A hateful attack

Hey, Gandhi… your blog sucks. I’m an agnostic who was born Catholic, so try to fit that into your conspiracy-addled mind, you anti-Semitic cretin.

(Oh, and learn how to spell anti-Semitic while you’re at it. Semite, Semitic, get it?)

Popularity: 2% [?]

45 Comments on “A hateful attack”

  1. I spell it wrongly on purprose, just to piss off anal-retentive fools.

    You know, the kind of people who think that one spelling mistake invalidates an entire argument…

    The kind of people who think that any criticism of Israel equates to a racist attack…

    People like you, I guess.

     
  2. “I made that mistake on purpose to make you look stupid.” Bwahaha! I’ll use that one next time I screw up.

    I nearly fell into your clever spelling trap. Except I’m not pissed off, and I don’t think that one spelling mistake invalidates your entire argument. I think your belief in nutty and racist conspiracy theories is invalidation enough.

    This is what you said:

    And what a surprise, the author just happens to be Jewish, like all the others who launch hateful attacks on my blog. So… are you on the payroll, or you do this shit just for fun?

    Pray tell, how is that “criticism of Israel?” Sounded to me like criticism of an individual Jew for being Jewish with some batshit crazy conspiracy talk thrown in. I know there’s a word for that… oh yeah, it’s anti-Semitism.

    Your blog still sucks, and I’m still not Jewish.

     
  3. your blog sucks

    … sounds like a “hateful attack”, doesn’t it?

    I’ve already responded to this on my blog, I am not going to repeat myself.

    If I am guilty of anythink, it is lazy hyperbole. But believe what you want. Reality is just a concept to people like you anyway.

    (Did I just say people like you – isn’t that anti-semetic too???)

     
  4. I WON’T USE THE PROPER SPELLING BECAUSE THAT’S JUST WHAT THE JOOOOOOOS WANT!

    IGNORANCE IS MY SHIELD! MY SWORD, MISSPELLED WORDS!

     
  5. Well, yeah, it’s a hateful attack (see, I hate anti-Semites). That’s the title of the post. You said that all the hateful attacks on your blog came from Jews, and I’m not a Jew, so I gave you one non-Jewish hateful attack. Get it?

    Boy, that’s a response. “Links like this I can live without – know what I’m saying?” You can live without links like… what? Maybe you meant Jewish links?

    (It might be, if I was Jewish. But I’m not.)

     
  6. So there you go, children.

    A puerile attempt to smear Cindy Sheehan becomes a squawking cacophany of “anti-Semite!” chants aimed at discrediting an anti-war blog.

    Right-wing war-mongering squawk-box tactics 101.

    You fellas must be real proud of yerselves…

     
  7. Sorry, but pointing out that Cindy Sheehan is a left-wing political operative with ties to other left-wing political operatives does not a smear make.

    And if you say something anti-Semitic you should probably expect someone to call you an anti-Semite.

    If you think it’s “right-wing tactics” to point out the openly declared motives and racist inclinations of our opponents, well, then our tactics are sound. Unlike your sole tactic, which is to immediately scream “Joooooooo on the payroll!”

    Oh, and your blog? Still sucks.

     
  8. So it’s OK for you to “point out the openly declared motives and racist inclinations” of your opponents?

    But when I point out the motives of a person attacking my blog and Cindy Sheehan, that’s racist?

    Go figure.

    Personally, I would think pointing out that JG is Jewish does not a smear make.

    And as his comment above reminds us, he is the one shouting “JOOOOOOOOSSSS!!!” all over the place, not me.

    Thou hypocrites!

     
  9. When your only basis for attacking a person’s motivation is his supposed membership in an international cabal of Jews, yes, that’s racist. That’s Protocols of the Elders of Zion racist.

    It’s also a smear because it’s just not true. It is true, however, that Sheehan has ties to Michael Moore. So how am I being hypocritical? I’m not the lying racist that you are.

    You have trouble with the basic definitions (as well as the spelling) of words, don’t you?

    Just embrace your foul anti-Semitism, Gandhi. Hell, David Duke is on your side, maybe you can learn something from him.

     
  10. So Sheehan has ties to Mike Moore which are so-o-o-o close as to make any comments from her clearly invalid, but JG has no ties to the rightwing Republikudniks, even if he just happens to parrot their talking points on a daily basis.

    Right…

    To go back to my original comment on PW:

    Blogs like this encourage small-minded, hateful invective while strenuously ignoring any serious debate of the real issues.

    PS: when you said “supposed membership in an international cabal of Jews” I think you meant “supposed membership in a supposed international cabal of Jews” – or is the cabal no longer a Conspiracy?

     
  11. And obviously, by your reasoning, the links between Israel and the Bush neo-cons are pure coincidence, and anyone drawing attention to such links (e.g. moi) is obviously a despicable racist.

    Or would it be OK to say there are links between Bush neo-cons and ISRAEL, but totally racist to suggest that there are links between Bush neo-cons and JEWS?

    Maybe I just need a lesson in Political Correctness, so I can be as polite to everyone as you and JG.

     
  12. You think the last name Goldstein is a “motive.” Now you bring up his “Republikudnik” ties (of which there are few if any), but a few days ago his last name was all it took.

    Your hateful invective started all this. If you apologize for your statement, or even admit that it was racist, maybe I’ll take back the cretin remark. Maybe.

     
  13. You didn’t draw attention to links between Bush neo-cons and Israel. You drew attention to a last name.

    Political correctness isn’t your problem. Anti-Semitism is. As I said in Jeff’s comments, I’m not surprised when someone lets something that might be anti-Semitic slip. I am, however, disgusted when someone screams, “Payrolled Jew!”

     
  14. Relax, Matt. Gandhi is just a victim in all this. I mean, I linked to his site and left a trackback, which means I was “occupying” his terrority. What other choice did I leave him then to dress himself up in the rhetorical bomb vest and come to my site and blow his shit up all over the place?

    Oh. And go ask the social cons how many Republican talking points I parrot every day. Hell, I’m not on a single Republican email list that I know of. But no matter: where there’s a Jew, there’s a conspiracy.

    Right Gandhi?

     
  15. But here’s the rub, Jeff. His blog doesn’t even have trackbacks, so you’re not occupying anything. He could have just ignored you and no one would ever have been the wiser.

    Instead it seems like he was a problem with the very existence of your little Judaic corner of the blogosphere.

     
  16. Can’t we all just get the fuck along, people?

    Amen.

     
  17. Your hateful invective started all this.

    Bullshit. JG started all this, as he (halfway) acknowledges.

    You guys can dish it up but you can’t take it.

    Hypocrites!

     
  18. PS:

    CINDY SHEEHAN!
    CINDY SHEEHAN!
    CINDY SHEEHAN!
    CINDY SHEEHAN!
    CINDY SHEEHAN!
    CINDY SHEEHAN!
    CINDY SHEEHAN!
    CINDY SHEEHAN!
    CINDY SHEEHAN!

     
  19. I’m still wondering how I’m a hypocrite. How is noting a link between Sheehan and Michael Moore and then implying that you’re a liberal sheeple in any way similar to your racist conspiracy theorizing?

    Even if I was a hypocrite, how does that justify your racism? Tu quoque ain’t gonna cut it here.

    But I guess you’ve given up actually trying to justify yourself now since you’re just yelling, “I’m rubber and you’re glue,” and chanting the name of your hero. That’ll learn me.

     
  20. I’m still wondering how I started this. I found Gandhi’s site on Technorati, looking for those cheering for CINDY! I linked him with about 7 others. Didn’t quote him or anything.

    From that, he showed up, saw my last name (for the record, I’m Italian / German / Irish) and went RIGHT for the Jewish conspiracy angle.

    Because he’s a shitty little anti-semitic lefty.

     
  21. I’m still wondering how I’m a hypocrite.

    I’m still wondering how I’m an anti-semite. Been a productive discussion, hasn’t it?

    I found Gandhi’s site on Technorati, looking for those cheering for CINDY!

    And why – oh why? – were you doing that, Jeff? Pray tell.

    Hunting down “victims” for your wicked invective – why do you do that?

    I doubt you even read a full post on my blog before you slandered me as a mindless “lefty”. Tell us, Jeff, once and for all – what IS your motivation?

    Is all your shallow, hateful sarcasm (and I can’t see much else on your blog) supposed to make the world a better place? And if so, for whom?

     
  22. It is not ok to imply that someone’s Jewishness is the sole motive for their “hateful” actions. That’s anti-Semitism. Mentioning that someones motives need to be scrutinized because his last name is Goldstein is not a critique of Israel, so you can’t hide behind that rhetorical rock.

    There, you’re an anti-Semite. Understand now? Probably not, because you’re a particulary slow anti-Semite.

    To answer your last question: A better place for the Joooooooos, obviously. Because that’s what he’s paid for.

     
  23. By the way, your “hateful invective” meter seems to be miscalibrated. Most people wouldn’t use that description for the word “Baaaa” linked to a post.

    But this:

    And what a surprise, the author just happens to be Jewish, like all the others who launch hateful attacks on my blog. So… are you on the payroll, or you do this shit just for fun?

    Now that’s some hateful invective!

     
  24. It is not ok to imply that someone’s Jewishness is the sole motive for their “hateful” actions.

    Two words: imply and infer.

    What we see is often based on our pre-conceived attitudes. You see an anti-Semite because you are pre-disposed to rationalise the words of “people like me” in that way. Your mind is blocked to the truth, so you must infer something as a handy excuse.

    I did not say what I said solely because JG is Jewish. I also mentioned his “Spirit of America” link, remember. And then of course there is his tastelessly childish attack on Mike Moore, Cindy Sheehan and myself. What I said is, put the three of these together and you get an all too familiar pattern (from my point of view at least).

    It’s the Bush squawking noise machine. A cocophany of hate. And to suppose that some of those who propel this machine (remember Armstrong Williams, Jeff Gannon?) are not reaping financial rewards from it is just stupid.

    Nuff said?

     
  25. Keep the lame justifications coming. Everyone can see through it and knows what your real agenda is.

    Your side lost the last few elections and ratcheting up your Jew-hating rhetoric while hiding behind the excuse that you’re just criticizing American/Israeli policy is going to help you lose the next few.

     
  26. “Real agendas” eh? I’m still waiting to hear what the “real agenda” for JG’s spiteful atttack was…

    BTW – Why do you assume I support Bonesman Kerry and the pro-war Democrats just because I oppose the pro-war Bush cabal? Who is stereo-typing whom here?

     
  27. Can’t we all just get the fuck along, people?

    lol, I’m with you, brother Jesus. I almost get the sense that some of the people here want to misunderstand one another. Now I’m getting back to work before my boss notices me needlessly increasing the entropy of universe on his time.

    PS: Thanks for James 5:1-6, it’s a real zinger!

     
  28. How is “Baaaa” spiteful?

    I said fuck-all about Kerry. “[This blog] campaigns for the removal of those responsible: Bush, Blair and Howard.” That’s from your blog. Since all three of those men won re-election, you lost.

    You’ll just have to get used to losing, because open anti-Semitism? Not a big winner.

     
  29. Elendil – How do I misunderstand Gandhi? He said something clearly anti-Semitic, I called him on it. I understand him perfectly.

     
  30. Iraq War? Big winner…

     
  31. I’ve got election results. You’ve got an anonymously sourced, speculative article. Anyone keeping score?

     
  32. Election results? You’ve got Diebold, Katherine Harris, Ohio, Kenneth Blackwell, …

    In Australia you’ve got Children Overboard, SIEV-X, interest rate scare-mongering, detention centres…

    Sometimes “winning” is really losing.

    And if you want to argue that the USA is really “winning” anything at all in Iraq, go right ahead…!!!

     
  33. BLACK IS WHITE! UP IS DOWN! WINNING IS LOSING!

     
  34. START WARS TO SAVE LIVES!!!

    KILL INNOCENT CIVILIANS TO SPREAD FREEDOM!!!

    TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH TO HELP THE POOR!!!

    DESTROY THE “NEW DEAL” TO SAVE SOCIAL SECURITY!!!

    GO TO JAIL TO PROTECT CRIMINALS!!!

    IMPOSE A UN AMBASSADOR WHO OPPOSES THE UN!!! AN ATTORNEY GENERAL WHO FLOUTS THE LAW!!!

    CLEAR SKIES!!! NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND!!!

    USA NUMBER ONE!!! WHOO FUCKING HOO!!!

     
  35. He said something clearly anti-Semitic, I called him on it. I understand him perfectly.

    QED!

    Okay then, it’s lunch time, my code’s being tedious, and I feel like a bit of fnord …

    [begin swirly screen]

    Somewhere, deep in cyberspace, the sound of a small comment reaches Captain Matt Moore’s supersonic ears. It’s the sound of Gandhi. And he’s in a bad mood: “… what a surprise, the author just happens to be Jewish, like all the others who launch hateful attacks on my blog,” he cries.

    “By golly!”, says Moore, red cape rippling majestically in the wind, “That sounds clearly anti-semitic! I shall seek out this impudent wretch and call him on it!”

    Moore flies through cyberspace, faster than a speeding bullet, to his secret base, TBOTCOTW. There, he sets himself down in front of his keyboard, and his fingers soon become a blur as he writes a stirring rebuttal. Finishing it with a flourish “… you anti-Semitic cretin”, he instructs Gandhi in the proper spelling of the word Semitic, and hits ‘Upload’.

    ‘One less anti-semite in this world’, he thinks to himself, ‘or at least, one who can now spell. My work here …’ (at this point, he swishes his cape, and raises his clenched fist) ‘… IS DONE!’

    [end swirly screen]

    ;-) Let us now together imagine another account of your exchange with him, the one that would have truly led you to ‘understand him perfectly’.

    [begin swirly screen]

    … “By golly!”, says Moore, red cape rippling majestically in the wind, “That sounds clearly anti-semitic! I shall seek out this person and find out what on Earth their problem is!”

    Moore flies through cyberspace, faster than a speeding bullet, until he reaches the lair of Gandhi, the appropriately titled “Bush Out”.

    “A leftist“, he says with a hiss, his nose crinkled with disgust, “I’ve heard that they can be anti-semitic (which is strange considering their traditions of multiculturalism and civil rights), so I better be on my guard”.

    Moore sneaks past the site-meter, and carefully climbs his way over the most recent posts, being careful not to get any of it on his freshly dry-cleaned lycra suit … O6 Election Focus: Impeach Bush! …. “Yech!” Bush Fantasy Bubble Set to Burst … until he finds what his looking for: August 9, 2005. Moore picks up the post, finds an old desk in the corner, sweeps aside the pile of old Guardian issues, and switches on the old green lamp.

    He quickly scrolls down, smirking at the protein wisdoms comment, until a single phrase, penned by Gandhi, catches his eye. … then I might as well give up this blog.

    Moore is suddenly taken aback. “Hrm,” Moore thinks to himself, “he sounds like these incidents made him unhappy. No, more than unhappy. It’s almost as if … as if, he was offended to have been called an anti-Semite” Intrigued, he keeps reading …

    If nobody can ever criticize Israeli government policy for fear of being labelled anti-semetic …

    “Ah-hah! He has a problem with Israeli government policy! Hrm … ” Moore creases his brow in thought as he keeps reading. A post from one Gandhi’s friends, Winter Patriot, catches his eye:

    there is a big difference among the terms Israeli [a nationality], and Jewish [a religion, culture and/or ethnicity], and Zionist [a political philosophy]. Most of the Jews I know are not Israelis and detest Zionism …

    “I wonder,” Moore thinks to himself, “when he identified Goldstein as Jewish, could it have been that he was really referring to Goldstein’s support for current Israeli government policy, rather than Goldstein’s ethnicity and religion?” Captain Moore reclines in the old chair, and strokes his chin thoughtfully.

    “Well, there’s only one way to be certain!” he exclaims. With the memory of St. Covey’s sage advice ‘seek first to understand, then be understood’ echoing in his head, Moore whips out a piece of monogrammed paper from his red underpants, and starts scribbling out a note to Gandhi.

    Gandhi, I have read your comments on Goldstein’s blog. They sound anti-Semitic. However, the comments on your blog here make it sound like you didn’t mean them that way. What gives?

    [heart], Captain Matt Moore.

    Next week: Gandhi and Moore clash in a mighty battle of the wits. But will their shared hate of racism be enough for them to join forces, so they can save the human race in time? Tune in next week to find out.

    [end swirly screen]

    St Covey, Captain Matt Moore, his red underpants, and all the Elders of Zion, are trademarks of Elendil Corporation and its affiliate Rummy’s Diaries. All incidents, situations, institutions, govemments and people depicted are entirely fictional and any similarity, without satiric intent, of characters or persons living or dead, is strictly coincidental. All rights reversed.

    In loving memory of our brother, Jesus, 0 AD to 30 AD, “Can’t we all just get the fuck along, people?”

     
  36. Wow. I haven’t read all that, but I will later.

    Gandhi, get lost. Your friend is more interesting.

     
  37. Dude…

    I’m assuming you’re American?

    If so, your country is going down the S-bend, and you are cheering madly… Even if you are Australian like me, the same applies.

    But that’s your life. Worse yet, however, as a result of your emperialistic mindset, millions of others are being dragged down the tube with you. For example:

    THE number of dead Iraqi civilians counted at the Baghdad morgue hit 1100 in July, the highest toll in recent history.

    Lucky we “saved” them all from Saddam, right?

    That’s on top of the US dead, who presumably are worth a whole lot more to “people like you”.

    And of course the wounded, the homeless, the anguished, the angry, the orphaned children who will grow up to be terrorists, perhaps killing you own children…

    That’s called “winning”, right?

     
  38. Ok, I read it all, and you’re more interesting, but just as wrong.

    I’ll repeat myself: You can’t defend anti-Semitism by saying it’s criticism of Israel.

    Pointing out that someone is Jewish as a way to dismiss their arguments, in the comments of a post that has nothing at all to do with Israel, is not criticizing Israel.

     
  39. You can’t defend anti-Semitism by saying it’s criticism of Israel.

    From having read him a while now, and I’m convinced that it is the other way around.

    I don’t think he’s defending anti-Semitism by saying it’s a criticism of Israel. I think his criticisms of Israel (or more likely neoconservativism and the right-wing that aligns itself with Zionism generally) have ended up sounding like anti-Semitisim.

    We are imperfect beings, Matt. Sometimes we use the wrong word, or say one thing when we mean another. Look at Gandhi’s second post … he himself calls it “lazy hyperbole”. It’s quicker to say “Jewish”, to link a person, their ethnic and religious associations, and their politics, then actually specify them carefully. In much the same way that the word “Muslim” can get misused.

    All throughout his comments to you, he has been saying that he has a problem with Israeli govt policy, with neo-conservatives and zionism. Even assuming that he should have been more specific with his speech, that had made an error of lazyness … can’t you at least take his word for it now?

    BTW, I’ve been following him for a while, and I think I know what he meant by the “payroll” comment. It was kind of amusing to read it, because even though I knew what he meant, I could very easily see how it looked after a comment about “Jewish authors” :-)

    Let me explain: He has written for a long time now about buzz-marketing as a political tool. He is of the opinion that some of the right-wing blogs are a form of buzz-marketing created by the Administration for propoganda purposes. I think that it’s probably true of some left-wing ones as well, but I digress … I think the part that intrigues me most about this idea is his point that if corporations have been using buzz-marketing techniques for a while, there’s no reason to think that political parties haven’t caught on. More importantly, our institutions often feel quite justified in feeding us misinformation during a time of war (e.g. Nurse Nayirah), and I’m intrigued by the idea that they would use blogs to do this, giving us a false impression that the information that we are getting is grass-roots.

    My day-job involves me researching self-organisation, so I don’t see the homogenisation of right-wing blog messages as a very strong reason to believe those blogs are in fact propoganda outlets. I also don’t think that bloggers need to be paid in a literal sense to motivate them to spread a message. Nonetheless, I think that’s what he meant when he referred to a “payroll”.

     
  40. and I think his payroll comment was also meant to be humorous, in a kind of jaded-cynicism way, but you’ll have to ask him.

     
  41. Oh, so it’s not criticism of Israel, it’s criticism of right-wing propagandists who align themselves with Zionism. Who all happen to be Jewish.

    And Jeff’s post had nothing to do with Zionism. It was a joke about Cindy Sheehan and the leftist bloggers who love her.

    And if the dude had said, “I chose the wrong words. Sorry,” right away I doubt I would have written this post. Instead he keeps bobbing and weaving, accusing me of hypocrisy, saying that he’s just criticizing Israel, he’s guilty of “lazy hyperbole.”

    So, there you have it, I think we’ve reached an impass.

     
  42. I think we’ve reached an impass.

    To be honest, I think I can see both your points. But I do know Gandhi (as far as anyone can “know” a fellow blogger), and I remain convinced that he’s not an anti-Semite.

    Oh well, it was worth a try. Thanks for indulging my Discordian story-telling impulses. And if you very feel the need to get terribly depressed about humanity, \begin{shameless plug} feel free to drop by my blog Rummy’s Diaries: The best darn archive of torture this side of blogspot for a leaked memo or three \end{shameless plug}.

     
  43. Impass? What impass?

    Think of it as a hurdle, Mark…

    Like they say, “the first step is accepting that you have a problem.”

     
  44. So when do you plan to overcome your case of denial? Cause I’ll be here when you’re ready to apologize.

    Who’s Mark?

     
  45. You guys are getting nowhere :-) Here’s my effort. Modify at will. Or argue some more over it. Whatever.

    > &lt

    I, Gandhi, blogger author of Bush Out, do solemnly declare myself to not be an anti-Semite. I apologise unreservedly for my lazy hyperbole. In future will endeavour to differentiate clearly between the words/phrases “Jewish”, “Zionist”, “Israeli government policy”, “neoconservative”, and “nefarious right-winger”, especially in discourse with members of one or more of the above groups.

    Although I remain of the opinion that there is a strong correlation between membership of the above groups, I will make every effort in future to refrain from making the logical fallacy secundum quid (which is nobby Latin for ‘hasty generalization’), as it is fallacious, and not very nice.

    When one of the members of afore-mentioned groups recommends to me that I have committed a secundum quid, even if I believe that the member is is doing so to undercut the truth of my message with a circumstantial ad hominem (see below), even if I didn’t mean it that way anyway, I will note it for my personal improvement, and wish them a pleasant day.

    > &lt

    I, Matt Moore, blogger author of TBOTCOTW, do solemnly accept Gandhi’s afore-mentioned statement that he is not an anti-Semite. I understand that sometimes people are not very accurate, especially when in a bad mood, and apologise unreservedly for taking so long to listen to accept Gandhi’s protestations for what they were.

    Although I remain of the opinion that it is not okay to use the word “Jewish” like that, I will make every effort to refrain from making a circumstantial ad hominem (which is nobby Latin for ‘attacking a claim by asserting that the claimant is only saying that because of who or what they are’), as it is second-guessing someone’s motives, and not very nice.

    When I am so moved to point out to someone that I believe that they have committed a secundum quid (see above), I will do so without sounding all circumstantial ad hominem, and if they say that that wasn’t how they meant it, I will cut them some slack, and wish them a pleasant day.

    > &lt

    Decided on the day of Setting Orange, Bureaucracy 11, Year of Our Lady of Discord 3171

    (Gandhi sign here) X………..

    (Matt Moore sign here) X………..

    Witnessed by
    (sign here) X… Elendil KSC …

     

Leave a Reply