dr. elsewhere here
Fascinating that, following so close on the heels of our intense debate on the lack of discussion in the US about problems in - and about - Israel, comes this piece by Nicholas Kristoff, due out in full tomorrow.
Also out this week, in The American Conservative, a similar observation of the lack of open debate on this topic here in the MSM, but the opening up of the discussion on - of course - the blogs.
It seems it's time for the thin-skinned among us to take a glance in the mirror for some reflection. Only then will the debate be reasoned, and not so emotional and defensive.
Just sayin'.....
12 comments:
Obviously, I've long wanted to see this country have a more balanced and informed debate over Israel. At the same time, I can see why the conservatives might say: "Time to open the door to criticism of Israeli policy? Okay. You Democrats go first."
Your blog tops results for the keyword 'GILLIAN ANDERSON' ... at blogsearch.sg informative post
dr. elsehere writes:
"It seems it's time for the thin-skinned among us to take a glance in the mirror for some reflection."
"The thin-skinned among us"? Is that supposed to be a euphemism for Jews? If you, Joe and unirealist demand on setting the standard of racial sensitivity and self-examination in this blog, then I guess the rest of us WILL have to develop much thicker skins, to the extent anyone cares to spend time here among the 3 of you.
I truly wish you could hear yourself. Your tone-deafness is astonishing, in the year 2007. I grew up in the mid-west, in an area where the worst insult was "nigger lover". Jews weren't popular either, as you might imagine. And yet I have haven't this kind of language (at least, not out in the open), and the dripping contempt, since I was child.
Bravo!
"Dripping contempt"? Hardly. Unless you men the contempt directed at US.
erm, yeah, the thin-skinned among us, whatever color, race, religion, gender, party, class, or whatthehellever.
your response gives us a definition, no matter your color, race, religion, gender, party, class, or whatthehellever.
and, ditto what joe said.
Ditto, indeed. The two of you are evidently beyond argument -- and basic decency.
I can't answer for every post here, but you insist on conflating your criticism of Israel with outside criticism of your apparently racist attitudes. I'm glad that N. Kristoff is finally coming around to criticizing Israel, but I've been doing it for years, as have many other Jews. Indeed, I'd like to think my correspondence with N.K. over the Palestinian rejection of an Israeli "peace" plan, led him to repudiate (as he did, in print) his former contention that the Palestinians were the defaulting party.
If "our Jewish brethern" "of Jewish extraction" "our thin-skinned friends", etc. don't suggest contempt, what does?
This blog has become hateful, moronic. And long term readers know it ain't the first time Joe has gone off the deep end -- for instance, publically gloating at the misery of the New Orleans poor.
This has truly been instructive.
"Brethren" is contemptuous? In what universe?
If someone said that I was of "Italian extraction," do you think for one second that I would take offense?
The above two paragraphs demonstrate why the phrase "thin-skinned" is perfectly apt. The shoe fits you perfectly, dude. Can I interest you in some polish or an extra set of laces...?
You are simply (here I go again) one of those sophists who specializes into reading racism into non-racist texts. Is someone paying you to make trouble (see commentary for the newer post) or are you just an idiot?
And I did not gloat about the misery of New Orleans poor. In fact, I said that NO is the only bastion of civilization in the south. I've also called Spike Lee's "When the Levees Broke" the greatest documentary ever made. I do believe that since southerners -- who habitually take more from the government than they pay -- voted for the guys who insisted that global warming is mythical, then reconstruction costs should come out of their pockets, not out of the pockets of more productive Californians. I've always been angry about red state leeching -- and until the leeching stops, don't ask my words to be temperate.
What exactly do you want, Joseph? You're part of an enormous and powerful majority, and yet you're making yourself out to be a victim.
Your casual comments on Jews reveal either a staggering insensitivity, or simple racist attitudes. Period. That's hardly anything new in the world -- we're all racist at heart -- but your absolute refusal to even consider that you're giving deep offensive is telling.
If this were a question of say, black Africa, with equivalent comments about blacks (for example, that you had no apologies for your black step-father), I very much doubt you'd cling to your position, much less stake it out to begin with -- or sustain it, by arguing that you couldn't possibly have racist attitudes, because your favorite musician is Miles Davis, you had a black girlfriend and some of your best friends are black.
As for the claims (not mine) you're addressing above in other posts, I for one wasn't offended by the Israeli arts' students stories, or even the celebrating Israelis story, for the simple reason that you often raise unprovable accusations, against all kinds of people. Also, I'm perfectly willing to entertain the notion that some Israelis may have had prior notice of the attacks, because many in the Middle-East seemed to know they were coming, and that some Israelis might have celebrated, seeing in the attacks still greater U.S.-Israeli cooperation in the war against Palestinians and Arabs.
However, others might well take offense, and I can't say I blame them. The underlying current can be disturbing, and one doesn't sense a generous untainted mind behind it.
Finally, it's easy to reply to posts which are hysterical in nature. Even assuming these post actually come from Jews (and there's no knowing for sure) someone else's hysteria says nothing about your own underlying attitudes, which you have made plain.
As for New Orleans, why don't you reproduce your comments, and let your readers judge? I'm sure it would make a nice entry....
And finally, if I ever look at this blog again, strike me dead. For a blogger you write well, and on occasion have broken (or culled) interesting stories. But the internet has removed the filter, and that can be either good or bad. In this case, the negatives have overwhelmed the positives.
anon, I have already explained to you very patiently that you misunderstood that "no apology" remark. You read what I said. You understood my point. Yet you continue to misinterpret it willfully.
What does this prove? It proves that you are not sincere -- that you are baiting me deliberately, trying to get my (admittedly all-too-gettable) goat.
Read the new post. I'M ON TO YOU. You are just a "mega-phoney" -- cleverer, perhaps, than are the other kids playing the megaphone game. But you have the same agenda.
Let's cut the crap. I am not racist, and you are not really offended. You are merely pretending to be offended, and we both know it. That's the "megaphone" script.
Dude, when you're made, you're made. And you, my spooky friend, have been well and truly made.
So slink off back to spook-land. And if you do post again, use a real on-your-driver's-license name as I do -- show some damn BALLS -- or your comments will be deleted on sight. (No, I do not apply those rules to others, but I will apply them to you. You are special.)
You want my comments on New Orleans? I'm proud of every damn word and take nothing back. Here's good chunk of it:
* * *
Bush caused this disaster. He ignored warnings of global warming. He decimated the budgets for agencies to provide relief and shore up the levees.
Southerners voted for him. Southerners should live, and die, with the consequences.
It's an inexact analogy for a number of reasons, but -- you know why I have no sympathy when people tell me about the firebombing of Dresden? Because I know that Hitler was ELECTED. And even when he assumed dictatorial powers, the people of Dresden did not rebel or even become measurably annoyed. They cheered for Hitler's war of aggression. They brought their misery upon themselves.
Yes, I do have sympathy ONLY for the people of New Orleans. They did not vote for Bush. Ironically, they are the ones hardest hit. I advocate donations to charity only because I feel so sorry for the poor people of New Orleans. As for the Bush-voters elsewhere -- my attitude toward them is pretty much the same as my attitude toward the "victims" in Dresden.
Those who summarize my attitude as "filled with hate" -- well, guys like me have been on the receiving of pure hatred for years, every time we turned on the radio. For years, I advocated a policy of turning the other cheek, of not sinking to the other side's level. But what has that stance ever accomplished?
From now on, I say, let us give as we get.
If the Bushites are going to call us elitists, then we should call them hillbillies. They don't like being called hillbillies? Then they must pledge never again to use the term elitist. It's that simple.
If they talk about us as though we aren't even human beings (and they have done just that, for well over a decade), then I will henceforth refuse to acknowledge THEIR humanity. The days when they felt free to fling insults at our side without fear of return fire are OVER.
New Yorkers and Californians, I must repeat, give far more to the federal government than we receive. So I will never allow any southern hillbilly to pretend that they have helped us in our hours of need. We can take care of ourselves. The hillibillies just take and take FROM us -- year after year, decade after decade -- and then they INSULT us. And then these whiners act wounded when a guy like me dares, finally, to hurl similar insults right back at 'em.
I'm not swayed by the argument that opinions like mine will serve only to make southerners angry. Southerners who grew up watching televangelists are beyond human reason. They are like the pod people in "Invasion of the Body Snatchers." I think we are wasting time even attempting to talk with such people. One might as well try to speak to a member of Al Qaida.
i know this is offtopic (and only tagentally related with NOLA), but all this talk about danicng a hora (and what? no bagels & lox?) and fingerpointing.... made me wanna think about something else, and where you said that Bush caused Katrina-- well i agree that the W's script said global warming doesnt exist, and karma-wise the south did support this bozo, but Joe-- if you watch the video Loose Beads you can clearly see that the hurricane was packed with explosives, and it was really a ploy to get people to watch Al Gore's movie. ha ha ha ha .... but seriously, what the tinfoil hat people say on this is interesting (including Tom Bearden, William Cohen) is that a) the city of BAM was hit with scalars (but of course we weint in with aid to help them! which showed we were nice even though we were now ighting wars on both sides of them) b) the we & australia used scalars to set off the tsunami (a major cleansing of banda ache and other 'problematic' groups) but then c) some of the other groups who have this technology (i've heard irael has it, as do the yakuza) we're pissed at the recklessness, and so they decided that it was payback time.... i mean Katrina was already on the atlantic side of florida when it decided to button-hook aound, travel south and then go back into the gulf heading straight for mardi gras... might sounds nutty and almost CDTranny but i'm not making the stuff up http://www.ecologynews.com/ecologynews102.html
and besides, at least i'm not calling you a racist for using words like Brethren :p
hey, at least the Al Quaeda people don't read Tim LaHey....... I believe that if you read even a page more than two of the Left Behind series your brain officially turns to cement
Post a Comment