Thursday, May 10, 2012

Twain (Updated)

If you cannot be civil then you cannot be here.

That's really the bottom line, I am afraid.


It has come to my attention that someone thinks that the above graphic represents an actual, physical threat.

What horrendous mierda.

Of course, it is not a threat.

Nonetheless, if a person cannot be civil, here, then they are not welcome.

Period. End of story.

Almost all the pro-Israel blogs screen comments before posting, but I have no intention whatsoever to allow any bad actors to force me to do so.


  1. Me either.

    The assholes can have their say and show themselves for what they are worth.

    I have enormous affection for Mark Twain. I've read pretty much everything he wrote. I do think however that dueling makes for a more polite society.

    1. Swords or pistols?

      Y'know, dude, I thought you closed up the bar and grill this morning. The link on blogroll went to a dead space and I was concerned that this blogging thing was maybe driving you a little bonkers, like it sometimes does other people.


      And write, damn you!


  2. To imagine that a threat was communicated shows how wacky things can be.

    I think that is is too easy to be gratuitous, and this contributes to making a bad environment even worse.

    The fact is that civility is no guarantee against censorship of ideas.

    1. Gratuitous?

      You may have a point. Certainly I can be guilty of that, as the ostrich so clearly demonstrates!


      Nonetheless, this person seems incapable of taking the point. Point being that he is not welcome here. Unfortunately, there is no real way to ban an IP address with blogger, which leaves me with two options.

      I can simply delete (and delete and delete and delete) the banned individual's comments or I can set up the system to screen comments for approval, which I definitely do not want to do.

      Most of the other pro-Israel bloggers do that, but I just do not want to. It's too controlling for my sensibility of things.

      Nonetheless, the banned individual is banned for a reason. The reason is that he is incapable of being civil on Israel Thrives.

      I was never rude on his blog, but he is perpetually rude on mine, on practically a daily basis. For months this guy has been posting these really childish, really nasty and demeaning comments which I immediately delete. In truth, I stopped even reading them long ago. Heck, for all I know he was posting really terrific original poetry, but I'll never know because I refuse to read the guy.

      Since the guy refuses to have a rational discussion then my only option is to ask him to stay off of my blog.

      That's it.

      That's all he needs to do and if he won't do that... well?... then we get little mellodramas... with much clutching at pearls.

    2. Because it isn't, even if it is wrong. But how you decide to "take" it is up to you. Are you seriously feeling threatened? After watching you in action, I am surprised that you would be so affected.

      Aside from observing how you deal with others, I have first hand experience. If only you did not engage in defamation, mockery and demonizing yourself, and in arbitrary censorship. But you do, and you tolerate it from others in cases where the recipient has so-called "Obama Derangement Syndrome," the sole criterion to decide if one deserves tolerance.

      Indeed, this is why I no longer participate at your blog. Aside from the boring content, why should one submit themselves to the treatment that is not much different than at other hate sites.

      If you truly feel threatened, I suggest you contact the authorities, rather than make it fodder on a public blog.

    3. The above was directed to Volleyboy.

      Mike, you were rude over there. Not sure who started it, but it is incumbent to stay on the high road, even when others cannot.

      Rudeness is too much a constant and it makes it almost impossible to have effective discourse.

    4. I must amend.

      There was a day when I was rude on that blog, wasn't there?

      The guy had been spamming this place for awhile until he finally got a rise out of me.

      That was not such a great day.

      Y'know, I'm a fisherman. I understand that it can take cast after cast after cast until a trout rises for the bate.

      But this is what the guy seems to be doing. He casts and casts until he gets a rise. Well, he got one.

      He can continue casting if he wants more.

    5. And my kids and wife... what did they do to you? Eh? You think writing to my home email is like fishing? What the hell is wrong with you?

    6. Hi VB,

      ya know, if you can manage to be civil then I will not need to delete your comments.

      But here is a question, why is it, in your estimation, that "progressive Zionists," such as yourself, refuse to acknowledge, and honestly discuss, the rise of the radical Jihad in the Middle East?

    7. Oh, and btw, no.

      Obviously I do not think that writing to your email is something like fishing.

      What you have been doing is "fishing."

      Congratulations, every so often you get a bite.

      Now, tell me, why are you guys almost entirely ignoring the rise of an anti-Semitic genocidal movement throughout the Middle East?

      I would think that, as someone who cares about the Jewish people, this might be of some interest for you, yet I see virtually no discussion of the topic by progressive-left Jews on Daily Kos.

      How odd.

      How come, do you suppose?

    8. We don't ignore it Mike... You should read our stuff more often.

    9. Of course, you do.

      You are in denial.

      For example, if you look at:

      There is no diary from the regular Jewish Daily Kos progressives discussing the rise of radical Islam in the Middle East.

      How is it that you guys are almost entirely ignoring the greatest threat to the Jewish people in decades?

      How is that?

      And, btw, if you look at:

      You will find a grand total of 3 (count 'em!) 3 diaries on the subject. And one of those is from 2007.

      So, my question for you, one that I very much hope that you seek to answer, is this:

      How is it that "progressive Zionists" are almost entirely ignoring the biggest threat to the Jewish people that we have seen in decades?

      You can continue your efforts to defame, but maybe you will consider answering a substantive question.

  3. If he writes to you, then how are your wife and kids involved? Do you tell them that you and they have been threatened? Or would they consider the "threat" silly? This is false outrage as I see it.

    The "unclean hands doctrine" concerns a widely held equitable conviction that those guilty of wrongdoing are in no position to condemn, judge, criticize, blame, or make claims on others for performing similar or related wrongs. I believe it is applicable here, for the reasons set forth in a previous comment.

    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    2. Ummm I never wrote to Mike's home email anything. He wrote on an email that is a personal email for my wife and I and is always up on our computer. He could have written to my hotmail account (he has the addy) and I would not have said "boo". But no...

      It is interesting that you see nothing wrong with writing emails to a persons home calling them "vile scum" in response to a blog post. I never did anything close to that. Never.

      It is a very telling comment.

  4. You have misstated, as is your wont.

    Above, I stated: "Because it isn't, even if it is wrong."

    Is it actually threatening to you, wife or kids? If that is what you want to maintain, your choice. But I am free to say that I think it is not even close to a real threat, and, as important, that you contribute to the creation of a poisonous environment as much as those you love to demonize.

    1. Ok well you are certainly welcome to try to justify emails sent to my home with highly insulting language that my wife and kids see as just fine. Pretty interesting there.

    2. I did not justify them. In fact, I said it was wrong, yet you persist to mischaracterize.

      I also said I think your claim to being threatened is a ruse, part of the kabuki. From my experience, you have few qualms about engaging in the standard game of insult and outrage. Rather than just saying the conduct here was inappropriate, you chose to put forth that what occurred was akin to a fatwa.

      You are not alone in playing this blame game. So do the activists you oppose, be they anti-Progressive or anti-Zionist. This makes it almost impossible to acknowledge important kernels of truth being offered regarding these matters.

      I wonder, do you believe there is a tension between Progressive and Zionist? And which of these do you consider more important or under threat?

      Do you believe that Islam is imperialistic and expressly targets Jews, among others, for discriminatory treatment? When does discourse about Islamic aggression and discrimination become hatred of the speaker, as you and others allege?

      Do you believe that one can support Obama yet be a strong critic of policy or performance? Or does any criticism equate, per se, to support for the Republicans?

      Rather than continuing this tired exercise where you tell me that I "see nothing wrong" when I said the opposite, then justify by explaining you are less culpable overall, perhaps this opportunity to explain yourself will serve a better purpose.

    3. For some reason, School, I do not expect that you will get any real answers to your questions.

      Call it progressive self-censorship.

    4. It is something akin to a situation in the UK where allegations of sex grooming rings of "Asian" men were ignored by state officials in fear of being called racist.

      As I see it, the same thing occurs here. There is a fear of being perceived as biased against Muslims. To offset, it is important to be seen as "fair" and hyper loyal to Obama. In that stilted environment, let alone overall, there is not much cause to think about the questions I asked.

  5. But I did NOT justify them. Nor do I justify the feigned outrage that you persist in.

    Interestingly, here you are participating despite the "threat."

    Why does your 8 year old have access to your email anyway?