The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks

From the mailbag:

You recently asked whether there was a group for groveling leftist Jews like you who hate Israel and who consort with the Kossacks advocating that France nuke Tel Aviv (check out today's cite, Yasser, assuming you didn't author that poorly written screed).  Is there a support group for those who are so pathetic that they can only gain companionship by bending over for anti-Semites?

Yes, there is. It is called "Hizbollah". Please join immediately. They will absolutely adore you.

I don't normally publish email, but this one's instructive.  It reminds me very much of the pre-Iraq War rhetoric designed to intimidate people from having a real debate about the war.  I'm honestly not sure what Israel should do, though obviously the country has the right and the duty to defend itself.  That I think Israel should defend itself though is not enough for the extremist AIPAC crowd.  To them, anyone who doesn't believe in indiscriminately killing Arabs should go join Hezbollah.  Anyone who recognizes that Israeli persecution of its own Arab citizens and its generally poor treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip has negative strategic consequences must be antisemitic or a groveling jew.

The reality is that Israel is acting with America's permission.  We've even accelerated arms shipments to Israel, arms they will use in the invasion of Lebanon.  At any point, Bush could stop Israel from attacking Hezbollah, as Reagan did in 1982.  Bush is doing nothing.  As a result of this combination of quiet encouragement through logistics and intentional diplomatic impotence, American citizens will be held accountable for Israeli actions.  Maybe Israel is doing the right thing, and maybe not.  But we should at least have the debate with all the facts on the table, since it's not just Israel that will wear the consequences.



Display:


Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (none / 0)

A lot of rage and even more fear out there in the blogosphere. I was taken aback at the LGF style comments on a Huffington Post thread on news reports about what is happening according to the corporatist media herd. Nothing controversial at all yet the thread was filled with hysterical demands that 'we' destroy Hizbolla and any Lebanese, women or children it mattered not, who got in the way.

I believe that many in Right Blogistan are crapping themselves in fear. They see Bush doing nothing, Lebanon will be his international 'Katrina', and they now understand that there is no 'Big Daddy' to protect them.

They are like cornered rats.


by Pericles on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 01:45:26 AM EST

Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (none / 0)

RatWing NeoCon Bushitters all spew the same bile word for word. They even all use the same syntax! It's quite amazing in a disgusting sort of nazi way.

Some say that Democrats and liberals need a way to disseminate such mindless repetition of the party line -- but I say thank goodness we're not like that. Long live the difference!


With Democrats Lieberman goes for the jugular. With Republicans he goes for the lips.
by Sitkah on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 01:53:12 AM EST

nits make lice (none / 0)

The title of a dKos recommended diary "They would've grown up to become terrorists anyway" reminded me of the "Indian wars" saying of the late 19th century, "nits make lice."

I didn't read the diary. There's only so much depressive reading one can do.

I was asked which side was I on and I said "of course both." But "they" cannot understand that.


Jeff Wegerson - PrairieStateBlue
by wegerje on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 03:04:02 AM EST

Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (none / 0)

Like all bullies, these guys are cowards to a man.  They talk a good talk and feel safe when they send anonymous emails to people, but would never have the courage to say something like that to your face, nor would they have the courage to go and fight the war they so desperately want other people's kids to fight.

The simple fact of their extreme cowardace is both the origin of their hateful statements (after all, isn't the modern "conservative" movement powered almost entirely by fear and hate?) and a reason to simply ignore what they spew.  If these people ever got the courage to venture out of their parents' basements, they might be dangerous and worthy of genuine smackdown.  As it is, they're merely noisy.


by jonweasel on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 03:19:37 AM EST

OT: Problems loading liberal sites right now (3.00 / 1)

Not my imagination.  Definitely something fishy happening right now.  Kos, Brad Blog, Raw Story, AMERICAblog, MyDD, Seeing the Forest, all maddeningly slow.

Michelle Malkin, Little Green Footballs, Powerline, Fox News, Myspace, ESPN.....no problem whatsoever.


by Village Jenius on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 04:51:12 AM EST

Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (none / 0)

Matt, thanks for publishing this.  I'm really sorry it had landed on your doorstep.  

Unfortunately, Lebanon makes too easy a target.  It is conveniently close and lacks an effective government to defend itself.  Attacking Lebenon has not been enough to restrain the forces in the Moslem world that really do want to destroy Israel.  These forces are scattered far more widely.  

Lebanon does, indeed, reveal some valuable truths but these are different from what the hysterics would like to force down the public's throats.  Occupying a confused and broken land will cost more than one might think.  Israel occupied southern Lebanon and was smart enough to leave.  The US should have learned that lesson and avoided long term occupation of Iraq.


by David Kowalski on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 05:12:11 AM EST

The Israeli Bias Problem (3.00 / 2)

My first similiar experience took place when I was 17 years old.  I had been in living in England, and I was back in the US, at a party at my uncle's house in Manhattan.  At that point in my life, I thought I would end up in a career in international affairs and I liked to debate the problems of the world.  At the onset of my political awareness, I was especially interested in the mideast problem, and followed news of the region closely, and loved discussing the issue with anyone who was knowledgeable.  At the party I was talking to all my uncle's friends about living in Europe, and at one point I mentioned my interest in mideast affairs.   I made a random comment that it was interesting watching American news coverage of the Israel and Palestine because it had a transparent pro-Israeli bias.  

Everyone reacted like I had just described in detail how much I wanted to fuck my mother.  No one was curious as to why I held this opinion, and no one was willing to engage in an honest debate.  There was just a berating condemnation of my comment, and I was told in clear terms how disturbed I was, and how I must never say such things in enlightened society again.  After this pathological demonstration, I became more interested in American perceptions of Israel than in Israeli policy itself.  

Later that year, my contrary nature being what it is, I created a little scene in a room packed full of diplomats.  The UN diplomatic community in New York had formed an organization called the International Protocol Officers Association... IPOA.  I dont think it's still around.  My uncle's art company was contracted to provide artwork for the inaugural party, and I volunteered to lug paintings through the streets of Manhattan to score entry to the ho-down.  

Once the party was underway, I slipped up the back stairway in a badly tied bowtie and entered Nirvana.  The biggest brownstone mansion I had ever seen packed two floors full of UN diplomats.  I met everyone I could and making my way around the crowds, I helped myself to a few drinks.  Somewhere around the second floor conservatory an Italian ambassador introduced me to the chief protocol officer of the US mission, an elegant middle-aged woman.  

Now, at the time, I was a little pissed off at the US mission.  Yasser Arafat had been invited to address the General Assembly the previous fall (1988), and was denied entry by the Reagan administration.  Technically the UN is neutral territory, and not controlled by the US government, but the Reagan administration had denied Arafat entry into US airspace, making his trip impossible.  Well, you can imagine, after a few drinks, I had no problem sharing my opinion of the situation with the chief protocol officer.  

After initial pleasantries about who I was and how I ended up there, I began sharing my thoughts, and the chatter in the room faded rapidly.  I ended after a few minutes by saying something like the US cannot be an honest broker if it refuses to engage in honest debate and diplomacy.  When I finished I was aware that the assembled diplomats had a look of subtle horror on their faces.  Everyone but the US protocol chief.  I was expecting a cool or dismissive response, but she had a look of total pride and joy on her face.  She was smiling broadly, and without hesitation she told me that I was absolutely right.  We had a great detailed conversation about international politics, and I think she enjoyed it so much because she was able to let down her diplomatic guard.

I became quite a little punk star of the party.  I dont know why I was not invited to next one.  That night my uncle, having heard of the incident,  told me that while he was impressed with my knowledge and passion, a career in international diplomacy was probably not the right career choice for me.  I dropped my Russian classes and started Greek and Latin that year.  

When it comes to discussing Israel in the US, I think it is helpful to address two seperate issues.  One is concrete, history and policy, and the other is subjective, American perceptions and biases of the situation.  It was very helpful living outside of the US as I learned about the topic.  Entrenched "pro-Israel no matter what" forces are much less influential in other countries, often to the point of irrelevance.  Cop-out non-positions like Bowers and Kos, "I dont want to actually have an opinion on the issue" are very disappointing to me.  

The that fact that you are Jewish will not spare you from accusations of anti-semitism when you paint a less than complimentary picture of Israel and even AIPAC, if the right people are paying attention.  I saw Russert's interview with Mike Wallace recently and was struck by his story of being attacked as a self-hating Jew, decades ago, after broadcasting a story that was not flattering to Israel.  If you actually form your lefty-Jewish group, and it becomes somewhat influential advocating positions not in line with conventional US thinking, I suspect that you will be attacked with a fervor that will make Ann Coulter look like Shirley Temple.  


John McCain loves war.
by Winston Smith on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 06:56:53 AM EST

Re: The Israeli Bias Problem (none / 0)

Thank you Winston.  Wonderful story.  


by weinerdog43 on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 02:30:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (3.00 / 1)

I have grown up in a Jewish neighborhood and have many Jewish friends. I to this day, do not understand how normal rational, loving people can justify murder and mayhem. If my grand parents country of origin or the Vatican was bombing another country and committing war crimes I would not be coming up with excuses to defend them.
Yes, they (Israel) has a right to defend themselves but this is not defense, these are war crimes!
Like it or not Israel has become the problem in the world. Sorry but that is the truth.


by fat karl on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 08:03:06 AM EST

Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (none / 0)

War crimes?


by Epitome22 on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 08:45:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Collective punishment is a war crime (3.00 / 1)

Deliberately targeting infrastructure like the electricity grid or water systems as an attempt to indirectly pressure combatants is not a legitimate war tactic.

Bombing Hiroshima won the war. Firebombing Dresden was a war crime. Firebombing Tokyo and a-bombing Nagasaki fall somewhere in between. But discussing the differences between these four bombing campaigns would require a certain degree of historical understanding and a little something the French wish they had a word for: 'nuance'. And nuance is exactly what you will never get in a discussion of the struggle between Israel and the Arab world.

In my smallish city they have dueling pro and anti war protests each Friday at noon, each side having their own designated side of the intersection. The rhetoric from both sides is just what you would expect but the Israeli attack has introduced a new twist. This Friday one of the pro-war crowd was waving a huge Israeli flag with a very small US flag attached to the staff. That this guy did not see the irony in subordinating the US flag to the Israeli one was telling. Much like the people who show their support for the flag by flying it from their car antennas until it is a set of muddy, tattered threads and then turn around and demand a Constitutional Amendment against flag desecration.

You don't get through to these people by explaining the fine points of the Geneva Convention or trying to explain the difference between the Six Day War and allowing Phalangists to slaughter Palestinians at Sabra & Chatila. Because what you will get is the kind of e-mail Matt is getting.

But I can say you will not advance the discussion much by throwing out a provocative question like "War crimes?" without any attempt to expand on your point, if any. Defending Israeli tactics is a legitimate move, to implicitly assert that the topic is off limits by a rhetorical question is illegimate. Understanding that gets us back to our old friend 'nuance' and as such I am not holding out much hope.


PollKatz: Bush Approval in 15 polls
by Bruce Webb on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 09:45:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Collective punishment is a war crime (none / 0)

Haha! Beautiful response, restraint, explanation. Thank you for that one.


Dust in the wind. All we are is dust in the divine, flatulent wind.
by Nezua Limon Xoloquinta Jonez on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 11:21:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (3.00 / 1)

This may sound strange, but I can't understand how people can't understand how rational people could disagree over this or pretty much any political issue. I get tired of people on both sides assigning irrationality or pure malevolence to those who disagree with them on issues such as war, abortion, health care, or education.  Rational people with access to much the same information are capable of diagreeing radically.

It's fairly easy for someone to believe that if Israel does not respond in this manner, that even worse things will come to pass.  I can't fathom being 100% certain that things would otherwise be worse, but I also can't imagine being 100% certain that things couldn't possibly be worse.  If you were a utilitarian, your approval or disapproval would hinge upon the probabilities that you assign to different alternative outcomes.  That's just one of several paths along which a rational person can come to justify Israel's recent actions.


Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both
by Anthony de Jesus on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 08:47:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (none / 0)

The problem of the world?

Are you sure that there aren't others


by v2aggie2 on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 02:21:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Air "America" (none / 0)

"Why don't Palestinians just move somewhere where they're welcome? -Ed Schultz


Independent who blames Dems for Republican crimes.
by Landsurveyor on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 08:34:33 AM EST

Never heard of the guy (3.00 / 1)

But ten seconds of Googling shows that while he appears on many of the stations that carry the Air America lineup he is not in fact associated with Air America but instead is separately syndicated.

I am not sure what your point is, it would appear to be a snarky attack on Air America generally, hence the air quotes, but beyond the implication that you find this comment to be somewhat un-American I am not sure what your intended contribution is here.

Blind quotes without context or comment just lower the signal to noise ratio.


PollKatz: Bush Approval in 15 polls
by Bruce Webb on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 09:57:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Never heard of the guy (none / 0)

"Guys like me? Ed Schultz and Al Franken? We draw more listeners than [Fox] does viewers!" -Ed Schultz


Independent who blames Dems for Republican crimes.
by Landsurveyor on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 10:06:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (none / 0)

Why is this The U.S.'s responsibility? Shouldn't the U.N or some other International body be handling this? We really need to make up our minds whether we want the U.S. to mind it's own business or continue acting as Grand High Master of the Elk Lodge of the world.

And if you think Israel as a right to defend itself, why are you chastising the U.S. for not preventing Israel from doing so?


by Epitome22 on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 08:43:35 AM EST

Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (3.00 / 1)

b/c we create the mess. we give not only the higest foreign aid to israel than we give to any other country, but we also supply them with arms. it's been our traditional role to support them to the point where some think of our foreign policy in that area as the same as Israel's. I can go on, but the point is that we can't pretend that this isn't ours no more than we can claim at this point Iraq isn't. Our hands are all over this.


by bruh21 on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 10:53:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (3.00 / 1)

."..groveling leftist Jew..."

The scary part to me is that people who use language like this think they're the only ones capable of forming a valid  opinion.


by Jeff Huber on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 09:25:07 AM EST

America's 'permission'? (3.00 / 1)

Try:  Israel is acting at America's invitation.

What we are seeing is the big plan as it unfolds.  When he took office, Cheney wanted the following countries levelled:  Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Syria--and the West Bank and Gaza.

Then, after it's all levelled--the plan is to send in big U.S. contractors to build shopping malls.  A bunch Arabs are killed (who cares?), a bunch of Republican megacorporations make $100,0000,000,000 in profits (awesome!), and a bunch of 'terrorist nations' magically become loyal Fox News watchers and lovers of President Bush (easy!).

So far, the plan has worked brilliantly.  I can feel the love flowing out of every guided bomb strike.  

Who or what caused that missile to be fired into Kyriat Shmoneh?  We'll never know.  It sure as hell wasn't one of the wanted-dead-or-alive Jesse James style 'terrorists' we see on TV.  And if we think the Shin Bet and the CIA had yet to penetrate Southern Lebanon, then we really are 'bent over' Jews.

But on your larger point:  welcome to the club.  If I had a dime for every zealot who called me a self-hating Jews...I'd have a lot of dimes.


by Jeffrey Feldman on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 10:22:03 AM EST

Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (none / 0)

Today you said:

"I'm honestly not sure what Israel should do, though obviously the country has the right and the duty to defend itself.  That I think Israel should defend itself though is not enough for the extremist AIPAC crowd.  To them, anyone who doesn't believe in indiscriminately killing Arabs should go join Hezbollah.  Anyone who recognizes that Israeli persecution of its own Arab citizens and its generally poor treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip has negative strategic consequences must be antisemitic or a groveling Jew."

Yesterday, I emailed on the "John Bolton/Nepotism" thread to express disagreement, and my perception that some liberal/progressives are ashamed of supporting Israel.  In my view, so ashamed, that they will go to the extent of bashing Israel, just so other people will still think of them as liberals/progressives.  I still believe that, and I hope you are not one of those liberal/progressives.

Today, I write to say that, while I am not sure you are correct in equating the AIPAC crowd with the extremist crowd, there is a disturbing trend among some extremists in the Jewish and pro-Israel community (I am Jewish and pro-Israel, so I can say this), who frankly do not care about the loss of life on the Arab side.

I AM STAUNCHLY PRO-ISRAEL, AND I DO CARE ABOUT THE LOSS OF LIFE ON THE ARAB SIDE.  NOT ALL ARABS ARE TERRORISTS.

No one should have to die, and when it comes time to account for why so many Lebanese had to die, any clear thinking Arab will go to Hezbollah, for an accounting.

I will also say that the apparently "disproportionate" response is NECESSARY to let Hezbollah, and their sponsors know that there will be a huge price to be paid for the kind of shit they have been pulling for years, and to let them know that however much Jews did not fight back in years past, they do now.  

If there is one fight you do not pick, it is with the craziest motherfucker in the room, and contrary to past perceptions of Jews, and current world opinion, maybe it is in Israel's interests, to be "the craziest motherfucker in the room."

Finally, I do not know that Israel persecutes its Arab citizens, or that it has treated poorly, those in the West Bank/Gaza Strip.  Israel is well aware that there is no future in mistreating any of its citizens.  If it mis-treats Jews and Christians, then future Jews and Christians will not want to "make Aliyah" (i.e., move to Israel).  If it mis-treats Muslims, it will just piss off the Arab world, more than it is already.  In that neighborhood, you do not piss people off unnecessarily.  That is what Hezbollah did.

The strategic and economic interests of the Jews and the Muslims are so in sync, it is amazing that nobody picks up that ball, and starts to run with it.

If religion is the opiate of the masses, and it may be, then nobody has better "stuff" than the Middle East.  Instead of shooting at one another, they should be building hotels, travel agencies and theme parks together.  They could be shaking down every Jew, Christian and Muslim pilgrim in the world, with world class religious tourism.  They could all be making so much fucking money, none of them would be able to see straight (which might make the next war less lethal).

Again, I reiterate what I said yesterday, it is time for everyone to think clearly, and to stop drinking the Kool-Aid.


by jfrankesq on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 10:32:30 AM EST

Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (none / 0)

Amongst some? I would increase some to say amongst a significant portion. I am not sure if its a majority but I am also sure that these voices that dont care about Arab lives aren't some small minority if these voices I am hearing here are representative.


by bruh21 on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 10:51:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Kool-Aid (none / 0)

Exactly. The "Kool-Aid" being the "Israel is always right" shtick. Which is why a positive outcome to the horror unfolding in the West Bank and Gaza Strip is that people are finally beginning to have an open dialogue about this; to hold up their deep, dark, crimson glasses of sweet, sweet, intractable dogma, and wonder if there are some rank clots floating about the sugary tides of such flawed philosophy.


Dust in the wind. All we are is dust in the divine, flatulent wind.
by Nezua Limon Xoloquinta Jonez on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 11:27:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

huge price to be paid (3.00 / 1)

"I will also say that the apparently 'disproportionate' response is NECESSARY to let Hezbollah, and their sponsors know that there will be a huge price to be paid for the kind of shit they have been pulling for years, and to let them know that however much Jews did not fight back in years past, they do now."

Haven't overwhelming military force and collective punishment been Israel's SOP for quite a while now?

Has it made things better or worse?

Fact is, blowing other countries to smithereens doesn't make people hate you any less. What it does is drive the survivors into the ranks of the radicals.

Everyone who's lost a parent, a child, a sibling, a spouse to Israeli bombing is that much more likely to buy into the hate preached by terrorist organizations.

So, in terms of the stated purpose, this solves nothing.


Yeah, I'm cynical.
by catastrophile on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 04:46:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (3.00 / 1)

You can imagine what Arab American children have had to put up since 911. It's unacceptable. My father was Jewish. I'm not. I do understand the emotional response. After all, I was named after a cousin who lost his life. However, like you said, the rhetoric is shaping up just like it did with respect to the Iraq war. Who will step up to the plate like Natalie Maines and a few others did?

About 40% of the population is Christian. I'm waiting to hear  what Pat Robertson has to say. Did he ever get his Jesus Theme Park approved?  

Thanks Matt for sharing. "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about the things that matter."  (MLK)


Dare to be free.
by misscee on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 10:36:36 AM EST

Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (none / 0)

The stuff above is why I don't engage people like that anymore. They know perfectly well that a critique Israel strategy doesn't equal either the claim that one doesn't believe Israel should support itself, or the more pathetic argument that one doesn't want Israel to exists. It is exactly like the Neocons dishonest way of trying to have a conversation. Of course, the reason being that they dont wont to have a conversation. They want to implement a strategy without any dissent. The way to do this is to demonize the dissent.


by bruh21 on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 10:48:13 AM EST

Re: The Bullying Strategy of the Likudniks (3.00 / 1)

Here is the simple truth. The zionist (they like to capitalize that term, which represents a movement that has been active for, I read, less than a century, as if it were, say, the Internet) colonization of Palestine is in no way different than the European colonization of Amerindia here. (I am a bit Amerindian myself.) Was it some great evil that the Amerindians put up resistance to their colonization here? Of course not. Was it wrong for the governor of my state (Massachusetts) to deliberately send smallpox contaminated blankets to Amerindians? It sure as hell was. Should I be condemned as ANTI- EUROPEAN for saying that. In a word, NO! So let's cut the crap about antineozionism being the same as anti-Judaism.

The current destruction of Lebanon is obviously a total violation of the Geneva Accords, and basic human decency as well. Yet, our most "liberal" U.S. congresspeople voted to support it. Many of them had my absolute support prior to this. They certainly do not now. I have tried very, very hard to resist the notion that our elected officials are in the pockets of the insane neozionists. But they have followed, in lockstep fashion, every policy that the Israeli neozionists have requested. So I not tend rather strongly to believe that they will do anything the neozionists demand, even if such actions lead directly to the destruction of the United States itself, and I deeply fear that they will.

Look HERE.


by blues on Sun Jul 23, 2006 at 12:00:08 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.