Steven Spielberg thread next to be led into I/P debate September 26, 2005 5:03 PM   Subscribe

Cleardawn seems dedicated to posting long discourses about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in any post that mentions Jews or a Jewish person, even in passing, and has succeeded in derailing a number of recent threads. Here and here and here., and probably elsewhere as well. The user obviously thinks that they are fighting the good fight, but this is clearly getting to be a bit much, and they don't seem to listen. Help?
posted by blahblahblah to Etiquette/Policy at 5:03 PM (124 comments total)

Personally, I blame the Semites.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 5:17 PM on September 26, 2005


I predict this thread will end in a clear consensus that you are absolutely correct.
posted by If I Had An Anus at 5:21 PM on September 26, 2005


I will be the first to admit that when jonmc originally called out cleardawn, I though that he (jonmc) was being oversensitive and prissy. I stand (actually, I'm sitting now, but clearly I could be standing) corrected.

cleardawn is simply another prolific, opinionated poster, and before I sound overly criticial, my advice is to simply post a bit less, cleardawn, and know that this site, though popular, is no one's soapbox.
posted by SeizeTheDay at 5:26 PM on September 26, 2005


I predict this thread will end in a clear consensus that you are absolutely correct.

I've learned to tolerate cleardawn, but I'll admit to being sick and tired of his "consensus," routine. This isn't a meeting, it's a meeting and nobody appointed him chairman. We're not here to "acheive consensus," we're here to provide cool links and say what's on our minds.

I though that he (jonmc) was being oversensitive and prissy.

*shrugs, boils hankies*
posted by jonmc at 5:32 PM on September 26, 2005


This isn't a meeting, it's a meeting

brainfart. "This isn't a meeting, it's a website.."
posted by jonmc at 5:34 PM on September 26, 2005


cleardawn obviously isn't aware of the years-long, often furious history here about Israeli/Palestinian issues, so his attempts to "educate the heathens" here just look condescending and silly as they inflame and polarize. If he'd learn to keep it to posts that actually reference I/P issues, he might educate a few folks, but his current approach comes off as more about him than about those issues.

Still, he's not violating any guidelines that I can see. What do you propose as a solution, blahblahblah?
posted by mediareport at 5:45 PM on September 26, 2005


*hugs, shanks boils*
posted by Kwantsar at 5:45 PM on September 26, 2005


I've ascertained that this might be a problem.
posted by raygun21 at 5:48 PM on September 26, 2005


If he'd learn to keep it to posts that actually reference I/P issues

Well, it's not always an easy line to draw. And sometimes the more information you have, the more connections you see. I sympathize with cleardawn's apparent frustration with the way the bald atrocities committed over there stare us in the face day in and day out, largely unrecognized despite (or perhaps because of the poor quality of) the non-stop media coverage. But yeah, I think the insertion of the subject into the sephardim thread was a little buttinsky, doomed from the start, unnecessary, and not done in good faith at all.

No one wants to be the guy who sits in the corner of the room, waiting for any lull in any conversation to ask: "Excuse me - and what about the Palestinians?"
posted by scarabic at 5:55 PM on September 26, 2005


You forgot Poland.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 6:02 PM on September 26, 2005


Why is everyone mad about the cups?
posted by ericb at 6:03 PM on September 26, 2005


Cleardawn derailed this magnificent post by OmieWise with some silly blather. No manners.
posted by LarryC at 6:03 PM on September 26, 2005


*hugs, shanks boils*

GET YER FUCKING HANDS OFF ME!
posted by Armitage Shanks at 6:04 PM on September 26, 2005


Far from "derailing the thread", I actually waited, deliberately, for several hours, for people to finish making comments on the historical material before I made my post.

Cut the guy some slack, he actually waited several hours before deliberately trolling in the thread.
posted by gwint at 6:05 PM on September 26, 2005


Yeah, that Crusades thing almost made me punch the screen. I was really enjoying that thread. BUT NOES WE HAS TO TALK BOUT BUSH Aarrgghghghghhghhhghghghhghghghghhghgh
posted by selfnoise at 6:08 PM on September 26, 2005


Excuse me--AND WHAT ABOUT THE PALESTINIANS?!
posted by fandango_matt at 6:08 PM on September 26, 2005


Anus (may I call you Anus?) that is a great link.
posted by LarryC at 6:12 PM on September 26, 2005


"dedicated to posting long discourses about the ..." - blahblahblah
/hiccup
posted by mischief at 6:17 PM on September 26, 2005


Cleardawn derailed this magnificent post by OmieWise with some silly blather. No manners.
posted by LarryC at 6:03 PM PST on September 26 [!]


LarryC: Well, all y'all were to blame for that. You didn't have to respond to cleardawn if you didn't want to.
posted by delmoi at 6:17 PM on September 26, 2005


No one wants to be the guy who sits in the corner of the room, waiting for any lull in any conversation to ask: "Excuse me - and what about the Palestinians?"

You don't want to be that guy. cleardawn does, and is.
posted by eddydamascene at 6:23 PM on September 26, 2005


Cleardawn derailed this magnificent post by OmieWise

Was that really a derail? Sure, cleardawn was misinformed, ridiculously certain and argued with the style of a nearsighted rhino, but he kept to the topic, at least. The issue here seems different.
posted by mediareport at 6:27 PM on September 26, 2005


Israel/Palestine rhetoric derails everything. Metafilter, the UN, anti-Bush protests.
posted by loquax at 6:35 PM on September 26, 2005


Delmoi: Very true, I didn't know Cleardawn's pattern at the time. I ended up emailing OmieWise to apologize for feeding a troll in his thread.
posted by LarryC at 6:45 PM on September 26, 2005


brainfart. "This isn't a meeting, it's a website.."

A damn fine thing you said something. I haven't been so stuck since that stupid card that didn't have anything interesting on the other side.
posted by yerfatma at 7:04 PM on September 26, 2005


"Hello," cleardawn lied.

cleardawn is a man of inadequate knowledge, small understand, little experience, and less humanity. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but his is suspect because even in threads where something substantive is at issue he argues only be assertion and logical fallacy.

His mission in any thread involving Jews is not only annoying, its offensive. It is not as if these threads are about the Middle East, or US weapons exports or, even, Iraq. His need to bring up I/P in the Tibor Rubin thread was ridiculous. How an American man, whose delayed recognition for a Congressional Medal of Honor may well have had something to do with the very real history of anti-Semitism in America, has anything to do with Israel in the way cleardawn asserts is baffling. cleardawn's failure to see Jews as people with a history that does not reduce to their supposed complicity in the debacle of I/P, coupled with his insistence that a conspiracy of silence covers this issue in threads that are not actually about the issue, raises serious questions about his motives in my mind. Jews have frequently been accused of power, persuasion and conspiracy, frequently with horrible results. He ignores quite civil requests from other users, as well as suggestions that he start his own threads on the topic, which indicates that his real mission is to shit in threads about Jews.

But I think that focussing on cleardawn's inability to read the word Jew without pointing out supposed Jewish flaws is too narrow. His style here, while mostly quite measured, is incredibly impolite. His method of argument by assertion is so dismissive and devoid of the common courtesies of argument and rhetoric as to be insulting. His frequent suggestion that those who disagree with him are racist is equally disturbing, and amounts to an almost continual ad hominem argument on his part. His unsubstantiated hatred of religion is offensive to anyone who cares at all for civility. "Anyone who promotes Christianity, Judaism, or Islam to children is promoting child abuse..." Only his vague orientalism and lack of actual knowledge about Buddhism as practiced in much of the world prevents him from making similar claims in this thread.

Most of how I feel about cleardawn and his lack of ability is detailed here. I point to it in this thread for two reasons: 1) I don't really want to rehash it all here (and I do think that its a general critique applicable beyond that thread), but I still agree with it all; and 2) In contrast to cleardawn, I'm not a big fan of hiding my impoliteness behind measured language. I would assume that if he had a similar set of substantive critiques of me (from that thread or elsewhere), he wouldn't resort to the kind of veiled accusations of racism that he does.
posted by OmieWise at 7:05 PM on September 26, 2005


"Respect to Ted Rubin. But not to Bush. I wonder when all the elderly Black heroes will be getting their overdue medals? And their own state? How about the unsung Arab heroes, too?"

Ugh. Cleardawn's become a master troll/derailer in a short period of time, and if he were casting so much derision toward, say, African-Americans instead of Jews, the whole site would be howling for bannination. I can't tell what faction he's trying to alienate more. I wish he'd give it a rest.
posted by highsignal at 7:08 PM on September 26, 2005


I've seen worse. A clear anti-Israel bias, to be sure. However, I really like most of what cleardawn posts. It's out there a bit, but doesn't that make you think, even when you disagree, or even especially when you disagree? For those who may not have read my posts here, I am a very strong supporter of Israel, not its current politics, but as a state. Sharon has been an ass, but somehow has started to be a bit Nixonean in giving up on Gaza without concession. He will die politically for this, but I applaud the courage. Even an anti-Semite should realize that world peace pretty much depends upon some sort of resolution of the Israel/Arab conflict. Giving the Palestinians a homeland will do much to furthering this resolution. However, demonizing Israel helps not. Cleardawn's comments sometimes fall into mere demonization of Israel. Shame on cleardawn for that. Regardless of these flaws, I think cleardawn is a person of heart. Derision for cleardawn's anti-Israel rants is in order, but do not forget the rest of the good stuff that cleardawn posts.
posted by caddis at 7:20 PM on September 26, 2005


caddis - I dunno if it's merely the Israel thing that's irking people. I have beefs with Israel, myself. It's the whole wresting control of discussions under the guise of "consensus," (which to me is a kindler, gentler for of fascism) that's getting under people's skin. I could be wrong though.
posted by jonmc at 7:30 PM on September 26, 2005


jonmc, I agree. That crap is obnoxious.
posted by caddis at 7:31 PM on September 26, 2005


A consensus of condescension?
posted by furtive at 7:38 PM on September 26, 2005


A shunning may be a good way to handle Cleardawn. It'll allow us to acknowledge the inappropriate comments witout contributing to the derail. I'm finding that replying 'I will not take the thing from your hand.' to PP when he starts trolling to be quite the stress reliever.
posted by Mitheral at 7:38 PM on September 26, 2005


hey look at me, i'm briefly witty.
posted by furtive at 7:39 PM on September 26, 2005


cleardawn is a lunatic. He completely shit in OmieWise's pristine shoah remembrance thread by not only facetiously denying the culture of holocaust remembrance, but by dragging israel into the thread with an 'OMG j00s = nazis am i rite?'. What the fack was that? Do I even have to elucidate what was inherently wrong with his insane debate? cleardawn is really...ummmm lame, and stuff.
posted by naxosaxur at 7:44 PM on September 26, 2005


caddis writes "Derision for cleardawn's anti-Israel rants is in order, but do not forget the rest of the good stuff that cleardawn posts."

What worries me, is that because cleardawn says many things that many people on this site might agree with, he's getting an easy time of it. But go look at the Crusades thread, where he entered, talked about something he had no knowledge of, preemptively slurred anyone who might agree with the theory he disagreed with, was presented with all kinds of evidence that he should at the very least revisit the issue, continued to insist that his "hunch" was correct, mocked other people's theories (incorrectly, since they are accepted theories about which he himself was ignorant), never once presented any evidence to support his case, and suggested multiple times that disagreeing with him (or arguing for the theory which he did not prefer) constituted irrevocable evidence of racism and a belief in eugenics. I may have been an asshole in that thread (I also may not have), but at least I backed up my statements with link after link.

I also think it serves his purpose to out yourself as a supporter of Palestinian rights. His assumption is precisely that unless you say it every time the word Jew appears you can't possibly think "correctly" about Israel/Palestine. That's ludicrous and should not be dignified with the contingent responses that it garners. No one, Jew or non-Jew, should have to temper their identity based on cleardawn's program for proper political engagement.
posted by OmieWise at 7:53 PM on September 26, 2005


That is the most skillful ripping of a new one I've read in a long time. I might have to schedule an appointment for a fitting.

Yes, Anus is fine, C. As is -sphincty. Thanks for asking.
posted by If I Had An Anus at 7:55 PM on September 26, 2005


What worries me, is that because cleardawn says many things that many people on this site might agree with, he's getting an easy time of it.

Bingo. Cleardawn likes the dramatic. So the u.s. government is a dictatorship and all republicans are racist. He lets bombastic statements fly left and right. That goes for his popular and not so popular opinions here. But the attitude is the same.
posted by justgary at 8:02 PM on September 26, 2005


OmieWise writes "What worries me, is that because cleardawn says many things that many people on this site might agree with, he's getting an easy time of it."

I think people are getting wise to his game. I just read that Crusades thread, and he's a disaster in it. I'll take everything he writes here with a large grain of salt in the future.

I'm not sure shouting him down will accomplish anything, though. It'll just make the derails worse.
posted by mr_roboto at 8:18 PM on September 26, 2005


I'm not sure shouting him down will accomplish anything, though. It'll just make the derails worse.

Cleardawn is a smart guy, and that shines through in some of his writings. The problem is he's prone to hyperbole and exaggeration, and this tends to turn the conversation into a slog of sentence parsing, grammatical gymnastics and (sometimes) nasty, personal shit.
posted by SweetJesus at 9:03 PM on September 26, 2005


First off, to mediareport, I really don't know what to propose, hence the thread and the tentative cry for help. The problem for me goes beyond simple derailment of the threads, or a particular disagreement with his views. Instead, I see a couple disturbing patterns, which I think OmnieWise also exposed. First, the series of incorrect but certain-sounding slanders, that Jews are religiously obligated to commit genocide (but don't worry, because "not all Jewish people agree with that") or the equivalence between the Nazi master race and the "chosen people," combined with his stated determination to post on all "threads with a Jewish interest" seem like he is gunning for ongoing conflict, as well as creating arguments of dubious value. Secondly, his assumptions of collective guilt on the behalf of all posters on every Jewish topic for the I/P conflict are equally disturbing, both intellectually and to the cohesion of the the thread -- the default in any thread about Jews should not be the need for each poster to repudiate the policies of the Israeli government, and/or Zionism as a whole, but that is what he seems to want.

So, what do you suggest? I am afraid ignoring him doesn't work, he clearly wants to provoke a response, and someone on a thread is going to give it to him and start the process anew. But, if that is the best approach, I am game. If someone could convince him not to do this, it would be even better.
posted by blahblahblah at 9:03 PM on September 26, 2005


They also killed Jesus.
posted by Krrrlson at 9:11 PM on September 26, 2005


I've got a burning passion for Tibet, but how many times have I mentioned this bit of historical injustice in MeFi? I count a whopping total of 0. (now 1)

It hadn't come up.

Course if I mentioned it every time there was anything on the blue involving China...
posted by dreamsign at 9:14 PM on September 26, 2005


Damn, cleardawn. After such a formal dressing down by such an erudite and patient member as OmieWise, I think you'll have a hard time calling bullshit. Better chill, friend. You're not doing The Cause any good at this point.

Part of the reason why Israel gets away with so much is that the shrill rhetoric that surrounding its follies and failures turns people away. You're actually worsening that. By napalming various picnics with your strident monotone, you're taking people to the point where they say "I don't want to hear it - both sides are just fucked" and that's bad.

When everyone says that and just switches off, the people with the power run away with the game, unchecked. There's a thing called picking your battles.
posted by scarabic at 9:17 PM on September 26, 2005


His need to bring up I/P in the Tibor Rubin thread was ridiculous. How an American man, whose delayed recognition for a Congressional Medal of Honor may well have had something to do with the very real history of anti-Semitism in America, has anything to do with Israel in the way cleardawn asserts is baffling.

And in his favor---when i called him on it for exactly that reason, he apologized. This kind of callout never helps, i find.
posted by amberglow at 9:25 PM on September 26, 2005


Cleardawn is annoying; it's as easy to ignore him as it is to ignore thomcatspike. Learn the poster's timbre and move on as soon as you recognize him.

As amberglow says, the callouts never really help.
posted by interrobang at 9:30 PM on September 26, 2005


..and in his favor---when i called him on it for exactly that reason, he apologized.

Amberglow, I didn't take his final post as an apology, instead I read it as the opposite, he wrote "Amberglow, thanks for your peacemaking efforts here, and for your clearly stated views on Israel/Palestine. However, I don't agree that it's wrong to bring it up here."

But your advice (and that of interrobang) on callouts and their usefulness is well taken.
posted by blahblahblah at 9:40 PM on September 26, 2005


the callouts never really help

Well, I have a much clearer picture of cleardawn now, for what that's worth. Thanks, blahblahblah. You helped spread the information that someone's on a crusade to deliberately provoke angry reactions in every Judaism-related thread he sees, as his personal punishment to all of the Jews who read MeFi for being born into a religion that, er, somehow managed to spawn right-wing fundamentalists who misuse the religion's ancient texts for bigoted ends.

*spanks own Jewish ass*

Thank you sir, may I have another.

At some point, his crusade could add up to enough shitting on the site that someone might give him a timeout, but if that doesn't happen, we'll just have to deal with yet another user who gets a thrill out of being inflammatory. *yawn* My guess is he'll move on to another subject when this one stops getting him the attention he wants, so, my advice to you, blahblahblah, would be to just laugh and ignore him. Seriously.
posted by mediareport at 10:16 PM on September 26, 2005


Yes, in hindsight I regret replying to him. I propose a Jewish conspiracy of silence with respect to cleardawn. You gentiles are welcome to join, if you like.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 10:21 PM on September 26, 2005


Well, gentlemen, we appear to have reached a concensus. Cleardawn would be proud.
posted by Bugbread at 10:32 PM on September 26, 2005


DAH!!!! I did it AGAIN!!

"Consensus", not "concensus".
posted by Bugbread at 10:34 PM on September 26, 2005


blahblahblah, in the "Old Testament" Books of Exodus, Deuteronomy, Joshua and Samuel, there are plenty of references to genocide, ethnic cleansing, racial purity, etc. etc. etc. See for example 1 Samuel 15, where The LORD send Samuel to tell Saul to go commit genocide against the Amalekites, and Deuteronomy 7 and 20, from which I shall now quote:

[Deut. 7:1-2]

1When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou;

2And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them


[Deut. 20:16-17]

16But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:

17But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee

I.e., G_D hath saith "Kill them! Kill them all! 'Exterminate the brutes!'"

I'm only able to read the Bible in English, though I've pointed to site with oodles of translations just in case. It's just that as far as I can tell, that is unless every English translation of the Bible I read at my dad's place and/or can find online is lying, it does indeed say in the "Word of God" itself that the Yahweh worshippers (Hebrews, Israelites, Jews) were more than once ordered to commit genocide by the Lord of Armies himself.

Whether the present-day Hebrew-speaking followers of YHWH are still obligated to wipe out or at least drive out all inhabitants of the Promised Land who do not worship only YHWH and that only in the proper way is still up in the air among Torah scholars and Israeli politicians. So I can't swear that cleardawn is 100% correct, only that there is indeed a sound Scriptural basis involved.

So that's my reason why this was a stupid callout.

Note that I think it's stupid and wrong to bring Biblical orders to commit genocide in every thread that in any way refers to Israel or Jews. The reasons for my judgment should be plain from this thread. Maybe cleardawn should keep it to every other Israel- or Jew-mentioning thread, or bring it up only when it's clearly appropriate -- for example when somebody starts insisting that "Judaism is a religion of peace!"

(And for those who are new to my comments, you'll find from sorting through them that I'm also anti-Christianity and anti-Islam, to pick two more items from a long list of "faiths" I find repulsive.)
posted by davy at 11:03 PM on September 26, 2005


My suggestion is this: Every time he does this (brings up palestine whenever jews are mentioned, especially when it's not germain to the post.) the first person to notice it should post the following:

I'm going to ignore Cleardawn's trolling, and I ask that everyone else do the same.

Then everyone else do just that. Don't respond to him.

then he will go away.

I hope.
posted by shmegegge at 11:57 PM on September 26, 2005


interrobang said: Cleardawn is annoying; it's as easy to ignore him as it is to ignore thomcatspike.

He's not just annoying. He's incredibly effective in derailing and shutting down threads that deal with anything involving Jews. If I were post a thread next week about the 18th century Jewish Messiah phenomenom of Sabbetai Zvi, how much you wanna bet that Cleardawn will get in on it and post his usual Israel/Palestine political derail? Knowing that, why should I bother posting?

Yeah, he can seem erudite, but I agree with Omie Wise that Cleardawn is dishonest intellectualism.
posted by zaelic at 1:18 AM on September 27, 2005


cleardawn and people like him are the best allies that the Israeli right wing could hope for. His concept of "collective guilt" requires that any discussion of Jewish culture should include an attack on all Jews as a reprisal for the actions of the Israeli government. That feeds the paranoia that Sharon uses to get elected, and shuts down Jewish moderates searching for a concept of Jewish identity that distances itself from Israel's actions. My guess is that cleardawn is a Mossad operative.
posted by fuzz at 2:26 AM on September 27, 2005


Metafilter: Arguments of dubious value.
posted by Chuckles at 2:54 AM on September 27, 2005


"the guise of 'consensus,' (which to me is a kindler, gentler for of fascism)"

These two words have both well-understood and defined casual and technical meanings and, as far as I can see, cannot possibly be synomyms.

From now on, no one on MetaFilter is allowed to use the word fascist in any of its forms.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 3:15 AM on September 27, 2005


Not just Jews; cleardawn has been rather rabid against just about any kind of religious belief at all. The only reason I didn't notice at first was because it blends so well into the general background noise on Metafilter, and I got baited as well. Took a few times to figure out IHBT.
posted by brownpau at 4:13 AM on September 27, 2005


EB, you need to cultivate that sense of humour synapse.

We need titles on these Metatalk posts, like "Should cleardawn be banned for its anti-Semitism?" That would help us route around all this CONSENSUS TERRORISM.
posted by gsb at 4:43 AM on September 27, 2005


don't you mean "FASCISM IRAQ?"

the thing that still gets me about cleardawn is that comment about giving black soldiers their own state. he never answered me (refused to do so?) in that thread, and I still have no idea what the hell he was getting at.
posted by shmegegge at 5:14 AM on September 27, 2005


But how will I put a slice of fascism cheese on my fascist apple pie?

It's all about the fascismo.
posted by dreamsign at 5:42 AM on September 27, 2005


Excuse me - but what about the Canaanites?
posted by scarabic at 6:04 AM on September 27, 2005


Only Fascists have cheese on apple pie.
posted by unreason at 6:17 AM on September 27, 2005


Ummm...has anyone informed Cleardawn about this little party in his honor? I'm surprised not to see him here.
posted by LarryC at 6:26 AM on September 27, 2005


We're waiting for him to post an appropriate FPP in which to bring it up.
posted by If I Had An Anus at 6:39 AM on September 27, 2005


Only Fascists have cheese on apple pie.

Fascists prefer Black Forest Cake in my experience.
posted by jonmc at 6:50 AM on September 27, 2005


I've given up on Cleardawn and his narrow minded foolishness. I've finally learned to ignore the bait. Now when ever I read "consensus" from him, I just smile and think about the religious society of Friends and their love of consensus, tolerance, good works and insistence on making one's own relationship with god.

I picture cleardawn at a Quaker meeting, standing up to share his feeling that: "Anyone who promotes Christianity, Judaism, or Islam to children is promoting child abuse..." and all the Quakers giving him a nice smile and a nod.

What the stink ever happened to nuance anyway? No place for it in a post 9/11 world?
posted by Divine_Wino at 7:00 AM on September 27, 2005


jonmc, my feelings echo SeizeThDay exactly. That's not an apology, just an acknowledgement of a change of opinion.

I'm not sure there is a clear consensus here and to my mind, religion aside, cleardawn has been capable of very intelligent and cogent input at times but that foundation is where he springs from when he engages in trolling.

That's the reason people have a varying response. It's because he seems to play the strawman argument (which he admitted) or subtle insinuation game without a great degree of constancy. And although I had a good go at cleardawn in one of OmieWise's threads, I had already decided by that stage, not having seen much of his religious invective, that his trolling was both calculated and erratic. That type of behaviour is very worthwhile calling out because people become alerted, but it's hardly likely to get him timed-out unless he gets personally vitriolic above the usual din.

I would ask that cleardawn note that his modus operandi has been well and truly been identified and rather than attempt any fightback here, he should think a little bit more about the negativity he spreads. I'm coming along to a moderate line here because it IS unlikely he'll get kicked out and also because, when he wants to, he can be a positive contributor to discussions. Obviously he's getting his kicks from a condescending lead-the-discussion attitude, but it isn't all the time imho. So please get your shit together cleardawn or fuck off.
posted by peacay at 7:16 AM on September 27, 2005


Summon Cleardawn!

can't help wondering what experiences jonmc has had eating cake with fascists. is this like one of those internet dating things, 'men seeking cake-eating fascists'?
posted by Slithy_Tove at 7:16 AM on September 27, 2005


"Anyone who promotes Christianity, Judaism, or Islam to children is promoting child abuse..."

Wow, what a blast from the past! I remember using that bait on FidoNet.
posted by mischief at 7:39 AM on September 27, 2005


has anyone informed Cleardawn about this little party in his honor?

I did. I also suggested that he might want to start his own FPP on topics he feels so strongly about rather than bring them up incessantly and vituperatively in threads where they don't belong.
posted by jessamyn at 7:45 AM on September 27, 2005


I agree that there's no good reason at all to drag the Israeli/Palestinian conflict into everything about Jews or Israel: it might indeed be possible to discuss Shabbatai Tzevi while completely ignoring the fact that "proto-Zionism" (gathering the world's Jews into "the Holy Land" and taking it "back" from the non-Jewish people who were then the majority of its inhabitants) was a big part of his messianic idea, as it may be possible to discuss the products of Israeli farms and construction firms while totally ignoring the Palestinians who since before 1948 have provided much of Israel's manual labor. It was also possible to discuss pre-1991 South Africa without mentioning apartheid, the downtrodden black South Africans or the ANC, and the fact that doing so was bad for the majority of black South Africans is just tough titties for them: "nice" people like us should not have to be reminded of horrible things done to people who bring it on themselves by not being like us, it's simply unseemly and rude. Is that what you were getting at, zaelic?

If so, then you'd have to agree that that we don't want to hear anything about the Shoah whenever people bring up anything connected with Germany and World War Two (disclosure: my mother's family has been in the "New World" since a the early 1700s, but they're German Gentile in origin), and you'd have to agree that slavery and racism had nothing to do with southern white people (disclosure: I am a southern white person). Assuming you can do that and shout down anybody who'd disagree, without thinking for a minute you were being intellectually dishonest, I'll be happy to agree to your conditions.

On the other hand, if you want to point out that I might have some kind of interest, as a German-descended Southern white Gentile, in having people separate Germans from the Shoah or white Southerners from slavery, then you'll have to admit that you don't really have an intellectually honest objection to cleardawn's "crusade". Unless of course your point really IS that '"nice" people like us should not have to be reminded of horrible things done to people who bring it on themselves by not being like us'.
posted by davy at 8:21 AM on September 27, 2005


Oh and by the way, there is indeed a correlation between "Abrahamic" religion and child abuse, though it is quite possible to abuse children without being a member of the "Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition".
posted by davy at 8:25 AM on September 27, 2005


Oh and by the way, there is indeed a correlation between "Abrahamic" religion and child abuse, though it is quite possible to abuse children without being a member of the "Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition".

But Davy, what you just wrote is rational and, at least to me, in no way inflammitory, which might just engender a conversation about that topic.
posted by Divine_Wino at 8:50 AM on September 27, 2005


Thanks, Divine_Wino. But what about my comment(s) posted four minutes earlier?
posted by davy at 9:16 AM on September 27, 2005


I think cleardawn isn't speaking truth to power so much as pissing in the cornflakes and it's lame.


I would like to point out that he is pretty much an Arch-Lefty and is getting roundly thumped around here, for trollish behavior, fwiw.
posted by Divine_Wino at 9:59 AM on September 27, 2005


cleardawn is getting roundly thumped around here for being an outspoken and "impolite" opponent of Zionism, D_W. Anti-Zionism is not really a left-v.-right thing: there are Trotskyite leftist groups that are as pro-Palestinian as the Stormfront. Pro-Israel vs. pro-Palestinian is another axis entirely, though I'm not sure what we'd call it (if not that).

Anyway, I agree that cleardawn's frequent rants can be a bit much, but it's a question of style, not substance: it is possible to discuss say Shabbatai Tzevi without discussing the evils of Zionism, but if somebody says "But the whole point of pre-modern Jewish messianism was taking the Holy Land from the non-Jews who then comprised most of that area's population" the only answer is "Yes, you'e absolutely right, but we don't want to go that far into that aspect of it now." They're not incorrect about the facts, it's just that being reminded of those facts sometimes makes us uncomfortable and distracts us from the particular aspect we want to concentrate on at the time.

Another example would be that it's possible to discuss the American Civil War without bringing up slavery or discussing SS uniforms without bringing up what those who were them did, but nobody can deny those things have a lot to do with one another.

Don't you have one of those greasemonkey killfile thingies?
posted by davy at 11:11 AM on September 27, 2005


"cleardawn is a man of inadequate knowledge, small understand, little experience, and less humanity."

Oh please. I'll agree with your "cleardawn isn't human" hyperbole when you show me his convictions for raping and eating infants.
posted by davy at 11:17 AM on September 27, 2005


I wrote about "discussing SS uniforms without bringing up what those who were them did."

This is my turn to publicly moan about my own typo, though I don't think I need to explicitly point out exactly which letter should have gone where.
posted by davy at 11:19 AM on September 27, 2005


cleardawn is getting roundly thumped around here for being an outspoken and "impolite" opponent of Zionism, D_W. Anti-Zionism is not really a left-v.-right thing: there are Trotskyite leftist groups that are as pro-Palestinian as the Stormfront. Pro-Israel vs. pro-Palestinian is another axis entirely, though I'm not sure what we'd call it (if not that).


I was more pointing out that he IS an Arch Lefty and IS being roundly thumped, not what being anti-zionist makes him on the political spectrum. That was a point that I was not making to you and that perhaps didn't need to be made.

I'm just talking away here, because you are being so civil and well-reasoned and that's hard for me to resist. But I guess I would say that what annoys me about Cleardawn is that (unlike some of our other trolls, and I don't think he is a full blown one) is that he sneaks in with what seems to be a point that I would tend to agree with and then blows it up with hyperbole and condescension, he's a bad lefty. It's not like he's flinging these bricks on the fucking Anti-Defamation league message boards, he's here on metafilter, sticking his dick in the hummos with a bunch of people that would probably agree with him if he toned it down and stopped lecturing like he just arrived for day one of the Black Bloc bootcamp sponsored by Fair Trade coffee and Working Asssets and his balaclava is the most "zapatista".

He offends my sense of theology and geometry. He's rude, the Palestinians deserve a homeland. Those are going to race in parallel down the road forever I guess.
posted by Divine_Wino at 11:30 AM on September 27, 2005


davy writes "Don't you have one of those greasemonkey killfile thingies?"

Don't believe in them, once a community needs them it's time to leave.
posted by Mitheral at 12:32 PM on September 27, 2005


Divine_Wino saith unto me: "you are being so civil and well-reasoned "

Whether you meant that as a joke or not, I just busted out laughing. "Civil and well-reasoned"? ME? (Hey scarabic, did you catch what he called me?)

"He's rude, the Palestinians deserve a homeland."

Cleardawn too will probably become "civil and well-reasoned", probably long before Palestinians get their homeland.
posted by davy at 12:43 PM on September 27, 2005


If so, then you'd have to agree that that we don't want to hear anything about the Shoah whenever people bring up anything connected with Germany and World War Two

Well, yeah. In a post about Dietrich Bonhoeffer's theology, bringing up the Shoah and those Jew-killing Germans is just churlish derailing. In a post about how the M-60 evolved from the MG42 and other modern small-arms evolved from earlier ones, bringing up the Shoah is just churlish derailing. In a post about German house architecture or industrial design from the period, bringing up the Shoah is just churlish derailing. In a post about how Rommel's ideas influence current military thinking (if they do), bringing up the Shoah is just churlish derailing.

And so on. There are lots of interesting things one can find and read and talk about that relate to Germany between 1933 and 1945, or WW2, or even the German military in WW2 that don't really have much at all to do with the Holocaust, and where dragging that into it is just, you guessed it, churlish derailing.

That's the consensus, anyway. Todd Lokken, who's rockin' with Dokken in Interlachen while swinging his bokken and talkin' to Falken, told me so.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 1:48 PM on September 27, 2005


Ah, shit. Todd, if you read this, I ain't pickin' on you. It's just that your name is fun to rhyme things with.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 1:52 PM on September 27, 2005


Here's lokken at you , kid.
posted by sgt.serenity at 2:10 PM on September 27, 2005


Davy said: Assuming you can do that and shout down anybody who'd disagree, without thinking for a minute you were being intellectually dishonest, I'll be happy to agree to your conditions.

That was quite a rant up there. I don't really rememeber making any conditions when I said that I sometimes think twice before making a post. Can there can be no discussion of anything until the potential ethnic/historical sins of the topic are addressed?

You got a lot to learn about Zvi, Davy. He became, along with thousands of his follower, a...er... Muslim. And thanks for pointing to my user page. Anybody named "Cohen" must, it seems, be pushing a secret Zionist agenda.
posted by zaelic at 3:02 PM on September 27, 2005


Um ROU_Xenophobe, about Dietrich Bonhoeffer, to quote:

"Dietrich Bonhoeffer (February 4, 1906 – April 9, 1945) was a German religious leader and participant in the resistance movement against Nazism. Bonhoeffer, a Lutheran pastor and theologian, took part in the plots being planned by members of the Abwehr (Military Intelligence Office) to assassinate Hitler. He was arrested, imprisoned, and eventually hanged following the failure of the July 20, 1944, assassination attempt[...]

During World War II, Bonhoeffer played a key leadership role in the Confessing Church, which opposed the anti-semitic policies of Adolf Hitler. He was among those who called for wider church resistance to Hitler's treatment of the Jews. While the Confessing Church was not large, it represented a major focus of Christian opposition to the Nazi government in Germany[...]

He was arrested in April 1943 after money that was used to help Jews escape to Switzerland was traced to him, and he was charged with conspiracy. He was imprisoned in Berlin for a year and a half."


So no, bringing up the Shoah and those Jew-killing Germans in a thread on Bonhoeffer's theology would NOT be "churlish derailing".

Sometimes it helps if you know what you're talking about, if you know what I mean.

--

On preview, yes zaelic, I was aware that Zevi and lots of his followers converted to Islam; they're known as Donmeh, a group that eventually Ataturk was supposedly born into. I don't think that was the aspect of his career that was most important, though of course I'm hardly the Definitive Authority on the subject.

You yourself got a lot to learn about that mind-reading stuff: I hear it's easier to tell what somebody you don't know does and does not know if your psychic brain waves don't have to escape your own abdominal wall first.

As far as being named "Cohen" goes, I've met black gentiles named Rosenberg but I've never met any goy of any stripe with your last name. And I don't know about you, but I'd be pretty surprised if a guy named Cohen was defending cleardawn's right to, as you put it, be "incredibly effective in derailing and shutting down threads that deal with anything involving Jews", even though another thing I bet I know that you don't know I know concerns the Satmar Hasidim's "top secret" anti-Zionism.

(What I don't know is to what degree NK diverges from the "regular" Satmar, and I don't have time know to study it.)
posted by davy at 3:27 PM on September 27, 2005


Well known, Davy. You do have time, however, to randomly pluck verses from the Old Testament, present them as some sort of statement of Jewish law when in fact, in a head spinningly underinformed reduction, you turn the world's Jews into (a few of whom temper their rabid worship of a murderous God with some contributions from the last 5 millenia--even humanism. but it's obviously congenitally genocidal humanism) Karaites, for whom the verses you cite would form the sum and substance of law on the topics they treat, and who had absolutely nothing to do with the founding of the state of Israel or with Zionism. But nuance shmuance.

And Neturei Kartah? Whither? Look who's Lokken now.
posted by kosem at 4:14 PM on September 27, 2005


Yes, I know that about Bonhoeffer. I meant to say "Bonhoeffer's theology of marriage," where a discussion of those filthy Jew-killing Germans would be a churlish derail. But his engagement to a minor might be a non-churlish one, since it relates to the topic at hand.

I was intentionally choosing subjects where the derail was immediately obvious.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 4:18 PM on September 27, 2005


Ataturk was not a Donmeh, Davy. Only his enemies accused him of that in order to besmirch him with "Jewish origins." He went to a High School in Thessaloniki which a lot of Donmeh attended. And Neturei Karteh is anything but secret. At least to those who have access to the Hasidic world. And yes, you are far from the authority on the subject. No argument there.

As for mind reading and stomach linings, it seems you aren't quite the expert on that, either.

It would seem that in defending Cleardawn you are more than willing to use his style of attack. You "out" a Jew - and then sit back and act smug in the fact that what little knowledge you may possess of Jewish culture is must be far beyond the realm of us mortals.
posted by zaelic at 4:22 PM on September 27, 2005


I can't swear that cleardawn is 100% correct, only that there is indeed a sound Scriptural basis involved.

There is also a sound scriptural basis for polygamy and putting homosexuals to death. You should take the Jews to task for that as soon as possible - I bet there are brass-knuckled Hasidim on a gay-bashing spree in some deserted Brooklyn alley as we speak. I hear jewwatch.org is a good place for this, you should try it.
posted by Krrrlson at 5:02 PM on September 27, 2005


Krrrlson: the gemora - the talmudic interpretation - on homosexuality is found only in the section on mamzerim, i.e., the question regarding the birth of a "legitimate" Jewish child. The Orthodox interpretation is that since no child is born of a homosexual union, there is no actual condemnation of homosexuality. A friend of mine, who was raised Gerer Hasidic, was asked to research this for a gay congregation in New York. Referring to "Sodom" and such we leave to the neo-con religious right.

Trembling Before G-d is a documentary focusing on gay Hasids in New York. Most are married and devout Hasids. When the film came out there weren't any riots.

I think what needs to be adressed here, in light of Cleardawn and Davy's comments, is the echte knee-jerk leftist reaction that links anything Jewish to anything Israeli/Zionist. It oversimplifies Jews as a people and a culture. Really: somebody wants to post a FPP on Sefardim and now we have to deal with Sepfardim = Jews = Israeli Oppression of Palestinains = 17th Century False Messiahs are Proto-Zionists = Gay Haters.

Damn you, Nov. 2004....
posted by zaelic at 5:22 PM on September 27, 2005


I... was being sarcastic. I hope that was clear.

Using Zionism as a point to attack the Jews goes beyond a "leftist knee-jerk reaction" - it is a favourite and time-tested tool of the antisemite, and I tend to be suspicious of anyone who does so.
posted by Krrrlson at 5:34 PM on September 27, 2005


Krrrlson: I got ya. And I agree about the Zionist angle: even Arafat and Al-Fatah recognised that and were careful to keep their politics clear on that point (in theory, if not always in practice.)
posted by zaelic at 5:43 PM on September 27, 2005


davy, go back and look at cleardawn's posts in the threads in question. If he'd done anything even close to the approach you laid out, I doubt we'd be having this discussion.
posted by mediareport at 6:29 PM on September 27, 2005


Well kosem , yesterday I didn't have to walk to my puppy and then carry my duffel bag full of dirty clothes up to the laundromat, to spend two hours mainly reading The Long Goodbye. Maybe you dig my comments so much you think I should be on call 24/7, but until I start getting paid for this I'll make my own schedule.

Now you want to argue that only Karaites follow the Law as it's actually written in the actual Torah. Whatever. Who is and who is not a "real" Jew, or what is and what is not "real"Judaism, is of course not for me to decide. I was merely pointing out that in the actual Book of Deuteronomy (or however it's called in Hebrew) The Lord G_D Almighty is in fact recorded as ordering the 12 Tribes to come out of the desert and kill everybody in the lands they come into. Are you telling me that the Book of Deuteronomy is fiction, is preached and cited by liars, and has never had any scriptural standing for any Hebrew, Israelite, and/or Jew who is not a Karaite?

Or maybe you missed the part where I said "Whether the present-day Hebrew-speaking followers of YHWH are still obligated to wipe out or at least drive out all inhabitants of the Promised Land who do not worship only YHWH and that only in the proper way is still up in the air among Torah scholars and Israeli politicians"? If you don't buy that I'd advise you to read up on Kahane.

Whatever. Next!
posted by davy at 7:02 PM on September 27, 2005


Hello zaelic! If you go back and read what I wrote I said that Ataturk was rumored to have been a Donmeh; personally I wouldn't know, I've never finished a single biography of him nor do I know his family. You said, as if I didn't know, that Zevi converted to Islam; I merely corrected your underestimation, and told you that I even know what Zevi's followers became known as in the 350 years since. (Repeating a rumor about Ataturk, while marking it explicitly as a rumor and not a fact -- "a group that eventually Ataturk was supposedly born into" -- was perhaps an unnecessary embellishment.) So I'm not claiming to be an expert, only saying that I'm not a TOTAL idiot. Furthermore, I'm perfectly aware that Neturei Karta is not really secret: they have a frigging web site for one thing -- so maybe in addition to further refining your mind-reading you need to look up "sarcasm".

And hey, I'm not the one who outed you as a Jew: you're the one who put your name as "Bob Cohen" on your Metafilter user page. So tell me, if you were to be featured in a TV documentary wearing a T-shirt with a gay slogan in a gay bar talking in favor of gay marriage, would you be surprised if the next day somebody pointed you out by saying "Hey, there's that gay guy!"? As for why I referred to your "identity", though this will go probably completely over your head, but every ad hominem there's a cui bono.

As for calling me an anti-semite, whatever. People get tired of being called nazis every time they're critical of Israel, or when they point out what it says in Deuteronomy, or when they refer to the rhetoric of a religious Zionist like Kahane to indicate that some Jews really do believe that Ol' Tetragrammaton Hisself really did say that "the Promised Land" should be For Jews Only -- and that that's still the way to go. But hey, if it floats your boat call me a nazi you go right ahead and do that: the only thing I'd accomplish by trying to persuade you otherwise is to be called "a nazi who denies being a nazi".

(I know, I know, IHBT. Whee.)
posted by davy at 7:38 PM on September 27, 2005


Now it's Krrrlson's turn.

Yes sir, there is in a fact a sound Scriptural basis for putting homosexuals to death, though of course those who claim the written Torah has no real authority will dispute that. For the past on 30 years I've used that shining turd of evil in my atheist polemics against the Bible and the "Judeo-Christian tradition". That very few people who say they believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob actually follow "the Word of God" enough to run around putting homos to death only shows that they're wrong, America is not really a "(Judeo-) Christian" country -- a fact for which I am quite greatful.

As for calling me an anti-semite, see my "whatever" at zaelic.
posted by davy at 7:50 PM on September 27, 2005


And mediareport, I don't know what you're getting at nor do I have time to go reading cleardawn's comments. If you want me to sit here and do a lot of slow one-fingered hunting-&-pecking in your direction I'll have to ask you to give me more to go on.

It's come to my attention that it's time to put my beer cans out for recycling and take the puppy (we call him "Joey" after Joey Ramone) out for his late-night wee-wee. Maybe if those people who like to trade insults with me would send me money I could hire somebody to take care of these off-line "details"?
posted by davy at 7:58 PM on September 27, 2005


for raping and eating infants

That just seems a little excessive to me.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:00 PM on September 27, 2005


Well, shit, boy, ya gotta tenderize it somehow.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:18 PM on September 27, 2005


Oh and by the way, at least in the U.S.A. it is mainly the Christians, and mainly a particularly rabid bunch of those, who in their homohating ravings point to that "their blood shall be upon them" stuff; Orthodox Jews do often say that was superseded by the Oral Law (see zalic's comments above) and many non-homohating Reform Jews point out that the essense of Reform is (as I understand it) is that "that was then, it's different now". Nevertheless, that injunction is indeed found in Leviticus, which book says it's a record of the commandments of God to the Israelites as they wander in the desert. If so many of today's Jews disagree with or are embarrassed by verses such as those I've brought up, then maybe a rabbinical college (Reform?) or yeshiva (everybody else?) should tell us that they don't really believe in the "Five Books of Moses" anymore and as far as they're concerned it's all a bunch of hooey; or if they want to pick and choose which parts to follow they should start publishing versions with the Bad Parts edited out, maybe with an index of deletia and perhaps explanations for them, just so we'll know and stop citing what I was raised to call "the Jewish Bible" as if it had all that much to do with Judaism and its God.

And yes, I do the same with the Christians, pointing that Paul really does say "the man is the head of the woman" and so on, so maybe they should just snip that crap right out too.

Generally speaking, as they stand written, the Tanakh, Holy Bible and Qu'ran do have a lot of hateful stuff in them about who God wants smitten and why. That "religion of peace" stuff (or what I grew up with, "God is Love") only works if you ignore or explain away large parts of what we're told by Religious Authorities (like our parents), as well as by the written word of the "sacred texts" themselves, is what God himself hath revealed as the Truth. (Or maybe God was kidding?)

And oh, before I forget, I also know that a lot of Jews don't like the term "Judeo-Christian", and regard Christian use of "the Jewish Bible" as a kind of blasphemous theft; given that I agree that Christianity and the New Testament have at least as much in common with the various Hellenistic mystery religions as with its supposed "ancestor faith" I see that point. However, please keep in mind that we're outnumbered in America, and I'm sure the Christers will give less heed to my views on the Jewish Scriptures than zaelic.

(So, is there anybody in this thread I haven't offended yet? Maybe if I opine that 'the Kronstadt rebellion showed that Trotsky wouldn't be any more "democratic" or "liberal" than Stalin was' -- another "controversial" position I actually sincerely hold -- I can extend this thread with a 100-post derail. After all, it recently worked well for Rothko.)
posted by davy at 9:30 PM on September 27, 2005


"but every ad hominem there's a cui bono"

That shows how mediocre is my proofreading-fu; what I meant was "FOR every ad hominem there's a cui bono".

(I'm pretty sure zaelic figured out what I was trying to say; he does seem to grok typed English a little better than he reads minds.)
posted by davy at 9:37 PM on September 27, 2005


Oh golly. From what I read a couple of years ago I did think Neturei Karta was Satmar; now here I see "There are in addition to the official Naturei Karta membership (whose origins are to be found primarily in the Lithuanian and German Misnagdic traditions), other Orthodox streams who oppose Zionism on similar religious grounds. Most visible among these has been the Satmar Hasidic sect led by the Teitelbaum dynasty. In more recent years, statements in a similar spirit have been expressed by some exponents of the Sefaradic 'ultra-Orthodox' faction associated with the Israeli "Shas" party."

Mea culpa. Crappity crap. I should have caught that earlier. On this one point I hereby officially stand corrected. In my own defense, "I'm not a TOTAL idiot" does imply that there IS some noticeable quantity of idiot in here somewhere, n'est-ce pas?

(Has anybody else noticed that a couple beers improves their proofreading and fact-checking, even if often only restrospectively?)

Speaking of which, I just found in the Wikipedia article on Neturei Karta that "because members of Neturei Karta participated in a prayer vigil for Yasser Arafat outside the Percy Military Hospital in Paris, France, where he lay on his death bed, the group was condemned by many Orthodox and Hasidic Jewish organizations and Hasidic dynasties" -- including, among a long list, Satmar. Very interesting. I didn't condemn anybody for participating in any prayer vigils for Ronald "666" Reagan, maybe because I don't try hard enough to distinguish myself from the sundry other brands of Far-Leftists. (I don't care much whether the USSR was "state socialism" or a "degenerated workers state", for one thing.)

So zaelic, how many "Jews on the street" know of and can keep straight the differences between the various "ultra-Orthodox" sects, including which accept the State of Israel and which don't? And how much do YOU know about the doctrinal and policy divisions among U.S. fundamentalist and/or evangelical Protestants; maybe you can tell me what the differences between the "Foot-washing Baptists" and the "Holy Rollers" are?
posted by davy at 10:16 PM on September 27, 2005


nor do I have time to go reading cleardawn's comments

But...but...

Never mind.
posted by mediareport at 10:23 PM on September 27, 2005


Neturei Karta is interesting. Check out the slogans on those banners!

--
And anyway. mediareport, I've re-read cleardawn's comments pointed at in blahblahblah's original callout, and I still don't know what you mean by "If he'd done anything even close to the approach you laid out, I doubt we'd be having this discussion."

I'd rather you humor me with an explanation please.
posted by davy at 10:41 PM on September 27, 2005


Let me clarify something: I was not defending cleardawn per se, and I was not going by what cleardawn said but what was said about cleardawn -- for one thing I was under the impression that it would take me hours to read all the hundreds of "offensive" examples of his "anti-semitism". I gather that he's accused of inserting something tantamount to a Mein Kampf chapter into every thread he participates in: something like "He popped into a thread about Curtis Sliwa and John Gotti Junior -- which had nothing to do with Jews except that happened in New York where there are lots of Jews -- with a diatribe on the Jewish plot to adulterate our bodily fluids! From Curtis Sliwa to the Protocols in three comments flat!"

Then when I (re-?) read the actual comments blahblahblah referred to they sounded slightly out of place but otherwise tame enough, certainly not as offensive as a lot of those pro- and anti-Bush posts in the Katrina threads. THIS is Metafilter's vaunted fire-breathing anti-semite demagogue?

As far as derailing threads goes, my hunch -- which might be wrong, though I doubt anybody's going to bother to prove it wrong or not -- is that damn near every Metafilter thread gets derailed pretty quickly. For example, a post on the what brand of bottled water somebody saw in a photo from New Orleans will spawn a thread that after five posts will derail into a "debate" on the evil Republican Party plot to adulterate our bodily fluids, which will then derail further into a discussion of Jenna Bush's lesbian french-kissing technique, in the middle of which somebody will post a jpeg of a Star Wars character.

What gives? Are y'all that desperate for somebody to stage pile-ons upon now that you've driven dios and ParisParamus away? If so I bet it sticks in your collective craw that cleardawn himself has avoided this thread; that you've had to settle for me, ME, ME. ("I look pretty tall but my heels are high...")
posted by davy at 11:35 PM on September 27, 2005


As far as derailing threads goes, my hunch -- which might be wrong, though I doubt anybody's going to bother to prove it wrong or not -- is that damn near every Metafilter thread gets derailed pretty quickly. For example, a post on the what brand of bottled water somebody saw in a photo from New Orleans will spawn a thread that after five posts will derail into a "debate" on the evil Republican Party plot to adulterate our bodily fluids, which will then derail further into a discussion of Jenna Bush's lesbian french-kissing technique, in the middle of which somebody will post a jpeg of a Star Wars character.

That sounds more amusing than having a whole bunch of threads derailed to exactly the same place, namely the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It's repetitive and boring.

Personally, I don't regard cleardawn as a fire-breathing anti-Semitic ideologue at all. His views seem pretty unremarkably lefty. Maybe a little more self-righteousness than usual, but that's not so remarkable. It's more a question of how he interacts with people: he's pretty quick to accuse people of various sins (racism, imperialism, ad hominem and strawman arguments, etc.), which violates FidoNet rule #2: Don't be easily offended. (Rule #1, of course, is: Don't be offensive.)

Any comments, cleardawn?
posted by russilwvong at 12:37 AM on September 28, 2005


davy derails the thread (of all threads) with a discussion of jews and genocide, then comes about this close to using the phrase "echo chamber". Well done.
posted by fleacircus at 3:11 AM on September 28, 2005


This thread is just as agenda driven and disingenuous as cleardawn's crusade... cleardawn has done well to stay far away.
posted by Chuckles at 5:10 AM on September 28, 2005


Or maybe you missed the part where I said "Whether the present-day Hebrew-speaking followers of YHWH are still obligated to wipe out or at least drive out all inhabitants of the Promised Land who do not worship only YHWH and that only in the proper way is still up in the air among Torah scholars and Israeli politicians"? If you don't buy that I'd advise you to read up on Kahane.

Well, that certainly makes it all better.
And I'll be sure to check out the writings of that well respected Torah Scholar Kahane you refer to. I've never heard of him.

*spits nasty taste out of mouth*

I will not waste our precious time dissecting your mischaracterization of my earlier comment. Or your incredibly nasty tone.
And to be clear, no one called you an anti semite for being critical of Israel, as no one calls me one when I am. Your suggestion (I know, the Torah scholars like Kahane and Israeli politicians, not you, are hard at work on this one.) that the Judaism (a religion about whose structure and practice you seem to know very little*) compels Israel to oppress, or that Judaism prefigures this conflict is, I'm afraid, classically anti semitic. But, as it is written, "whatever."

Done. With. This. Thread.
posted by kosem at 5:51 AM on September 28, 2005


meta
posted by scarabic at 7:38 AM on September 28, 2005


Are y'all that desperate for somebody to stage pile-ons upon now that you've driven dios and ParisParamus away?

No they didn't.

Just Sayin'.
posted by I Love Tacos at 7:46 AM on September 28, 2005


davy is the new cleardawn.
posted by brownpau at 7:50 AM on September 28, 2005


Let the circle be unbroken.
posted by Divine_Wino at 7:54 AM on September 28, 2005


brownpau is correct.
posted by caddis at 7:55 AM on September 28, 2005


davy plz put me on your JEW LIST too but i have to go now im late for shul okay o k a y ... kthnxbye
posted by naxosaxur at 8:34 AM on September 28, 2005


What the fuck, Davy? Step away from the computer, man. The cathodes are affecting your mind.
posted by klangklangston at 8:34 AM on September 28, 2005



posted by brownpau at 5:22 PM on September 28, 2005


Is that a Jew, brownpau? I heard they have large noses just like that.
posted by Krrrlson at 8:57 PM on September 28, 2005


Ask enough Southerners and you will find one who thinks they have horns. You won't have to ask too many I bet.
posted by caddis at 9:11 PM on September 28, 2005


caddis, you bloody bigot, what does being Southern have to do with it?
posted by davy at 10:52 AM on September 30, 2005


My turn: "meta".
posted by davy at 10:54 AM on September 30, 2005


Sorry davy, my last comment was uncalled for.
posted by caddis at 12:14 PM on September 30, 2005


Sorry to come so late to my lynching party! I only just got Jessamyn's email, since I haven't checked that account for a while.

Firstly, thank you. I'm genuinely honoured so many of you took time to offer your views on my posts - even those of you who didn't bother to read them first!

Secondly, thank you to those of you who have pointed out errors in my posts, and helped me understand some points better than I did before. That's what this medium is best for, and when people work together, honestly, in that way, we can teach each other a great deal. Even OmieWise has occasionally made valid and useful points (in between the personal attacks) in reply to my posts, from which I have learned, so thank you for that. I hope I've occasionally helped others in the same way.

Thirdly, to those who have said I'm trolling, or trying to derail threads; that is certainly not the case. I try to be scrupulously honest in my posts. I don't go in much for sarcasm. My comments often question mainstream views, but that's only because the views I hold are not all mainstream views. I try to always remain open to polite discussion and debate, and my views are not set in stone; far from it. I'm here to learn, just as much as to teach, and perhaps more than that, for companionable discussion between equals with different perspectives.

Fourthly, to those who have made hate-filled, personal attacks against me, in this thread and elsewhere, simply because they disagree with my views. Well, that's fine. I, for one, try to bear no grudges. Have a nice day; and take a look in the mirror sometime.

Finally, I'd like to repeat my stated opinion that Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are inherently abusive of children - primarily because they teach children blatant lies as if they were the deepest truths.

Of course, some people find that idea offensive, and hate - would even like to kill - anyone who expresses it. So it's unsurprising that they launch personal attacks on me here. In earlier ages, I would have been burned at the stake - at least!

Perhaps the important thing to remember when reading a public forum like MetaFilter is that a truth remains true, and a lie remains a falsehood, no matter who happens to post it.

I try, therefore, to judge every post on its own merits, rather than being seduced by the social reputation, good or bad, of the poster. Even dios or ParisParamus occasionally says something worth reading; and it is no less worth reading because he has said it.

Perhaps we can all agree on that.
posted by cleardawn at 1:35 PM on October 14, 2005


More specifically, I should also defend my posts mentioning the Palestinian question inside Jewish history threads, which have been so violently criticised here.

There seems to be an unspoken, but socially enforced, expectation that any discussion about Jewish history should exclude all critical mention of modern Israeli or Zionist history. That expectation, and that social enforcement, richly deserve to be questioned and exposed.

To do so is not a derail, nor is it axe-grinding, and it certainly is not anti-Semitic in any meaningful sense of that word. It is a straightforward challenge to the racist version of history which is taught by omission in schools and in the mainstream media - the racist version of history which excludes the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Palestine, carried out by Israeli troops with American weapons and funding.

To my mind, the most important part of history is its relevance to the present. The Holocaust has a powerful lesson to teach to all mankind - and yet here we are, unable even to mention it as an analogy for the events in Palestine without being pilloried. "Godwin's Law" effectively muzzles all discussion of the lessons of the Holocaust, while the people of Ramallah and Bethlehem and Gaza are forced to starve in ghettoes for the sake of Israel's demographic purity.

And to even mention any of this in the context of, say, American-Jewish war heroes, or Jewish history, or Jewish culture, is said to be wrong, impolite, unacceptable in polite society.

Sometimes, alas, we really can't discuss the relevance of the past to the present, even in a forum like this one, simply because it offends too many people.

I do not apologize for having tried.
posted by cleardawn at 3:33 PM on October 14, 2005


« Older London Meetup   |   taxonomy for mefi posts Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments