October 01
Male, Jewish, in my extremely early sixties, married with kids (well, at this point I guess that should be "kid"). Thanks to Lezlie for avatar artwork - sort of a translation of my screen name. "Salaam" is peace in Arabic, hence the peace sign. (No, my name doesn't mean "hunk of meat" and yes, the pun is intentional.)


Koshersalaami's Links
SEPTEMBER 23, 2013 11:28AM

Vilifying Israel: a very different take

Rate: 17 Flag


Published on Open Salon and Our Salon

Two years ago, a Sudanese human rights activist by the name of Simon Deng gave a speech at the Durban Watch conference in New York. Here is a link to the text of the speech in case you want to verify it, though I have copied it in its entirety here:

I actually got this in an e-mail, not as a link, from someone I often refer to on my blog as my Negative Muse. Sometimes she sends me stuff I actualy agree with.

Mr. Deng said:

I want to thank the organizers of this conference, The Perils of Global Intolerance. It is a great honor for me and it is a privilege really to be among today's distinguished speakers.

I came here as a friend of the State of Israel and the Jewish people. I came to protest this Durban conference which is based on a set of lies. It is organized by nations who are themselves are guilty of the worst kinds of oppression.

It will not help the victims of racism. It will only isolate and target the Jewish state. It is a tool of the enemies of Israel. The UN has itself become a tool against Israel. For over 50 years, 82 percent of the UN General Assembly emergency meetings have been about condemning one state – Israel. Hitler couldn't have been made happier.

The Durban Conference is an outrage. All decent people will know that.

But friends, I come here today with a radical idea. I come to tell you that there are peoples who suffer from the UN's anti-Israelism even more than the Israelis. I belong to one of those people.

Please hear me out.

By exaggerating Palestinian suffering, and by blaming the Jews for it, the UN has muffled the cries of those who suffer on a far larger scale.

For over 50 years the indigenous black population of Sudan — Christians and Muslims alike — has been the victims of the brutal, racist Arab Muslim regimes in Khartoum.

In South Sudan, my homeland, about 4 million innocent men, women and children were slaughtered from 1955 to 2005. Seven million were ethnically cleansed and they became the largest refugee group since World War II.

The UN is concerned about the so-called Palestinian refugees. They dedicated a separate agency for them, and they are treated with a special privilege.

Meanwhile, my people, ethnically cleansed, murdered and enslaved, are relatively ignored. The UN refuses to tell the world the truth about the real causes of Sudan's conflicts. Who knows really what is happening in Darfur? It is not a "tribal conflict."

It is a conflict rooted in Arab colonialism well known in north Africa. In Darfur, a region in the Western Sudan, everybody is Muslim. Everybody is Muslim because the Arabs invaded the North of Africa and converted the indigenous people to Islam. In the eyes of the Islamists in Khartoum, the Darfuris are not Muslim enough. And the Darfuris do not want to be Arabized. They love their own African languages and dress and customs. The Arab response is genocide! But nobody at the UN tells the truth about Darfur.

In the Nuba Mountains, another region of Sudan, genocide is taking place as I speak. The Islamist regime in Khartoum is targeting the black Africans – Muslims and Christians. Nobody at the UN has told the truth about the Nuba Mountains.

Do you hear the UN condemn Arab racism against blacks?

What you find on the pages of the New York Times, or in the record of the UN condemnations is "Israeli crimes" and Palestinian suffering. My people have been driven off the front pages because of the exaggerations about Palestinian suffering. What Israel does is portrayed as a Western sin. But the truth is that the real sin happens when the West abandons us: the victims of Arab/Islamic apartheid.

Chattel slavery was practiced for centuries in Sudan. It was revived as a tool of war in the early 90s. Khartoum declared jihad against my people and this legitimized taking slaves as war booty. Arab militias were sent to destroy Southern villages and were encouraged to take African women and children as slaves. We believe that up to 200,000 were kidnapped, brought to the North and sold into slavery.

I am a living proof of this crime against humanity.

I don't like talking about my experience as a slave, but I do it because it is important for the world to know that slavery exists even today.

I was only nine years old when an Arab neighbor named Abdullahi tricked me into following him to a boat. The boat wound up in Northern Sudan where he gave me as a gift to his family. For three and a half years I was their slave going through something that no child should ever go through: brutal beatings and humiliations; working around the clock; sleeping on the ground with animals; eating the family's left-overs. During those three years I was unable to say the word "no." All I could say was "yes," "yes," "yes."

The United Nations knew about the enslavement of South Sudanese by the Arabs. Their own staff reported it. It took UNICEF – under pressure from the Jewish-led American Anti-Slavery Group — 16 years to acknowledge what was happening. I want to publicly thank my friend Dr. Charles Jacobs for leading the anti-slavery fight.

But the Sudanese government and the Arab League pressured UNICEF, and UNICEF backtracked, and started to criticize those who worked to liberate Sudanese slaves. In 1998, Dr. Gaspar Biro, the courageous UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Sudan who reported on slavery, resigned in protest of the UN's actions.

My friends, today, tens of thousands of black South Sudanese still serve their masters in the North and the UN is silent about that. It would offend the OIC and the Arab League.

As a former slave and a victim of the worst sort of racism, allow me to explain why I think calling Israel a racist state is absolutely absurd and immoral.

I have been to Israel five times visiting the Sudanese refugees. Let me tell you how they ended up there. These are Sudanese who fled Arab racism, hoping to find shelter in Egypt. They were wrong. When Egyptian security forces slaughtered 26 black refugees in Cairo who were protesting Egyptian racism, the Sudanese realized that the Arab racism is the same in Khartoum or Cairo. They needed shelter and they found it in Israel. Dodging the bullets of the Egyptian border patrols and walking for very long distances, the refugees' only hope was to reach Israel's side of the fence, where they knew they would be safe.

Black Muslims from Darfur chose Israel above all the other Arab-Muslim states of the area. Do you know what this means!? And the Arabs say Israel is racist!?

In Israel, black Sudanese, Christian and Muslim were welcomed and treated like human beings. Just go and ask them, like I have done. They told me that compared to the situation in Egypt, Israel is "heaven."

Is Israel a racist state? To my people, the people who know racism – the answer is absolutely not. Israel is a state of people who are the colors of the rainbow. Jews themselves come in all colors, even black. I met with Ethiopian Jews in Israel. Beautiful black Jews.

So, yes… I came here today to tell you that the people who suffer most from the UN anti-Israel policy are not the Israelis but all those people who the UN ignores in order to tell its big lie against Israel: we, the victims of Arab/Muslim abuse: women, ethnic minorities, religious minorities, homosexuals, in the Arab/Muslim world. These are the biggest victims of UN Israel hatred.

Look at the situation of the Copts in Egypt, the Christians in Iraq, and Nigeria, and Iran, the Hindus and Bahais who suffer from Islamic oppression. The Sikhs. We – a rainbow coalition of victims and targets of Jihadis — all suffer. We are ignored, we are abandoned. So that the big lie against the Jews can go forward.

In 2005, I visited one of the refugee camps in South Sudan. I met a 12 year old girl who told me about her dream. In a dream she wanted to go to school to become a doctor. And then, she wanted to visit Israel. I was shocked. How could this refugee girl who spent most of her life in the North know about Israel? When I asked why she wanted to visit Israel, she said: "This is our people." I was never able to find an answer to my question.

On January 9 of 2011 South Sudan became an independent state. For South Sudanese, that means continuation of oppression, brutalization, demonization, Islamization, Arabization and enslavement.

In a similar manner, the Arabs continue denying Jews their right for sovereignty in their homeland and the Durban III conference continues denying Israel's legitimacy.

As a friend of Israel, I bring you the news that my President, the President of the Republic of South Sudan, Salva Kiir — publicly stated that the South Sudan embassy in Israel will be built— not in Tel Aviv, but in Jerusalem, the eternal capital of the Jewish people.

I also want to assure you that my own new nation, and all of its peoples, will oppose racist forums like the Durban III. We will oppose it by simply telling the truth. Our truth.

My Jewish friends taught me something I now want to say with you. 

AM YISRAEL CHAI - The people of Israel lives!

It would be easy to assume that I quoted Mr. Deng in order to defend Israel. That is not the case; Israel is not an innocent state.

As I have said many, many times, I do not object to criticism of Israel, and have partaken in such criticism frequently, including on this blog.

However, Mr. Deng addresses an issue I’ve been thinking a lot about lately, and he does so in a far more stark way than I could. The issue that’s been bothering me is the phenomenon of treating criticism of Israel as a sacred activity, as an activity that justifies anything and everything in its cause.

Israel has done bad things, but Israel is not Satan. Treating Israel as though it were has consequences. As Mr. Deng points out, some of those consequences involve slavery and murder.

I live a far more mundane life than Mr. Deng has, thank God, so my concerns are far more pedestrian. For the purposes of this post, my concerns are the effects of this attitude on my fellow bloggers. I have two concerns.

The first of these, not surprisingly, is antisemitism. As those of you who follow me know, a while back I wrote a post about someone else’s post, a somewhat typical anti-Israel post, that provided a link to some very virulent antisemitic stuff. (The link was eventually changed.) Though I could use that blogger as an example, it is not she who surprised me. The surprise I got took place on her thread where two commenters, on being confronted with the contents of this link, defended her on the grounds that she was attacking Israel and that attacking Israel was a justifiable activity. In other words, I was presented with the argument, made by two separate people, that antizionistic efforts justify antisemitism. I’m sorry, but as far as I’m concerned, nothing justifies antisemitism. Bigotry is inherently evil. You’re either OK with bigotry or you’re not. If you are, don’t expect me to think that you occupy the moral high ground. You don’t.

The second of these is dishonesty. I’m not sure I can distinguish here between lying to others and lying to oneself; I think a lot of the latter is involved, so we may be looking at intellectual dishonesty as opposed to deliberate lying to others. Where I see this manifested is in demonizing exclusively and past rationality. If you think that AIPAC is going to murder you in your sleep, chances are you fall into this category. If you think that Israel is the most evil entity on the planet, I suggest you reread Mr. Deng. I recently read a blogger make a series of points about the use of Sarin in Syria that added up to the conclusion that the idea that Mr. Assad had used Sarin on his own civilians was less credible than the idea that the Israelis participated in getting Sarin to Syrian rebels for the purpose of murdering their own civilian allies in an effort to discredit Assad. Oh, and by the way, the Israelis supposedly partnered with the Saudis and Jordanians to do this. Somehow, the history of how the Assads, father and son, have treated their civilian populations over decades has less relevance than the concept that Israel is the source of all evil that doesn’t emanate from the United States.

I suspect I’d have an easier time making a credible case for the existence of the Tooth Fairy than making this case credible.

Criticizing Israel is one thing, but there are things that it just doesn’t justify.

If you’re sacrificing your opposition to bigotry and/or if you’re sacrificing your own honesty,

you’re sacrificing too much.


Author tags:

antisemitism, politics

Your tags:


Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:


Type your comment below:
A very thoughtful piece. Too often anti-Israeli rants verge into anti-Semitism. And ignoring the multitude of malefactors around the world besides Israel perhaps reflects an imbalance of attention. But just and righteous criticism of Israel when due is essential because Israel is held to a higher standard of behavior than other countries.
I am all over the place but I think Hilary Clinton said it best:

"We have a close, unshakable bond between the United States and Israel, and between the American and Israeli people. We share common values and a commitment to a democratic future for the world, and we are both committed to a two-state solution. But that doesn't mean that we're going to agree."

Have people learned from history?
Israel, like the USA, is overly criticized as we both are, whether sub-consciously or not, held to a higher standard. The reason is because we are obviously superior in our democratic and economic, and, as it happens, military, abilities. We both suffer these critiques for the same reason, our Far Right Wings are both completely insane in every way- absolute wingnuts. What's worth looking closer at is how the Far Left of the USA aligns with the Palestinians, for obvious reasons, while, as they do here, ignoring the truth about the majority of Israelis- and, this is a group who has been so very wrong before, supporting first Stalin, then Mao ... those who find them credible have no sense of herstory whatsoever.

Thanks for sharing Mr. Deng's story, truth told, once again.
The embrace of opposition to Israel since the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin in 1995 and the subsequent emergence of hard core coalition governments that followed his death has become a kind of liberal knee jerk reaction. That reaction has been exacerbated in the UN General Assembly by settlement expansionist policies, the wall, the invasion of Lebanon and a multitude or poor decisions on both sides of the Israeli Palestinian divide. I'm reminded of a professor's assessment of the conflict: "It's a family feud that been going on for 3500 years and it's all about access to arable land and water in a place where both are hard to come by."
mDon't ever stop explaining these arguments.

The one thing I have been abundantly, abundantly clear about for as long as I've been blogging here is that just and righteous criticism of Israel when due is essential. Unfortunately, a tremendous amount of the criticism of Israel I see here is neither, and that is precisely my problem.

I agree with Hilary's statement. And, generally speaking, particularly with the current government, I'm more likely to agree with the American take than the Israeli.

That comment was worth writing this post for.

I'll agree that those policies exacerbated the problem though I won't agree that all of them were mistakes. The last invasion of Lebanon was triggered by an attack on Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah across a border that hadn't seen Israelis cross it in the previous six years. The wall has saved a whole lot of Israeli lives as terrorists used to just walk into Israel and now terrorism is minimal. Expansionist policies I agree about - as far as I'm concerned, they're simply wrong, particularly given that those losing land are the more moderate elements of the Palestinians, not Hamas.
What an amazing and courageous speech by Mr. Deng. Thank you for this!
You know, ONL mentions that some of the anti-Israeli rants here boder on anti-Semitism. I would leave out the "borders on". I appreciate that you do speak out. Your point about people supporting anti-Semitism as justified because it is being used to attack Isreal strikes a chord. It's the same thing I see with the racisim used when criticizing the President.
Terrific post, and again, good for you for speaking out.
I've been trying to figure out how to express this for a while. Actually, years. And you're right; it does have similarities to the way people talk about Obama. The similarity is in the wholesale total demonization. I thought George W. Bush was awful, as in probably the worst President in American history. As much as I thought that, there were a few things about him that I respected. For one, that he wasn't a hater. At all. Most conservatives I know have some hatred in them but I never saw it in Bush. I respected that he had the most diverse administration I'd ever seen, including this one, and that none of it involved tokenism. These were his people and background be damned. I also respected that he admonished the public in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 that American Muslims had no hand in this, bore no responsibility for it, and did not deserve to be harassed in any way. (I don't remember how he put it, but I do remember that he stood up for that population quickly.)

Why do I say this? Because if someone gets something right, I'll encourage that, and if they get something wrong, I'll criticize it. I don't react by saying: I have identified this person as an enemy and there is no such thing as an inappropriate weapon or attack.

No limits. If someone were to say to me: "Hitler did not love Germany," I'd probably reply that I think he did. God knows there was enough wrong with the man, but that probably didn't belong on his list. At worst I'd shut up because I wouldn't want to defend him, but I wouldn't pile on, not because I didn't think he deserved it but because my own standards control my behavior, regardless of his. I'm not going to deliberately attack someone on grounds I know to be baseless, even someone I want to see dead. End of sentence.

If the real crimes are big enough, I don't need fake ones. If they aren't big enough, demonization isn't appropriate.

That also goes for countries and organizations.
Israel rtepresents he status quo in a dual sense, and so draws a generalized hostility from those who don't like the status quo, if one could argue that sometimes Israel proper goes looking for enemies, if everyone does that, and, there is a history people seem to forget too, as to paranoids having quite real enemies.
A two state solution could be helpful, although I doubt it would in the long run solve every problem either.
Depends on how it was done. Done right, there's a possibility it could normalize that part of the Middle East. If it were done right, which is to say if it were done in such a way as the Israelis understanding that there are certain concessions they need to give, even if they can get away without them, because it is those concessions that will stop significant numbers of Palestinians from trying to undermine the agreement once it's in place, a tremendous amount could change. If Israel and Palestine were really not interested in attacking each other, you'd see far more normal economic relations, way more commerce, and way more traffic across the borders, some for religious reasons. Given that the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is the sole reason most area governments give for opposition to Israel, if the Palestinians are satisfied enough to live with a state, that opens the door to regional trade relations and vast reductions in tensions. It would open the door to more shared technology, more regional manufacturing, more mutual investment, more God knows what. The amount of good an arrangement like that could do in the long run is scary. In Israel the region has one of the world's chief technology engines; in the Arabian peninsula the region has insane amounts of energy money. Right now the two are separate. The world changes if they aren't.
I won't.
I don't screw around with antisemitism.
This post, taken with the comments, transcends this digital medium. It deserves a big oak table, comfortable chairs, and bread that can be broken by hand and shared. It's a visit.
Good to see that so far, thinly veiled anti-semitism is not evident. It would be embarrassing, considering your measured tone and excellent points, but alas it usually winds up here anyway.
pretty good stuff....the man presents himself well....
There is a pathological aspect to antisemitism that goes way beyond bigotry.
Rated and Reddited
Well done, Kosh and Mr. Deng. What a sad, sad life he has endured.
Ooops. I had to come back to rate.
There is no point in further vilifying Israel. The facts are quite apparent to the world outside the USA and indicating that there are worse places does not shift Israeli realities to any satisfactory degree.
We are fighting supernatural forces every single day. It is such a travesty when we get caught up in the bigotry, hate, and criticism of one another - whether individual or national. It is so hard to stay clear of the "system" of things. People suffer daily - everywhere. Abuse, slavery in some fashion, opression, betrayal... it goes on and on and it will until the end... which really may be just the beginning. My biggest flaw is just as the writer of your above piece states, sacrificing my own honesty. It is so hard to stay true to our innermost values, our morals, our decency as human beings under the current system of things. Great post.
Thank you all.

No, indicating that there are worse places does not shift Israeli realities to any significant degree. However, as Mr. Deng pointed out, it isn't only Israeli realities that are at stake here. The fact that the world's attention has been so drawn to Israel at the expense of other nations, particularly through the UN, has meant that other worse realities have gone unreported and unaddressed. That, I'm afraid, is quite significant.

The second question is the one I raised rather than the one Mr. Deng raised, and that is whether vilifying Israel is such a priority under any circumstances that it justifies, well, collateral damage, such as the tolerance of antisemitism in order to criticize one more time or to criticize virulently "enough." What is worth it under what circumstances?
In other words, saying anything bad about Israel encourages antisemitism so better not expose the repulsive behavior of certain aspects of Israeli policy since that might encourage antisemites. Of course, that follows Israel's general propaganda line that any criticism of Israel is automatically antisemitism. A parallel with the US line that any exposure of despicable US government action encourages terrorists
No. Not in other words. That last statement indicates that you haven't bothered to read either this post or anything else I've ever written on the subject. Or maybe you have and your memory is that bad - if that's the case, my condolences.
And you seem to have not the slightest hint of the intent behind Zionism and how tho policies of Zionism have been implemented from the time just previous to the establishment of Israel consistently through current policies. There was a strong line of terrorism from several Jewish organizations in the pre-nationalistic times right through to the current national agenda with no deviation. You speak idealistically of the dream of joint Arab-Israeli policy to make a useful combination where both would prosper wonderfully with no hint that Israel is vigorously chopping up any possibility of the Palestinians having a coherent nation with broken fragments of land that are totally subservient to military domination by Israel. This was laid out in the original Zionist agenda and it is well known history. There is nothing hidden about this and it is no fantasy nor is it antisemitism.
Of course it isn't. If you'd ever read a word I'd written, you'd get that I don't think of it as antisemitism. In terms of the chopping up, I agree with you. I think it's immoral, I think it's bad news in general, and I've expressed that. Repeatedly. I wrote a whole post once about how to get a Palestinian state. I've written that the settlements are wrong over and over and over. I will tell you for the fiftieth time because you apparently weren't listening the other forty-nine (and this probably isn't literally an exaggeration - I've said this in one form or another on OS one Hell of a lot of times):

Criticism of Israel does not constitute antisemitism.

When you defend someone who links to virulently antisemitic material (and this isn't a generic you, in this case I mean Jan Sand) on the grounds that they're attacking Israel, you're not just criticizing Israel any more. You're tolerating something very different. In this case, there was no question in your mind that the material in question was antisemitic. Quoting you from the thread, before you figured out that what I was quoting came from a link in the post itself:

"I am very surprised, Koshersalaami, to see you posting obvious anti-semitic nonsense in this blog and then, in your own blog, complaining about its appearance in this blog. What kind of screwy game are you playing?"

So, we agree that what was linked was blatantly antisemitic. Once we'd established that I wasn't playing a screwy game, that I was in fact quoting a link from that post, your response was:

"Nevertheless, much of the criticism of Israel is quite valid and criticism of the policies of Israel does not automatically become anti-Semitic."

Both comments quoted in their entirety.

My problem wasn't with the criticism of Israel. That's a canard. "Criticism of the policies of Israel does not automatically become anti-Semitic." Agreed. Always agreed. I wasn't there to protest criticism of the policies of Israel. I was there to protest "obvious anti-semitic nonsense."

And you didn't. Not a word. You protested it when you thought it came from me, but once you learned where it did come from, once you learned that it came from someone who was criticizing Israel, all you did was defend her.

My question, Jan, is why this was OK with you. Why did you think that taking the blogger to task for presenting this was not an appropriate response?

I did not attack her over Israel. At all. I stated in that thread in response to you that she has a right to criticize Israel, that this wasn't about Israel.

My problem was that she attacked Jews. By your definition.

Where were you?
that screaming mama got it right when she said
"We are fighting supernatural forces every single day. "
echoing a favorite bible passage of mine..
"for we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but
against principalities, against powers
against the rulers of the darkness of this world,
against spiritual wickedness in high places..."
Ephesians 6:12...

The wickedness you bring to our attention (thanks a lot..
I trying currently to sacrifice my honesty,
go with the flow...)
is beyond horrific.
How can it happen?

I spoke to a lady today who had that question.
the only lame thing I could say is that
with so much magnified GOODNESS
in our species
the concomitant
SO MUCH EVIL, so much over the top BAD.

a tradeoff?
As Arlo Guthrie once said, if you're going to have a light, you need a dark to put it in.


Though we can never get it completely right (see Mao's concept of Perpetual Revolution), we can get closer. The balance between that which is good and that which is not isn't a constant. We make progress. Slavery is not the factor it once was. Sexism is bad, but nothing like it used to be. Same for racism. Same for anti-LGBT bigotry. Assumptions change. Standards change.

The existing balance should not be accepted. It is our job to improve that balance. If anything, that is our purpose.
A song by van Morrison comes to mind reading yr posts. “Cry for Home”
I'll be waiting, I'll be waiting on that shore
To hear cry for home

When you hear, hear the call
You won't have to fake at all
Hear cry for home
I'll be standing, I'll be standing within reach
When you hear, hear the call
I'll be waiting, I'll be waiting in the breach
For you, when you hear
When you hear, hear the call
You won't have to think at all
Hear cry for home”
Then in yr comments: “The existing balance should not be accepted. It is our job to improve that balance. If anything, that is our purpose.”

Right on. I fear though, that as the Light increaseth, so does the darkness.
My biggest fear. Coming so true.
Onward! To?...
Well back Home.

Mao an interesting dude indeed by the way…
I think Jan's far too confused here to continue sensibly. He's not aware of what he's referencing and how it affects his line of argument.
Wonderful to read Mr Mao , just his words..without all that damn shit that happened..
“There are many stubborn element, graduates in the specialty schools of stubbornness.
They are stubborn today, they will be stubborn tomorrow,
and they will be stubborn the day after tomorrow.
What is stubbornness (huan'gu)?
Gu is to be stiff. Huan is to not progress:
not today, nor tomorrow, nor they day after tomorrow.
People like that are called the stubborn elements.
It is not an easy thing to make the stubborn elements listen to our words.”
're JAN...
let him be Jan. aint no one like him...
He's not tolerating bad things anyone's saying about bipolar people. We're in my glass house. I'm sensitive about the rocks.
why the hell u build a glass house?
i built one once and storms and hurricanes and meteor showers
left it in ruins. i wandered the land alone except for my
doppelganger, the dude who says dumb things alot
but at least he someone to talk to.
now i got four solid walls.
Very thoughtful. Usually I blog about sex and suburban stuff. I stay away from politics because I ...have started seeing much of the discussions as pragmatic and logistic rather than ideological (?). on my first date with my husband we discussed the Palestine issue...that was in the much has changed on both sides to alter our views. Let's just say that ,as more information comes to light, those of us who are flexible in thinking, can alter.
"My problem was that she attacked Jews."

No I did not. You are a bold faced liar for saying that, asshole.

Your hypocritical, hasbara bullshit, your made up prevarications and your clear attempts at not just character assassination, but literally aiding and abetting the physical endangerment of people INCLUDING MINOR CHILDREN by your good friend, shows you for the conniving, backstabbing, malicious scum bag that you truly are.
If you ever have enough nerve to come here again, I will delete every comment you leave.