An editor of has declared that any pity for the Palestinians in Gaza is “unethical and immoral.” The editorial by Adi Dvir appeared in Israel’s largest newspaper, Yedioth Ahronoth, on January 4, 2009 as the international community has complained about civilians deaths in the campaign and the United States blocked a United Nations resolution calling for an end of all hostilities.
Adi Divr writes:
To pity the people of Gaza is to patronize them, in essence implying that they do not control their fate, the state of their government, or their own actions. It is to assume one of two things: Either that Gazans are too stupid to oust the cancerous Hamas presence in their midst, or that they are unable to do so.
A bit harsh I’d say. It is hard to view the current bombing campaign as a sign of respect.
I am sympathetic to Israel’s loss of patience over the incessant rocket attacks from Hamas areas. No country is expected to remain silent as such attacks occur. These rockets kill indiscriminately, including the recent tragedy where Palestinian rockets killed Palestinian children in Gaza. However, it is hard to see how this campaign is going to help end those hostilities. There is growing concern over excessive force, such as the killing of Iman al-Ham and the destruction of an entire apartment building to kill a Hamas leader. There are reports that Israel is using sound bombs and even calling homes to warn civilians before such attacks to reduce civilian fatalities, click here.
What is clear is that columns like those by Adi Dvir show how detached people have become to the suffering of people on the other side of the conflict. The columnist goes on to say “[j]ust as a crying baby who only elicits pity will continue to cry, the citizens of Gaza will continue to cry out to the world instead of taking matters into their own hands.” The total absence of any sense of humanity is all too familiar in this part of the world.
For those sane Israelis who support this operation, the condemnation of Adi Dvir should be shift and loud.
For the column, click here.
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn’t. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn’t be. And what it wouldn’t be, it would. You see?” (Alice in Wonderland, Lewis Carroll)
Well it seems Adi Dvir has gotten his wish and his world.
On JT’s comment that: “I am sympathetic to Israel’s loss of patience over the incessant rocket attacks from Hamas areas. No country is expected to remain silent as such attacks occur. However, it is hard to see how this campaign is going to help end those hostilities.”
***************
Some wisdom from popular culture here, this time from the right-wing movie “Red Dawn”:
If a fox stole your chickens… Would you slaughter your pig because he saw the fox? No. You would hunt the fox… You would find where it lives and destroy it! And how do we do this? Become a fox.
–Col. Strelnikov
Mespo,
I just saw that scene from Red Dawn a few days ago on the TV. I didn’t think of it’s importance then, but it does follow the same pattern of sick right wing thinking that we are seeing in Gaza and we have seen in Iraq.
This is a very good interview, right on target with this post. It’s from Terry Gross:
“Fresh Air from WHYY, December 23, 2008 · Filmmaker Ari Folman was a 19-year-old Israeli soldier serving in Beirut at the time of the 1982 massacre of Palestinian refuges. Though he has no memory of the time, he revisits the mission in his new film, Waltz With Bashir, a surreal, animated documentary of the terror.”
God Bless the Israelis.
Hey lefties, where is Barack Obama when you need him?
JT -
“There are reports that Israel is using sound bombs and even calling homes to warn civilians before such attacks”
That’s a good thing right? What they’re doing is calling to these apartment buildings and telling the civilians to get out. The “Sound Bombs” you mentioned are also designed to warn civilians of an impending rocket attack.
These seem like good steps designed to reduce civilian casualties.
A simply ridiculous assertion.
carlito
1, January 4, 2009 at 9:32 pm
God Bless the Israelis.
Hey lefties, where is Barack Obama when you need him?
Hey, Carlito. Obama isn’t the President yet. We understand your excitement about his being inaugurated, but you’ll have to wait a couple more weeks. Despite his disappearing act, George Bush (ugh!) is still the President. You’ve just gotta start keeping up with the news.
“God Bless the Israelis. Hey lefties, where is Barack Obama when you need him?”
*******************
You have to wonder about a guy who calls down the benevolence of the Almighty for a group of foreigner fighters, but ridicules his own countryman for not doing something he is legally precluded from doing. Strange animals these conservative trolls.
Israeli apartheid; makes old South Africa look like Disney World.
Buddha Is Laughing 1, January 5, 2009 at 7:02 am
“A simply ridiculous assertion.”
What’s a simply ridiculous assertion? That calling ahead to apartment complexes and warning the people of an impending attack is ridiculous?
That’s what the Israeli’s are doing. Same with the “Sound Bombs”.
The sound bombs are to warn people of an imminent missile strike.
These both seem like good steps towards reducing civilian casualties and as professor Turley pointed out, Hamas really asked for it this time by breaking the ceasefire and just launching rockets into Israel.
What would the US do if Mexico started firing rockets into the southern states? Killing Americans and destroying infrastructure?
What would we do?
What would want to do?
Wayne,
I just heard a very interesting discussion of this on Diane Rehm. “Hisham Melhem, Washington bureau chief for Al-Arabiya TV, and Washington correspondent for “An-Nahar” spoke directly to your point. He said, the warnings don’t help as there is no place for the people to go. Two of the commentators (including Mr. Melhem) readily pointed out that there is a complete lack of imagination and willingness to resolve this conflict on the part of all govts. involved. If we wanted to, we could knock some heads together and at minimum get an immediate cease fire. This is not an unsolvable problem but what is happening now makes a resolution more and more difficult.
Jill 1, January 5, 2009 at 11:56 am
“Wayne,
He said, the warnings don’t help as there is no place for the people to go. Two of the commentators (including Mr. Melhem) readily pointed out that there is a complete lack of imagination and willingness to resolve this conflict on the part of all govts. involved. If we wanted to, we could knock some heads together and at minimum get an immediate cease fire.”
I’m all for a ceasefire. I just also know that Israel does have a right to defend itself and Hamas had ZERO right to fire those rockets into Israel last week, breaking the truce and killing innocent civilians for no good reason.
This conflicts been going on as long as I’ve been alive. Longer even. And its clear the Arab’s are playing this for all its worth.
The idea that the people have “no where to go” when the building is called is not true. They just need to exit the building and move to another area. This has been proven in the last 48 hours by the fact that several buildings called prior to attacks were destroyed without the loss of life.
From the article:
I’m not taking sides here. This conflicts been going on so long that taking sides is impossible. I’m for peace, not war and I’m for the sanctity of human life. Nothing is more important to me. But I also recognize the right of a country to defend itself from ruthless, unprovoked attacks. Hamas started “this one” as it were, and when they launched rockets into Israel last week for no reason other than to push Israel and hopefully draw international ire against them, they crossed a line that they should not have crossed.
If Cuba launched missiles into Miami today, killing Americans and destroying homes and apartments, what would you suggest we do about it? “Talk” to Cuba? Ask them nicely to stop? Seek international help so we could hold sponsored peace talks?
I wouldn’t. I’d say we take Castro and his military out before they killed any more Americans.
Israel has the right to defend itself. They need to be measured and reasonable in their response, meaning surgical strikes and preferably special forces to take out Hamas rocket sites and leadership, but they have a right to protect themselves and given our current occupation of Iraq I don’t see how we have any moral high ground to preach from here.
Wayne,
I agree with Gyges, that when people have stated their positions and they aren’t going to see eye to eye, it’s time to stop posting about it. I agree with you that Israel has a right to defend itself. Defending oneself militarily is one way to go, but it hasn’t shown any success in decades. There are more ways to respond to violence than with more violence. Suppose Israel had gone to the international community to set up outside peacekeepers to stop the rocket attacks, while simultaneously opening up Gaza to much needed food, medicine,energy and other necessities? They could delegitimize Hamas rather quickly. Responding in kind is giving legitimacy to an illegitimate organization. They are also delegitmizing themselves in the eyes of the international community. Belicosity is probably the least effective way to handle attacks. I’ve stated my position. I heard what you said and I don’t agree with it. At this point I will stop. It’s not lack of respect, just a recognition that we don’t/won’t agree.
Jill 1, January 5, 2009 at 12:46 pm
“Wayne,
I agree with Gyges, that when people have stated their positions and they aren’t going to see eye to eye, it’s time to stop posting about it.”
What?
I mean seriously, what?
So you get to state your opinion, along with appropriate responses but when you direct a comment towards me I’m not allowed to respond to it?
If you didn’t want me to respond to your comment to me then why’d you make it? What kind of lunacy is this new doctrine? You get to comment to me, but I am not permitted to respond?
I didn’t realize there was this new “one comment per topic rule”.
The reason I didn’t realize it, probably has something to do with the fact that you nor anyone else observes it.
Apparently this is one of those new rules that only applies to me.
Sorry Jill, but that statement is founded in insanity not reality. Everyone has a right to comment, and if you don’t want people responding to you then why bother addressing them?
I for one don’t want people commenting to me who think I have no right to counter their response.
Seriously, that was just an utterly ridiculous thing to say.
I sometimes wonder if this is a blog, or a Kindergarten.
And the real irony of your statement is that AFTER declaring I have no right to respond to your comment to me, you then proceed to “restate” your argument.
Thus breaking your own crazy new rule.
You stated your opinion once Jill, thus by your rule you have no right to address the topic further.
What’s the words you used? Oh yea.
Seems you just broke your own zany rule.
Guess its one of those “do as I say not as I do” thingy’s, huh?
Wayne,
I believe Jill was trying to end her side of the discussion amicably, not force you to be quiet.
I’m perfectly capable of interpreting the English language on my own there rimshot Pete, but thanks for the tip. And since you apparently are not, here’s what she wrote.
Then, after writing that, she goes on and continues “posting about it”.
As she just instructed me not to do.
So thanks for the two cents worth but I think I’ve got it covered.
Now aren’t you supposed to be keeping you comments to yourself or something?
Oh and as for the “amicably” part, thanks for implying that my reasonable, polite and informative response to her was not “amicable”.
Which is what you just implied.
How about you go back to insulting me for no good reason and I go back to calling you a dick?
It made more sense that way.
“But I also recognize the right of a country to defend itself from ruthless, unprovoked attacks. Hamas started “this one” as it were, and when they launched rockets into Israel last week for no reason other than to push Israel and hopefully draw international ire against them, they crossed a line that they should not have crossed.”
I’m sorry, but does Hamas represent Lebanon or Gaza?
Or does Hamas conveniently represent any country they happen to lob grenades from?
I’m glad Jill posted that though, because it goes to show the real issue here with the blog “regulars”.
None of you can handle debate, or opposing positions. Except maybe for Mespo. He at least debates, and doesn’t “whine”.
The rest of you are a bunch of whiners. Whenever someone has an opposing position, you gang up on them and try to paint them into being some sort of villain. It seems that you prefer an echo chamber as opposed to a venue for diverse opinions.
I said nothing wrong, and certainly nothing deserving to be effectively told to “shut up” which is effectively what Jill just told me by stating I couldn’t redress her responses to my statements. And which is also what you and your little “verbose” comment yesterday was all about. I’ll state my opinions Gyges, and read and respond to the comments, without any help from you.
Stick to what you know best. Acting like a pompous, self righteous ass and leave the rest to me.
Bob, Esq. 1, January 5, 2009 at 1:28 pm
“I’m sorry, but does Hamas represent Lebanon or Gaza?
Or does Hamas conveniently represent any country they happen to lob grenades from?”
Apparently, since the people of Lebanon or Gaza are unable to contain or control them and allow them to operate freely in their regions.
If Al Quaida was in Mexico launching missiles at the US, would you likewise be against the US moving into Mexico to take them out?
Don’t be drawn in Bob to the peripheral blather. My position is not siding with Israel. It’s also not siding with Hamas. But Hamas launched rockets into Israel killing innocent people and that is an act of war. If there was a group operating out of the US that was striking Russia, or China, launching ICBM’s from US soil and hitting the Kremlin or Beijing, they wouldn’t worry about whether or not Washington “sanctioned” it. They’d attack us and rightfully so, because we permitted this so called covert army to live and operate in our country, and to harm and injure others from our lands.
Israel has a right to defend itself. That’s all I’m saying.
Wayne,
I was stating my position and why I feel the way I do. I am not trying to stop you from responding. It’s not my right to do that. I think it was confusing of me to say that and give a response. It was not my intent to silence you and I hope you have seen by now that I am not out to “get” you. I like to read many opinions and I’m happy when more people respond, not fewer. Mike Spinell wrote about his feelings on this issue. He gave information to look up and then told everyone to make up their own mind. I am trying to follow his example. That is what I have chosen to do.
Again, that is my choice and it is not my intent nor my right to impose it on you.
Israel has a right to defend itself. That’s all I’m saying.
I think everyone agrees on that. It’s the methods they use that are debatable.
Ok Jill, thanks. Sorry if I misinterpreted your statement.
“Apparently, since the people of Lebanon or Gaza are unable to contain or control them and allow them to operate freely in their regions.
If Al Quaida was in Mexico launching missiles at the US, would you likewise be against the US moving into Mexico to take them out?”
Care to clarify your metaphysics of morals here; much less your theory of sovereign nations?
“Every action is right which in itself, or in the maxim on which it proceeds, is such that it can coexist along with the freedom of the will of each and all in action, according to a universal law.”
…
“The resistance which is opposed to any hindrance of an effect is in reality a furtherance of this effect and is in accordance with its accomplishment. Now, everything that is wrong is a hindrance of freedom, according to universal laws; and compulsion or constraint of any kind is a hindrance or resistance made to freedom. CONSEQUENTLY, if a certain exercise of freedom is itself a hindrance of the freedom that is according to universal laws, it is wrong; and the compulsion of constraint which is opposed to it is right, as being a hindering of a hindrance of freedom, and as being in accord with the freedom which exists in accordance with universal laws. Hence, according to the logical principle of contradiction, all right is accompanied with an implied title or warrant to bring compulsion to bear ON ANY ONE WHO MAY VIOLATE IT IN FACT.” (‘Science of Right,’ Immanuel Kant)
Seeing you’ve identified Hamas as the ‘actor’, I’m keen to guess how you can show me Israel’s ‘implied title or warrant’ to ‘bring compulsion to bear’ on the citizens of Gaza (or Lebanon) for the acts of Hamas.
Les 1, January 5, 2009 at 1:53 pm
“I think everyone agrees on that. It’s the methods they use that are debatable.”
No doubt. And there are some serious questions here as to what Israel is doing that is not being discussed. Like the use of cluster bombs.
Don’t let people paint me into a position that I have not taken. This started when I “illuminated” a comment by JT in the article where he wrote about Israel calling ahead prior to bombing, and the “Sound Bombs”. The way he wrote it it appeared that he saw these things as somehow bad. I merely pointed out that they seemed like good things and were a sign Israel was at least trying to reduce civilian casualties. I was just clarifying that statement, which caused several of the regulars to conclude I was siding with Israel.
As a side note, I can see JT augmented his statement this morning to clarify that these two things, the “calling ahead” and the “sound bombs” were steps to prevent unnecessary deaths.
Bob, Esq. 1, January 5, 2009 at 1:56 pm
“Apparently, since the people of Lebanon or Gaza are unable to contain or control them and allow them to operate freely in their regions.
If Al Quaida was in Mexico launching missiles at the US, would you likewise be against the US moving into Mexico to take them out?”
Care to clarify your metaphysics of morals here; much less your theory of sovereign nations?”
How about you try answering the question? Instead of all this hype?
How about talking to me, instead of at me?
If Al Quaida was hold up in Mexico, and had established mobile Missile Platforms and was launching missiles into the US and killing Americans and destroying infrastructure, would we be justified in invading Mexican territory to eliminate the enemy?
See?
Not an easy question to answer, is it?
“How about you try answering the question? Instead of all this hype?
How about talking to me, instead of at me?”
Allow me to further illustrate. Law & Morals are founded within one very simple concept: “Adopt only that maxim that you would will to become a universal law.” That’s the categorical imperative.
The categorical imperative doesn’t give a rat’s ass about how you or I feel. It’s got nothing to do with you or me and everything to do with an analysis of ‘what would become of the world if this were always the case.’
Instead of thinking of the categorical imperative as hype, try a more anthropomorphic approach.
Whenever you get lost in thoughts of who “deserves” what; imagine the categorical imperative as Clint Eastwood’s character at the end of “Unforgiven.”
Little Bill: “I don’t deserve this; to die like this. I was building a house.”
William Munny: “Deserve’s got nothin’ to do with it.”
“If Al Quaida was hold up in Mexico, and had established mobile Missile Platforms and was launching missiles into the US and killing Americans and destroying infrastructure, would we be justified in invading Mexican territory to eliminate the enemy?”
No; for the simple reason that Mexico was not the actor.
Likewise, if Al Qaeda recruited a bunch of trigger happy Texans just itching to bomb the hell out cities on the border of Mexico for allowing illegal immigrants to cross, Mexico would not be legally or morally justified to wage war against the United States.
Bob, Esq. 1, January 5, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Allow me to further illustrate. Law & Morals are founded within one very simple concept: “Adopt only that maxim that you would will to become a universal law.” That’s the categorical imperative
No, I don’t think I will. I asked you a simple question. A question you are posting voluminous amounts of bullshit to try to circumvent.
Forget all the polysyllabic words. Forget the categorical imperative and anthropomorphic approach and just answer the question.
Its a simple question.
If Al Quaida was hold up in Mexico, and had established mobile Missile Platforms and was launching missiles into the US and killing Americans and destroying infrastructure, would we be justified in invading Mexican territory to eliminate the enemy?
Yes?
Or no?
Bob, Esq. 1, January 5, 2009 at 2:22 pm
“No; for the simple reason that Mexico was not the actor.”
There. That wasn’t so hard was it?
Thanks for answering.
With regards to your answer, all I can say is I am glad you’re not the Secretary of Defense.
We disagree. In philosophy and in morality. I believe if the Mexican government can’t control the people operating within its borders, then its surrendered a degree of its sovereignty, with regards to our right to move into their territory for the express purpose of eliminating a national threat.
You think otherwise.
We disagree.
Wayne,
If I had meant to be insulting I would have said something like “Can’t you read? Jill was being nice and trying to avoid the sort of long rants you subject us to in the name of ‘debate.’ I wish you would just shut up and let the rest of us have a conversation.” I didn’t say that. It would have been against the wishes of our host, and I believe that your two biggest fault is a thin skin combined with a tendency to get too worked up over disagreements with others. I don’t think that makes you a morally, intellectually or in any way inferior or make you any less deserving of having your voice heard. I just get annoyed with your demeanor sometimes. I realize that I have my own annoying faults, but I don’t feel bad for having a personality that annoys you. I also don’t expect you to feel bad for having one that annoys me. The last few days (which I’ve already apologized for, I wonder if you’ll extend me the same respect?) notwithstanding, I generally ignore you when you get to ranting. I don’t always suppress my bad habits, but I try.
What I did was to defend the motives of someone who doesn’t generally defend herself. By calling her actions “amicable” I didn’t mean, or even imply, that yours weren’t. I won’t apologize to you for this because you choose to be slighted even when no insult was present.
“No, I don’t think I will. I asked you a simple question. A question you are posting voluminous amounts of bullshit to try to circumvent.”
So you’re less concerned with the reasoning for my answer than my answer itself. I see.
“Forget all the polysyllabic words. Forget the categorical imperative and anthropomorphic approach and just answer the question.”
Actually I answered it the first time via posing a question illustrating just how implausible your argument was. I answered it a second time by reminding you that the law doesn’t give a crap how you ‘feel’ about who ‘deserves’ what. And then I answered it a third time in crayon.
How do I put this; your hypothetical is bullshit. The law punishes actors and not geography; no matter how much you feel a certain geography ‘deserve’s it’
Gyges 1, January 5, 2009 at 2:34 pm
“Wayne,
If I had meant to be insulting I would have said something like “Can’t you read? Jill was being nice and trying to avoid the sort of long rants you subject us to in the name of ‘debate.’ I wish you would just shut up and let the rest of us have a conversation.” I didn’t say that.”
Sure you did.
You just said it.
Gyges 1, January 5, 2009 at 2:34 pm
“It would have been against the wishes of our host, and I believe that your two biggest fault is a thin skin combined with a tendency to get too worked up over disagreements with others. I don’t think that makes you a morally, intellectually or in any way inferior or make you any less deserving of having your voice heard. I just get annoyed with your demeanor sometimes.”
Which is why the “apology” Jill was fawning over wasn’t worth the pixels it populated.
Because it was insincere. It was merely to appease our “host”.
Just like now as you try to paint me into being angry, or thin skinned.
Just because someone is capable of recognizing your carefully worded insults, doesn’t mean they’re thin skinned. Nor does responding to them. You have insulted me many times, in many threads, subtly usually, so as not to draw attention or ire from our host, but you’ve done it nonetheless. You do it in a manner befitting a big brother talking to his younger, dumber sibling. I recognize it. I acknowledge it. And I respond to it. That doesn’t make me thin skinned.
Now if you’re saying you’d like to start over, then fine. I’m all for starting fresh. We can put all the water under the bridge you like. But that means talking to me with respect, not condescension.
Talk to me with respect and I’ll return it in kind.
Gyges 1, January 5, 2009 at 2:34 pm
“What I did was to defend the motives of someone who doesn’t generally defend herself. By calling her actions “amicable” I didn’t mean, or even imply, that yours weren’t. I won’t apologize to you for this because you choose to be slighted even when no insult was present.”
No. What you did was stick your nose in where it didn’t belong.
You have a history with me, and thus you knew your interjection would not be well received. You knew that.
You know you knew that.
Unless of course you want to declare you are now stupid, something we both know you’re not.
As for the apologies, keep em. Trust me I’m much more insulted by your fake, insincere self aggrandizing apologies which are merely for the sake of appearance than I ever was by your subtle yet bellicose barbs. And that only because you think I’m doltish enough to buy them.
If you want to bury the hatchet so to speak, then consider it buried. Just talk to me with a modicum of respect and I shall do likewise.
Bob, Esq. 1, January 5, 2009 at 2:36 pm
“Actually I answered it the first time via posing a question illustrating just how implausible your argument was. I answered it a second time by reminding you that the law doesn’t give a crap how you ‘feel’ about who ‘deserves’ what. And then I answered it a third time in crayon.
How do I put this; your hypothetical is bullshit. The law punishes actors and not geography; no matter how much you feel a certain geography ‘deserve’s it’”
First of all the implausibility of a analogy is never a topic for debate. It only becomes a topic for debate when the receiver is unable to refute the logic thereof, as you are now.
Secondly, its not that implausible. We have intelligence now telling us Al Quaida is using Mexico to enter the US because of the similarities in appearance to the Mexican people and the Arabic people. So the idea that Al Quaida might use Mexico as a staging ground to launch attacks on the US is not at all implausible.
Not that its plausibility matters on bit, as I stated above.
As for your Red Herrings and Straw Dogs about who “deserves what”, that’s just more bullshit.
I never suggested this was about deserving. I said Israel, and any country for that matter, has a RIGHT to defend themselves.
And if Al Quaida started slamming rockets into Miami, felling Senior citizens homes and the Mexican government couldn’t (or wouldn’t) do anything about it, IMMEDIATELY, then we would have every right to move into Mexican territory and take out the enemy.
The notion of letting Americans die while we debate with Mexico and the international community is absurd. Ridiculous. We’d go in, and we’d go in guns blazing and we’d not stop until the enemy was defeated. And we’d be fully within our rights to do so.
As for your “crayon” comment, stow it. In case you haven’t gathered by now I have fairly broad vocabulary and am not hindered in that respect. I merely was keeping you from burying your answer in pompous sounding bullshit.
My I have missed quite the gun fight at the OK corral today with four of our regulars. My only comment is to say I wasn’t aware that Hamas has killed anyone with those rocket attacks. I thought they were more nuisance that lethal. Certainly Israel can defend itself but is there no room for a proportional response. If I slap you across the face, may you you sever my headwith a bayonet in response. Is that moral or even productive?
Gyges:
I think your comments in defense of Jill are noble, and I am not aware of any annoying habits of yours. I also think your take on our friend waynebro is dead on.
Mespo,
Be that as it may, I should have had better manners than to do it when I’m a guest at someone’s “house.”
Mespo,
I think that what people find annoying is like Beauty, mostly universal but with enough variation that everyone gets to join in the fun.
“# mespo727272 1, January 5, 2009 at 3:49 pm
My I have missed quite the gun fight at the OK corral today with four of our regulars. My only comment is to say I wasn’t aware that Hamas has killed anyone with those rocket attacks. I thought they were more nuisance that lethal. Certainly Israel can defend itself but is there no room for a proportional response. If I slap you across the face, may you you sever my headwith a bayonet in response. Is that moral or even productive?
# 42 mespo727272 1, January 5, 2009 at 3:52 pm
Gyges:
I think your comments in defense of Jill are noble, and I am not aware of any annoying habits of yours. I also think your take on our friend waynebro is dead on”
Ahh, and there it is. The gang up. When someone won’t submit to your bullshit, in comes the Hole-In-The-Head gang to shore up your nonsense and promote your self professed superiority.
So instead of burying the hatchet, or finding that respect for others, you will now burrow into the warm bosom of your Band of Bullshitters, and return to declaring my inferiority.
Fine.
I made an attempt to meet you in the middle but obviously the 3 Amigos would rather play the pile on game rather than “get along” as you all profess you want to.
Just don’t come crying to me anymore about playing nice.
And Mespo? Well, you know where you can shove it, right?
Gyges 1, January 5, 2009 at 4:01 pm
“Mespo,
Be that as it may, I should have had better manners than to do it when I’m a guest at someone’s “house.””
Oh I’m sorry.
I wasn’t aware this was “your house”.
And here I was under the mistaken notion all along that this was Professor Turley’s blog.
How utterly inferior of me.
waynebro:
Come on. Nobody’s insulting your intelligence, just making an observation that sometimes, just sometimes, you appear a little thin-skinned. We all like to read your comments and your points are often well taken, but what makes this little soiree go is differences in opinion crisply put and wittily defended. Don’t pack your marbles up just yet.
mespo727272 1, January 5, 2009 at 3:49 pm
“My I have missed quite the gun fight at the OK corral today with four of our regulars. My only comment is to say I wasn’t aware that Hamas has killed anyone with those rocket attacks. I thought they were more nuisance that lethal. ”
Well Mespo, as usual when you come in to toss your less than two cents worth, what you “know” and what you are “aware of” is far from reality.
Next time you decide to waltz in and stir up an argument that was clearly winding down, you might try to at least be accurate.
waynebro:
Unfortunately the AP in a Jan. 3, 2009 article disagrees with your unreferenced quote:
“Israel’s bruising air campaign against Gaza over the past eight days began days after a six-month truce expired. Gaza health officials say the air war has killed more than 480 Palestinians in an attempt to halt Hamas rocket attacks that were reaching farther into Israel than ever before. Four Israelis have been killed by rockets.”
Apparently your figures are from before the truce. 480 for 4 doesn’t seem proportional to me, or, it seems, to most anyone else.
mespo727272 1, January 5, 2009 at 4:19 pm
“waynebro:
Come on. Nobody’s insulting your intelligence, just making an observation that sometimes, just sometimes, you appear a little thin-skinned. We all like to read your comments and your points are often well taken, but what makes this little soiree go is differences in opinion crisply put and wittily defended. Don’t pack your marbles up just yet.”
Stow it.
Your combined attempts with your side kick who’s name shall not be uttered herein to drive me out just haven’t worked nor will they. You think you’re subtle, or fooling someone but you’re not. You’re just a pompous ass who’s too afraid to post his own photo, probably due to the fact you’re not who or what you claim to be. For all your talk, you and your friend who also failed to post her photo after declaring she “ought to”, are just two pompous snobs with big mouths and bigger egos who half the time don’t have an intelligent thought between the two of you. You saw this argument between Gyges and me winding down, so you decided to come in and stir it up. That makes you less than the grandiose image you present in here. The fact that your long time “regulars” support you and gang up on me is merely a tribute to “group think”, nothing more. You’re a coward. And a liar. And I’d call you that to your face if you had the balls to show it.
And as for my marbles, at least I’ve still go mine.
What happened to yours?
mespo727272 1, January 5, 2009 at 4:33 pm
“waynebro:
Unfortunately the AP in a Jan. 3, 2009 article disagrees with your unreferenced quote:
“Israel’s bruising air campaign against Gaza over the past eight days began days after a six-month truce expired. Gaza health officials say the air war has killed more than 480 Palestinians in an attempt to halt Hamas rocket attacks that were reaching farther into Israel than ever before. Four Israelis have been killed by rockets.”
Apparently your figures are from before the truce. 480 for 4 doesn’t seem proportional to me, or, it seems, to most anyone else.”
Stow this too. You actually think I’d reasonably debate the issue with you after you waltzed in and insulted me like that? Go diddle yourself mespo. If you want respect then show some.
Well folks, these “discourses” illustrate the epitome of the pros and cons involving the freedom of speech section of the First Amendment. Professor Turley has stated that he prefers to allow such freedoms, including the endless and irrelevant trolling copy/pastes that—at least—increase the blog hits per year honors!
Most importantly, we are all free to ignore whatever sections we choose and/or avoid persons with whom we might prefer to stay disengaged. This is one very important provision of the U.S. Constitution receiving full display and action within this blawg.
The only reason I’m being attacked in this thread is because I dared point out Israels attempts to curb civilian deaths. I took a partially opposing view, then was quickly shoved into a completely opposing view (whether I possessed it or not), and then of course comes the inevitable character flaw lectures. These are designed to augment your positions by instead of attacking my positions, attacking my character. I’ve counted this technique in here now over half a dozen times. It works pretty well too.
Someone disagrees or offers a contrary opinion. Others counter it, then when their counters are rebuffed or contested, they turn to character assassinations. It’s a common tactic, made famous by Karl Rove. And it works really, really, well.
FFLeo:
Your advice is sound as always. I will take it.
Good call.
I just wish people on this blog could be more civil when discussing “Red Dawn”.
I’m gonna close my role in this thread with this.
I never defended over-reactions by Israel. I never defended civilian killing. I came in and pointed out, and accurately so, that a statement in the above article seemed to infer that the telephone calls and “sound bombs” were a bad thing. I pointed out they were a good thing. This prompted two responses.
One from Professor Turley, where he modified the statement to point out these were to reduce civilian casualties. Probably just an oversight in the original article no doubt.
And one from others, trying to paint me into a corner into defending EVERYTHING Israel is doing and has done.
Its a strawman way to argue for sure. You try to force my position into something it is not. Then, when you don’t like my responses, you start with the character assassination, the condescending talk and the holier than thou facade. And it works pretty well. See, you get me responding to not one, but three or four people and it appears I’m ranting, when in fact I’m responding to multiple parties. It works well. One does not stand well against many.
But if alone I must post then alone I’ll post, rather than put up with such pompous snobbery that would have turned heads on the Titanic. This is a “click” to be sure, you few. You loyal few. You “band of brothers” or something like that. And I’m clearly on the outside looking in. But that doesn’t make me wrong.
And that mespo thinks that because “his” numbers are lower than “my” numbers that that somehow lessons Hamas’s attacks on civilians is indeed a testament to that fact.
He was wrong when he implied (I’m doing that cool 3rd person snobbery now, only it doesn’t really work since I’m talking to myself) that there were no deaths. Now he wants to argue the number as if that makes it better. The fact is Hamas suddenly started murdering civilians launching wave after wave of rocket attacks on civilian populations and that is a reason for Israel to respond. We holding no moral high ground of our own with our troops currently occupying a foreign country that never attacked us, can’t really fault them for doing what they need to do to defend themselves. We can demand however they do it humanely, and I was merely pointing out what appeared to be an attempt by Israel to do just that, by warning civilians prior to air strikes.
For my stating that, all this followed. Perhaps I am a bit thin skinned sometimes, or at least appear that way. But considering how many times I’ve been attacked out of the blue for no reason other than “being here” it’s surprising I’m not more so.
Anyway that’s all I got. Mespo, sorry I called you a liar. I went over there. You helped me over, but I still made the trip.
Seamus,
Some subjects are just to charged to discuss calmly. The greatest movie ever made is one of those topics.
Gyges:
“Some subjects are just to charged to discuss calmly. The greatest movie ever made is one of those topics.”
Ah yes, who could ever forget Jackie Treehorn’s production of “Gutter balls?” Especially with Kenny Rogers on the soundtrack.
The assertion that pity for Palestinians is immoral and unethical is simply ridiculous.
Perhaps I should have been clearer.
BIL
Hope you’re not implying I was asserting that it wasn’t. My statements had nothing to do with that article declaring it immoral to pity the Palestinian people.
Bob.
I neglected one thing in my response to you.
I was trying to steer you away from your philosophical argument because you for some reason were failing to mention that Hamas was elected by the people of Gaza. Hamas hold 70 seats in Gaza on the Palestinian Council. More than half of Gaza residents voted for Hamas, so therefore your disinterested third party routine falls flat.
Hamas represents the Gaza majority and that doesn’t support your reasoning. Not that theres any excuse for Israel to over react but Hamas is the elected majority in Gaza, thus its a legitimate target when Hamas attacks Israel.
Bob:
“Ah yes, who could ever forget Jackie Treehorn’s production of “Gutter balls?” Especially with Kenny Rogers on the soundtrack”
******************
Yeah, yeah, oh, yeah!
Waynbro, you said
“Which is why the “apology” Jill was fawning over wasn’t worth the pixels it populated.
Because it was insincere. It was merely to appease our “host”.
Just like now as you try to paint me into being angry, or thin skinned.
Just because someone is capable of recognizing your carefully worded insults, doesn’t mean they’re thin skinned. Nor does responding to them. You have insulted me many times, in many threads, subtly usually, so as not to draw attention or ire from our host, but you’ve done it nonetheless. You do it in a manner befitting a big brother talking to his younger, dumber sibling. I recognize it. I acknowledge it. And I respond to it. That doesn’t make me thin skinned.
Now if you’re saying you’d like to start over, then fine. I’m all for starting fresh. We can put all the water under the bridge you like. But that means talking to me with respect, not condescension.
Talk to me with respect and I’ll return it in kind.”
What Jill said to your was extremely respectful, and I feel it was 100% sincere.
This just illustrates the point others have made about being too quick to take personal offense with any disagreement. Haven’t you caught on to the kind of sparring there is here? This is courtroom cool where no bead of sweat is ever allowed to be seen, and you’re getting worked up into a lather.
LindyLou 1, January 5, 2009 at 8:11 pm
“What Jill said to your was extremely respectful, and I feel it was 100% sincere.
This just illustrates the point others have made about being too quick to take personal offense with any disagreement.”
No Lindy.
What this illustrates is how the group pile on effect can snowball a minor discussion or disagreement into many, many, many different, independently oscillating disagreements and arguments.
In this particular instance, you are misreading what I wrote to Gyges and misapplying it to Jill.
None of that was directed to Jill.
But so goes the comedy calliope. We’re all guilty of the same things I think, but it’s easier to pick one particular person and lump it all on them. The Jews used to do this many years ago by heaping their collective sins on a single goat, then banishing it to the wilderness. So, I’m the goat. Fine. I’ll live with it.
Anyway I’m tired of arguing with 30 different people about 30 different flaws with my character so pardon my lack of enthusiasm. I was trying to meet some here half way but that didn’t work and now you and others will need to straggle in and misread some more into what I wrote so you can bash me some more so say your dirties and be done with it. I was hoping at least to stay near the topic but clearly that’s not gonna happen now.
Lindy Lou,
I appreciate what you said. I had left this thread and just saw what Wayne had written because I looked at your post. What I wrote was completely sincere and thank you for recognizing that.
Wayne,
I am angry that you accuse me of being insincere. I was not. I thought this matter had been settled a long while back in this thread. I am hoping it is resolved at this time.
Jill 1, January 5, 2009 at 8:27 pm
“Wayne,
I am angry that you accuse me of being insincere. I was not. I thought this matter had been settled a long while back in this thread. I am hoping it is resolved at this time”
Amazing.
See what I mean?
Now Jill is taking what you said about what I said about what Gyges said that you misapplied to Jill, and likewise misapplying it to herself.
Now Jill thinks that what you said I said that I did say but not to the party you said I said it to, was said to her instead of the party it was said to because of what you just said.
See how the pile on effect works?
It feeds on confusion and with each new member comes new false flag attacks requiring one person to respond to many false flag attacks, making the one person look “hostile” or “argumentative”. Its easy to do, and there’s a few master artisans here who have ample experience employing this technique. You’re just an unwitting ally, yet a critical component for success.
-
Jill: I never said that. Don’t try and figure it out. It’ll just make your head hurt.
I know it will, cause its giving me a migraine.
O.K. Wayne. I consider the matter closed and hope you will as well. We should all go watch Red Dawn!
Liberal Blogosphere Duped By 3-Year-Old ‘Gaza Bombing Video’
By Noel Sheppard | January 5, 2009 – 15:17
Just how badly do many liberal bloggers want to depict Israelis as heartless killers and Hamas as poor defenseless victims?
On Sunday, a more than three year old video of an accidental munitions truck explosion at a Palestinian rally in September 2005 was spread around the liberal blogosphere as footage of an Israeli attack on Gaza on January 3, 2009.
Two prominent leftwing websites — Raw Story and Democratic Underground — displayed this video for hours before a poster at Reddit exposed the hoax (h/t NBer Blazer).
Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs reported early Sunday:
A gruesome propaganda video uploaded to LiveLeak that purported to show the aftermath of an IDF attack on civilians in Gaza turned out to be a fraud—it actually shows the results of an accidental explosion of a truck full of Hamas rockets at a Palestinian rally.
This didn’t stop the video from reaching the top spot on reddit.com and gaining more than 2,000 up votes, because reddit.com is absolutely infested with antisemites and terror supporters: GRAPHIC Video of Israel Defense Force’s attack on Gaza civilian market — originally uploaded on & banned by YouTube (NSFW) : politics.
Raw Story issued a correction Sunday:
On Sunday, RAW STORY ran video of a bombing in Gaza purported to be recent footage leaked from an exiled Palestinian blogger. We removed the video from the site early Sunday and issued a correction but the original was deleted in a database without the actual html file being removed, so the original persisted through Monday morning without our notice.
The footage is the aftermath of a devastating bombing taking place in a market, said to have been taken on Saturday. According to Haitham Sabbah, it was taken “immediately after a terrorist Israeli air strike hit a busy market where kids with their mothers and fathers were searching for food to eat from one of the local markets early on Saturday 03, Jan 2009.”
Raw Story has removed its original article on this matter, but Question Everything still has the text:
As Israel’s IDF wages it’s [sic] own “media war” via Twitter and YouTube, uncensored footage from Palestine has been completely blacked out in the US.
Until now.
Saturday, before Israel launched a full-scale invasion of Gaza, a Palestinian with a camera witnessed a devastating bombing. His video shows the brutal, bloody results of an air strike on what appears to be a civilian area.
In the footage, scores of bodies – men, women and children – lay strewn about a Gaza market as abject chaos spirals around them. Some struggle to their feet, covered in concrete powder and blood, as others assess their injuries or join the effort to carry away wounded.
Within moments, men in camouflage holding automatic weapons and RPGs assert a growing number among the citizenry. The men, presumably affiliated with Hamas, appear to be helping with crowd control and medical response.
The source of this video was Haitham Sabbah, a self-proclaimed “Palestinian activist and blogger.”
Although he too has updated his blog to reflect his error, this is what he originally wrote concerning this video:
This video clip was taken with a mobile camera immediately after a terrorist Israeli air strike hit a busy market where kids with their mothers and fathers were searching for foot to eat from one of the local markets early on Saturday 03, Jan 2009, Gaza.
As you will see, there are no words to describe the terror of the Jewish state of Israhell. This is why Israel is continuously refusing to allow foreign correspondence and reporters from entering Gaza.
Please spread the video widely. Let the world see what their news TV channels won’t show about reality of Israel. (YouTube deleted the video minutes after it was uploaded, but it is worth trying again).
Get the code for the video to embed on your blog from: http://sabbah.blip.tv/#1642223.
I guess that’s all it takes to get anti-Israeli propaganda spread throughout the liberal blogosphere these days.
How sad.
Jill 1, January 5, 2009 at 8:48 pm
“O.K. Wayne. I consider the matter closed and hope you will as well. We should all go watch Red Dawn!”
okay,.. but you get it right?
I never called you insincere. That was LindyLou confusing something I said to Gyges, about Gyges apology into something to do with you.
I never called you insincere. Anyway I hope you see that.
But I refuse to watch anything with Patrick Swayze in it.
Whew! I’m just delighted to see it demonstrated that the ‘racket’ in Bartlebee/Cromagnum Man/Waynebro’s head was not invented just for me. This really is the tape that runs in there 24/7.
WB – man, you are so stuck…
If you could just experience yourself the way I do. I won’t speak for others even though I think I could – for a few, anyway.
You don’t debate. You nit-pic. In order for ‘you’ to be ‘right’, because for you it is personal, everybody else HAS to be ‘wrong’.
And you always HAVE to have to last word. It’s very irritating.
When I insult you, which I rarely do to anyone in any other setting, all I am doing is telling you what you already believe about yourself. It’s uncanny. I have never met you (and never will), yet I can push your buttons. How is that? It’s because you have huge chip on your shoulder ie you ‘wear it’ on your sleeve.
The reason I know there is hope is your utter dismay that a doctor would ‘ever’ say such a thing…
You talked yourself into what you believe and you are going to have to talk yourself out. As before, I suggest you get yourself a therapist. You have a lot of work to do.
See how the pile on effect works?
One by one they straggle in. Gyges, Lindy, and now finally, the Ice Queen herself, here to insult, slander, and generally dismiss my character over something she avoided all day.
Until now.
Its the pile on Jill. It works well.
No one person could possibly respond to so many character assassinations without looking combative or flawed.
All day long we’ve gone on this, me dealing with one character attack after the other. And now, at the end, when a little peace is made, in comes Lindy Lou, to misrepresent something I said, dragging you in, so that now I have to answer to that, and then when you and I make a little peace, in comes Patty.
To just launch a ranting tirade of insults, character attacks and downright ugliness.
After promising professor Turley last night, that she’d stop.
And round and round the calliope we go.
Patty, I’d answer to your foul, ugly bile, but frankly, you sicken me.
How others in here, Professor Turely above all, thinks anything of you other than you are some sort of crazy stalking kook, is beyond me.
But that’s their problem.
I for one have no problem telling you to go shove your insults up your big fat smelly ass.
YA’ ALL WERE DUPED!
Liberal Blogosphere Duped By 3-Year-Old ‘Gaza Bombing Video’
By Noel Sheppard | January 5, 2009 – 15:17
Just how badly do many liberal bloggers want to depict Israelis as heartless killers and Hamas as poor defenseless victims?
On Sunday, a more than three year old video of an accidental munitions truck explosion at a Palestinian rally in September 2005 was spread around the liberal blogosphere as footage of an Israeli attack on Gaza on January 3, 2009.
Two prominent leftwing websites — Raw Story and Democratic Underground — displayed this video for hours before a poster at Reddit exposed the hoax (h/t NBer Blazer).
Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs reported early Sunday:
A gruesome propaganda video uploaded to LiveLeak that purported to show the aftermath of an IDF attack on civilians in Gaza turned out to be a fraud—it actually shows the results of an accidental explosion of a truck full of Hamas rockets at a Palestinian rally.
This didn’t stop the video from reaching the top spot on reddit.com and gaining more than 2,000 up votes, because reddit.com is absolutely infested with antisemites and terror supporters: GRAPHIC Video of Israel Defense Force’s attack on Gaza civilian market — originally uploaded on & banned by YouTube (NSFW) : politics.
Raw Story issued a correction Sunday:
On Sunday, RAW STORY ran video of a bombing in Gaza purported to be recent footage leaked from an exiled Palestinian blogger. We removed the video from the site early Sunday and issued a correction but the original was deleted in a database without the actual html file being removed, so the original persisted through Monday morning without our notice.
The footage is the aftermath of a devastating bombing taking place in a market, said to have been taken on Saturday. According to Haitham Sabbah, it was taken “immediately after a terrorist Israeli air strike hit a busy market where kids with their mothers and fathers were searching for food to eat from one of the local markets early on Saturday 03, Jan 2009.”
Raw Story has removed its original article on this matter, but Question Everything still has the text:
As Israel’s IDF wages it’s [sic] own “media war” via Twitter and YouTube, uncensored footage from Palestine has been completely blacked out in the US.
Until now.
Saturday, before Israel launched a full-scale invasion of Gaza, a Palestinian with a camera witnessed a devastating bombing. His video shows the brutal, bloody results of an air strike on what appears to be a civilian area.
In the footage, scores of bodies – men, women and children – lay strewn about a Gaza market as abject chaos spirals around them. Some struggle to their feet, covered in concrete powder and blood, as others assess their injuries or join the effort to carry away wounded.
Within moments, men in camouflage holding automatic weapons and RPGs assert a growing number among the citizenry. The men, presumably affiliated with Hamas, appear to be helping with crowd control and medical response.
The source of this video was Haitham Sabbah, a self-proclaimed “Palestinian activist and blogger.”
Although he too has updated his blog to reflect his error, this is what he originally wrote concerning this video:
This video clip was taken with a mobile camera immediately after a terrorist Israeli air strike hit a busy market where kids with their mothers and fathers were searching for foot to eat from one of the local markets early on Saturday 03, Jan 2009, Gaza.
As you will see, there are no words to describe the terror of the Jewish state of Israhell. This is why Israel is continuously refusing to allow foreign correspondence and reporters from entering Gaza.
Please spread the video widely. Let the world see what their news TV channels won’t show about reality of Israel. (YouTube deleted the video minutes after it was uploaded, but it is worth trying again).
Get the code for the video to embed on your blog from: http://sabbah.blip.tv/#1642223.
I guess that’s all it takes to get anti-Israeli propaganda spread throughout the liberal blogosphere these days.
How sad.
Patty’s idea of sanity.
Run along, Waynebro…
…which is what I requested you do many months ago when you showed up as Bartlebee and then again as Cromagnum Man shooting your mouth off from the beginning – much like Thingum ‘Bob Esq’, BTW…
Despite what JT has stated, you are both unwelcome here – in my view.
And you can take ‘Jill’ along with you as well – Uggghhh
That’s it Patty.
Get back into character.
Amazing.
Patty C:
Just a small question for your consideration. Can it really be an insult when the purported victim insists on repeating it everywhere he goes? I think you nailed his identity long ago while I gave him the benefit of the doubt. Your intuition was right AGAIN. I stand in awe of your Bartlebee detector.
You all want to be part of a group where you don’t ‘fit’ – exactly.
What do you want me to say?
You can hang on the fringes, peer over the edges, but you are not one of ‘us’, are you? And you know it, don’t you?
Sorry.
Watch, listen,and learn.
Funny a guy hiding behind his keyboard, too afraid to post his own photo, is busy blabbering to another blogger who likewise hides behind her\his keyboard likewise being too afraid to post a photo, about “identities”.
That I am not “one of” you is not in doubt. I am definitely not one of “you”. Nor your sheepish friend the mespo, who hides under your skirts and takes a swing when he sees an opening.
No, I’m not one of “you”.
You’ve fooled a lot of people Patty. A lot of people think you’re really what you claim. A physician. An attorney. A scholar.
But not me. I know you for what you are and have all along. That’s why you hate me. That’s why you stalk me and have all along. Because I see you.
I know why you won’t post your photo.
I know why you post endless recipes.
I know what you are.
And that drives you nuts.
Which is why you cannot help yourself from stalking me.
Because I see you.
And your little dog too.
-
Yea. That sounds just like a “Physician”.
A “Physician trained in Psychiatry”.
Particularly one who holds a concurrent law degree.
Sure. Makes perfect sense.
Wait. What’s that sound? “Paging Doctor Patty to the I C U”
ICU
I wonder if the Professor has any of that wine left from this morning. I really doubt it.
Such discussions are disrespectful to Professor Turley. There are several bona fide attorneys—as evidenced by their websites—who post here using their real names. However, after the recent ad hominem posts, I do not know why they would want their names associated with this site in any way given the degenerating basal discussions.
Obviously there are some very talented people who frequent this blawg; however, and we are letting the banal aspects of human nature denigrate the otherwise exemplary intelligences of most participants.
Please ignore those you do not like.
Former Federal LEO:
Former Federal LEO:
Former Federal LEO:
YOU POSTED A LINK TO A FRAUDULENT STORY CLAIMING ISRAELIS ATROCITIES AND YOU OWE AN APOLOGY!
YOU POSTED A LINK TO A FRAUDULENT STORY CLAIMING ISRAELIS ATROCITIES AND YOU OWE AN APOLOGY!
YOU POSTED A LINK TO A FRAUDULENT STORY CLAIMING ISRAELIS ATROCITIES AND YOU OWE AN APOLOGY!
Liberal Blogosphere Duped By 3-Year-Old ‘Gaza Bombing Video’
By Noel Sheppard | January 5, 2009 – 15:17
Just how badly do many liberal bloggers want to depict Israelis as heartless killers and Hamas as poor defenseless victims?
On Sunday, a more than three year old video of an accidental munitions truck explosion at a Palestinian rally in September 2005 was spread around the liberal blogosphere as footage of an Israeli attack on Gaza on January 3, 2009.
Two prominent leftwing websites — Raw Story and Democratic Underground — displayed this video for hours before a poster at Reddit exposed the hoax (h/t NBer Blazer).
Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs reported early Sunday:
A gruesome propaganda video uploaded to LiveLeak that purported to show the aftermath of an IDF attack on civilians in Gaza turned out to be a fraud—it actually shows the results of an accidental explosion of a truck full of Hamas rockets at a Palestinian rally.
This didn’t stop the video from reaching the top spot on reddit.com and gaining more than 2,000 up votes, because reddit.com is absolutely infested with antisemites and terror supporters: GRAPHIC Video of Israel Defense Force’s attack on Gaza civilian market — originally uploaded on & banned by YouTube (NSFW) : politics.
Raw Story issued a correction Sunday:
On Sunday, RAW STORY ran video of a bombing in Gaza purported to be recent footage leaked from an exiled Palestinian blogger. We removed the video from the site early Sunday and issued a correction but the original was deleted in a database without the actual html file being removed, so the original persisted through Monday morning without our notice.
The footage is the aftermath of a devastating bombing taking place in a market, said to have been taken on Saturday. According to Haitham Sabbah, it was taken “immediately after a terrorist Israeli air strike hit a busy market where kids with their mothers and fathers were searching for food to eat from one of the local markets early on Saturday 03, Jan 2009.”
Raw Story has removed its original article on this matter, but Question Everything still has the text:
As Israel’s IDF wages it’s [sic] own “media war” via Twitter and YouTube, uncensored footage from Palestine has been completely blacked out in the US.
Until now.
Saturday, before Israel launched a full-scale invasion of Gaza, a Palestinian with a camera witnessed a devastating bombing. His video shows the brutal, bloody results of an air strike on what appears to be a civilian area.
In the footage, scores of bodies – men, women and children – lay strewn about a Gaza market as abject chaos spirals around them. Some struggle to their feet, covered in concrete powder and blood, as others assess their injuries or join the effort to carry away wounded.
Within moments, men in camouflage holding automatic weapons and RPGs assert a growing number among the citizenry. The men, presumably affiliated with Hamas, appear to be helping with crowd control and medical response.
The source of this video was Haitham Sabbah, a self-proclaimed “Palestinian activist and blogger.”
Although he too has updated his blog to reflect his error, this is what he originally wrote concerning this video:
This video clip was taken with a mobile camera immediately after a terrorist Israeli air strike hit a busy market where kids with their mothers and fathers were searching for foot to eat from one of the local markets early on Saturday 03, Jan 2009, Gaza.
As you will see, there are no words to describe the terror of the Jewish state of Israhell. This is why Israel is continuously refusing to allow foreign correspondence and reporters from entering Gaza.
Please spread the video widely. Let the world see what their news TV channels won’t show about reality of Israel. (YouTube deleted the video minutes after it was uploaded, but it is worth trying again).
Get the code for the video to embed on your blog from: http://sabbah.blip.tv/#1642223.
I guess that’s all it takes to get anti-Israeli propaganda spread throughout the liberal blogosphere these days.
How sad.
Former Federal LEO:
Former Federal LEO:
Former Federal LEO:
YOU POSTED A LINK TO A FRAUDULENT STORY CLAIMING ISRAELIS ATROCITIES AND YOU OWE AN APOLOGY!
YOU POSTED A LINK TO A FRAUDULENT STORY CLAIMING ISRAELIS ATROCITIES AND YOU OWE AN APOLOGY!
YOU POSTED A LINK TO A FRAUDULENT STORY CLAIMING ISRAELIS ATROCITIES AND YOU OWE AN APOLOGY!
Liberal Blogosphere Duped By 3-Year-Old ‘Gaza Bombing Video’
By Noel Sheppard | January 5, 2009 – 15:17
Just how badly do many liberal bloggers want to depict Israelis as heartless killers and Hamas as poor defenseless victims?
On Sunday, a more than three year old video of an accidental munitions truck explosion at a Palestinian rally in September 2005 was spread around the liberal blogosphere as footage of an Israeli attack on Gaza on January 3, 2009.
Two prominent leftwing websites — Raw Story and Democratic Underground — displayed this video for hours before a poster at Reddit exposed the hoax (h/t NBer Blazer).
Former Federal LEO
1, January 5, 2009 at 10:57 pm
“Such discussions are disrespectful to Professor Turley. There are several bona fide attorneys—as evidenced by their websites—who post here using their real names”
I never said anything about Professor Turley in that respect, so please do not disrespect him (or me) by implying that I did.
Nor did I ever suggest that there weren’t “several bona fide attorneys” here.
Patty just happens to not be among them.
Yes, I did post a link to the video and I am the only person on this site who was guilty because no one else ever responded specifically to the video. However, I am not a liberal. I am likely the only conservative Republican who posts on this blawg; therefore, your ad nauseum “Liberal Blogosphere Duped By 3-Year-Old ‘Gaza Bombing Video” does not pertain to this “liberal” blawg, but applies only to me individually, as a conservative and not as a liberal.
You need to view the follow-up 2nd video link on the Wal-Mart post (where I posted the 1st video link) about the Gazan civilian deaths documented by a Norwegian ER doctor. The 200 deaths (total-to-date) mentioned in the 2nd official CBS video far exceeded the deaths documented in the original video you reference.
Why didn’t you post to the one Wal-Mart post where it would have been relevant instead of posting within numerous other threads here?
Former Fed.
The Trolls don’t live in the real world where facts and reality matter. Don’t waste your time with them. The rest of us here know you and your quality work on this site.
Waynebro:
“I was trying to steer you away from your philosophical argument because you for some reason were failing to mention that Hamas was elected by the people of Gaza. Hamas hold 70 seats in Gaza on the Palestinian Council. More than half of Gaza residents voted for Hamas, so therefore your disinterested third party routine falls flat.”
No, you’re reasoning from part to whole, aka employing the fallacy of composition. Simply because a portion of the Gaza government is aggressive towards Israel, it does not follow that Gaza itself is the aggressor. Thus the entire world states in its papers that Hamas, and not Gaza, has been attacking Israel; and Israel, in an anemic defense of its attacks, claims that it is ONLY targeting Hamas and not Gaza.
The proportionality argument is nothing more than a polite/chicken-shit way of objecting to this very problem. Part of the beauty of logic is that it doesn’t give a rat’s ass about walking on egg-shells for fear of being deemed an anti-semite.
“Hamas represents the Gaza majority and that doesn’t support your reasoning.”
Israel itself never claimed that it was attacked by Gaza; thus the papers of the world all read that Israel is responding to attacks by Hamas.
Former Federal LEO
1, January 5, 2009 at 10:57 pm
“However, after the recent ad hominem posts, I do not know why they would want their names associated with this site in any way given the degenerating basal discussions. ”
More like “anal” discussions.
Here. Allow me to summarize this or any thread I dare to voice an opposing comment (or any comment at all for that matter).
Behold.
The Muse Calliope.
It seems to me that there are only two possible solutions to the I/P problem, genocide or ethnic cleansing. The only question is whether it is Israelis genociding or cleansing Palestinians or vice-versa.
Whichever way it is is it needs to be done with much greater speed so the rest of us can stop arguing about it.
I really don’t know why-
I care for you all so much but I do…
…something about living vicariously…
FFLEO you are a gentleman!
Jill you are truly kind!
Lindylou You are wise in choosing to remain an earth mother!
Everybody else: You know one must be bold to be on The Turley Team!
There is no “us” or “them” (excepting trolls) you are all Regulars!
As “Regulars” recognize tomorrow/today is a new day and nothing has been said which was so awful that can be overcome.
We have only been discussing Gaza we are not living in Gaza!
Actually you were discussing Gaza;
I just like to watch!
Does anyone else remember Peter Sellers in “Being There”?
Thank you rafflaw and CEJ.
I made a mistake by not confirming the authenticity of the video at the link. At the time I posted the link, there were 400 deaths reported and verifications that the Israelis targeted mosques and markets. All such reports that were later documented as factual.
The person who posted the first video disingenuously took advantage of the current facts by substituting the dated 2005 video as his “proof” of the carnage. Therefore, there was an Israeli bombing at a main Gaza market within the last 2 days resulting in numerous civilian deaths and casualties. The 2005 video was taken at a Gaza market, but Hamas was responsible for an “accidental” explosion of weaponry resulting in similar civilian deaths and casualties.
The Norwegian doctor’s video provided by CBS is virtually unimpeachable. One of the problems is that reliable information is unavailable because the Israelis are forbidding foreign war correspondents from entering Gaza. The official Israeli news stated that the hospital the Norwegian doctor was speaking from was harboring Hamas terrorists and the entire hospital staff vehemently denied that accusation (from the NBC Nightly News).
Wayne,
I mean what I say. I imply with precision. Your INFERENCE is the problem here. Perhaps raff is right. You often seem a bit thin skinned, but especially in this thread. I am not your enemy unless you are a Neocon, then it’s on. While I sometimes find your posts misguided, I do not list you as Neocon as you have not acted demonstrably evil. However, if I have a problem with YOU, I will address YOU. My initial statement was just that: a comment made in an open room to no one in particular. It was your choice to infer I was talking to you – a sign of defensiveness as well as an improper inference. I’m not one of the bears you want to poke either. I don’t fear a criminal Unitary Executive or threats of prosecution from a government I consider illegitimate until Bush/Chenney is punished. I certainly don’t fear calling you out if I have a problem. That being said, the assertion that sympathy for Palestinians is immoral and unethical is ridiculous in toto and on it’s face. That’s pure Neocon Likhud propaganda bullshit from word one. By this argument, it was immoral and unethical to protest the Holocaust. Supporting a displaced and persecuted population is supporting a displaced and persecuted population. This is a fascist tactic – denigrate the population you want to attack as to create a (false) justification and attempt to garner sympathy to your cause by creating a feeling of inclusion. You remember all those photos of pre-WWII Germany with the shop windows painted with the word “Juden” or other colorful bits about those hook-nosed baby killers were bad for the Homeland? Same thing. And you should know better.
Wayne: I´m sorry, but you must have missed some news if you think Hammas started “this one”..
and no wonder, because “this one” was started the nigth of the Usa presidential elections, when Israel made a short campaign of airstrikes and some ground troop entry. It was a brilliant choice of time since no-one was gonna notice much.
but yeah, thats why hammas said they did not want to keep up the cease fire, cause as they stated, Israel had not honored its part of it (wich included of corse the free travel of relief trucks with fuel, medicine and such intoo gaza).
So whether your looking at short OR long term, Im afraid Israel started.
FFLEO,
You’re a reasonable man. It’s easy to see why someone would mistake you for a liberal considering the sordid company you keep.
FFLEO,
I was impressed that you tracked this down as well. The fact that photos and video is so open to manipulation is a real concern. Kudos!
The BBC had very good coverage this A.M. updating the situation in Gaza. I was especially interested in the UN representative’s take on what is happening to civilians and that he considers what has happend war crimes. He believes everyone should account themselves before international law tribunals.
Buddha Is Laughing 1, January 6, 2009 at 7:23 am
“Wayne,
I mean what I say. I imply with precision. Your INFERENCE is the problem here. Perhaps raff is right. You often seem a bit thin skinned, but especially in this thread.”
Of for the love of God.
And round goes the calliope.
Round, and round, and round, and ……
One more time for the perpetually dense.
Behold.
The Muse Calliope.
ME: I have an opinion on this slightly different from some others in here.
SOMEONE ELSE: Shut up Waynebro.
ME: You shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #1: No you shut up.
ME: You have no right to tell me to shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #1: Sure I do. We’re better than you.
SOMEONE ELSE #2: Shut up Waynebro.
ME: You’re no better than me.
ME: You shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #1: Yes we are.
SOMEONE ELSE #2: No you shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #3: Shut up Waynebro.
ME: No you’re not.
ME: You have no right to tell me to shut up.
ME: You shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #1: You’re stupid.
SOMEONE ELSE #2: Sure I do we’re better than you.
SOMEONE ELSE #3: No you shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #4: Shut up Waynebro.
ME: You’re stupid.
ME: You’re no better than me.
ME: You have no right to tell me to shut up.
ME: You shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #1 I know you are but what am I?
SOMEONE ELSE #2 Yes we are.
SOMEONE ELSE #3 Sure I do, we’re better than you.
SOMEONE ELSE #4 No you shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #5 Shut up Waynebro…
See BIL, I never took the position you’re so inanely arguing this morning. Why you ask? How’d you miss that? Because are just another wooden horse climbing onto the calliope without bothering to actually read what was said prior to launching a tirade of sanctimonious bullshit.
I’m not thin skinned, if I were I wouldn’t be here with this gaggle of pompous preening popinjays.
But even if I were, it would be better than being as thick headed as you are being now.
You’re arguing with your own strawmen. You’re arguing positions I never took. Just because someone points out that Israel has a right to defend itself, as Professor Turley pointed out in the article (funny no one jumped on him for tha)) and that there are some visible steps being taken to reduce civilian casualties, doesn’t mean they’re taking Israels side.
Particularly when they state “I am not taking Israels side”.
But apparently in all your pompous blather you failed to ignore that. Probably the froth coming from your mouth fogging up your monitor or something. Whatever it was, take your inane lectures, your false flag attacks, your straw arguments and put em where the sun don’t shine. The Calliope is closed for repairs.
Gaylord,
If you’re someone pretending to be Wayne, stop. I may not like Wayne very much, but my disagreements with him were always that, disagreements. This is just petty name calling along the lines of what Patty is known for, which I’ve also objected too in the past. So please, stop.
If you’re Wayne (which would be completely stunning to me), perhaps you should enlighten us as to the meaning of your new nom de keyboard.
See Folks? The Calliope never closes.
Another Cock to climb on the Crapheap to Crow.
No it wasn’t “petty name calling” Gyges. If you bother to read instead of glancing and lecturing, you’d see it was chocked full of good advice, clarity, and downright mockery of my doltish “superiors”.
I tried to explain, what’s that term again? ….ah yes, with “CRAYON” with my little Calliope demonstration, complete with self deprecation and full acknowledgment of the “Two to Tango” formula.
Alas its all lost on you “geniuses” as is my current highly descriptive moniker.
All I can do is steer you to the nearest Blockbuster and hope the movie from whence the Focker name came, will illuminate you.
I’m trying to meet folks half way here, but it seems most of you are stuck on your side of the island.
SOMEONE ELSE #1: Shut up Waynebro.
ME: You shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #1: No you shut up.
ME: You have no right to tell me to shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #1: Sure I do. We’re better than you.
SOMEONE ELSE #2: Shut up Waynebro.
ME: You’re no better than me.
ME: You shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #1: Yes we are.
SOMEONE ELSE #2: No you shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #3: Shut up Waynebro.
ME: No you’re not.
ME: You have no right to tell me to shut up.
ME: You shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #1: You’re stupid.
SOMEONE ELSE #2: Sure I do we’re better than you.
SOMEONE ELSE #3: No you shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #4: Shut up Waynebro.
ME: You’re stupid.
ME: You’re no better than me.
ME: You have no right to tell me to shut up.
ME: You shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #1 I know you are but what am I?
SOMEONE ELSE #2 Yes we are.
SOMEONE ELSE #3 Sure I do, we’re better than you.
SOMEONE ELSE #4 No you shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #5 Shut up Waynebro…
Are we learning yet?
Gaylord,
I thought it was clear that I was talking about your nom-de-keyboard. If it wasn’t I’m sorry, I was in such a rush to defend Wayne (who is possibly you) that I didn’t take the time to proofread and edit as well as I usually do.
What I’m not sorry for is thinking that “gaylord focker” was a childish insult. It seems I missed a pop-culture reference, it happens. Given Waynebro’s previous pride in using his own name, the sudden switch seemed a little out of character.
Gyges,
I agree. Gaylord never did answer how “he” changed his name. This seems like the attack of an enemy. This is incredibly ugly. Stop immediately. This kind of thing has no place on this blog. No ene here wants to read such things. It is disrespectful of JT who asked people to refraim from personal attacks. It is disrespectful of other people who come to this blog and should not be subjected to such things. People come to this blog to read ideas on the topic and have fun. This is wrong and needs to end.
Charleton Heston
Planet of the Apes
If the two of you putting your collective brains together cannot figure out why I put up the Focker moniker then I don’t know what to tell you.
Like I said. Rent the movie.
It’s like talking to mannequins.
JT,
Please put a stop to this. This is reprehensible behavior. This is someone pretending to be Wayne. It takes a very bad intent to do something like this. This behavior should not be allowed to continue.
JT, forgive them. They know not what they do.
Or in this case, they know not what I do.
Jill? It’s really me. No ones pretending to be me.
If you’d go set up a WordPress account instead of “squatting”, you’d see that there is an option in your WordPress profile to change what they call your “NICKNAME”.
Thus, you can log in as yourself, but use any “NICKNAME” you want.
Therefore, be ye not afraid. It is I.
It’s an Alice in Wonderland World and we have voluntarily jumped (have not fallen) into the rabbit-hole of paranoid hallucinations…
Wouldn’t that make me the rabbit?
FFLEO,
That is not Wayne. Someone has appropriated his image. Please see what Gyges and I wrote above. This is a destructive, cruel action that has no place on this blog.
Jill,
Most of us have the utmost respect for Professor Turley; however, if he allows “Wayne’s World” to continue on *his* blawg then the quality will decrease into Alice in Wonderland nonsense.
Mr. Turley has the ability to trace ISPs and “narrow down” who posts what material. I admire his freedom of speech rules here, although all sites need at least a modicum of decorum.
Amazing. Utterly amazing.
Here I thought the use of the “Focker” name (from “MEET THE PARENTS, duh) would jar your attention spans long enough to put the puzzle together. Apparently not.
Mr Turley has my IP. He has my EMAIL. And we’ve communicated several times.
The only nonsense here is you three superior intellects who for some reason cannot take a simple hint, nor see their own roles in what I carefully spelled out for you last night, hence the “calliope”.
But apparently you’re not done riding your horses quite yet, so on with the calliope we go.
One more time for the terminally obtuse.
SOMEONE ELSE #1: Shut up Waynebro.
ME: You shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #1: No you shut up.
ME: You have no right to tell me to shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #1: Sure I do. We’re better than you.
SOMEONE ELSE #2: Shut up Waynebro.
ME: You’re no better than me.
ME: You shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #1: Yes we are.
SOMEONE ELSE #2: No you shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #3: Shut up Waynebro.
ME: No you’re not.
ME: You have no right to tell me to shut up.
ME: You shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #1: You’re stupid.
SOMEONE ELSE #2: Sure I do we’re better than you.
SOMEONE ELSE #3: No you shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #4: Shut up Waynebro.
ME: You’re stupid.
ME: You’re no better than me.
ME: You have no right to tell me to shut up.
ME: You shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #1 I know you are but what am I?
SOMEONE ELSE #2 Yes we are.
SOMEONE ELSE #3 Sure I do, we’re better than you.
SOMEONE ELSE #4 No you shut up.
SOMEONE ELSE #5 Shut up Waynebro…
Are we learning yet?
Yes I did learn:
“After domain squatting, here comes online identity squatting…” I guess this is common now. I checked out the concept of squatting on another person’s identity and this is what is happening here.
I have confirmed that there is no “squatting” here. As Gaylord’s request, I have confirmed that it is the same IP. This is Waynebro who is writing under the name Gaylord as he states. I only just now was able to follow this line of commentary and I agree that it has gotten way out of control. This site is dedicated to civil and free discussion. It is degraded by long diatribes and personal attacks. I would appreciate if Waynebro and others would endeavor to try to consolidate their remarks to avoid multiple replies in quick succession. Since the home page only shows a small number of replies, it prevents others from appearing on the page on this and other stories. Usually such excess has been due to the presence of trolls who seek to shutout of voices by occupying as much space as possible. Our regulars need to help preserve the unique character of the blog. Let’s just call this a bar fight, order a new round of stories, and talk about the guy hanging naked from the ski lift.
Not for me thanks. Clearly I am “out of my league” as Patty has stated on so many overlooked occasions. I’m just not up to the level of this “class” of people. Particularly ones who are so highly intelligent, that they cannot comprehend why I’d use the Focker name this morning.
That’s a level of intelligence that I shall never likely attain (nor aspire to). I am indeed, “out of my league”.
So I shall leave you to it.
As Kipling so aptly put, “whether down from Gehenna or up to the Throne he travels the fastest who travels alone.”
Asta
mespo727272 1, January 5, 2009 at 9:48 pm
Patty C:
Just a small question for your consideration. Can it really be an insult when the purported victim insists on repeating it everywhere he goes? I think you nailed his identity long ago while I gave him the benefit of the doubt. Your intuition was right AGAIN. I stand in awe of your Bartlebee detector.
—-
Thanks, mespo. It’s gratifying to finally be recognized again,
so to speak
Inciteful query, as per your usual. I suspect there is much psycho-combustible mileage to gain, if you will, by portraying oneself as the unwitting and innocent victim of a completely unprovoked and hostile attack after simply ’showing up’, and expressing an opinion in a completely respectful and non-combative manner.
As you know, methane is a proven/possibly viable ‘Alternative Fuel’, also… {;o
p.s. FFLEO, Ahhh, the Voice of Reason’!
BIL, remember ‘Monkey Boy’ on the Australian tourist in India’?
Gyges, Jill, and LL especially – get a clue…
(JTeeeee, Bartlebee etc etc etc is disrupting the blog again
- make him STOP…!!!)
For once, as ironic as it seems, I think I agree with Waynebro!
Hah!
Here is the simple truth. The masses of impoverished, uneducated people in this world, including those unfortunate enough to inhabit Gaza, have no more control over what happens to them than Adi Dvir has over whether the sun will rise tomorrow. Any contrary assertion is simply absurd. To feel compassion toward people in that situation is not only moral, it is morally compelled. Mr. Dvir is another example of a person who is prepared to justify brutality whenever he believes his justification serves a worthy cause.
Wayne,
At least I’m not a “nanny nanny boo boo” little shit head contrarian with no ability to argue past “I know you am but what am I”. What are you? Four? That’s the best you got? Turns out you really are an amateur douche bag after all – just like Martha and CCM and all the others. You know. Your alter egos/compatriots. You did manage to hide yourself a while, troll, but as always your mental disorders give you away eventually. You’re not misguided. You’re a moron with Ctrl- C and Ctrl-V. And you are about to get treated as such. This isn’t an ad hominem attack. This is accurate and factual after your recent actions.
That simple enough for you, Wayne?
Fuck you Buddah you chickenshit prick, coming in after the fact to talk tough. I’m not a troll and I sure as hell ain’t no Martha. And I sure as hell ain’t staying in this blog after the way I’ve been treated by you and the other pinheads calling themselves “regulars”. You’re an ugly lot of paranoid, ignorant, pompous, self righteous PRICKS, and its a good thing you have this blog because no one else would tolerate your ugly, ignorant constant never ending personal attacks.
I’ve provided Professor Turley with my contact information, so he knows who I am. He knows I’m not a troll and he knows I sure as hell ain’t Martha.
If you’ve got anything else you want to say to me little man, here here’s my email.
Waynebro@yahoo.com
Shoot me your contact information. We’ll see what a tough guy you really are.
Well, well, look whose got a short fuse in addition to something else short!
So now you want to start a fight, eh? Wow, stupid and unable to discern who not to screw with.
Contact info? Like I’d give contact info to someone who just threatened me. I’m not as dumb as you are, Wayne. Thanks for your contact info though. I’ll put it to good use. I hope you like tranny porn. But if you want to fight, how about this, Billy Badass?
Come to Kansas City. Go to a Johnson County Public Library or a Kinko’s (any of them). Post here. I’ll meet you there or close by. Not to fight though. So all of my friends can come laugh at you, simpleton. And FYI, unless you’re a black belt or have advanced military combat training, you’re the projected loser in a physical confrontation too, Mr. Small Cerebrum/Bad Attitude. You’re welcome to try, but you’ll pardon me if my 30 plus years of martial arts training makes me giggle at guys like you.
Now go ask mom if it’s okay for you to leave the basement, troll-BOY.
Yea, I thought as much.
I didn’t threaten you little man, nor did I say anything about “fighting”. I simply provided you my email so you could speak with me directly instead of playing tough guy in front of your friends.
I wanted to see if you at least had enough balls to come out from behind the keyboard and put a name and a face behind all your tough talk. And as I figured, you do not.
Out of all the big talking keyboard cowards in here, so far I’m the only one who put up his photo and email. And now you hide behind your keyboard and spin tales about black belts and friends. Many of us have “black belts” pal. Few of us use them in blogs to act tough in front of his buddies.
This is my last response to you in here. I’m done blogging here so don’t bother to respond in here. If you’re man enough, I provided you with an email address to “talk tough” to me in. You can tell me more tales about your big bad black belt, or whatever your “big man” attitude wants to tell me.
You know, you came yesterday out of the blue calling me, a 50 year old home owner, business owner, father, and a generally decent human being, a “douchebag” and all sorts of other things for what you said was my “actions in here”.
Well, I didn’t do anything in here. I simply responded and quite moderately I might add, to a lot of personal attacks that were launched completely without provocation. I simply made one comment about Israel taking steps to defend itself, and on came the onslaught of idiotic rants, insults, slanders, and personal attacks.
Think I’m wrong? Go find the post. Go find the comment in this thread where I was soooo terrible. Go find the comments that caused Patty and Mespo to start in on their tirade. Go find the comments that Leo was criticizing. Hint. You won’t. They’re not there. All of my comments except for a small misunderstanding with Jill which we worked out on our own were simply comments responding to a barrage of personal attacks.
And now I’ve got tough guy calling me names who’s too afwaid to come out from behind his keyboard to talk tough directly to me, and even too afwaid to talk tough in email. Instead, you strut like a preening peacock in here pronouncing your “black belt” and talking about fighting.
And you call me the crazy one.
Don’t respond to me in here because I am done with this blog. I shouldn’t have even checked it this morning. You have my email. I gave it to you. Along with my photo. So at least if you’re going to call people douchebags and make threats to harrass them in the blog, you can at least say it to them, and not a chat room board.
You want to talk tough? Talk tough to me in my email. Tell me about your big bad black belt. Make threats about computer crimes like you just did in here. Say whatever you want, but say it to me. Not to your blog audience tough guy. Say it to me.
If you’ve the balls. Which obviously, for all your “30 years of martial arts training”, you do not.
I’m done. Don’t bother to respond unless you can summon the courage to email me directly. If you respond in here I won’t see it. Of course your friends in here will, which is what you want, so you can act like the big man. Of course I know, and you know, that you’re not the big man. You’re just a little man with a big mouth who talks incredibly brave when he’s anonymously hiding behind his keyboard.
And for any still confused as to why I would provide my email and photo, it was in a failed attempt to stave off your “dehumanization” tactics that you employ regularly whenever someone says something in here someone doesn’t agree with.
See, it’s much easier to paint a blogger as a “troll” and thus sub human and not worth any further respect. Its how you people operate. Once you decide you don’t like someone, you proceed to dehumanize them, calling them douchebag trolls and making them less than human.
I’ve found with most people, its harder to do that once there’s a name, a face and even a private email address attached to the person. That’s why I gave professor Turley my phone number. I assumed that once you people discovered that the guy you were attacking was a real person, and not a “troll”, you’d find it within yourselves to meet him half way. Which is what I tried to do with my failed attempts at self deprecating humor. Failed only because they fall on deaf ears.
Clearly though such attempts are lost on the “regulars” in here, as apparently most of you are too busy foaming at the mouth (or keyboard as it were)to ever take the time to read, ask questions when there are doubts, and generally recognize a reasonable human being when you see one. Alas, so goes the fickle mob.
Anyway that’s all I’ve got to say. I’ve said the same thing in so many ways in this thread, and I invite folks to go through the thread and reexamine what was actually said as opposed to what numbskulls like Budda claim I said. Go back, see for yourself. This thread is indeed a virtual Rosetta Stone to understanding the dynamics of the “group bully effect” and how effective it can be in taking one person, demonizing them, and driving them out like so much rubbish.
Try the email. It works. Always has. Trolls don’t post their photos. Trolls don’t post their email addresses. Trolls don’t give out their phone numbers. If you talk to someone directly you’ll find its not so easy to dehumanize them like you do in here, and maybe, just maybe, you’ll find out that you’ve been wrong all along.
Course, it would mean coming out from behind your wall of comfy anonymity, and as we’ve seen from Mespo, Patty, Leo, Budda and the rest, together not one of you is comfortable doing that.
It’s much easier to insult, stalk, mock, demonize, and dehumanize from behind the anonymity of a blog handle. And you all do it so well. Later you superior intellectuals.
waynebro:
By my count you have alienated or insulted six people on the blog, and now are “calling people out,” like Buddha, who is nothing but rational in all of my discourse with him. Do you think it might be time to look in the mirror and see just what it is that causing all this controversy. We can either accept that you are the misunderstood one and the brunt of unwarranted personal attacks by all concerned, or we can accept that some of this is brought on by your own words. In Court and in matters of credibility we always argue: is it more likely that Mr. W lying or are all six of these witnesses who don’t even know Mr. W lying just to frame him? I think you know how that usually turns out.
Darn… Now who’s going to play the part of the arguementive middle-aged man with nothing better to do than insult complete strangers and twist their words?
Hey, mespo, WB called ME out first – months ago.
So there
ie JTeee, mespo is not being completely accurate in his presentation.
Make him STOPPP…
I told you how to see me if you think you’re that bad.
Like I said, I’m not as stupid as you, Wayne.
Go on. Ramble away, Big Man. I have a side bet on how many words it’ll take you to accomplish nothing this time. If you are interested in learning a lesson, you should take away this.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those who are controlled by situations and those who control situations. The manipulated and the manipulators.
Res ipsa loquitor, fossor.
Buddha Is Laughing:
“You’re a moron with Ctrl- C and Ctrl-V.”
That’s funny.
One lives to be of service.
I for one will not apologize. I am delighted WB is absent for the time being, although, based on bitter past experience, I predict he will be back. It’s just a matter of time.
However, I am indeed the ‘Ice Queen’ today enjoying my ‘Snow King’, Princes, Princesses, and our collective Arctic ‘Flamingos’ in the Crystal Palace/Igloo Compound
My house is temporarily filled with skis and skiiers and several dirty coffee mugs.
Lots of fun, food, and celebrations continue!
Wow, this thread took a weird turn …
Anyone up for some waffles?!!
I’d like to take this moment to point out that trolling is a behavior, not an intrinsic property. Iridium doesn’t look like processed uranium, but both are radioactive.
And waffles would be lovely, mojo. Thanks. I like an orderly breakfast.