Monday, January 28, 2008

The also ran

So, here's a thing --

Couple of days ago, some person named 'ran' showed up for the first time in a few of my older comment threads. This person, whoever they are, was agreeable and complimentary, advising me that they agreed with every word I'd posted and, in fact, stating enthusiastically that "you've got a new fan, fanboy".

Then, in a more recent comment thread, I mentioned my preference for Israel over other, less democratic, more insanely xenophobic, Arabic countries.

You could nearly hear the abrupt SCREEEEEEEECH! of emotional brakes, the sudden KRAK! of an appalled and astonished head whipping around and the POP! of eyes bulging as 'ran', whoever he or she might be, took that particular comment from me in.

Then I got:

I take it you were a big fan of apartheid era South Africa too?

good day sir.

Sic transit gloria mundi and all that other good Roman shit, I guess.

This seems like as good an occasion as any for me to stick my foot right back in it, so, with no further ado, I re-present, from one of my previous blogs, originally posted back in December of 2002 --


I just like Israel. Sue me.

I'm about to go on the sort of long screeching political tirade I'm really not very good at. Nonetheless, it's my blog and I'll make myself look like an idiot, for the very few who will every actually read this, if I want to.

Supporting Israel is one of those things that, these days, makes most of the other liberals I know want to disown me and insist that, no matter what I may say, I'm certainly no damned liberal they want to acknowledge as a comrade and kindred spirit. Over the course of my adult life, many of my opinions on hot button issues have convinced various left wing larynxes I'm acquainted with that I cannot, under any circumstances, be allowed to consider myself anything but, at best, a 'moderate', and in many ways, a raving 'conservative'.

For example, since I am a white male, and I regard affirmative action as being a well intentioned, poorly conceived, badly executed program whose logic has been insupportable from its inception, many of my liberal contacts over the years have looked upon me with horror. To my mind, you do not combat racism by enabling and institutionalizing reverse racism, but most of the liberals I know, especially the Caucasian ones, have had oppressor guilt imprinted on their DNA patterns since their gestation, and are apparently simply incapable of understanding that you do not wipe out bias by instituting a system in which everyone making any sort of choice or distinction MUST, as a matter of law, pay MORE attention to race, and in fact, prioritize their choices BY race, rather than ignoring race altogether and simply looking at the qualifications of each candidate, as should be the actual goal of any social initiative meant to wipe out racism.

Affirmative action is a big one, but my liberal acquaintances are also appalled by my reluctant, through-gritted-teeth, less than full throated affirmation of abortion rights (as a male, I acknowledge it's not up to me, nor should it be up to the government, to decide for any woman what she will do with her own reproductive system; nonetheless, I hate the very idea of abortion and would have a very difficult time respecting any woman who ever had one for frivolous or casual reasons, or as someone on CHICAGO HOPE once put it, I support birth control, not abortion), and they especially hate the way I insist that although I really like the idea of gun control, the Constitution of the United States simply and irrefutably prohibits it absolutely, and any statute being enforced within the United States, be they Federal, State, or municipal, that in any way inhibits or interferes with the people's right to keep and bear arms, is unConstitutional, until such time as we amend the Second Amendment.

And, lately, as I wryly note above, supporting Israel, especially in its most recent horrifyingly violent ongoing conflicts with Palestinians, has become yet another issue that liberals want to disown me for.

However, I will note that until very recently, supporting Israel was considered to be the very definition of liberalism. American conservatives, for the most part, have viewed Israel's existence with dubiety (to say the least) for decades since its inception. Most conservatives used isolationist bluster to make what was actually simply 'good old fashioned Jew hating talk' seem more acceptable, but the bottom line for the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s seemed to be, if you supported Israel, or, at the very least, if you supported the idea of the American government supporting Israel in any way, shape, or form, you were either a goddam yarmulka wearing commie symp pinko Marxist Jew undermining American values yourself, or you were a devious fifth columnist in the secret pay of the Zionist-Marxist International Axis trying to overthrow the American government and bring the U.S. into a one world government dominated by the godless commies.

My, how things have changed.

Bill Connoll, whose alarmingly thought free left wing blog Thoughts On The Eve Of The Apocalypse I was recently directed to by the generally excellent (if slightly too knee jerk for my taste) Skippy the Bush Kangaroo, seems to sum up the viewpoint of most of the left wing liberal bloggers I'm aware of these days, in this post , where he notes, among many other things, a report entitled:
Killing The Future, Mostly of Palestine
Two days ago, Robert Fisk reported on the release of Amnesty International's recent report, "Killing the Future: Children in the Line of Fire
In one of its most shocking reports on the Israeli-Palestinian war, Amnesty International today condemns both sides in the conflict for their "utter disregard" for the lives of children -- 250 of them Palestinian and 72 Israeli -- who have been killed over the past year.

Although the Fisk report then goes on to say, with remarkable sanity and balance:

"It also attacks Yasser Arafat's Palestinian Authority for imprisoning militants for political purposes rather than submitting them to fair trials for the killing of children. It says the assertion by Palestinian armed groups that international law imposes no constraints on them is untrue. "No violations by the Israeli army, no matter their scale or gravity, can ever justify the targeting and killing of Israeli children or any other civilians by Palestinian groups."

This clearly annoys Connoll, as it would most of my fellow self named liberals these days, who dislike it when anyone says anything mean about Palestinians, whom my fellow left wingers, in apparent knee jerk reaction to the current conservative and populist biases against Arabic culture, have embraced as oppressed, patriotic heroes and cultural martyrs. Connell notes :
Ironically, the very same day Fisk's report was published, the International Herald Tribune ran a storystating, "A 12-year-old Palestinian schoolboy was shot and killed by Israeli soldiers Monday and 22 other children were wounded by Israeli gunfire while throwing rocks and debris at army tanks in the besieged West Bank city of Nablus, local officials reported. Five adults were also wounded."

Remarkably, I've heard little about any of this in the American media.

Connoll's post is simply one of many I could have pulled off nearly any of the liberal blogs I read and generally enjoy and agree with. In fact, over on William Burton's always thoughtful and never, to my mind, knee jerk or reflexive, blog, someone whose name I cannot recall posted a several hundred word comment calling me a racist and a bigot, at great and enormous length, because I indicated in one of my own posted comments there that I like Israel a lot more than I like Palestine, in both sweeping general and pretty much every specific comparative point I was aware of.

Liberals, as I've stated, seem to have simply, for the most part, absorbed a maxim: American conservatives don't like Arabs right now, so we must love Arabs and defend their right to be Arabs and to exist as Arabs with every fiber and particle of our beings.

Since Israel is now, as it has pretty much always been since its inception as a nation, in a death-struggle with various Arab nations, but especially those who call themselves Palestinians, this apparently means that liberals are now against Israel.
Well, again, as I stated at the top of this: I just like Israel, especially as opposed to Palestine. And while I admit, I'm no minutely informed political power blogger who knows everything there is to know about domestic and international political affairs going back to the mid 19th Century, and I'll admit, I may certainly be guilty of oversimplifying things, nonetheless, I would like to state some hard truths, as I perceive them, on this subject.

I like Israel, especially as compared to their cultural and political opponents, the Palestinians, for many reasons. I'm going to try to set out those reasons on a couple of lists -- List (A), of things Israel does that I generally judge in a kindly and approving fashion, and List (B) of things Israel doesn't do that I view similarly. Ready? Here we go:

List (A): Israel does:

    • elect its government democratically

    • tolerate different religious views

    • live in peace with anyone, no matter what their origin, race, culture, or belief system, as long as they don't shoot at them

    • eschew the mutilation of its adolescent female population's genitalia as a social control mechanism

    • allow its women to wear whatever the hell they want to in public or private, pretty much

    • allow its women to vote, drive, and fuck anyone they feel like fucking, whether or not they're married at the time

    • allow its women to leave burning buildings regardless of their state of dress or undress

    • have an actual criminal justice system with courts and judges and juries and trials, as opposed to one where religious fanatics make snap judgements on the spot and carry out barbarous, cruel, often lingeringly torturous punishments and/or executions without any chance of appeal

    • commit most if not all of its violent acts with uniformed troops against an openly declared, sociopathically fanatical enemy, said uniformed troops generally acting only in either undeniable self defense or in retaliation for previous, terrorist style attacks by non-uniformed personnel who generally target civilians

I could go on and on, but -- no, wait, I think I will go on and on for a little bit longer, anyway, with List (B). Israel does NOT:

    • enforce its own particular religious doctrines by allowing bands of armed thugs to roam the public streets beating those they see breaking the Laws of Moses

    • punish girls caught taking walks with unsuitable boys by allowing government officials to gangrape them

    • punish adulterous wives by burying them up to their necks in the sand and then having mobs of men throw rocks at their heads until they die, with or without an actual trial to establish the guilt of this remarkable non-crime

    • dance and sing in the streets when large buildings full of non-combatant strangers fall burning to the ground, killing thousands

    • deploy biological and chemical weaponry on its own citizenry, or, as far as I know, anyone else

    • pay a death benefit to the families of sociopaths who strap bombs on themselves, walk into public areas frequented by Palestinian civilians, and then self detonate

    • call those same self detonating, murderous sociopaths 'heroes' and 'martyrs', not to mention 'soldiers' despite the fact that none of them wear a uniform when they carry out their 'military attacks'

    • dress up babies as suicide bombers as a hilarious cultural in-joke and then take pictures for the family photo album

    • hijack airliners full of non-combatants and drive them into large buildings full of non-combatants to make some insane geo-political point

    • embrace a rabid cultural ideology entirely devoted to the eventual eradication through any means necessary of an entire population of human beings they just don't frickin' like, regardless of whether or not that population actually accedes to their ridiculous demands or not

All of the above are reasons why, shockingly and appallingly, I support Israel, especially as Israel is contrasted with the Palestinians, and Arabic culture in general.

However, I realize that that list isn't enough. (Well, I realize that nothing I say will be enough; those who are adamantly opposed to me will not be persuaded by anything I say; only those who already agree with me before I ever sit down to write this will agree with me after reading it. But what the hell, it's a slow night.) So, a few more points to the 'why I like Israel and think Palestinians should shut up and go away' argument:

Let's look, once more, at one of the things my fellow left wingers (God, how they hate it when I call them that) bring up the most often in their 'Israel just sucks and so does the American media's coverage of the Middle East' blather, namely, the fact that lots and lots of Palestinian children have been killed in this conflict by evil Israeli Defense Forces -- apparently, far more of them, in fact, than Israeli children have been killed by Palestinian 'soldiers', 'martyrs', and 'heroes'. And this fact, my liberal fellow travelers endlessly trumpet, is all but ignored by the goddamned Israel hugging American media. (My fellow liberals do tend to eschew the terms 'Jew loving' or 'Zionist', but I swear I can sometimes almost hear them gritting their teeth as they force themselves not to type either of them.)

Looking at the report passed along by Connoll, I see the International Herald Tribune ran a story stating, "A 12-year-old Palestinian schoolboy was shot and killed by Israeli soldiers Monday and 22 other children were wounded by sraeli gunfire while throwing rocks and debris at army tanks in the besieged West Bank city of Nablus, local officials reported. Five adults were also wounded."

Now, this leads me to ask two rhetorical questions. The first I frankly admit, I don't know the answer to, and what I'd guess, based on my own beliefs and perceptions, could well be wrong. Still:

1. Exactly what is the percentage of dead Palestinian children that have been killed by unformed Israeli troops after violently provoking said troops by engaging them as an armed mob with missile fire, and, apparently, the support and encouragement, if not outright leadership of nearby Palestinian adults? As opposed to, say, the percentage of Israeli children who were killed by non-uniformed Palestinian terrorists walking into eateries and shopping centers and libraries with bombs strapped to their nutball asses and self detonating?

My guess, which again, I fully admit, could be wrong, is that both percentages are going to be pretty high. Furthermore, I'd also guess, just off the top of my head, that the percentages of Palestinian children killed by non-uniformed Israeli terrorists with bombs (or anything else) while they were just sitting around reading books or eating ice cream is pretty fucking low. Similarly, I'd also guess that the percentage of Israeli children shot down by uniformed Palestinian defense forces after they started screaming, charging, mobbing, and throwing rocks at said uniformed and armed soldiery is pretty low.

In fact, I'm going to guess that probably the reason so many more Palestinian kids have been killed by Israeli soldiers than Israeli kids have been killed by Palestinians, is that in general, Israelis, whether they are children or adults, do not attack armed soldiers with their bare hands, or with sticks and stones and pieces of street debris. (Unless, of course, the armed soldiers are trying to herd them into ovens or something.) This may speak to Israelis being more civilized than Arabs in general, or more intelligent, or more sane, or all three. In this specific case, I suspect it actually speaks to Israelis raising their children to be tolerant, as opposed to Arabs and Palestinians in particular raising their children to hate Israelis and to believe that if they die fighting the enemies of Allah they will automatically go to Paradise (and that last belief strikes me as not only being completely nuts and insanely irresponsible, but also simply an undeniably evil thing to teach a child). But what the hell do I know.

My second rhetorical question on this matter is this:

2. You're a uniformed tank commander in a region where you, the soldiers under your command, and the people you are there to protect and patrol, are surrounded at all times by violent fanatics who will stop at nothing to cause you, and them, harm. It has been demonstrated to you so many times, and so tragically, that no sane person can doubt it, and no responsible peace officer can disregard it, that among your enemy, there are no individuals who can be safely judged by appearance, gender, race, or age as non-combatants. It has also been demonstrated repeatedly that a mistake on your part will certainly lead to your death and the deaths of the people under your command, and those you are there to protect. Abruptly, while on patrol, you find yourself surrounded by a screaming mob of adolescents and some adults, all obviously hostile and vigorously and violently engaging you and your troops with sustained missile fire.

I want to take a moment to note, here, that 'you' as the uniformed tank commander in this example are not necessarily Israeli. You could be an American in Hanoi in 1968, surrounded by Vietnamese 'civilians'. You could be a Bosnian Serb. You could be a Sunni Muslim nervously patrolling a Shi'ite neighborhood, or a South Korean soldier in the DMZ. In some parallel timeline, you could be a Native American, fighting to defend your last remaining free territory from the evil encroachments of the Vile White European Invaders. And it's helpful (although those I'm writing this mostly to won't remotely want to) to try and take away the nationalist and cultural labels from this, and just see a generic situation. But, continuing the question, or thought exercise:

Utilizing what superhuman ability granted you by the deity of your choice, or perhaps your otherworldly origin or the effects of atomic radiation on your parents' DNA, do you instantly come to the conclusion that mixed in among the rocks, sticks, pieces of brick, bottles, and other missiles hurtling at you and your soldiers, there is no Molotov cocktail, grenade, or crude but effective homemade Semtex bomb? And, barring your use of said superhuman ability to instantly reach this crucial, life and death conclusion, what amount of force do you conclude is justified to preserve your own life, and the lives of your troops, and the lives of the people you are charged to protect, against this attack? And how much time do you think, in this exercise, you would have to ponder this before you had to take some sort of action?

Analogy is always suspect, but I'll tell you what: if I get a bunch of my buddies together, we all get rocks and clubs, and we head across town to the closest Islamic mosque and gather around it as a screaming mob, waving our clubs and hurling our rocks through the windows, I'm personally willing to bet that the cops are going to show up pretty goddam quick with guns drawn and tell us, in no uncertain terms, to stop doing that shit or they will shoot us dead. And I suspect even more that, if there were already cops standing around outside that mosque when we arrived, and we started tossing rocks at them, they'd start shooting back at us. And I suspect they'd do that even if me and my buddies were adolescents or teenagers, once they gave us a warning or two to cut the shit. American adolescents and teenagers have been known to carry guns and explosives, and the fact that an armed peacekeeper only sees rocks and clubs doesn't mean they won't necessarily respond with lethal force.

I'm also pretty sure, although the news reports Connoll reviles for their lack of balance (meaning, sympathy for Palestinian patriots, heroes, and martyrs) don't mention it, that the Israeli Defense Forces in question probably told the Palestinian mob in this particular example to cut the shit or they'd be fired on. Maybe more than once.

Now, suppose instead of cops protecting that mosque in my example, there are American Special Forces troops, with loaded M-16s and full combat ordinance, stationed there instead. And suppose instead of me and my buddies, or a bunch of obviously American kids that these Special Forces guys don't know, through generations of repeated atrocities, are willing to do anything to kill them, they are instead being attacked by a mob of -- I don't know -- fanatical Iroquois secessionists who have over the past forty years demonstrated a willingness to go to any extreme of violence to wipe out American soldiers and peacekeepers illegally occupying what they consider to be their own legitimate territory. Exactly what's going to happen to that screaming, attacking, rock throwing mob of zealous partisans?

My fellow liberal lefties seem to quite ardently believe that when Palestinian terrorists attack civilian targets with lethal weapons of indiscriminate effect, they are behaving patriotically and heroically. In contrast, when uniformed peacekeeping troops retaliate for those terrorist attacks, or even fire in self defense on fanatical mobs attempting to swarm their position, they are unconscionable war criminals who should be perfunctorily tried and then summarily hung.

Okay, that may be an overstatement; most of my fellow bloggers do, as a nominal afterthought, condemn Palestinian suicide bombers. Yet still, the vast and overwhelming impression I get is that the left wing of blogdom these days somehow, even while condemning Palestinian terrorism, views the actions of the Israeli Defense Forces as being somehow every bit as bad, if not actually worse.

One final rhetorical point and then I'm done with this, at least, for now:

"Land for Peace" is another biggie that both the liberal Israeli left wing, and the liberals over here, keep harping on. The Israeli occupation of the Left Bank is an immoral incursion. The Palestinians of the left bank are an illegally occupied and oppressed people. If Israel is serious about peace, then Israel has to get the hell out of the Left Bank, apologize for illegally settling it in the first place, pay reparations, and, I don't know, line up individually by the millions to kneel and kiss Arafat's ass and murmur sincere imprecations of their cultural remorse on live, internationally broadcast television.

I don't know whether or not the Israeli occupation of the Left Bank is an immoral incursion, and while I admit that, let me also state that I in no way am saying that the Israelis are some sort of fantasy Jedi Knight culture composed of nothing but noble heroes who are all wise and benevolent and good. Are there bad Israelis? I'm sure there are. Have the Israelis done bad things? I have no doubt. So has everyone. I've done bad things. Everyone I know has done bad things. America has done bad things, Russia has done bad things, France has done bad things, Belgium and Switzerland and, I don't know, goddam Luxembourg have all done bad things, I would imagine. And the occupation of the Left Bank, for all I actually know, is a Bad Thing that Israel has done. Nonetheless, I want to point out one more thing that seems to me to be obvious, but that no one else has even mentioned:

Based on what seems to be generally known and admitted by pretty much everyone of every political persuasion about Palestinians and Israel, what's going to happen if Israel just throws up its hands, says "Holy shit, you guys are right, we just suck -- we're outta the Left Bank, and y'all have a party, okay?"

My fellow left wingers all seem to think that, assuming the awful and intransigent and bloodthirsty Israelis would just open their eyes and embrace that most reasonable of all positions, why then, the Palestinians would fall to their knees and go 'lawsamercy, you Jews are our brothers after all!'. There would be a big group hug, everyone would dance and sing in the streets, two disparate cultures would embrace and learn from each other, the very heavens would open and manna would pour down and the Millennium itself would be fairly begun.

I'm sorry, I think that's just stupid. What I think is far more realistic is that the Palestinians would then say "About fucking time, you stupid fucking Jews. Now, since you've acknowledged that you have absolutely no moral claim on our holy ground, get the fuck out of Jerusalem right this instant, you infidel dogs, or we'll kill you all."

And I tend to think they'd put it exactly like that, too.

I also personally believe that if every Jew in Israel were then, at that point, to suddenly clap themselves on the forehead and exclaim woefully, “You know, you’re right, we have absolutely no moral grounds for living here in the Middle East, let’s just scatter ourselves back amongst the various nations of the Earth again", and got on planes and vamoosed, leaving the functional infrastructure of Israel behind for the Palestinians to take over without asking for one red shekel in compensation -- the Palestinians would still not say ‘thank you’. I suspect, at that point, that the Palestinians would move in, take over the houses and buildings and well irrigated fields built and paid for and died over by the Israelis for generations, and pretty much immediately lay plans to, using whatever methods were available or became necessary, wipe out the blot that they consider the Jewish people to be from the very visage of humanity itself.

(Actually, I suspect first there’d be a jolly damned big Islamic holy war over which particular subsect of Islam got to occupy the actual Dome of the Rock, and as long as they don't start throwing around nukes I say have at it, O Sons Of The Desert, but if there were any extremist Muslims left when the dust settled from that one, then they’d get around to plotting the deaths of every Jew in the world. After which, assuming there was ever an ‘after’ to that, they’d start plotting the deaths of every non-Moslem Shi’ite in the world.)

So, I don’t know. Maybe the Israelis should acknowledge that their occupation of the Left Bank is illegal and they should withdraw. Or maybe some of their detractors should acknowledge that Arabs in general, and Palestinians in particular, simply hate all outsiders in general, and all Jews in specific, and there is absolutely nothing Israel can do other than lie down and die, to placate them, or win lasting peace, in the Middle East.

Nothing, I mean, except wipe every Arab religious/cultural zealot off the face of the Earth. Which, to date, the Israelis have shown remarkable restraint in not actually setting out to do, in my opinion.

Ultimately, why do I like Israel, and dislike Arabic culture so much? Because Israel, and Judaism, are cultures of tolerance and permissiveness and individual freedom and democracy. Arabic culture, and Islamic culture, are based on intolerance, conformity enforced by instant, barbaric punishments, misogyny, autocracy, and violent repression. Jews, as far as I can see, raise their children to be tolerant and to not pick fights. Arabs, and especially Palestinians, raise their children to hate all non-Arabs (and some fellow Arabs) so virulently that they are willing to kill themselves, or send their loved ones off to horrible fiery deaths, in order to take a few of the enemy with them.

I sympathize with any innocents who get caught in a crossfire, and I also sympathize with those who are warped by spectacularly bad parenting, no matter what race or culture they may belong to. But when we’re talking about the victims of suicide bombers, as opposed to those killed when they willingly engaged armed soldiers in a violent confrontation -- well, sorry. My sympathies and support go to the Israelis.

I take it back. I’m not sorry at all.

It may be worth noting here, in closing, that it was probably this exact post that, long ago and far away, moved Dean Esmay, perhaps the prince of all right wing pro-war attack bloggers, to declare ringingly that I was his "new favorite blogger".

And it's this post, probably more than any other, that drives every left wing blogger who comes across it to near blithering insanity.

What can I say?

I just like Israel.


  1. Anonymous1:14 PM

    And it's this post, probably more than any other, that drives every left wing blogger who comes across it to near blithering insanity.

    What can I say?

    I just like Israel.

    Bunnyman - I've read that particular post before, and admit that it bothered me the first time I read it and it still bothers me, but perhaps not for the reasons you think.

    I suspect that what drives other left wingers to "blithering insanity" isn't the relatively innocuous statement at the end of your most recent post "I like Israel" (hey, me too). It's that this :

    the Palestinians would then say "About fucking time, you stupid fucking Jews. Now, since you've acknowledged that you have absolutely no moral claim on our holy ground, get the fuck out of Jerusalem right this instant, you infidel dogs, or we'll kill you all."

    And I tend to think they'd put it exactly like that, too.

    and this:

    there’d be a jolly damned big Islamic holy war over which particular subsect of Islam got to occupy the actual Dome of the Rock, and as long as they don't start throwing around nukes I say have at it, O Sons Of The Desert

    and this:

    Arabic culture, and Islamic culture, are based on intolerance, conformity enforced by instant, barbaric punishments, misogyny, autocracy, and violent repression.

    make you sound - with all due respect - as if your post isn't so much about your affection for Israel as it is an expression of bigotry towards Arabs in general. Which is probably what attracted Dean Esmay, honestly.

    Now I don't think you are a bigot.
    I agree with much of what you've said (particularly your points about the poisonous "martyr culture" that seems to be prevalent in Palestinian society), but if I'm going to be honest I have to admit I am uncomfortable with a lot of the generalizations you've made with respect to Arabs and Arab culture, primarily because I am uncomfortable with generalizations in particular (being a good liberal, dontcha know) and also because none of the Arabs I know (Muslim and non-Muslim) fit your description.

    It's possible that commenter ran's knee-jerk response was because he's, well, a jerk, but it's possible that he simply lost your larger point because he couldn't get past the (probably deliberately) inflammatory language. Just a possibility.
    (good god - I sound like a concern troll ;))

    Anyhow, this comment has gone on way to long, and hopefully I've made my point without causing offense.

  2. "We are not an innately good or inherently heroic nation. We never have been. We are an Evil Empire. We are evil now, and we have been for at least the last two centuries, and if you don't want to believe that, and you also don't want to believe in the various things I've detailed above (all of which actually happened, some of which may still be happening), then study the true history of America's conquest of the Western frontier, or American's annexation of Hawaii, or American's acquisition of the Phillipines or Puerto Rico."

    Or, then, there's

    "Do we mock Roman Catholics on THIS blog? Does a bear wear a tall hat? Does the Pope shit in the woods? Fuck Roman Catholics and the pedophile priest they rode in on, that's what I say."

    And, say, from the comment threads of that very post, there's the following:

    Always Esteemed Scott said...

    dismissively mocks people of faith, especially those who are opposed to abortion and gay marriage.

    Guilty as charged. I'm willing to (mostly)give folks who are opposed to abortion the benefit of the doubt, but as far as I can tell, the primary reason for opposing gay marriage is, and always has been, simple bigotry, and I'm sorry, but I have no time for bigots.

    --regularly uses harsh, vulgar, intolerant language to attack moderates or conservatives.

    Ah, this is such bullshit.
    Oops. Guilty again.

    * * * *

    I'm confused. So, I can say that the entire nation and culture of America is evil and imperialistic, and that's okay. And I can say really bad things about Roman Catholics, too, and that's okay. And then, you know, you yourself admit you have little or no use for those who oppose gay marriage, plus, apparently, you're willing to use harsh language towards moderates and/or conservatives.

    So I'm confused.

    Or, perhaps, and I say this with utmost respect, you are. I think you may want to go back and reread the objectionable, extreme passages of mine that you quote in your response. If you can find a single spot where I have singled out any individual of ANY culture and said hateful things about that person, I will personally apologize. Furthermore, if you can find any place where I've mocked any ethnicity or race, I'll apologize for that, too.

    Here is what many of my fellow liberals do not seem to understand -- culture and religion are, in adults, a choice. Yeah, it's hard to throw off the shit you're taught is right and wrong in childhood, but I don't accept that as an excuse; I'm the weakest individual I know, and I've managed to overcome most if not all of my basic Western Christian Hate Hate Hate programming, and if I can do it, so can anyone else.

    I intensely dislike Arabic culture. Do you know why? Because it's intolerant, violent, xenophobic, violent, murderous, violent, misognystic, and, did I mention, VIOLENT? It embraces such sociological wonders as female genital mutiliation (I don't use the word 'circumcision' because then some yutz will say 'well, what about MALE circumcision', and I have to explain that the Jews and other cultures circumcise male babies for reasons having to do with hygiene, while female circumcision came about entirely from a misognystic cultural desire to control female sexuality, and to even try to compare the two is simply hideous), family generational vendetta, torture, dismemberment, and slavery.

    Islam, which is a religion designed and tailored for Arabic culture (just as Paulist Christianity is a religion designed and tailored for Roman sub-citizens), also embraces all of these things. Women are chattel. If someone murders a member of your family, you are not entitled, but very nearly constrained, to murder then in return. Slavery is cool as long as your slaves are not fellow Muslims.

    I have nothing against any random individual of Arabic descent. Many of them have rejected all this nonsense and happily live in a more modern, secular society, either in the Middle East (before we invaded and broke the most prominent one there) or by moving to other parts of the world where they can be freer and happier and, hopefully, not take their 12 year old daughters to some butcher to have their clitorises (clitorii?) removed.

    I don't make fun of Indian Hindus, as one random example. Why? Well, they have some weird beliefs (by my standards), but none of those beliefs seem to include mutilating their girl children or committing mass murder. (Show me a people who actively and openly worship Kali, on the other hand, and I may very well heap derision on them.)

    Anyway, the bottom line is, not all cultures and/or religions are equal. Nonetheless, I frequently ridicule, scorn, and snort derisively on my various blogs at various different subsets of Christianity, at various different aspects of Western and American culture, and, especially, at conservatives and Republicans. And not only do you not bitch at me for those 'generalizations' (although I will note that invariably one of my ex girlfriends will, when I start 'generalizing' about conservatives), but you frequently show up in the comment threads yelling "oh yeah BABY you GO!!!"

    Being a member of a particular political party or idealogy is a choice one makes, and as it is a choice, it can be legitimately criticized, even harshly, by others. And you seem to understand that being a member of a religion is also a choice, and as such subject to analysis, criticism, and even ridicule... at least, as long as the religion in question is Western and Christian.

    Where you seem to be having trouble is (a) when I ridicule a religion that you've been programmed, as a good liberal, to be paranoically defensive about, and (b) when I ridicule a culture, in general.

    But continuing to abide by various cultural beliefs as an adult is also a choice, and as such, legitimate grounds for analysis, criticism, and/or ridicule.

    Beyond that, again, NOT ALL CULTURES ARE CREATED EQUAL. Lord knows there is plenty wrong with Western culture, American culture, and, I have no doubt, with Jewish culture, but WE DON'T FUCKING STRAP BOMBS TO OURSELVES AND BLOW UP GROUPS OF STRANGERS.

    And that is NOT simply the act of individuals which only those individuals should be reviled for. The Palestinians recently voted in Hamas as their... I don't know what the hell to call it, 'government', I guess, and Hamas openly advocates and supports suicide bombing. Various Arabic and Middle Eastern authority figures pay rewards to the surviving families of suicide bombers, and, goddamit, apparently Arabic culture finds the concept of Arabic babies dressed up as suicide bombers to be funny.

    This is a profoundly sick culture, and you either reject it or you embrace it, and if you embrace it, that is a conscious decision and I will ridicule you for it.

    I hope I've made this clear.

  3. Anonymous9:41 PM

    I hope I've made this clear.

    Uh...yeah. Crystal.
    Just so *I'm* clear - I'm not calling you a bigot, okay? In case that was how you interpreted my comment.

    Always Esteemed Scott said...

    Hey! You're using my own words against me! That's cheating!

    In all seriousness...okay, that's a fair point.
    Why is it that it's okay with me that you say similar stuff about (for example) Americans, Roman Catholics, etc and it doesn't bother me, but stuff about Arab culture makes me uncomfortable?

    To be honest, I can't answer that. Well, okay, I can, but frankly, the answers I came up with were not particularly convincing, even to me.

    Where you seem to be having trouble is (a) when I ridicule a religion that you've been programmed, as a good liberal, to be paranoically defensive about, and (b) when I ridicule a culture, in general.

    Actually, I probably would have had very little to say had you confined your remarks to Islam (the religion) rather than Arab culture in general.

    Why? I dunno. Maybe you're right, and my "good liberal programming" is causing me to reflexively respond negatively to your post even when (as I think I mentioned before) I agree with much of what you were saying. Perhaps the discomfort comes from that cognitive dissonance, I don't know.

    In any case, I think I need to examine my responses to the original post again. Assuming I haven't burned all my bridges already, I'll get back to you:)

  4. Scott,

    There are no bridges burned. I don't give up on friendships simply over a disagreement. For one thing, it's always possible that I'm wrong. I don't think I am this time, but I could be. I appreciate people trying to keep me honest.

    Offensiveness is always subjective. I realize there are those who are going to be offended by my extremist statements, like "have at it, O Sons of the Desert", but I would hope those who know something about me realize I'm not (and never will be) serious when I seem to be advocating any kind of armed violence between factions. (Although, if the McCainites and the Romneyettes want to start going after each other with guns and grenades, well, I live in a mostly liberal neighborhood and have a pretty deep cellar...) (See? That was a joke! And it didn't bother you at all, did it?)

    Anyway, I still regard you as a very cool guy and a good friend, so don't sweat it. If I torched friendships every time somebody disagreed with me, I'd have no friends left at all. And that's no way to live.

  5. Anonymous1:29 PM

    there are those who are going to be offended by my extremist statements, like "have at it, O Sons of the Desert", but I would hope those who know something about me realize I'm not (and never will be) serious when I seem to be advocating any kind of armed violence between factions.

    Ah, hell, I knew that the first time I read it. Like I said, I wasn't accusing you of actually advocating that, only that, you know, someone like ran maybe though you did :)

    And honestly, if
    McCainites and the Romneyettes want to start going after each other with guns and grenades,
    ...I'd supply the ammunition.
    And the popcorn. See? I'm just as bad. :)