« Another Public Service Announcement | Main | Taking her pantsuit and going home »

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

More fun with trolls

I've mentioned on a number of occasions that keeping a blog provides nearly limitless opportunities to be abused, and frequently forces one to endure missives from some of the truly unbalanced people in the world.

To be clear, I'm not talking about the people who strongly disagree with things I've written here, and who somehow manage to express their opinions in an intellectually honest manner (i.e. without resorting to personal attacks on me, or attacking me from behind the veil of presumed anonymity). No, I'm talking about trolls who, time and time again, prove the GIDT:

Theory

[source]

Last night I received such a splendid proof of the GIDT that, after initially deleting it from the comment thread, I decided that I just had to share it.  The best part is that the author thinks she is anonymous.  But I know who she is.   'Nuff said. 

Anyway, here it is in all it's glory... with editorial comments added by your host (don't thank me... I'm a giver):

"Wow. First visit to your blog [ed: Um, no it's not... but nice head fake] and I can see you are far more of a racist than I ever imagined.  I'm impressed!  [Ed:  Why would you imagine me to be a racist if you'd never visited my blog?]

You said: "I say that when an Arab terrorist is caught and killed within a yeshuv, the settlers should hold the body for ransom. And when it is finally returned, it should be liberally coated in pig fat and missing its private parts."  Charming. [Ed:  To be clear, I never said it would be charming.  That was you.]

Treppenwitz [Ed: No need to be formal... we've had coffee together.  You can call me trep!], you are but a squatter, living off someone else's land, effectively. Tell me, how can you sleep at night with the smell of blood? [Ed:  Thank you!  I'd been thinking we had a leak in the sewer line... and all along it was the smell of blood.  Honey... mystery solved!]

Here is the real story [Ed: Ah, so have some insider information?], though, not the one you see through your squatter-goggles [Ed:  Are those anything like beer goggles? Oh never mind.]:

Man wants to commit attack on settlers illegally occupying his land, eating his crops, harming his family and frightening his kids. During the attack - and here I quote the Israeli press "a 9-year-old boy was lightly wounded when he was stabbed in the hand." [Ed: Nice use of the passive, dis-associative form.  So you are saying that the man wanted to carry out an attack for a long list of presumably valid reasons... and that a boy was lightly wounded when someone stabbed him in the hand.  Any word on whether these two events are in any way related... or who might have stabbed the boy?]

A bunch of settler terrorists [Ed:  Ah, there are the terrorists.  I knew they were in this story somewhere.] decide to go on a rampage in the nearby village (without having any idea whether it is or not the village of the perpetrator). They shoot at people, burn houses. Destroy cars and private property. Randomly assault people - men, women, children, indiscriminately. They leave EIGHT [Ed:  Oooooh Cap-lock!] victims behind, then retreat to their illegal squat they call a settlement [Ed: I checked 'The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage' and I'm pretty sure that even if a person is being referred to as a 'squatter' you can't call the place in which he/she has established unauthorized domicile as a 'squat'.  Check me on that, though.] , where they will of course be patted on the back by likewise terrorists, and the government will shake its hand in disapproval. [Ed: I could be wrong, but I think you were going for 'head', since shaking ones hand would just come off looking odd... like a case of the DTs or maybe even Parkinson's]

And the only thing you can find, however, rather than condemn what happened, is to spew more of your hatred and attempt to justify settler terrorist activity to cover up for the first crime - settling in Occupied Palestine. [Ed:  Actually, if you look closely, I used almost 600 words in my post (and G-d knows how many more in the comment thread) unequivocally condemning the retaliatory attack by the residents of Yitzhar.  Strange how you missed that and instead zeroed in on the one hypothetical comment I made about what should be done with a terrorist's body if he/she were ever killed inside one of our towns.]

It's people like you who give Israel a bad name." [Ed: I can't come up with a suitable retort to that parting shot.  Feel free to offer your own.]

And you thought being a blogger was all glory and adulation.   Hah!

Posted by David Bogner on September 16, 2008 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c581e53ef010534aeb27e970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference More fun with trolls:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

"It's people like you who give Israel a bad name."

... and it's people like you who give respectability to terrorism.

Posted by: Bob | Sep 16, 2008 2:19:20 PM

I can't imagine that this person could possibly have anything good to say about Israel...

Posted by: Safranit | Sep 16, 2008 2:29:45 PM

Bob ... Strong work. Well done.

Safranit... This person lives in Israel (although does not consider anything outside the green line to be Israel). Strange, the name of my town is in the Bible... but the name of her town isn't.

Posted by: treppenwitz | Sep 16, 2008 3:09:57 PM

(1)"Man wants to commit attack on settlers illegally occupying his land"

In law, the objection would be 'assuming facts not in evidence.' The Geneva Convention does NOT apply to disputed territory that is, in essence, a border dispute. There is no "Palestinian state" and never has been, so it is not "Palestinian land" or the territory of a sovereign state, a prerequisite under the Geneva Convention. Jordan, the former occupier, and Great Britain and Turkey, the previous owners, have surrendered any claims to this land. Therefore, the land ownership itself is in dispute, and people (both Arab and Jewish) who settle on this land are not doing so illegally. If it were illegal, then we would have to deport not only the Jewish settlers but the several hundred thousand illegal settlers imported to the West Bank from Jordan and Syria between 1948 and 1967.

(2)"eating his crops, harming his family and frightening his kids" --More facts not in evidence. As a matter of fact, I looked and could not find a single reference to the attacker's family being harmed, frightened or their crops stolen. Since Anonymous Troll also posits that there is NO evidence that the terrorist came from the village, I'm not sure how she logically can argue that (a) no one knows where he is from and (b) his family in the village was terrorized by the Jews.

I guess logic isn't her strong point.

(3) "During the attack - and here I quote the Israeli press "a 9-year-old boy was lightly wounded when he was stabbed in the hand." Actually, I couldn't find a single Israeli press piece that said this--I found one Israeli blog entry that said it. Maybe I missed the piece Anonymous read? Most of the many articles I read, both Israeli and Arab, accurately described the boy as being stabbed in the hand and 5 TIMES in the back. How selective of your anonymous troll to pick a quote that omits the serious nature of the attack and the child's subsequent hospitalization. In media, I believe this is called "spin" and most normal people recognize it as a form of lying.

(4)"A bunch of settler terrorists decide to go on a rampage in the nearby village (without having any idea whether it is or not the village of the perpetrator)."

Apparently the settlers have an excellent idea of where the arsonist/would-be-murderer came from:

""In actuality," Yitzhar spokesman Yigal Amitai said, "Arabs of Asira el-Kabaliye have set fire to the fields of Yitzhar seven times in recent weeks, yet the army and the police did not take action to prevent these attacks in advance, nor to thwart them as they were happening, nor to apprehend the guilty parties afterwards...
We therefore now have reason to fear," Amitai continued, "that the terrorist who burnt down the home of the Ben-Shlomo family, tried to murder the Ofan family next-door, and then stabbed nine-year-old Tuvia Shtetman, will also not be caught by the police or army."


(5)"They shoot at people, burn houses. Destroy cars and private property. Randomly assault people - men, women, children, indiscriminately."

This is what they did. I, like many of your readers, am ashamed that the people of Yitzhar acted like Arabs. However, given the numerous attacks they've suffered recently, the lack of action taken by their government to protect them, and the fact that the Arab terrorist succeeded in torching one home, stabbing an unarmed child multiple times and almost succeeded in breaking into another woman's home, I understand their frustration and anger.

And after all, is it fair to justify Palestinian attacks because the Palestinians feel frustrated and angry, but not the Jews? I myself believe it would be better if both groups of people refrained from acting like barbarians, but if Arab barbarity is justified by "anger" or "frustration" or "humiliation" then so should Jewish barbarity be similary justified. Unless, of course, one subscribes to the patently racist theory that Jews are more civilized than Arabs and hence must be condemned for acting like Arabs? Maybe that's what your troll meant?

(6) "And the only thing you can find, however, rather than condemn what happened, is to spew more of your hatred "

Did she read your post? I thought you DID condemn it? WHAT hatred?

"I...am a religious 'settler' who is angry at the settlers who decided to take the law into their own hands and attack the Arab village. I am especially appalled that they fired guns...anyone who uses a gun for anarchy...to terrorize, destroy property or instill fear instead of as a last resort to save a human life... deserves to lose his/her gun (and the right to carry it). Anyone who puts themselves in the place of the police and/or army is not deserving of protection from either of those forces."

I thought this was a pretty unequivocal condemnation of the behavior at Yitzhar. Certainly I understood it that way. Was I wrong?

The fact that you also condemned the media for their bias in no way detracts from your condemnation of barbaric behavior.

(7) " justify settler terrorist activity to cover up for the first crime - settling in Occupied Palestine"

Sheesh -- see Number One above. There is no such thing as Occupied Palestine. If Ms. Troll is going to argue, then argue facts, not rhetoric and wishful thinking.

I am (still, though growing dubious) in favor of a Two-State solution which would create an unoccupied Palestine -- but I think the ball is in the Palestinian court at this point.

Posted by: aliyah06 | Sep 16, 2008 3:22:33 PM

How about pointing out to the troll that if her dear arab brethren had accepted partition in 48, they'd have their state...ah, but they don't want partition, do they? They want it all.

Posted by: Marsha in Englewood | Sep 16, 2008 4:27:57 PM

you certainly have coffe with interestin' folks

Posted by: asher | Sep 16, 2008 4:29:50 PM

I'm a frequent visitor but an infrequent poster. I don't live in Israel (or 'Occupied Palestine' either for that matter and what a nonsensical notion anyway!), so I don't presume to know what it must feel like from any party's side. But (there is always a "but", isn't there?), I think the bit about "smearing in pig fat" an Arab's (presumed Muslim)corpse is a bit extreme, though I hope I understand the emotion that drives the impulse.

Don't get me wrong, I think the settler community had every right to protect itself within its own borders (and didn't do that) and I completely agree with the point about the rule of law, which is why I make the point about not defiling the dead. Jewish law proscribes such activity against its own, doesn't it? So it seems reasonable to extend such respect towards 'other' dead people, even if 'we' did have to kill them within our own borders and for a legitimate reason. Once they are dead, they are no longer a threat in that sense. I accept that there may be a message that needs to be made clear, but the fact of killing them does that in most cases (excepting, of course, where there are virgins involved).

I'm thinking more here that two wrongs don't make a right. It is terrible beyond words what has been meted out to captured IDF soldiers, hostages, those on the receiving end of Qassam rockets and suicide bombs,and other civilians of Israel, by an enemy that hides behind its own civilian populace as a shield. The restraint shown by Israel and her people is almost beyond endurance, in my view.

I think, though I stand to be corrected, that there is a Jewish expression that says, "don't exult over your fallen enemy" and a corollary to it that goes, "but don't rush to help him up either".

Other than the 'pig fat', I completely agree with Trep and the other posters here (though I can't believe you've had coffee with her!), and her comments seem to me to be motivated out of blind hatred and she has (chosen) to completely ignore what you really said.

Finally, if its "people like you who give Israel a bad name", I know who I would feel comfortable and confident standing next to, and no prizes for guessing it isn't Ms Troll!

Posted by: Ken | Sep 16, 2008 5:20:00 PM

Next time Ms. Troll stops in for a visit, give her a cup of Folger's Instant. That'll teach her!

Posted by: psachya | Sep 16, 2008 5:32:43 PM

There is something quite amusing about so many people referring to me anonymously - albeit in the wrong gender. I can almost hear the gasps - 'how dare he disagree with the great Treppenwitz!'

However, David, you're very mistaken and have allocated your virtual ire to the wrong person. Which is probably the only reason -- well, that and a tad of narcissism -- that I am posting again on your blog.

A couple of quick corrections and responses:

- No, we did not meet. And it was indeed my first visit. I had heard of you though.

- I did sign my post; you just deleted it. I sign with my first name, which can give you a clear idea of my gender, my religion and, given our part of the world, my ethnicity as well.

- No, I'm not a she.

- I am surely not the 'she' you have in mind. I'm not sure I'd like to have coffee with you, though. I just happen to have used her internet connection, which is what threw you off. That's something your tracker couldn't tell you, could it David?

- On a related note -- I'd actually like to know what tracker you're using. It sounds awesome! Where can I download it?

- Yes, sir, you and other settlers are squatting in someone's else land.

- Yes, I have good things to say about Israel. Plenty, actually. You are not part of them though, I'm afraid.

- By occupied Palestine, i refer to the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. You know, international law and stuff?

- I never said you said it was charming. Which is why the word came outside the quotation marks (which you can see in your own copy-paste of my message).

- No, please, no, no Folger instant!!

Beyond all this -- my previous note was very open to debate, and I'd be happy to do that. Even with the people who say that the Geneva convention does not apply. And indeed, the version of the story that I told was ultra-romanticised. I presume it was unusual to you seeing other do what you do...

You, however, were displaying extreme racism towards a people, more so, towards a race. You were quite provoked, I see by my note.

GOOD! :)

Posted by: Mo-ha-med | Sep 16, 2008 6:20:02 PM

Nope, wrong again!!

"You, however, were displaying extreme racism towards a people, more so, towards a race. "

Racism is defined as "hatred or intolerance of another race or other races" and "a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others."

Trep has never said this. I've never said this, nor do I believe it, nor do I hang out with people who believe it.

The only people I've ever known to believe this are the ones spewing Jew-hating venom from their web-sites in white supremecist basements and their fellow-travelers in the Arab world.

Just a teensy bit of checking will lead you to hundreds of Arab web-sites shouting filth about Jews --- and you want to talk to me about "racism?" Clean your own house first.

We'll just have to agree to disagree about the international law/occupation thing -- since your responses above are merely the reiteration of what you claim to have said before, you've not brought anything new to the discussion, except the bogus charge of 'racism,' something that folks like you resort to whenever you want to censor others who disagree with you.

How curious that the writing style in THIS post is totally different from the writing style in the first Troll-note posted by Trep. Could it be that you didn't write the first Troll-post? Since you're so keen to have a discussion with us (oh, sorry, forgot--you just came here to do some vilifying...silly me!) why don't you post your real name and a link to your own blog/column/Facebook account, whatever...then we can really talk.

But that may be pushing your tolerance for intellectual honesty too far, huh?

Posted by: aliyah06 | Sep 16, 2008 7:11:20 PM

David, I found your post about the attack to be fair, nuanced, and thought provoking. You clearly condemned vigilante actions and reckless use of guns to 'settle up'. I guess I can see that because I can read beyond a seventh grade level and don't hate you for living in Israel and daring to not fit neatly into a stereotype. Keep up the good work!

Posted by: Alice | Sep 16, 2008 7:17:31 PM

Hey Mo! (or is is Moe?),

Ummmm....Jews have been living in the West Bank and all of Jerusalem for thousands of years. Despite all the disasters and deportations that have occurred, a remnant has always remained. Even in the so-called 'occupied areas.' The Arabs? Well, they showed up in the 7th Century, centuries after the Jews. How did Israel end up controlling East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza (which the Israeli government foolishly gave back)? The Arabs started wars and the Israelis finished them. It's that simple. So let's recap: 1) It's Jewish land and has been long before the Arabs showed up and 2) the Israelis took their land back as a war prize after the Arabs attempted to destroy Israel...repeatedly. Simple.

Oh, and I'm not a Jew. So other than the Biblical issue of who-owns-what, I don't have a dog in this fight. But fair is fair and the Jews have earned the right to live on what's theirs.

Oh...one more thing. If the so-called 'Palestinians' (who are actually Jordanian or Egyptian, there never has been a country named Palestine), would behave themselves, they would have their own country by now. But no, they just can't bring themselves to act civilized. Sucks to be them.

Peace. :)

Posted by: Karl Newman | Sep 16, 2008 7:22:50 PM

Thanks, Karl.

Ken:
I completely disagree about the pig fat. Since there is ultimate glory in dying as a martyr, SOMETHING needs to be done to remove this glory. Otherwise, there will always be more martyrs willing to go get their 70 virgins at the expense of Jewish children.

Posted by: triLcat | Sep 16, 2008 7:31:07 PM

Ah. I'm disappointed. Look, for the 'not the same style' issue -- first, this one is in bullet points. You know? And you know, you'll just have to take my word for it. Or, don't. I think David can confirm anyway -- he'll check the IP address and the email i entered for checking purposes. David, you want to ease your little friend's worries that she is indeed not facing an army of Mo's, but just one?

Or aliyah06, did you expect me to call settlers squatters again, as an e-signature? My first post has succeeded in turning the table on David, end of story. I don't need to keep going on that. Do us all a favour and outgrow it, aliyah06.
I hope that settles this once and for all.

Oh, but i might indeed link to my own blog/column/Facebook account - in a bit. i love the mystery. You know, building up your audience's expectations and all that :) You really thought your response would get me to do that? Seriously? :)
And indeed -- Mohamed is my real name. Pleasure to meet you!

And racism? I only took one browse in this blog - not in this post, i give you that - to see that its author is indeed extremely racist. I don't know about you. I'll be glad to check your blog, though.

There are indeed tons of anti-jewish websites in arabic. However, did you ever notice that the "look what your guys have done" (or 'check your own house first' as you put it) response is only used when one runs out of arguments?

Karl Newman: Naaah, use Mohamed or Mo, not Moe. Moe reminds me of the barman in the Simpsons.
I'd love to argue west bank sovereignty issues though. I'm afraid i have so attacks to respond to first. Raincheck? :)
But yeah, you're right -- right now, it does suck to be Palestinian. Sad.

Posted by: Mo-ha-med | Sep 16, 2008 7:34:40 PM

...that was "some attacks". Apologies for the typo.

Posted by: Mo-ha-med | Sep 16, 2008 7:35:58 PM

Why do people like this even visit this blog? Please share this woman's info with us so we know who not to deal with in the future.

Posted by: Seth | Sep 16, 2008 7:56:42 PM

Rain check? Sure. :)

Posted by: Karl Newman | Sep 16, 2008 8:53:36 PM

triLcat: I understand why you may disagree and take the point about removing the glory, but if we wouldn't comtemplate doing such a thing to a Jew, why would it be right to do it to someone else? Again, two wrongs don't make a right.

I was reminded of a (true) story from the UK where someone had put rashers of bacon on a Muslim (or could have been Hindu)corpse in a hospital mortuary as a 'joke', causing extreme offense and distress to the family of the deceased. I accept that the deceased may not have been 'affected' per se, but the point is that it caused distress and upset to those left behind.

Does it matter that in David's hypothetical case the deceased was perpetrating a supposed act of martyrdom, hence justifying the pig fat? It probably does since we've all seen the 'rejoicing' that happens afterwards, and my mind goes back to 9/11 and the street scenes in various Arab/Muslim countries when those particular 'martyrs' got their tickets to nirvana, but nentheless just because you can do something, doesn't mean that you should, is my point.

Anyway, I think we are a bit of a sideshow here....

The 'real deal' is between Trep and Mo, and while Mo may think s/he has succeeded in "turning the table on David", I've got Trep ahead on points! Seconds out, next round please.

Posted by: Ken | Sep 16, 2008 9:42:55 PM

There are indeed tons of anti-jewish websites in arabic. However, did you ever notice that the "look what your guys have done" (or 'check your own house first' as you put it) response is only used when one runs out of arguments?

Moe,

The same thing can be said about self proclaimed victory as you have claimed to have turned the tables.

I didn't notice you quoting facts or providing sources.

Posted by: Jack | Sep 16, 2008 9:59:16 PM

Ken: the "smeared in pig fat" thing references British official policy during their tenure as administrators of Palestine.

In order to stop shahids from suicide missions, they had the bodies buried with pig's carcasses - which according to Muslim belief/superstition prevents one from entering paradise.

This cut down the motivation of various "holy warriors" who believed they would go straight to heaven if they attacked Jews and Christians.

So it's not at all far-fetched. It actually was British government policy.

They also forced local mufftis to ride on the cow-catchers of locomotives to stop booby-trap bombing of the rail lines.

Nobody said boo about these "abuses of human rights and dignity of the native people" blah blah - perhaps because there was a lot more common sense back then.

Posted by: Ben-David | Sep 16, 2008 10:05:23 PM

triLcat:

My pleasure. :)


Interesting read to go along with the pig fat comments.

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pershing.asp

Posted by: Karl Newman | Sep 16, 2008 10:23:06 PM

Ben-David: Thanks for that, interesting stuff. I don' think I said anything that suggested it was far fetched, or at least didn't intend to suggest that, or mention human rights.

Karl: Thanks for the link, indeed interesting.

Posted by: Ken | Sep 16, 2008 11:05:05 PM

Reminds me a bit of the quote attributed to a British General Sir Charles James Napier:

A quote for which Napier is famous involves a delegation of Hindu locals approaching him and complaining about prohibition of Sati, often referred to at the time as suttee, by British authorities. This was the custom of burning widows alive on the funeral pyres of their husbands. The exact wording of his response varies somewhat in different reports, but the following version captures its essence:

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."[1]

Posted by: Jack | Sep 16, 2008 11:06:09 PM

You are so lucky, Dave. You get comments good enough to use as regular posts. That means you have to spend less time writing your own material. Like I said, just plain lucky!

Posted by: Baila | Sep 16, 2008 11:13:56 PM

One of my neighbors keeps a jar of lard in his basement just for that purpose - he can't wait until he has to open it up.

Anyway, one day Mohammed decides to be a Shahid. The idiot blows himself up (premature detonation, the boy was a little too eager). He gets up to heaven and gets greeted at the gates. He sees his 70 virgins waiting for him on the other side.

"Moe," says the angel, "I've got good news for you, and bad news for you".

"The good news is, we've got 70 virgins for you."

"The bad news is, after you blew yourself up, one of the settlers stuck your 'you know what' into a jar of lard he keeps in the basement, so it didn't make it up here with you."

Posted by: JoeSettler | Sep 17, 2008 12:37:10 AM

I am not a settler. I do not live in Israel. I do not justify what those settlers did. But I really can't stand the other side at this point, especially when they try to excuse the unacceptable behaviour of Palestinians, terrorists, Arab religious fanatics, or the terror-sympathisers and apologists among Europeans and Americans.

I guess that must make me a racist and someone "who gives Israel a bad name". Or at least a sympathiser of the bad-namers.

I take pride in the company I keep - we few, we happy few, we band of brothers......

Oh, and by the way, regarding pig fat, I have actually used precisely that to prep the pavement and trees of public spaces when an Israel-bashing event was scheduled. There is nothing quite like the smell of bacon on a hot day in San Francisco.

Posted by: The Back of the Hill | Sep 17, 2008 5:13:13 AM

Hmmm, not in the Bible... Hmmm... Tel Aviv...

ואבוא אל הגולה תל אביב הישבים על נהר כבר ואשר המה יושבים שמה...
(Ezekiel 3, 15).

Phew. He doesn't think it's me!

Bit difficult to get your hands on a good amount of pig blood these days, since the Ultra-Orthodox managed to make pig rearing a real problem (Doesn't bother me. As far as I'm concerned they are welcome to outlaw all commercial animal rearing for food, but I'd rather vegetarianism was not forced on people)! Maybe you'd have to hunt some wild boar, on the Carmel or in the Galilee. Mind you, even if it was pig blood, how would they know? So you might as well use cow blood, tell them it's pig blood, and save yourself the bother.

Posted by: Imshin | Sep 17, 2008 6:13:15 AM

Nice side-step, Mohamed. You managed to proclaim victory without addressing any of the issues or responding to analysis in any rational way -- how Arab of you . Simply restating "he is a racist" is a polemic, not a persuasive discourse.

On racism--except for the lunatic fringe, no one in Israel is calling for the "transfer" of Arabs out of Israel; yet in the Arab world, it is mainstream and de rigeur to demand the "transfer" of Jews out of the West Bank.

I submit to you that the ones practicing racism are the Arabs. Can you provide a logical explanation for why Arabs can be Israeli citizens but Jews aren't allowed to be future-Palestinian citizens? Or citizens of Jordan, or Iraq, etc? The answer appears to be--Arab racism. (We don't need to digress on Darfur and the treatment of sub-Saharan blacks by Arabs at this stage).

BTW, Palestinians aren't a "race." Familiarize yourself with the terminology before you use it.

Tzom kal.

Posted by: aliyah06 | Sep 17, 2008 8:10:34 AM

Hey Mo, hey Mo -

Take a hint. You've wandered into the wrong neighborhood.

But unlike your buddies in Ramallah, we don't butcher folks from the other side when they accidentally find themselves in our 'hood. We merely insult them to death.

So go in peace. And have a cup of Folgers. On me.

Posted by: psachya | Sep 17, 2008 8:23:09 AM

I'm glad somebody caught on to the Moe comment. :D

Posted by: Karl Newman | Sep 17, 2008 8:47:36 AM

I must admit thst Mo-ha-med is a lot more coherent and reasonable as a commenter than when his writings appear in the posting itself. Howcome?
I wouldn't even label him troll.

Posted by: asher | Sep 17, 2008 9:26:57 AM

Mo, or whatever you are calling yourself these days (the moniker 'Tali Fahima' comes to mind as particularly appropriate)... In my absence several people have stepped up and tried to engage you in a substantive, constructive debate on the issues (and yes, some have simply responded to you in kind)... ignoring your insults, arrogance and rhetoric. You say that you are interested in debating the facts but you have ignored all of these commenters. You seem quite pleased with yourself to have 'provoked' me (as indicated with your childish use of caplock). Was that your goal? Do you really think that being deliberately provocative is going to bring about the kind of change you want? Well, sorry to break the news to you... but the only emotion you provoked in me is pity. I hate to be the one to say this, but there is only one thing sadder than an uninformed racist whose outdated 'radical' ideas are held up for public ridicule; that is when the person whose ideas are held up for ridicule doesn't realize he/she is the brunt of the joke. At this point I don't need to satisfy myself of who you are. You have admitted to using the Internet connection of the person I indicated, and I see that you two have been thick as thieves (traveling to the north together), so it isn't much of a stretch to imagine that at any given moment the drivel could be coming from either of you. Very nice... I'm sure you two have much to talk about. It's just very sad that failed ideas that have cost both Jews and Arabs so much in squandered opportunities, progress and blood are still in vogue in certain circles. Go ahead and spew your slogans... play your heroic part in the 'resistance' against the evil occupier (even though by your definition, the center of the country is equally occupied). But Just know that you (both) are your own worst enemy and do far more damage to the ideals you hold so dear than all the settlers put together.

Posted by: treppenwitz | Sep 17, 2008 10:04:39 AM

JoeSettler:
Great joke!

Posted by: Ben-David | Sep 17, 2008 1:21:55 PM

Too many comments to respond to, I'm afraid, but:
aliyah06: Jews are indeed citizens of Arab countries-- there are Jewish communities in Morocco, in Egypt, in Yemen, a few (very few, unfortunately) in Iraq, and a large community in Iran (which is not an Arab country, though).
And in my vision of peace (peace? anyone?) I absolutely foresee Jews living in the West Bank becoming Palestinian citizens if so they choose...
What goes in Darfur is horrendous, and there is indeed a good deal of racism in there. There's more to it though. Read Alex de Waal - he started tracking the situation in Darfur since the 1980s.

Pasachya: but I would go in peace, my friend, if that were an option. If they would let me. (will explain later).
But I'll pass on the Folger!

Back of the Hill: Hilarious story with the demonstration in San Francisco.
And no, actually, it doesn't. When you do excuse rampaging in innocent village, when you support destroying the houses of the families of terrorists or criminals - even though the Law explicitly says that you may not punish one for the sins of another, when you occupy someone else's land and walk around with a gun effectively looking for a chance to use it, then yes, you would be giving Israel a bad name.

Posted by: Mo-ha-med | Sep 17, 2008 2:22:53 PM

And now to the piece de resistance!
Dear David,

My childish use of caplock? Dude, that was for ONE word! (okay, now two).

Let's take it back from the start, shall we.
Me, new visitor to your blog. You, unabashed hater. I leave a comment at the bottom of one of your previous pots, effectively, YES (three!!:) provoking you. In a sense, my purpose was to show you that the world outside of your bubble thinks very little of you. What i did effectively - and I invite you to re-read my very first message to you- was to write a very different version of the story you were commenting on, in essence where the bad guy was the folks you root for. But you, my friend, are like a Manchester City fan: you root for your team - good or bad. Well, guess what, Manchester City really sucks these days - but you won't admit it.

It could've ended there - you could've replied there, on that thread; or could've deleted it after reading it.
Instead you seemingly could not take disagreement. It's part of your personality I guess.
And you had to make a whole big story out of it. And here's where you went wrong, buddy: you concealed to your readers who I was - since I had also signed my first message; you were just dishonest to your own audience - and instead decided to accuse someone else. If you hadn't, I would've let it die. JoeSettler can tell all the cute jokes he wants, you can respond to your heart's content.
In effect, you seem to be settling old scores on my account. Na'ah! If you've got a problem with me, you talk to me. Grow up already.
Although I am flattered that you're assuming that I can write for two.

Do you know what the difference between you and I is, David? The main difference is not political - although this is a big part of it, too. No. It's a behavioural, personality difference. You're the type of guy who would, had we been in a hypothetical rural setting, would burn the crop field of someone you had an argument with. (Gosh, i can see the comments on the crop field already...:). Me - well, I may not be a fan of you personally - but, when I read in your archive and read the story of your child whose life had really improved after surgery, I was genuinely happy for him. I have known disability in my childhood.
If we switched places, David, if it was my son in surgery, you wouldn't be able to work up an ounce of sympathy for my family. Because you let political differences - hell, personal differences - blind you, and you try to make as much damage as possible to everyone around your opponent, regardless of whether or not they are involved.

What you need to do now is outgrow this discussion, and if you've got something to solve with me, buddy, you talk to me. Email me if you want (i know you have my email). Heck, give me your phone number and I'll be happy to talk to you.
You can even come down to Ramallah - which is home and where I'll be as of tonight - and I'll buy you coffee. Do come after sunset though - i'm fasting during the day. :)
Keep third parties out of the picture. As a matter of fact, if you had any morality or honesty in you, you'd delete all your insinuations.

Capice?

In peace,
Mohamed. (Moe? Really? Oh come on, people!! :)

Posted by: Mo-ha-med | Sep 17, 2008 2:56:47 PM

Mo-ha-med... tsk, tsk, tsk. You were doing so well. You start off sounding almost reasonable... and then you get angry and the train goes off the tracks. You ignored all the solid information presented in the comment thread regarding the legal status of the land, and continue to call the 'occupation' illegal. You can't have it both ways. Either refute the legal claims/explanation presented or stop insisting upon terminology you refuse to support with evidence. Same goes for crap like saying there are Jews living in Arab lands when we both know that 99% of them had to flee without their possessions (i.e. ethnic cleansing). Also, stuff like "When you excuse rampaging in innocent village" isn't going to fly because the entire premise of my post was a blanket condemnation of that act... something you conveniently keep side-stepping. I came out against the 'Manchester City' fans (to use your analogy) but you were too busy hating to notice. As to the idea that I somehow cheated my readers of knowing your identity... because I didn't use your made-up name 'mo-ha-med'? Yeah right. You hide behind anonymity and complain that I obscured your identity??? Color me confused!!! And you must be a psychic if you can make assumptions about me such as your certainty that I would burn someone's crops over an argument and that if your child were sick I wouldn't feel any sympathy for it. I comment on the real world... I don't make ridiculous predictions about how you or anyone else might act. I posted your idiotic tirade for all the world to see in a more prominent place than the comment thread in order to hold your racist, hateful ideas up for public ridicule. This is my blog and once you put your words here I may do with them as I please (as you can on your blog). I didn't ask you to post a comment and I certainly don't owe you anything (including civility) when your first comment is full of insults and falsehoods. As to emailing you... the only email address I have is the one you claim is not yours... so if you want to take this discussion off-line, you'll need to be the one to grow up and reveal your identity.

Posted by: treppenwitz | Sep 17, 2008 4:06:52 PM

I take back and rescind my remark from 0927 hours

Posted by: asher | Sep 17, 2008 4:21:24 PM

"Jews are indeed citizens of Arab countries..."

Very few, dear, mostly remnants. Iraq just specifically passed a law prohibiting Jews of Iraqi descent from being Iraqi citizens; one of the first laws passed by Jordan was a law prohibiting Jewish citizenship and ownership of property. Heck, Ghaddafi won't even let Jews VISIT Libya!

"And in my vision of peace I absolutely foresee Jews living in the West Bank becoming Palestinian citizens if so they choose..." And you're either joking with us, or you haven't been following Palestinian policy -- the West Bank must be devoid of Jews, according to whatever Palestinian party you talk to.

"(peace? anyone?)" Sure--you have my email. Think we can do a better job of reaching peace than all the professionals? I'm game.

" my purpose was to show you that the world outside of your bubble thinks very little of you." You think you speak for the WORLD? Egomania is a serious diagnostic condition--I'd get help soon.

"I invite you to re-read my very first message to you- was to write a very different version of the story you were commenting on..." Okay, did that--nothing's changed. You presented a somewhat overblown hysterical version of your interpretation of spun facts, leaving out important details, and from that jumped off into calling Trep a racist. You still haven't back up that accusation or anything else, despite having ample time to do so.

"Instead you seemingly could not take disagreement" Projection, Mohamed. Trep publicly posted you as an example of mendacity, propagandistic fact-spinning and personal attacks; you are twisting his comments into a personal attack on YOU and playing the victim role when you were the attacker.

"You're the type of guy who would, had we been in a hypothetical rural setting, would burn the crop field of someone you had an argument with....if it was my son in surgery, you wouldn't be able to work up an ounce of sympathy for my family. Because you let political differences - hell, personal differences - blind you, and you try to make as much damage as possible to everyone around your opponent, regardless of whether or not they are involved."

More ad-hominem attacks. Mohamed, you're dehumanizing someone simply for having a different point of view than yours -- you don't know him, you've never met him, never had a cup of coffee with him. How are you different than the average bigot who passes judgement on people he knows nothing about?

I never called you "Moe" -- please.....

tzom kal, b'shalom

Posted by: aliyah06 | Sep 17, 2008 4:27:35 PM

Asher: oh, no! How sad I am :)

David: Seriously, grow up.
You can't take someone putting a mirror to your nose and show you what a racist individual you are; this is really what's bugging you.
Support that with evidence? Hmmm. You live in occupied land (that's the West Bank). You are, in your own words, a 'gun-toting settler'. You justify murder of Palestinians. And your pig-fat-on-dead-people/terrorist is also racist, because you're not trying to hurt him (he's already dead!) but to hurt others of his same religion (come to think of it, your racism goes beyond Arabs, you're an Islamophobe. Bravo!); you refer to Arabs as 'goat-shaggers'. Does that not sound racist to you, David?

So you do not, simply do not, get to call me racist. You, of all people! Ha!

I don't need to be psychic, David; you write extensively about yourself, enough for readers to compose a good idea of who you are. You are so typical, David, and indeed very predictable.

You did, half-assedly condemn the rampage - only to justify in the ensuing discussion about when it's fair for settlers to take justice in their own hands. Pfff.

Yes, Davy, You deliberately LIED (yey! four!) to your readers and indeed concealed my name on purpose. Come on, we're both more intelligent than that. You just wanted your worshipers to stand at your altar and praise you for being so smart and witty. Which, as you said, is your blog so you can do what you want.

I commented on your blog with one purpose, Treppenwitz. I came back because you made a big mistake, as your vitriol reached someone else, and I had to show you the errors of your ways, you bad, bad boy.

Many things here I could discuss. Geneva conventions. Jewish exodus from Arab lands. Etc etc. Another day, maybe. Perhaps when you begin by washing your mouth with soap and righting the wrong you've done to others. Then we can talk.

I'll be in Ramallah as of tonight. Coffee? (no, not Folgers! Actually good cappuccino!)

Yom tov,
Mohamed.

PS - yes, you have my email address. C'mon, Dave, we're both smarter than that.
PPS - is blogging the only thing you do at work? Wow.

Posted by: Mo-ha-med | Sep 17, 2008 5:17:25 PM

Yo, folks! Mohamed has an address: http://travellerwithin.blogspot.com/

Go visit. He's actually more articulate there than he has been here, has a bunch of interesting articles. He seems to be visiting TA....have to look at more after dinner.

Be nice.

Posted by: aliyah06 | Sep 17, 2008 5:31:35 PM

Aliyah06, oh you party-spoiler you! :)

Well done though! I wasn't expecting anyone to find it until tomorrow!
Respect. :)
You also win a free coffee in Ramallah!!

PS -- Glad you enjoyed the blog!

Posted by: Mo-ha-med | Sep 17, 2008 5:42:31 PM

No one here (not even the late great Reb Meir Kahane) EVER justified killing of Palestinians. Stop projecting your wishes on us, Mo.As for Gaza being occupied...well, it's true. It's currently occupied by a bunch of uncivilized barbarians who haven't left the 12th century. But not by Israel.

Posted by: Marsha in Englewood | Sep 17, 2008 5:48:28 PM

Mo-ha-med.... Hmmm, when it comes to bring proof of anything it always seems to be 'another day' with you. Interesting trend that. But yet you always seem to have time for childish taunts and insults. So here we go again. I don't live in occupied lands and you have had the benefit of several explanations of why this is so. Kindly refute that evidence or desist from using the term. Also, if you insist on calling me a racist, you will need to bring some evidence. My interest in hypothetically smearing pig fat on a dead terrorist is directed at him (in that it will deny him paradise according to his own beliefs) as well as to discourage future potential terrorists who may not be so keen to act if the 72 virgins are suddenly taken off the table. Next, please indicate where in my post I justified the murder of Palestinians. As you know, each time I refer to myself as a 'gun toting settler' it is with extreme irony since I hardly fit the image. Sadly, it is because of Arab terror that I need to arm myself, not out of any desire to harm anyone. I am, however, an Islamophobe. Guilty as charged. We're not talking about an irrational fear such as acrophobia or arachnophobia or claustrophobia. I think that given what is going on around the world and the stated objectives/threats of countless Islamic groups claiming to be waging Jihad in the name of Allah... Islamophobia is not an unreasonable or irrational fear. And yes, I get to call you whatever I wish. remember... my blog. My rules. I didn't invite you here... you came on your own. And speaking of my blog... for a newcomer, you seem remarkabnbly well versed in the contents of my archives. Could it be that our mutual 'friend' is sitting next to you... or that you are that person herself? Either way, you are lying about having never visited my site... given the dozens of anecdotes and archived posts you've mentioned, that much is clear. Another bit of racism on your part is that you see no problem with the fact that you are in an Israeli city now but can go to Ramallah this evening. Yet if I wanted to go to Ramallah I would be arrested (at best) or killed (worst case). Why do you think that is? Lastly, I never blog at work. I represented my company at a defense exhibition last night in Rishon L'Zion and was able to take much of today off. But thank you for your concern about my work habits.

Posted by: treppenwitz | Sep 17, 2008 6:01:33 PM

You're just too thick to admit that you were wrong.
Anecdotes? It's called archive, buddy. And I only clicked on the past couple of months. I'm sure there's much, much worse where that came from.
How did you not think of that? Archive, David! Archive!

Again, YOU calling ME racist is truly le monde a l'envers. It's still amusing though, but don't push it now, Davy-boy.
I refer you to the definition of racism that someone used, further up in the blog.

I'll only say that once more. (actually, you're so thick that i might need to say it more than once, but oh well).

If you have a problem with me, kiddo, you talk to me. Capice? Gosh.

Posted by: Mo-ha-med | Sep 17, 2008 6:10:08 PM

Moe,

You do a good job of trying to prick folks. If the goal is to piss people off and make them react, well, that is probably a winning tactic.

But if the goal is to really engage in debate, then you are doing a piss poor job of it.

Posted by: Jack | Sep 17, 2008 6:31:38 PM

Jack- as i said earlier- i was indeed trying to provoke our friend Davy here, into showing him a different view of the world.. But i couldn't agree more. I'm happy to engage in debate, but i fear that this may not be the right forum for it. As someone said earlier- i did stop in the wrong neighbourhood. Perhaps you'd do me the honour of paying my blog a quick visit? :)

Posted by: Mo-ha-med | Sep 17, 2008 8:45:57 PM

Strange, the name of my town is in the Bible... but the name of her town isn't.

Are you sure? Tel Aviv is in Ezekiel (mentioned as a place in Mesopotamia). By the way, the actual meaning of the toponym is "wasteland hills" rather than "hill of spring" (Aviv -> Akkadian Abub = wasteland). Very fitting, if you ask a proud Jerusalemite such as myself.

The important point is that your town is located in the place where the biblical Jewish town of the same name once stood, whereas her town is probably located in a place where Jews never settled until the 20th century.

Mohamed:
You can even come down to Ramallah - which is home and where I'll be as of tonight - and I'll buy you coffee. Do come after sunset though - i'm fasting during the day. :)

I don't know about Mr. Treppenwitz, but I'll be doing miluim soon in Ramallah, and would love to drop by for some coffee. And yes, we usually come after sunset.

Posted by: ashoichet | Sep 17, 2008 9:08:57 PM

Mo,

Jack is right on the money. You've just admitted that you came here to provoke someone, in this case you went for the gold by attacking the blog owner. That makes you a troll.

The thing is, you have the intelligence to engage in a good healthy debate. However, instead of doing so, you chose to use bile instead of your brains. That resulted in several people (myself included) letting you have it with both barrels instead of trying to engage you on an intellectual level. Why bother?

That's sad really and here's why. Many of the people who frequent the comments section of this blog either live under the threat of Arab terrorism or have family that do. They hear about a nine year-old Jewish boy being stabbed, or a Jewish family being slaughtered by terrorists that infiltrated the border, or a bus somewhere in Israel being blown up by a suicide bomber. Many of them view Arabs as barbarians and considering the evidence, that's hard to refute. You, by coming here in the guise of a troll, have blown a golden opportunity put a human face on the Arab world. You've done yourself and your people a disservice.

So....the ball is in your court. What now?

Posted by: Karl Newman | Sep 17, 2008 10:16:24 PM

hey mo? are you having a nice time in tel aviv? are the locals showing you a good time? you painting the town red? funny but the only jews i know who can go to ramallah are those in army fatigues and know they can get out alive... in an apc.

y'all come back now, hear?

Posted by: nikki | Sep 18, 2008 12:29:37 AM

what's everyone got against Tel Aviv and how come people are assuming (when you assume, you're making an ASS out of U and ME) that this dude is posting from there. David never actually said where the posts are coming from.

Still on assumptions, how do we know that this dude actually exists, and is who he says he is? Maybe David is doing a reality-check on us (unlikely proposition I admit)? Or maybe it's someone pretending to be someone else. In any case, makes me nostalgic for Carol (Oh Carol...) you know who.
C'est la vie say the old folks goesa to show you never can tell (Chuck Berry).

Posted by: asher | Sep 18, 2008 9:52:00 AM

Post a comment

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In