Interesting. There are clearly some people who don't know about you yet. I haven't heard about this anywhere else.

It would be a good idea for you to send messages to some of the people you follow when you post so they know when you have.

Islam is a gutter religion in the same league as zionism which is part of the Synagogue of Satan. (As opposed to the devout Jews) This does not diminish the zionist war crimes against the Palestenians.

At my own peril, I pray for judgement day, when all this BS will stop and we can enter a new era of peace and happiness.

@ks: Yeah, I've never attracted a lot of attention to my blog. I tend to get recognized -- if at all -- more as a gadfly. Since the major emphasis of my OS postings has been to keep track of excrescences of more-or-less undebatable expressions of real antisemitism, I can't say the general lack of interest from the community here is much of a surprise.

"excrescences of more-or-less undebatable expressions of real antisemitism"

Ah yes, the legendarily rampant anti-semitism of Open Salon. Such as for instance Padraig's use of the word "sneakily." You exposed that hateful so-and-so for the foul Jew-hater that he is alright. Keep up the good work Davey.

@rwnj: I'm not really interested in who you think is or isn't getting into heaven. You gave up the last of your moral credibility with your comment over at Robin Sneed's blog about the World Jewish Congress precipitating the Holocaust by declaring war on Germany in 1933.

"This does not diminish the zionist war crimes against the Palestenians."

Read what I wrote instead of responding to what you wish I'd written. I'm not talking about whether the Hamas attack on the UN facility at all mitigates bad Israeli conduct toward Palestinians. I'm asking all of these OS people who get themselves truly exercised by Israeli mistreatment of Palestinians if they actually find themselves giving much of a shit when it's Palestinians who abuse Palestinians.

If, as seems to be the case, their concern for the real welfare of real Palestinians is only aroused when it is jeopardized by the actions of Israelis, then I think we may safely infer that what exercises these highly excitable OSers (including yourself) is not the imperiled condition of the transgressee but the identity of the transgressor.

@nanatehey: If you can look at the behavior I've been pointing out on my blog for over a year and decide that antisemitism isn't something you need to be concerned about, then I have to say -- it's folks like you who help justify the existence of an armed Jewish state.

Folks like me? Do you mean people you've chosen to label as anti-semites? Yes, of course, that would explain why Israel behaves the way it does. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

@nanatehey, cont'd: You might also want to notice the multiple times in the discussion at Padraig's blog where I explicitly said I wasn't calling him an antisemite and had no reason to think him one. I called him out -- correctly -- for playing around with shabby insults that had ugly connotations. No doubt if someone were to insult the president for laziness or some such -- in a context, moreover, such an "observation" was both irrelevant and blatantly false -- you'd recognize it for the racialized attack it was, whether or not you believed the writer to be truly a racist.

But, clearly it's more appealing to you and Padraig to fantasize about being victims of a drive-by attack, rather than paying attention to what was actually said by someone who takes positions you don't like. Knock yourself out.

@natatehey: "Do you mean people you've chosen to label as anti-semites? "

No, I don't mean that. Try reading what I've written instead of what you wish I'd written. I mean people who see real, honest, undeniable instances of antisemitism, shrug, and walk away. Or prefer not to look at all.

If you can't figure out how to switch off your antipathy to Israel long enough to acknowledge that antisemitism is a real issue, regardless of how you feel about Israel, you may not be an antisemite, but you're not part of the solution, either.

This bears further discussion.

"it's folks like you who help justify the existence of an armed Jewish state"

You seem to imply there that an armed Jewish state needs justification. Which is odd, because I've never thought that it needs justifying myself. It's self-apparent that the Jewish people need a secure homeland, and Israel is that homeland.

I always read exactly what you've written Dave, so save the "instead of what you wish I'd written" chorus for someone else. You constantly infer from my remarks an antipathy for Israel where no such antipathy exists. Talk about faulty inferences.

"I always read exactly what you've written Dave"

Indeed. Then find me the place where I labeled Padraig an antisemite, if you would. While you're at it try comparing it to this (http://www.people.hbs.edu/dlieberman/lieberman.jewsRaceEmpire.pdf), wherein I do identify an antisemite, and see if you can spot the difference.

"it's folks like you who help justify the existence of an armed Jewish state"

Well! I guess that sure settles it!

Nanatehay, it's ALL your fault that ISRAEL MURDERED 9 INNOCENT PEOPLE IN INTERNATIONAL WATERS!
Wow, dude! I didn't know you had that kind of stuff!



... and guess who didn't do it?

Oh, and Dave... if all you got is one instance where Israel DIDN'T commit an attack in Gaza, I'm not too damn impressed, K? Hows about if I see your attack with no loss of life and raise you Rachel Corey and Mohammed al-Durrah?

BTW, have you got anything to say about the9 INNOCENT PEOPLE ISRAEL MURDERED IN INTERNATIONAL WATERS?

That's the thing Dave. You didn't come out and openly label Padraig an anti-semite. You aren't a forthright enough person to do that, at least not here in OS. Instead you weasel and you insinuate and you imply, but the end result is the same.

"Points to you also for gratuitously attaching the adverb "sneakily" to a Jew in an essay ostensibly contemplating the issue of antisemitism."

"I don't assert that you "must" be an antisemite on this basis. I call it out as evidence of a willingness on your part to play around with some decidedly ugly rhetoric. Own it or not, but you deserved to be called on it."

“At the very least, I'd think that one would want to be highly conscious of the language one chooses when addressing topics as sensitive as Jews as antisemitism. Is Padraig an antisemite? I have no way of knowing, but I do know now that he is willing to toy with rhetoric that dances right up to the edge -- and he is too clever a writer not to know just what he was doing.”

All of this based on his use of a single word. You say that Padraig is willing to "toy with rhetoric that dances right up to the edge." At that point, anyone reading the comment will naturally ask "What edge does Dave mean?" It's the edge of anti-semitism of course, and your goal was to imply that Padraig is right there on it if not beyond it. I would respect you more if you had just come out and called him a Jew-hater rather than prevaricate and pussy-foot the way you do.

And Amy, Dave will mention how the Turks killed a Kurdish person with a tank so the flotilla raid was OK. He'll go on at length in reply here as to how that is NOT what he means, but the two things always come up together when he discusses the issue so it's difficult to take it any other way.

@Safe_Bet's Amy

Hm. Do I get to name Maha Ohayon? How about Noam Ohayon? No? Okay, how about Einat Haran? Or Yael Haran? Perhaps you'd care to share your feelings about Firat Basan, then?

No?

Didn't think so.

"if all you got is one instance where Israel DIDN'T commit an attack in Gaza, I'm not too damn impressed, K?"

Not really concerned with what impresses you, Amy. K? If you're so concerned about Palestinian welfare, but not concerned enough to keep track of what their "leadership" is doing to them, it's not really my responsibility to relieve you of your laziness.

New material from Dave! See Amy, the raid is OK for more reasons than just the Kurdish dude. Who would have imagined it, that Israelis have been killed by Palestinians? I never KNEW! Dave, what a stellar defense, kudos my friend.

@nanatehey: "That's the thing Dave. You didn't come out and openly label Padraig an anti-semite. You aren't a forthright enough person to do that, at least not here in OS. Instead you weasel and you insinuate and you imply, but the end result is the same."

That you want it so doesn't make it so. I don't believe Padraig is an antisemite. I don't even believe you are. I do believe, however, that you're both strangely eager to cast yourselves as victims of an attack that didn't happen. If Padraig had responded by saying something like, "Yes, I guess that was an ill-considered and unnecessary swipe on my part. It was inessential to my argument, and I've taken it out," the entire ensuing discussion wouldn't have taken place at all. But then where would all of that exquisite moral outrage against valor so vilely wronged have gone?

And, no, murders by Turks don't make the flotilla raid OK. But, of course, the flotilla raid doesn't make the murder of Kurds by Turks okay, either -- and that doesn't seem to be an equation you can quite bring yourself to manage. My continual question to you: why does the one seem so much less important to you than the other? If you're so tired of hearing me mention it, why have you never bothered to condemn the act itself, instead condemning of me for making you notice it?

Might you even be able to entertain the thought that the two events are not, in fact, entirely unrelated? Could the Turks not be turning the sudden *very* belated outrage on the Israelis as part of a campaign to draw attention *away* form the simultaneous stepping-up of their attacks on the Kurds? Might they not, in fact, be playing both the Israelis *and* the anti-Israel crowd for suckers?

"I would respect you more if you had just come out and called him a Jew-hater rather than prevaricate and pussy-foot the way you do."

Hm. I rather doubt that.

"Who would have imagined it, that Israelis have been killed by Palestinians? I never KNEW!"

Ah. So Amy can name victims, and that's okay by you. Naming Israeli victims, though -- now *that's* offensive.

Well played, sir.

"I don't believe Padraig is an antisemite."

Hmm. Yet you DID strongly imply that he may well have anti-semitic tendencies. How else to take your comments on his post, especially in light of the fact that you didn't make it clear there as you just did here what you really think. Forgive me Dave, but this is just more proof of what a prevaricator you are.

"Could the Turks not be turning the sudden *very* belated outrage on the Israelis as part of a campaign to draw attention *away* form the simultaneous stepping-up of their attacks on the Kurds? Might they not, in fact, be playing both the Israelis *and* the anti-Israel crowd for suckers?"

Maybe so Dave. The Turkish question though leads back to a point I raised at Padraig's though, and it's a point you don't mention when you bewail those who hold Israel to a higher standard than its neighbors. If you already addressed it, I didn't catch it in the thread over there:

Turkey hasn't been the single largest recipient of US military and other aid for decades; Israel has. That being the case, perhaps some criticism of Israel's policies when they are illegal or wrongheaded or harmful to US interests is justified, wouldn't you agree? We can't force every thuggish regime in the world to make nice, but it doesn't seem unreasonable to expect Israel to at least try to, considering that the very existence of that state without our longstanding aid and political support would be problematic at best.

"Naming Israeli victims, though -- now *that's* offensive."

Well played, sir."

You're putting words in my mouth Dave. Where did I say it was offensive? Do you have any other tricks besides prevarication and twisting people's words and character assassination via innuendo? It would seem not.

"Hmm. Yet you DID strongly imply that he may well have anti-semitic tendencies. "

No. I DID accuse him of playing with rhetoric that had antisemitic connotations. Which, by the way, he DID. I neither stated nor implied anything about his "tendencies," about which I can have no knowledge -- as I clearly stated at the time.

"Turkey hasn't been the single largest recipient of US military and other aid for decades; Israel has. That being the case, perhaps some criticism of Israel's policies when they are illegal or wrongheaded or harmful to US interests is justified, wouldn't you agree?"

Sure. Where have you seen me say that criticism of Israel for policies that are illegal or wrongheaded is unjustified?

So are you saying that if Israel wasn't receiving so much US foreign aid, you'd give no more of a shit for the Palestinians than you do for the Kurds? I'm actually still waiting for proof that you're more pissed off at the Turks for running over a kid with a tank than you are at me for, you know, talking about it. By the way, calling the victim "the Kurdish dude"? Way to trivialize a horrible death. Stay classy, man, don't ever change.

"You're putting words in my mouth Dave. Where did I say it was offensive?"

Hm. So perhaps you can tell me what emotion moved you so deeply at the reading of these names that you were prompted to respond with those deeply felt ALL CAPS. Or does the experience of seeing the names of dead Israeli children always move you to expressions of sarcasm, as opposed, you know, to the names of victims of Israelis?

"Forgive me Dave, but this is just more proof of what a prevaricator you are. "

There's really nothing to forgive here. You seem to be laboring under the misapprehension that I care enough about what you think to take offense. I'm really not all that concerned about slurs to my honor from a fellow who bravely posts under a pseudonym.

Hmmm, I think I understand, now.

david, of whom there are literally hundreds if not thousands named lieberman, thinks he's a hero by posting under such a generic name.

How pedestrian!

If you'd bothered to open the doc I linked above, you'd see I've claimed credit using my full name which, if a trifle old world, has the advantage of distinctiveness.

Still evading the "Kurdish dude" problem, I see.

David, when I read your previous blog post with signs held by Turks at a rally held by a party, there, which had garnered, at last count, 4.1% support, I knew all that I wish to know about you and your own unique way of playing the hasbara stooge.

Ah, Ninja Mark. Pray tell, what percentage of a polity needs to endorse the Final Solution before it rises to a level worthy of your lordly gaze?

Any more stupid questions, david?

Only this, you dashing samurai, you: if you know everything you need to know about me, I am wondering, why are you here?

Most likely Mossad posing as local gunmen. It's the only possible explanation. The only one. It's got to be Israel's fault. Otherwise life just doesn't make sense.

"david the dunce, lieberman asks: "why are you here?"

Simply to expose another empty headed hasbara spewing lunatic.

You're precious Daveyboy. What you describe as "slurs to your honor" are simply accurate descriptions of your character, descriptions arrived at from reading your commentary here and on other posts. And you do seem a little wounded, your protestations to the contrary notwithstanding. Wounded and out of ammunition; you're reduced now to making snide little digs at

1. my use of a pseudonym
2. my use of caps in a comment
3. my use of the word "dude"

What's next, a disparaging remark about my avatar? These are all irrelevancies my friend, though admittedly somewhat amusing. Face it Davey; you're an essentially dishonest person, a deceitful, mendacious apologist for "Israel, right or wrong" posing as something else. At least Jerusalem Mike has the guts to state his position without pretense; he is exactly what he appears to be. You on the other hand are a phoney who refuses to own up to the implications of his own words. You say:

"No. I DID accuse him of playing with rhetoric that had antisemitic connotations. Which, by the way, he DID. I neither stated nor implied anything about his "tendencies," about which I can have no knowledge -- as I clearly stated at the time."

Tsk tsk, watch the caps Davey, they connote offense taken and unfair bias, remember? Caps or no caps though, you are weaselling here again. You're great at semantics and at post facto disclaimers, but facts is facts, and the fact remains that you strongly insinuated Padraig was an anti-semite. It's the only logical inference someone reading your comments on the thread can make. Since liars make me ill, and since having a discussion with you is as rewarding as wrestling wet toilet paper, I'll get out of here and leave you to your crusade. Keep fighting the good fight against those excrescences of "real anti-semitism" (such as Padraig's egregious use of the word sneakily), lord knows Israel would likely founder without your bold knight errantry.

@nanatehey: You are either too dim to apprehend the difference between an accusation of doing something and an accusation of being something, or you are pretending to be, in which case you are simply a liar. Either way, the problem, as I said to Padraig, is all yours and none of mine. Don't let the door hit you on the way out ... on the other hand, what the heck, let it.

@mark the moron (gee this is fun, isn't it?): If all you can manage is to mutter your horrible horrible h-word and then scuttle away on the tippy tips of your tippy-ninjy-tippy toes, then all you've really exposed is your lack of imagination, integrity, and -- what's that other i-word? oh, yes -- intelligence.

@Stellaa: Oh, Stellaa, Stellaa. Have you really failed to grasp that my topic is not the attack on the playground, but the utterly predictable utter lack of response to it from you OS amen choristers? And, true to form, the usual suspects have appeared here to rear themselves up on their hind legs and collectively to utter a mighty "meh." But just imagine the joyous feeding frenzy we'd be seeing if it were the IDF what dunnit. You can safely bet that folks like you and Amy wouldn't be troubling yourselves over the zero body count then.

Stellaa: "Instead of dealing with the issue, the factions, the people in Gaza you made it part of your Jihad."

Ha! Jihad! I see what you did there. Oh, Stellaa, does your wit have no limit?

Stellaa: "Go figure, I guess you somehow care about people but only if they are like you."

Ah, so now I am highly ethnocentric into the bargain, eh? Are you sure you haven't been trading notes with this guy?

Rated, as a first class post. I'd be tempted to say it's been a magnet for maggots, but I don't want to put my fellow asshole, Stellaa, in with that excoriation.

Padraig Colman: "David, you are quite demented"

Now there's an insult with no antisemitic connotations whatsoever. See how easy that was?

It was nanatehey and not I who brought your name into this discussion. If it offends you to find me having to restate my position here, take it up with him.

PC: "You continue to construct this insane edifice on my use of one word which I deleted as soon as you indicated that it caused you offence."

And you to continue pile up this mountain of increasingly phony outrage on my single sentence pointing out your gratuitous use of that one word.