that many people ARE now getting to be critical of Egypt's blockade; but yes, it's true that Arab states have generally received much less criticism than they should for anti-Palestinian actions, and that it is hypocritical for such countries to then condemn Israel for such actions without looking in the mirror. As for your first question: I think that most of it would get us into a whole new topic, which I would rather discuss on a thread devoted specifically to the blockade. But I will say at this stage that *even* if Israelis feel that they have no choice but to continue the blockade for *their own* self-defense and security, one should at least not claim that it is really good for the Palestinians.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Violet_Crumble]

19. Why do you keep spamming this forum with links to some stupid blog?

And not just a garden variety stupid blog, but one that's devoted to whining and moaning about commenters at The Guardian. How is that mindless crap any more acceptable than if DU allowed us to post links to a bunch of disgruntled past and present DUers who love calling Skinner, Lithos and a bunch of us here antisemites?

[shira]

21. that 2nd link on WilliamBapthorpe is a perfect example

Did you look at it?

It shows how the Guardian moderators and powers-that-be "tolerate" rants like this...

“We’ve been doing that for the last forty years till we’re blue in the face. Sadly there’s only one way to deal with these religiously motivated maniacs who think their superstitious beliefs from international law. 1. We asked them to leave their squats, kindly. 2. If they don’t, we force them to at gunpoint. 3. If they still refuse, they must be slaughtered, every last man, woman and child.”

No action was taken with this commenter at CiF for days, except deletion of his post. Not until CiF Watch made a big deal of it did he start being moderated. He has not been banned.

Remember, you just wrote this...

Don't you worry. I feel the same level of contempt for those who are bigoted against Jews...

Let's see that contempt now. :)

[Violet_Crumble]

23. Uh, you didn't answer the question I aqsked you.

If you'd bothered reading what I said, you'd know how stupid it would be to post what you did. I'm not the slightest bit interested in what some idiots I don't know are saying about other people who post at CiF who I don't know. In case you haven't noticed, this isn't CiF, so if you want to whine about it, go somewhere else and do it. Why you insist on polluting this forum with that crap is beyond me...

[shira]

24. but you say you're against anti-Jewish bigotry

so prove it

[Violet_Crumble]

25. And you still refuse to answer the question I asked you...

I'm not proving anything to a delusional and manic moron like you, so fuck off...

[shira]

26. i'm against racism and bigotry and so is CiFWatch, that's why

You say you are too but that doesn't appear to be the case.

[Violet_Crumble]

29. I know plenty of places that are against bigotry...

And unlike you and that mob of whining arseholes at that blog you obsessively link to, those sites I know of are opposed to ALL bigotry, not just antisemitism. So if you want to repeatedly post links to sites that are opposed to bigotry, then post a link to them, and not to that mindless spew that you have been linking to..

Stop posting shit that's whinging and bitching about posters on some other forum. It's boring and spiteful and has nothing to do with DU. If people want to read things for themselves they can go to the Guardian itself instead of that nasty little cesspool you link to...

Ah, yep, you've caught me out, Shira. I bathe in a hot bath of bigotry every day before I spend at least two hours planning my next move in my scheme to destroy Israel and drive all the Jews into the sea. Yr really cutting into my Hate Party time right now, and I'm going to have to restart my musical soundtrack of hatred (does anyone else think Korn are too wussy for pure hate?) to get in the mood again. Now excuse me while I trot off to Stormfront, which of course I only read for the facts and not the opinions ;)

[shira]

31. do you find anything wrong with these comments...

Here they are again:

“We’ve been doing that for the last forty years till we’re blue in the face. Sadly there’s only one way to deal with these religiously motivated maniacs who think their superstitious beliefs from international law. 1. We asked them to leave their squats, kindly. 2. If they don’t, we force them to at gunpoint. 3. If they still refuse, they must be slaughtered, every last man, woman and child.”

[Violet_Crumble]

32. I've got no fucking idea and even less interest in knowing what that's from..

Are you now copying and pasting stuff from that moronic blog? What's not sinking into yr skull about what I've said about that place and the people who are bitching about people I don't know?

on edit: Just to be clear on what yr posts linking to that blog remind me of. It's like watching some tacky soap opera where I've got no idea who's who and after watching it for a few minutes realise that I'm not going to waste any time trying to work it out. I really hate tacky soap operas and blogs and sites that are set up to bitch about people somewhere else. It's childish and pretty cowardly, imo...

[shira]

35. those are comments right off CiF and that poster was not banned

in fact, the Guardian editors did nothing but delete that post.

Imagine if that comment were made against Muslims?

And again, you say you're sympathetic to bigotry vs. Jews but that doesn't appear to be the case at all.

Here is a PDF written by Jonathan Hoffman on the pervasive antisemitism at CiF...
http://www.zionismontheweb.org/CommentIsFree_ParliamentASCttee_July08.pdf

[Violet_Crumble]

39. What the fuck do you want anyone here to do about it? This is DU, not CiF...

And don't lie, Shira. You borrowed that from that silly blog yr obsessing over. How many fucking times do you have to be told that I'm not interested in what some idiots I don't know say about people I don't know before it starts sinking in? I really have huge problems with taking anything you have to say about anyone seriously, given the complete rubbish you've said about me...

And please try to keep up. Being a member of Islamic Jihad and plotting to destroy Israel doesn't allow me time to not be bigoted against Jews. Seriously, Shira. I wish you'd spend at least a second or two reading posts yr replying to!

[shira]

41. at least admit that's bigotry CiF needs to act more seriously against

[Violet_Crumble]

44. What bit of me not being interested in the comments at CiF or that blog are you not getting?

And why are you ignoring me admitting to you that I'm a member of Islamic Jihad?

p.s. I'm not familiar with the way the comments work at CiF or what the rules are or how they're enforced, and as I don't participate there, I'm not too interested in finding out. What I do know from reading some threads there is that there's some antisemitism, but there's also Islamophobia, especially in the ones I read about the minarets being banned in Switzerland. Why is it that you and those bloggy people don't seem to have a problem with the anti-Muslim bigotry that's been expressed?

[pelsar]

20. LB...you wrote and asked....

He does say that fanatics are dangerous, but I think he means by fanatics 'people who demonize others of different views and consider that all who are not with us are against us' rather than the extreme left or right. I think he is more tolerant than most of us here of those who disagree with him, either from the far left or far right, so long as they don't have a quasi-religous attitude that those of different views are 'the devil'. I may have got his views wrong; if so, I am sure he will say so.

this is so..and i will explain- a good example are the kibbutzim, or whats left of them. The few that survived are the ones that were flexible in the values and adapted to each new generations changing values. As each generation grew up in the kibbutzim, many of the younger generation that couldn't identify with the kibbutz:s values would leave. The smarter kibbutzim realized this, saw it would be the end of their dream and adapted and their kids stayed and continued to the next generation. These societies remain true to their socialistic core beliefs but have members with a wider variety of beliefs. Those that were more "religious" in the outlook, philosophy and values and didn't modify or adapt, are not longer kibbutzim…they are now infact capitalistic corporations (rather ironic).

That lesson i apply to politics. Those on the right or left, who are not religious in their outlook are flexible, and can adapt to the changing conditions and events. The obvious example was Begin and Sadat. But there have been others, Uri Avny, etc. As we experience life, our values change as do our politics, some go right, some go left, but even when we do modify our views, we still keep some of the previous ones as well or are at least sympathetic to them…hence i see far more in common with the right and left, at least in israel, than i do otherwise. Perhaps thats the core of my tolerance for the other and why i see that tolerance, as essential for a society to prosper and protect its citizens as they change their own personal views.

as been noted i draw the line with religion, whatever its color, which by nature is simply intolerant. Though it must be tolerated in a society and its members protected, at the same time they are dangerous to that same society by virtue of their dogma.

[LeftishBrit]

50. Thanks - interesting points!

I don't entirely agree that religion is by nature intolerant. There are plenty of live-and-let-live religious people, who believe in separation of church/synagogue/mosque and state. But attempts to impose religion on state law *do* lead to intolerance.

[pelsar]

56. religion can be "passive"....

and accept its role when there is a separation between church and state. The haredim in the States are a good example. However, within their community they do not accept democratic values, they only accept the democracy around them as a necessary evil in order to live in peace with their society. True there are the lesser religious that are far more acclimated, but all religious carry with them the baggage of the core beliefs which are in essence not based on the complete civil rights package...they cant. They can modify, they can adapt...all of that is necessary for both cultural and religious and moral reasons...and they will and are productive members of their communities...and i wish them all well, to prosper and contribute.

but they all carrry the seeds, the core of a very anti democratic way of life within the religion (sounds like original sin.....) and their political power must be kept limited, via moral and cultural means, least they take advantage of the democracy, for there will always be elements, within those communities, that attempt to impose their religion or get favors because of their religion on the state.

We are all religious, we have some variation of a religion within us, but when one religion gets too much power, it destroys the society, by limiting our individuality......we may get sooo pissed at someones opinion, and yes they may be complete morons for believing what they do (or geniuses), that difference is the essence of a thriving society.....we have to preserve it.

[shira]

48. response to LB

I mentioned a poster from England named "IsraeliNurse" who posts frequently at CiFWatch. If you go to their website and look on the left hand side, you'll find all her articles. She has described herself as far-left wing when she used to live in Israel. I invite you to check out her articles to compare/contrast your views on I/P since you label yourself the same way she does. I've read enough from her to conclude that the two of you are not alike on I/P and once you read her posts for yourself, I'd like your thoughts.

Also, google "WilliamBapthorpe" and CiF watch and you'll see several articles about him. You'll find this commenter at Guardian's CiF was never banned for a comment he made at CiF, and in fact, no action other than deleting his post was taken by the moderators and editors at CiF. If not for CiFW, the Guardian would have taken no action on this character. Imagine if he had written the same against Muslims. My point is that at CiF, they're very quick to delete/ban anyone making even the slightest criticism of Hamas or anything that looks anti-Muslim or anti-Arab, but they take almost the opposite view of comments that are anti-Jewish or anti-semitic. The Guardian is hailed by many as leftwing and anti-racist, or at least sympathetic to racism and bigotry....that is, except in the cases of Jews. Your thoughts?

[LeftishBrit]

49. A few points

(1) There are some disgusting comments there, all right.

(2) Comment is Free is a political discussion site which is given space by the Guardian, but the content is not specifically endorsed by them.

(3) I like some CiF writers, dislike some others, and am unaware of many others. It's not that influential a site; and I don't read it that frequently.

(4) People have a right to blog about the problems with their media. As I'm British and have easy access to The Guardian, as well as to many other better-selling and mostly much more consistently objectionable papers, I would generally rather form my own judgements than follow CiFWatch. In any case The same goes for other media-watch blogs such as TabloidWatch and MailWatch, though I am at times rather tempted to NOT have to read the Daily Mail.

(5) Bigotry exists. Everywhere. Certainly including Britain. And the comments sections in newspapers tend to be rather a magnet for bigots!

However, it is by no means restricted to The Guardian, CiF, or the real or assumed Left. I was thinking at first of going to one of the tabloids for evidence of this; but that could be seen as unfair because the tabloids may be considered less 'respectable' than the Guardian - even though far more popular and influential. So I decided on The Times, our longest-running paper, over 200 years old, and historically and to some extent now, the most 'respectable' (though this has lessened a bit since Murdoch took it over). They are conservative, but by no means seen as extreme right.

Recently, The Times published a news article on a proposal by UKIP to ban the burqa. Some of the discussion was thoughtful and reasonable; but here are a few examples of the rest:

(Blatant Islamophobia):

Cliff Starkey wrote:
I need to vote Conservative to help get this dreadful government ejected, but otherwise UKIP would get my vote. The burka is a manifestation of a murderous creed that was invented relatively recently in 622.


Michael Woodman wrote:
To (a Muslim poster):

Your charge of racism will cut no ice with me. Racism is now a devalued currency. The fact that I am sick of the muslim presence in my country has little to do with racism (and I’ve ceased to care if it does or not). No, what I and many others object to is the arrogant disdain that muslims show for the culture of my country (which does not consist of laddettes, drunkards, drug addicted youths, as muslim critics of the “decadent” west like to portray it.) We actually have a history of fine art, literature, music, architecture and scientific and philosophical thought, if you’d care to look it up.

I also detest the colonisation of whole areas of my country by your inferior culture and your oppressive religion. You complain about the effects of colonisation on places like India and the middle east, well, I don’t enjoy your colonisation of my country either. At least we have left your countries (and just look what your people have made of them!) And don’t give me the rubbish about our military presence in the muslim world; we are only there because so chaotic and dangerous are many of the countries that muslims occupy that we are forced to go there and try to establish some order to protect ourselves and others from their chaos and violence.

As for the burkha, it is an unfortunate fact that Islamic culture is incompatible with rational, democratic culture and the burkha is simply one of the most in-your-face symbols that says “I am muslim, I hold your culture in contempt.


(Sexist, homophobic and generally RW):

Matt B wrote:
For years we have had to put up with left wing politics along with loud mouthed lesbians fighting for so called womens rights, when now they support or remain silent over the suppression of women through the burka! This mask is a threat to our national security and complete way of life and should have been banned ages ago.


(General anti-immigrant bigotry - the British specialty, and not even confined to WASPS):


John Bray wrote:
Ban the Burka! nice idea but, but merely populist sound bites from UKIP. Britian has been sold out to immigration & multiculturism, in addition to the systematic destruction of our industry and culture. We have let the rise of Islam in this country happen rather than what we should have done and, adopted the idea "When in Rome". Banning the Burka should form a raft of mesures to reclaim our country as we once knew it, or....... Mr Cameron get your head out of the sand.


Krishna Kumar wrote:
If UKIP follows up this justified demand with demands like complete stop for immigration from trouble zones like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Somalia and others, then Tories will be in real trouble.

There should be change of laws to deport criminals back to those countries from where they have come. Half of British unemployment, crime, security expenses and welfare services related problems will be solved!



(And of course even a discussion of burqas attracts the regulatory piece of antisemitism):

Kate Goldsmith wrote:
Simon Best asks: "what did the jews do to Germany?" Well, consider the infamous Balfour agreement, an agreement with Rothschild and the jews to bankrupt the German war effort. create strikes in Germany and drag America in to defeat Germany in 1916, all in return for Palestine for the Jews. Then, the humiliating Treaty of Versailles, imposed by 90 Jewish bankers, impoverishing Germany and creating hyper-inflation and unemployment and resentment, made the decent Germans angry at the Jews. Then the declaration of war by the Jews and the deadly trade and economic sanctions imposed by American Jews on 24 March, 1933 against democratic Germany. In return, Germans refused to buy from Jewish shops. The Germans had logical reason to fear the jews and, so, defended themselves.The Zionists helped Hitler to rid Germany of its Jews. The Jews call it their "holocaust!"
Any more questions Simon Best? Now you know.



Antisemitism of course features more prominently in discussions related specifically to Israel: e.g. the following relating to a news item about aid workers being expelled:

Philip Shahak wrote:
‘Looks like the Zionists are preparing to expel aid workers so they won't witness the coming Holocaust that the IDF keeps threatening to perpetrate against the Palestinians.’

Bill McCann wrote:
From the 'Secret Tablet of Moses':

"Thou shalt not criticise Israel.
"Thou shalt not condemn Israel.
"Thou shalt not bear witness against her.
"Thou shalt not deny her right to take her neighbour's goods.
"Thou shalt not deny her right to destroy neighbour's house.
"Thou shalt not obstruct her right to expand the borders of her holy land.
"Thou shalt always bow before her people.
"For in all things, Israel is always right, the way of truth is to be found in her only and great is the anger that will come upon you if you deny her."


So - my point is that the problem is not with 'the left' but with the media as a whole, with prejudiced people, and with the fact that online newspaper comment boards tend to attract such people. Arguably, none of the comment boards are sufficiently policed. Threats of violence and real personal abuse and certain racist *words* can get you deleted, but nasty viewpoints - Islamophobic, antisemitic, anti-immigrant, sexist, etc. - generally don't. At any rate, none of the above posters appear to have been banned.


As regards your first question - I can have a look and analyze the comments one by one (probably after completing some work which I now need to return to!), but I don't see why my views on I/P specifically need to correspond with those of another individual who also happens to be left-wing. Being left or right is defined by so many things; and in fact I wouldn't say that I had *exactly* the same views on *anything* as anybody else!

[shira]

51. self delete

self delete

[shira]

52. on your two points....

1. While you and IsraeliNurse are bound to disagree on some things, she's more in line with Carlo Strenger and is clear that SLES types like Gideon Levy, Haas, Avnery, Shlaim, Seth Freedman etc... are hateful and bigoted propagandist nuts - not liberals.

2. The problem with the Guardian is that they're extremely selective with their moderation (deleting comments, banning posters). They seem to be on the ball WRT every other form of racism and bigotry with the exception of anti-semitic / anti-Jew sentiments. In fact, I challenge you to find on CiF any article or comment that still exists that is bigoted or racist against any group other than Jews. They should either moderate equally or not at all. In fact, I'm for freedom of speech and I'm not particularly for banning any comments. If comments are horrendous, stop comments altogether.

[Violet_Crumble]

58. Are you for real? Of course there's bigotry against Muslims at CiF!

I can't believe anyone would sit here and try to deny that it happens. Did you not read any of the articles about the banning of minarets in Switzerland? If you want, I can find some time later to go find anti-Muslim comments and post them one by one and watch you try to explain why they're not examples of bigotry. Let me know if yr free to entertain :)

[shira]

61. then show me please

my contention isn't that there aren't anti-Muslim comments ever made at CiF....it's that they're dealt with swiftly and immediately. I challenge you to find any that exist now. As for articles, show me one CiF article that is anti-Muslim.

[Violet_Crumble]

64. What's this?

This is from a thread about the Swiss ban on minarets:

'I and many other westerners have a problem understanding why fellow Muslims in Muslim countries seem to continually blow each other up on a daily basis and also westerners when they get the opportunity, or can this be classed as a fair element of a free societry. Without shuffling around the sidelines isn' t this the main reason why they and their Minarets are not wanted in Switzerland or anywhere else for that matter.'

See any problems with that?*

I'm not sure why someone would be so obsessed that they'd sit around timing how long it takes posts to get deleted. Idiots like that really need to get themselves a hobby and realise that mods have lives as well...

* I've asked that question keeping in mind that you've defended bigoted anti-Muslim posters in this forum in the past (remember Sezu?)

[shira]

65. link?

I don't defend anti-Muslim bigotry so please stop with that crap. Do you really want to get started with posters here you defend who have made horrendous anti-Jew statements, not to mention what you have written on your own about Haredi, settlers, etc.? What's the point?

[Violet_Crumble]

66. Here...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/dec/09/switzerland-minarets-ban-culture-war

Yes, you did defend Sezu when they were posting some nasty anti-Muslim crap here, so don't deny it or try to change the subject...

Mind you, I'm fascinated to know what bigoted anti-Jewish things I'm supposed to have said about the settlers and Haredi ;)

[shira]

67. thanks, that's pretty bad.....looks like the mods are busier on I/P threads where it's more heated

Can you find one article at CiF that's anti-Muslim? The point is, I'm not aware of one...while dozens exist that are anti-Jewish or anti-semitic.

For the last time, I don't defend anti-Muslim bigotry and I know you're well aware of what you've written about Haredi and settlers here. Drop this, Violet.

[Violet_Crumble]

68. No, I'm not going to waste time searching for things on another site...

Do it yrself if yr so fucking interested. I'm not.


Not for the last time, you did defend Sezu when they posted some very anti-Muslim comments. I can go find the posts if yr going to sit there and keep on denying it...

Yes, I'm very aware of what I've written about the Haredi and settlers. You, otoh, clearly aren't. I've never made any antisemitic statement about either group, and if you say I have, put yr money where yr mouth is and give some examples of what you claim is antisemitism...

[shira]

70. well, if/when you ever find an article on CiF that is anti-Muslim or racist against any group...

....I'm sure you'll let me know. :)

In the meantime, since you're so interested in finding out about anti-semitism and how it relates to I/P, here's what the ADL has to say...
http://www.adl.org/main_Israel/default.htm

And FYI, the ADL is hated by the far right here in America for being too leftwing. So let's not pretend the ADL is run by "rightwing pro-settlers" with rightwing views on I/P who want to stifle criticism of Israel while constantly humping Netanyahu's leg 24/7. Recall that folks like yourself and some others here are not representative of mainstream left views in either Israel or America (which BTW is the topic of our discussion, namely what is really LW regarding I/P vs. what is RW). The leftwing views of the ADL on what constitutes antisemitism or bigotry against any group, including Muslims, are accepted by the vast majority of leftwingers in the USA and Israel.

Maybe the ADL can teach you a thing or two about proper criticism of Israel vs. demonization and outright bigotry.

Let's see whether you agree more with the ADL on I/P matters, or the rightwingers who hate this organization for being too leftist. :)

[Violet_Crumble]

73. I just said I'm not going to go looking...

I'm not even sure why you demanded I go and find that stuff, but there's not enough hours in the day for me to do the stuff I need and want to do, let alone go off on Shira-Quests where I'm being ordered to track down things I wouldn't normally look for or read...

No, yet again you haven't comprehended what I said in the post yr replying to. What I stated very clearly I wanted to know more about is for you to put yr money where yr mouth is and back up those false accusations of yrs that I've posted antisemitic stuff about the settlers and Haredi. You were asked to supply links to my posts where I'd supposedly done so. Where are they?

As for the rest:

* I couldn't give a fuck what the hard right call anything. Those people are morons, so why should you think what they say should be taken seriously by anyone?

* If the ADL had stuck to speaking out against bigotry and not gotten involved in cheering on Israel in the I/P conflict and had they a leader who hadn't denied the Armenian genocide, I might feel more kindly about them, but they screwed up royally on both counts, and I have no respect for them. I don't view them as either a Left or Right wing group, btw. I suspect you file them under Left Wing because you've decided you approve of them..

* You keep on ignoring me when I point out that you don't have a clue about what my actual views are, seeing as how you've totally misrepresented my views many times.


So, will I hold my breath waiting for you to either provide some links to where you claim I've made antisemitic posts about settlers or Haredi, or apologise for making false accusations?

[shira]

75. then don't

1. The reason I ask is to make a point - the point being that the Guardian champions itself as anti-racist and anti-bigotry but is actually not (and deliberately so). When it comes to I/P related articles, the mods are very busy cleaning up anything remotely resembling anti-Muslim or anti-Arab sentiment. Not so much anti-Jewish. Worse, there are literally dozens of articles written by antisemites who are commissioned and paid by CiF for their bigoted articles. CiF's editors, however, know not to commission anti-Muslim bigots or anyone who writes anti-Muslim articles. BIG double-standard there! Not that you really care so much, but the ADL says so and they are the #1 organization committed to anti-racism and anti-bigotry.

2. Rather than play your childish, flame-war games, I thought it would be best to go directly to the #1 source on anti-semitism, bigotry, and racism. And that trusted source (which is demonstrably leftwing) says that much of what you believe on I/P is extremely problematic and hateful, and at the very least borderline bigoted and antisemitic.

3. And of course you don't label the ADL as left or right, no surprise there, but then again - you're out of the mainstream left in both the USA and Israel - so you don't really get to define what's leftwing or not. Obama also won't touch the Armenian genocide and hold Turkey accountable. Unfortunately , it's a political hot potato - think of the issue of pissing Turkey off. But the ADL is leftwing, whether you like it or not and if you do a little research on what they advocate and what they're against, it will become very obvious to you. There's a reason why most liberal, leftwing democrats in the USA have voting records that are pro-Israel (they're not cheerleaders humping Netanyahu's leg) and part of that is because they're mostly in line with the liberal ADL and agree with almost all its views on I/P. Most Israeli leftists also agree with the ADL. Sucks for you, huh? :)

The point to all this is, and the topic of our debate, is that what you view as leftwing on I/P is not leftwing. What you label rightwing is mainstream leftwing. You're views are outside of the mainstream lefwing - at least in the USA and Israel. If it came to working for or against mainstream leftists in both the USA and Israel, it appears you'd rather work against them. Oddly enough, you've aligned yourself with far rightists in your disgust with the ADL. :shrug:

So have you given up your delusions that your views on I/P are leftwing and that my views or the ADL view, etc... are just a bit too "rightwing"? :)

[Violet_Crumble]

77. That's what I've been telling you for the past few posts. Glad you finally got the hint...

What the hell sort of point are you trying to make by demanding I go searching for some anti-Muslim articles? Oh, it's the same point you were trying to make when you challenged people to find comments that were anti-Muslim, and both LB and I supplied examples of them? I really don't get what yr point is now. Are you trying to deny that any anti-Muslim articles ever appear?

You accuse me of antisemitism, I ask you for some links to examples, you refuse, I ask again, and you call it my 'childish, flame-war game'? Don't make ugly accusations aimed at me unless you can back them up with links to what I've said. I have not made antisemitic posts about settlers or the Haredi, and if I had you'd be able to supply the links to them that I've repeatedly asked you to supply.

Why are you still babbling claiming to know what my views are? You don't. Also, why do you totally ignore what gets said to you in posts? Are you programmed to do that?

Ah, thanks for clearing all that up. So seeing I label Nutty's govt RW, clearly they must be LW ;)

Actually, my views on the I/P conflict are left-wing. I don't think there's anyone at DU who actually reads my posts and comprehends what my views are who'd agree with you saying I'm not left-wing. I'll file that right under the other silliness of labelling my posts antisemitic. Seeing as how I said I don't view the ADL as RW or LW, why the hell are you saying in yr last sentence that I find the ADL's views just a bit too rightwing? Don't you read what you reply to at all?

[shira]

79. your views on I/P are not mainstream leftwing in either the USA or Israel

There is a reason most leftwingers in both the USA and Israel find the ADL and its views on I/P and antisemitism, racism, and bigotry credible, trustworthy, and reliable. There is a reason most leftwing politicians in the USA vote pro-Israel (mostly related to the ADL's views). And there is a reason why most leftwingers reject your extremist views on I/P. Most leftwingers believe your views on I/P are hateful according to ADL guidelines. They believe your radical views are not representative of leftwing views on I/P in either the USA or Israel.

I'm starting to understand why you think the label "progressive" is such a wanker term and why you're reluctant to label yourself as a progressive. I say it's because you realize you're not part of the mainstream leftwing.

Can you admit that your views on I/P are not representative of most leftwingers' views on I/P in either Israel or the USA, and that you are working against the interests of mainstream leftwingers in both countries?

[Violet_Crumble]

80. As I've told you repeatedly, you've got no clue what my views are...

Somehow I think you speaking on behalf of most LWers in the US and Israel is as bullshitty as when you falsely accused me of antisemitic posts, which I notice you've now refused to supply any links to even though you've been asked to multiple times now....

No, you don't understand why I think progressive is a wanky American term. Why do you insist on making up complete bullshit about other people's views the way you do? You've been incredibly dishonest on more than one occassion about what you claim my views on I/P are, so it does look really stupid of you to sit there and keep on pretending you do.

For the record, I couldn't give a shit if my views are mainstream in US or Israeli terms or not. I've mentioned before that it's really bizarre that you seem to think this matters, seeing as how I'm an Australian and don't believe my views have to be the exact same as someone elses...

[shira]

81. your views are counter to the ADL and most voting democrats/leftists in the USA and Israel

Your favorite writers on I/P and your favorite pro-Palestinian organizations are considered by most mainstream Israeli and US leftists (including the leftwing ADL) to be hateful.

Maybe you can explain to me how my views are outside the mainstream left in both the USA and Israel?

[Violet_Crumble]

82. As I've told you repeatedly, you've got no clue what my views are...

Somehow I think you speaking on behalf of most LWers in the US and Israel is as bullshitty as when you falsely accused me of antisemitic posts, which I notice you've now refused to supply any links to even though you've been asked to multiple times now....

No, you don't understand why I think progressive is a wanky American term. Why do you insist on making up complete bullshit about other people's views the way you do? You've been incredibly dishonest on more than one occassion about what you claim my views on I/P are, so it does look really stupid of you to sit there and keep on pretending you do.

For the record, I couldn't give a shit if my views are mainstream in US or Israeli terms or not. I've mentioned before that it's really bizarre that you seem to think this matters, seeing as how I'm an Australian and don't believe my views have to be the exact same as someone elses...

This time try reading what I said. Do you think other people are not noticing that you totally ignore anything that gets said to you?

on edit: I doubt very much you know who my favourite authors on the conflict are, and I've never seen anything like a poll or anything that shows that most mainstream American leftwingers consider them to be hateful. Also, I disagree strongly with yr claim that the ADL is a leftwing organisation. As I said, I don't think it's left or right wing and you just slap the left wing label on it coz you approve of it, which is a very silly way of defining the difference between left and right...

[Djinn]

88. ROFL

"you're out of the mainstream left in both the USA and Israel - so you don't really get to define what's leftwing or not"

I must have missed the memo that said the mainstream in the US and Israel get to decide what's left wing and what isn't :rofl:

Left wing has a meaning, one that you seem utterly ignorant of. However if we ARE allowing the majority to dictate terms I think you'll find that the majority Israeli (and I'm not sure you actually have a grasp of majority Israeli views on any of this either but I'll go with your assertion for the sake of argument) and US views on the I/P are WAY out of step with the majority opinion in the REST OF THE WORLD. So guess it 'sucks for you' huh?

[shira]

90. please explain what's so RW about the mainstream left in both the USA and Israel

Did LW'ers in the USA and Israel miss a memo at some point explaining how it is to be a proper LW'er?

We're talking the mainstream left in both Israel and the USA, not the mainstream in general - okay?

[Djinn]

92. go do politics 101

and then come back when you know what left/right wing mean. You clearly don't.

Which US politician advocates for worker control of the economy?

Left and right wing have a meaning, whether the US has such a paucity of political discourse that many have come to believe left/right mean something they do not is sad but does not change the meanings of those terms.

[Violet_Crumble]

106. Good luck trying to get any sense out of it...

fwiw, I totally agree with you that Shira has absolutely no idea about what Left or Right means. I think she doesn't have any idea as to what politics are like outside of the US and thinks everywhere else is just like the US...

Anyway, just wanted to say hi and also to remind Shira that she's yet to supply a single link to back up her claim a few posts ago that I did antisemitic posts about the settlers and the Haredi, and I'm still waiting for her to put her money where her mouth is and prove she's not one of those 'supporters' of Israel that fling around accusations of antisemitism wildly at legitimate criticism of Israel and the occupation :)

[LeftishBrit]

71. Taking your challenge...

There is plenty of negativity toward Muslims and other groups in comments on CiF (even after some of the more egregious comments have obviously been deleted:

Peter Tatchell recently wrote a good article criticizing Sharia law. Most comments were reasonable - but some definitely stepped over the line into Islamophobia and general anti-immigrant bigotry:

BobBorn1943
The whole point of Sharia is to intimidate people into accepting misogyny and the rest. Sadly, it's too late for Britain. The Americans will resist.

Brit47
No one asked the British public if WE wanted a multicultural society...never mind sharia law in a Christian country!!!!

RightWingExtremist


I hate to break it to you Peter, but the problem is not with Muslims, or Political Islam. The problem is with Islam itself, which as a religion seeks nothing less than full spectrum domination. You must totally surrender your will and prostrate and submit yourself to God. There is nothing moderate about that.
A Muslim who rejects Sharia law, is like a vegetarian who eats a bacon sandwich every morning. (i.e. not a real vegetarian at all).

'Aminshah' shows bigotry in the other direction, against secularists:

Secularism has brought nothing but misery to most of these "enlightened" states.It has brought anarchy,teen pregnancies,teen binge drinking,and people who are devoid of any decency or moral compass.Ending in decaying and decadent societies.Yup secularism is the way to go.All the way to hell in a hand basket.


And another poster is against both Muslims *and* secularists:

It is no surprise that the godless UK is a petri dish for Islamic evangelicalism, and is marching ahead toward the embracing Sharia Law. Your ultra liberal ways and tolerance is allowing ISLAM4UK to move ahead as planned. God help you all.




An article by Ed Husain, objecting to profiling of Muslims, receives the following from Canadian poster Contrarian2:

I hesitate to comment, from my location in Canada, given that the writer is in the UK, which now seems to have become a major location for the recruitment, motivation and training of terrorists. But IMHO this article is complete nonsense.
The author should understand that attitudes in North America are hardening against the idea of being worried about what Muslims think. Quite the reverse, the attitude is becoming one which says it's time for Muslims to worry about what non-Muslims think.


A poster of Irish origin seems to think that because his family had to deal with prejudice and collective punishment toward the Irish, the Muslims ought to do the same:

'The upshot of having a father who, through no fault of his own, probably worked now and again in gangs with men who had IRA connections, meant no RAF staff college for my brother and no Rolls Royce engineering apprenticeship for my other brother.
The difference for 'your lot' is that you have high-level anti-discrimination support. But you'll just have to live with the consequences of the London bombers, the 9/11 bombers, the Madrid bombers etc, being Muslim and motivated as Muslims/Islamists.
When I'm stripping off in airports (which I do a lot) I can't help but blame Muslim terrorism. But I have no doubt that my very obviously Irish father had a horrible time at the height of Irish terrorism. He was probably abused in the street, but he never complained. His 'own' people were responsible.

...you and your fellow Muslims will have to do what my father did. Make sure your personal behaviour is beyond criticism, ensure your children are fully integrated and condemn terrorists at all times - not ifs, no buts and no historical crap about what happened 1000 years ago.
Like the reaction of the Muslims in the Question Time audience after 9/11, I can't believe your community hasn't quite grasped what terrorism in your name - whether you want or not - actually means for you.'


There are a number of debates that come up about that other I/P conflict, India/Pakistan. Religious prejudice sometimes shows up here, but a lot of it is simply nationalist, with supporters of India and Pakistan bashing each other:


There are a number of debates that come up about that other I/P conflict, India/Pakistan. Religious prejudice sometimes shows up here, but a lot of it is simply nationalist, with supporters of India and Pakistan bashing each other's country.

Here is an interesting thread, with some good points, but also some bashing:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/29/india-pakistan-terrorism


E.g. 'Politicus' has robust views as how Pakistan should be treated·

Zardari is lifeless puppet, he has no authority. The Pak government is the ISI, which makes Pak a rogue state. You got your war on terror right there, Yanks. You made the ISI, now get rid of it. No need to look for "al Qaeda" phantoms, that's your jihad central right there, wearing Pak uniforms. Instead of wasting time chasing Osama, Obummer should send his drones and Delta Force rambos after General Ahmed. Clean out the ISI Augean stables and jihadi terrorism in Asia will be over.


Proudly Cynical, an Indian poster, has no very high opinion of the neighbours:


No Mr Hamid, we may not be a perfect nation and yes we have some serious questions to address in this country, and yes we have a bunch of politicians who are better off in prison camp, but no we do not stand with Pakistan in this. They can sort out their own mess by running to both big daddies. We have nothing in common with a country that openly sponsors militants. We will muddle along with our own means. We will manage on our own, thank you very much.


I suspect that if you have not noticed negativity toward other groups besides Jews and Israelis, it may be because you may not read many articles or get involved in discussions that relate to other groups. You seem to be very exclusively interested in political issues relating to Israel, and that is fine - but you cannot then assume that no other sorts of 'bashing' are going on, just because you don't read or notice them.

[shira]

74. thanks, see post #67

[LeftishBrit]

83. One would have to define an 'anti-Muslim' article

There are certainly numerous articles that oppose Islamism; support liberalization of Islam; state that Muslim immigrants should open themselves to the values to their new society; recommend that we 'Just Say No to Sharia Law'; and so forth. I would not consider such views as anti-Muslim, but I am a secular leftist who agrees with such views. Some Muslims might consider them as anti-Muslim; some wouldn't (or even wrote some of them!). Similarly, different Jews may have different views as to what is antisemitic.

This article is not exactly anti-Muslim, but has views on the subject of Iraq which would arouse strong objections from most Muslims - and from almost everyone on DU:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/jan/27/illegal-war-iraqis-hope-blair

ETA: on the whole, British writers and politicians tend not to be specifically anti-Muslim. They tend to be anti-IMMIGRANT; and that incorporates anti-Muslim sentiments. Nonetheless, some very influential writers have made specifically anti-Muslim comments, implying that Britain or Europe as a whole is 'overrun' by Muslims; e.g. the 'Eurabia' myth - and they tend to write in places far more widely read than Comment is Free.

[shira]

84. that article isn't hateful or anti-Muslim bigotry

The point is that the Guardian's CiF editors regularly commission authors who write bigoted antisemitic articles. This, despite the fact that the Guardian hails itself as anti-racist and against all forms of hate and bigotry, leading many here at DU and elsewhere to think such hate is legitimately progressive or mainstream leftwing.

What do you think about the ADL and its views of what constitutes antisemitism or incitement to hatred against Jews? Do you think it's fair to regard the ADL as a progressive or leftwing organization?
http://www.adl.org/main_Israel/default.htm

[LeftishBrit]

85. It isn't anti-Muslim; but it is defending aggression against Iraq

Here is an example of a really anti-Muslim article, from a much more widely-read source, with far more influence on British public opinion, than CiF:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-452815/Will-Britain-day-Muslim.html

And here is an excellent article - from a source that I'm sure that you would consider as impeccable - describing and denouncing the 'Eurabia' myth. Unfortunately, some of the comments fully demonstrate the persistence and perniciousness of this myth in Britain.

http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=eurabia+timesonline&d=4775015851557187&mkt=en-GB&setlang=en-GB&w=e4dfea91,5190bdfc

Re the ADL:

Remember that though I have many American contact, I am not American, so I don't necessarily know *everything* about this organization. It is certainly progressive historically, and to some extent it still is. I approve of many of its actions; disagree with some (e.g. their acceptance of Turkish denial of the Armenian genocide).

However, one difference between the ADL, and your posts is that the ADL devote a lot of attention to right-wing antisemitism. Your posts seem to focus exclusively on antisemitism on the *left*. This may be just because this is a left-wing board, or because antisemitism from self-described left-wingers seems particularly hypocritical; but sometimes I get the feeling that you think that left-wingers are particularly antisemitic, or that right-wing antisemitism and other forms of bigotry are somehow less important. I may be wrong, but if you would post even occasionally about RW antisemitism (outside the Middle East itself), or at least acknowledge that right wing bigotry and hawkishness is a very serious and important problem, even if you choose to give your time to other issues, it would IMO make your messages more convincing.

I also get the feeling at times that you divide philosophies into stark categories. Thus, if someone is progressive, they must agree with all other people whom you regard as progressive. And that there is a certain set of viewpoints on Israel that always go together. It is *possible* to have different views in different areas of Israel-related controversies; e.g. (in my case) about 50-50 on the Israel-Palestine situation as a whole, 90% or sometimes 100% pro-Palestinian with regard to anything whatever to do with the RW settlers, and 200% pro-Israel when it comes to Israel being blamed for other countries' wars and other misdeeds. I realize that the combination means that almost everyone disagrees with me on *something*.

Finally, I do not consider that people who disagree with me on I/P in either direction are right-wing, unless their views lead them to sympathize with people who are generally right-wing: e.g. the pro-Israeli who supports Dan Pipes or Melanie Phillips or Christian Zionism; the pro-Palestinian who supports Pat Buchanan or Muslim Right organizations.

[shaayecanaan]

54. I always figured your reasonableness schtick...

was part of some phd thesis on conflict management or something. You never know what Oxbridge will fund these days.

My old man went to Oxford for a while. He said after his third day there he started thinking that Pol Pot had the right idea. After that, he swore up and down he would send his son to Syria to a good practical engineering school where I would learn to build bridges, which luckily he didnt follow through on.

Golly gee, was that a pointless aside or what?

When I first saw this forum about a year ago, there were quite a few members of the "three cheers" squad. It must be said, apart from the particular poster to whom we have recently referred, that there are no longer many of them left.

I take it Oberliner is gone. About a month ago he/she cryptically hinted that he/she might not be in this debating game just for shits and giggles. If so then times are tough, I guess.

Anyway, my point being that even in this relatively short time span the view amongst the demographic of this web site seems to have tended towards a more orthodox, leftist, anti-imperialist and pro-Palestinian position.

In a way its a pity as I have become quite accustomed to a good old slanging match on this board.

[pelsar]

55. come on...i'm still around....

In a way its a pity as I have become quite accustomed to a good old slanging match on this board.

now i feel fukin insulted....i don't count?

[azurnoir]

69. I think you've been "dethroned"

as the King Slanger or the King is dead long live the Queen so some such

but really I haven't a marathon Pelsar vs ? debate in a long time

[shaayecanaan]

76. Dont know...

Im quite prepared to believe you when you say that you are about as accommodating/leftist as you are likely to find in Israeli society.

If so then the prospects of change from the Israeli left are pretty much nil.

Im with Donald when he says that someone (probably Europe) is going to have to put in place fairly clear incentives for there to be any impetus for Israel to make peace with the Palestinians.

Removing MFN status, visa-free travel within the EU, etc. Make it hard enough for them and then wait for them to make a business decision, so to speak.

[pelsar]

78. why dont you reverse it....

give some incentives for the Palestinians to make peace?.......seems to me the ideas that were tried by israel kind of fell flat......pulling out of lebanon, did not bring us peace...pulling out of gaza didnt give us a peaceful border

and no economic incentive is going to induce us to risk lives......

perhaps the energy should be spend on making gaza a better place to live?...until that changes, i dont see the advantage (nor does the PA) of repeating the gaza experience in the westbank..do you?

[LeftishBrit]

60. You would be wrong!

I do have a PhD, but it's on young children's language development.

I have never studied conflict management, politics, or even political psychology, academically (we didn't do the latter in the days of the dinosaurs when I was an undergraduate). In my more cynical moments, though, I do think that spending a lot of time around 4-to-6-year-olds can be good training for this forum when it's in its full glory!

I suppose if I *had* been influenced by student politics of the Thatcherite 80s, I would have ended up as a Tory MP or New Labour journalist - as some of my contempories did. Phew, lucky escape for me!

What did your dad study?

[shaayecanaan]

72. Classical philology

not too far from your area I suppose.

His account of the politics was a bit different. Linguistics in general was going through that whole battle between structuralists and post-structuralists. It got incredibly bitter, people hated to show up for work and all that sort of thing.

[Violet_Crumble]

59. I just wanted to commend you on how patient and friendly you are to Shira...

It's a bit of a contrast to how I've seen you get with other posters...

Just curious, but have you read all her posts in this thread?

[IndianaGreen]

17. A lot of bad things happened in DU after 9-11 that let to an exodus to LGF

It is hard to tell who a person is just based on internet persona. I am certain that a lot of the bad blood that developed regarding Israel and related issues could have been avoided if people had known each other in person, rather than in an anonymous and one-dimensional discussion board.

What is happening in LGF could easily happen anywhere, even in DU.

Does the fact that a person changes their mind on a given issue, as Johnson did regarding some of his former net allies, mean that they were a plant or were phony to begin with? Hard question to answer in regards to LGF. In the real world, there is always plenty of evidence of personal epiphanies. There was plenty of evidence of that in the case of Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the Fort Hood terrorist. In both personal statements and in internet postings, it was clear that Hasan was becoming radicalized.

I am truly sorry that Charles Johnson is now fearful for his personal safety. Had he not been so cozy with the rightwingers he associated himself with, perhaps he would have recognized their propensity for violence.

A very long article, at the end of which I found myself nodding my head in agreement with Johnson when he says “I miss the days of Walter Cronkite.”

[varelse]

86. This is a very interesting article

thank you for sharing it here.