(http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2009/11/13/shimon-the-moral-pygmy-calls-goldstone-small-man/)

Shimon, Moral Pygmy Calls Goldstone ‘Small’ Man

Anti-Israel nincompoop and self-proclaimed morality expert Richard Silverstein in March 2008:

(http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2008/03/10/merkaz-harav-students-denounce-minister-as-murderer/comment-page-1/#comment-83533)

You must’ve been blown in by a foul wind fr. my good “friend” Aussie Dave, the liar & moral pygmy who writes Israellycool & makes feeble attempts to ridicule my views.

Meanwhile, Silverstein’s Twitter profile picture has inspired me: Tickle Me Dodo?

Consequently, I’m politely suggesting that if any of you think Israellycool is worthy of nomination in any of the categories, please nominate it.

I’m eligible for a number of categories, including but not excluded to Best Middle East or Africa Blog and Best Very Large Blog. But I suggest you look at the categories and decide for which my blog is worthy of nomination (if you do decide to nominate the blog, please nominate it only for the categories you truly believe it is worthy, and don’t “dump” nomination links in each and every category like some other bloggers are prone to request from their readers).

Last year, I placed a respectable third for Best Middle East or Africa Blog, behind the accomplished  Michael Totten and anti-Israel cretin-blogger Juan Cole. In fact, I was actually leading for a good number of days, and ended up with over 14% of the overall votes. But most importantly, my readership increased after the awards, which was my main objective.

http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2009/11/04/house-denounces-goldstone-baird-courageously-dissents/comment-page-1/#comment-115776

You’re right. There’s a website set up by Maize with almost the same name, http://www.ungoldstonereport.com/ which I confused w. the other website.

Why would you waste yr time creating a site dedicated to “fisking” the Goldstone Report? Don’t you have anything better to do w yr time? But now that I think of it one of yr partners is the notorious Aussie Dave & he REALLY doesn’t have anything better to do w. his time. So I take that question back.

BTW, who paid for that snappy graphic design for yr site? The foreign ministry perhaps?

Glass house. Stone.

Introducing Silverstein’s public LinkedIn profile:

[click images to enlarge]

In other words, it is Silverstein who REALLY doesn’t have anything better to do with his time.

After begging for money to send him to a conference..

http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2009/10/05/j-street-national-conference/

I want to urge you to attend, if possible, J Street’s national conference, Driving Change, Securing Peace, from October 26-28th in Washington, DC.  Jerry Haber of the Magnes Zionist and I will be hosting a panel of bloggers who write about the Israeli-Arab conflict.  They will include Phil Weiss, Kung Fu Jew, Max Blumenthal, Helena Cobban and Ray Hanania.  We’re also working on a live video feed from Israel that will enable us bloggers there to participate.  If anyone knows of any West Bank or Gaza bloggers whom we can include let me know (they would need a webcam and Skype, or something similar, setup).

—-

I expect that it will cost $1,000 for my travel and lodging expenses during the conference.  I would like to ask you, generous readers, to step up and help me defray my costs of organizing and attending this important panel.  Please make as much of a contribution as you can afford in order to make our progressive voices heard at J Street and beyond.

..he takes a commenter to task (for G-d knows what)

But do come to the panel & if you have the temerity to say a word or introduce yrself I’ll make a pt. of telling the audience what a schnorrer you are.

schnor⋅rer

–noun Slang.

a person who habitually borrows or lives at the expense of others with no intention of repaying; sponger; moocher; beggar.

A leading human rights group has suspended its senior military analyst following revelations that he is an avid collector of Nazi memorabilia.

The group, Human Rights Watch, had initially thrown its full support behind the analyst, Marc Garlasco, when the news of his hobby came out last week. On Monday night, the group shifted course and suspended him with pay, “pending an investigation,” said Carroll Bogert, the group’s associate director.

“We have questions about whether we have learned everything we need to know,” she said.

The suspension comes at a time of heightened tension between, on one side, the new Israeli government and its allies on the right, and the other side, human rights organizations that have been critical of Israel. In recent months, the government has pledged an aggressive approach toward the groups to discredit what they argue is bias and error.

Injected suddenly into that heated conflict, word of Mr. Garlasco’s interest seemed startling to many. The disclosure ricocheted across the Internet: Mr. Garlasco, an American, was not only a collector, he has written a book, more than 400 pages long, about Nazi-era medals. His hobby, inspired he said by a German grandfather conscripted into Hitler’s army, was revealed on a pro-Israel blog, Mere Rhetoric, which quoted his enthusiastic postings on collector sites under the pseudonym “Flak88” — including, “That is so cool! The leather SS jacket makes my blood go cold it is so COOL!”

It was a Rorschach moment in the conflict between Israel and its critics. The revelations were, depending on who is talking, either incontrovertible proof of bias or an irrelevant smear.

The Mere Rhetoric posting said Mr. Garlasco’s interests explained “anti-Israel biases.”

The administration of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also weighed in, but its views on groups like Human Rights Watch were already clear. Mr. Netanyahu’s policy director, Ron Dermer, told The Jerusalem Post in July, “We are going to dedicate time and manpower to combating these groups; we are not going to be sitting ducks in a pond for the human rights groups to shoot at us with impunity.”

After the report about Mr. Garlasco came out, Mr. Dermer called it “perhaps a new low.”

At first, Human Rights Watch, a global organization with headquarters in New York, issued an unequivocal statement of support for Mr. Garlasco, saying he “has never held or expressed Nazi or anti-Semitic views.”

Ms. Bogert at the time said his work has been “extensively reviewed, lawyered, scrutinized, pulverized by our program and legal staff, and we have not in six years ever had cause to question his professional judgment.”

Mr. Garlasco, who worked at the Pentagon helping to target bombs in the second Persian Gulf war, has since traveled the world for Human Rights Watch, investigating and writing reports of the alleged use of white phosphorus munitions in Gaza, cluster munitions in Russia and Georgia, and other military practices in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon.

Ms. Bogert called the attacks on Mr. Garlasco and her group “a distraction from the real issue, which is the Israeli government’s behavior.”

But some who firmly support Human Rights Watch were left unsettled by the researcher’s extracurricular activities.

Helena Cobban, a blogger and activist who is on the group’s Middle East advisory committee, asked on her blog, Just World News, if Mr. Garlasco’s activities were “something an employer like Human Rights Watch ought to be worried about? After consideration, I say Yes.”

Other groups say they have felt more heat from the Israeli government and its allies. “Recently we have seen a new attitude, a stepping up,” said Sari Michaeli, press officer for the group B’Tselem, which recently came under harsh criticism from the Israeli military for a report that concluded that civilians made up more than half of the Palestinian casualties in the Gaza offensive.

Mr. Garlasco declined to be interviewed. But on Friday he posted an essay with the Huffington Post in which he called the Nazis “the worst war criminals of all time,” explaining that he was simply a “military geek” whose interest grew out of his own family’s history.

“I’ve never hidden my hobby, because there’s nothing shameful in it, however weird it might seem to those who aren’t fascinated by military history,” he wrote. “Precisely because it’s so obvious that the Nazis were evil, I never realized that other people, including friends and colleagues, might wonder why I care about these things.”

Yaron Ezrahi, a professor of political science at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, said he did not believe that Mr. Garlasco’s interest in memorabilia could support allegations of “premeditated bias.” He said, however, that Human Rights Watch’s credibility might have been wounded because Mr. Garlasco’s hobby “has armed the right-wing fanatics” who “work day and night to demonize any individual or organization that raises questions about the military practices of Israel when they end up even with unintended civilian casualties.”

And that is one thing that seems to especially trouble Ms. Cobban, who said in an interview that the controversy played into the hands of the government and its helpers in the fight.

“They have been given this deus ex machina gift,” she said, “about the discovery of Garlasco and his out-of-hours hobby.”

While I admit to feeling satisfied while reading the article, I can’t help but question why the New York Times felt the need to interview, of all people, a left-wing Israeli professor, to the exclusion of even one of the bloggers (yours truly included) who investigated Garlasco’s hobby.

Then again, this is the New York Times we are talking about.

In the meantime, all is not lost for Garlasco. He now has some more time to put back some cold ones.

Update: Anti-Israel blogger Richard Silverstein is predictably peeved about this latest development. In his latest post entitled Human Rights Watch Suspends Garlasco for Inconvenient Hobby (I kid you not), he claims Garlasco’s only fault is “having a hobby that few outsiders can comprehend as meaningful or interesting,” and repeats the absolute falsehood that Israel’s foreign ministry was involved in uncovering Garlasco’s Nazi obsession.

http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2009/09/14/human-rights-watch-suspends-garlasco-for-having-inconvenient-hobby/

Personally, I think the whole Garlasco affair is starting to make Human Rights Watch look like a character in opera bouffe.  Marc Garlasco, the group’s senior military analyst, the guy who visits battlefields to determine what types of atrocious munitions have been used to kill innocent civilians in pointless conflicts, collects World War II memorabilia, including badges of Nazi anti-aircraft units (in which his grandfather served).  Apparently this is enough to land you in hot water in this crazy world we live in–that is if your every move is under scrutiny by the pro-Israel smear industry in the form of NGO Monitor (with a little help from Avigdor Lieberman’s Israeli foreign ministry).

The N.Y. Times reports today that HRW has, as I expected, quivered in its boots and suspended Garlasco from his job.  I don’t really understand why you would suspend someone from his professional assignment when his only fault is having a hobby that few outsiders can comprehend as meaningful or interesting. Garlasco has made no statement either supporting Nazism or condemning Israel or Jews.  In fact, he has harshly criticized the Nazis in the introduction to a book he wrote on collecting such historical artifacts.  The main charge, aside from the distortion (continued in the Times’ inaccurate headline, Rights Group Assailed for Analyst’s Nazi Collection) claiming he collects Nazi memorabilia, is that his hobby is somehow weird or ghoulish.

My hope is that HRW is suspending Garlasco with the intent on resolving this matter quickly and reinstating him.  The ostensible reason for suspending him is to investigate the matter more fully.  I presume someone will want to go over his 8,000 posts contributed to a few collectors discussion forums, to ensure he never said anything that might be further damaging to HRW.  Thus far, nothing I have read is in the least incriminating.

Once again I take strong issue with the role Helena Cobban has played in this matter.  As I wrote yesterday, normally I find Helena’s instincts to be impeccable on matters political and journalistic.  But not this one.  For the life of me, I don’t understand how allowing yourself to be interviewed on this matter by the N.Y. Times and speaking harshly against Garlasco sheds anything other heat on the matter, rather than light.

In addition, it seems to me that one of Helena’s main issues with Garlasco is that, as a military man, he comes from an entirely different cultural milieu than she (who is a pacifist Quaker).  But think of this–doesn’t HRW need military experts with military backgrounds and yes, perhaps odd (to us) military hobbies?  How else can it get the goods when something like the Gaza war occurs?  Are we going to send Quaker pacifists to examine shell casings and serial numbers?  I have pro-Israel readers of this blog applauding Helena for her stand.  Isn’t there something wrong with this picture??

Notice how Silverstein is so keen to smear Israel, he automatically accepts Garlasco’s defense of his “inconvenient” hobby. Those of us involved in uncovering Garlasco’s obsession took the time to do painstaking research, and build a strong case questioning Garlasco’s objectivity when dealing with Israel. Silverstein’s modus operandi is to begin with the position that Israel is behind all evil, and work his way back from there. And he has no problem making palpably false statements and accusations.

Update: NGO Monitor deals with the real issue arising from Garlasco’s Nazi fetish.

Human Rights Watch’s reported suspension of its senior military expert, Marc Garlasco, is a belated recognition of the need for an independent investigation, not only of the individual involved, but more importantly, of HRW’s management. As an organization that claims to promote human rights, the moral implications of Garlasco’s central role in the campaigns against Israel (as documented in NGO Monitor’s 100-page study on HRW), and related issues should also be included.

Beyond Garlasco’s activities and statements surrounding his Nazi memorabilia collection, this investigation should examine the HRW employment process, and the credibility of the numerous reports and related activities in which he played a central role. In particular, this detailed and external review should examine the veracity of reports on Israel which Garlasco co-authored and presented at press conferences, and which included repeated condemnations using terms such as “war crimes”, “violation of international law”, etc. These allegations promoted the campaign to isolate Israel internationally, including the formation of the Goldstone mission.

For a number of years, NGO Monitor has identified numerous claims in Garlasco’s reports and statements on Israel that were false, inaccurate, distorted, and biased. Since 2003, when Garlasco joined HRW, the title and role of “military expert”, and the credibility given to his allegations, were justified on the basis of his seven years in the US defense establishment, in which he claims to have fulfilled numerous positions.

NGO Monitor has not found any independent sources to support Garlasco’s claim to the type of expertise and knowledge of weapons and technology that are invoked in the various reports he has co-authored at HRW. Indeed, the available biographical information on Garlasco’s career prior to employment at HRW is consistent with the view that his expertise is far below the level required for the claims made in his HRW reports. This highlights the need to examine the process and decision making which led to Garlasco’s employment at HRW.

The specific HRW reports and statements which were based on Garlasco’’s claim to military expertise include:

• Razing Rafah (October 2004)
• Gaza Beach (June 2006)
• Second Lebanon War
  • Cluster Munitions (“Flooding South Lebanon”)
  • Civilian Casualties (“Why They Died”)
• Gaza War
  • White Phosphorous (“Rain of Fire”)
  • Drones (“Precisely Wrong”)

As NGO Monitor analyses have demonstrated, each of these cases includes technical “evidence” which is clearly false. Examples include the claims regarding weapons systems discussed in the white phosphorous (“Rain of Fire”) and drone reports (“Precisely Wrong”) concerning the Gaza war, and the extensive discussion of tunneling detection technology in the 2004 report (“Razing Rafah”).

There are also many examples of entirely speculative claims in Garlasco’s reports for HRW in which technical language is used to support unverifiable testimony from Palestinians in Gaza, or people in Southern Lebanon who may have links to Hezbollah.

Analysis of HRW’s credibility and moral standing should also examine the roles of clearly biased individuals in the Middle East division, such as Joe Stork and Sarah Leah Whitson – both of whom were active in anti-Israel activities. Whitson led HRW fundraising efforts in Saudi Arabia, emphasizing allegations of Israeli war crimes (including Garalasco’s false claims on white phosphorous), and attacked critics (“pro-Israel pressure groups”).

NGO Monitor’s President, Prof Gerald Steinberg said “Garlasco’s statements in various chat forums and other platforms dealing with Nazi memorabilia explain the anti-Israel bias that is reflected in his reports, as shown in NGO Monitor’s systematic analyses. Evidence of this bias and its implications must also be included in this investigation of HRW’s Middle East activities and Garlasco’s role in this area.

HRW’s reliance on Garlasco’s supposed ‘expertise’ raises enormous questions over the credibility of their activities.  It reflects an organization that has consistently placed ideology above professionalism and universal human rights values.”

And by better and better I really mean worse and worse for HRW.

Following from HRW’s boilerplate response left on a number of blogs (not including Israellycool – perhaps IntenseDebate scared them off), they’ve now been sprung using sockpuppets.

Earlier this evening I received a comment from “Dash F.”, about the Garlasco story, saying:

This is total nonsense. It’s malicious and defamatory and borderline libelous, to be honest. The mere fact that someone collects a certain kind of military artifact does not make them loyal to what those artifacts represent. Saying Garlasco is a Nazi b/c he owns Nazi medals is like saying someone interested in cave paintings is a neanderthal. It simply makes no sense! Instead of dragging this man’s name through the mud, perhaps it would be better to consider his record, his position at a leading Human Rights NGO (which, despite claims to the contrary, is not anti-Israel since they criticize Israeli and Palestinian tactics alike when either cross the line of legality), and the fact that he COLLECTS stuff. That’s as far as it goes. People study and write about and read about and are interested in every evil figure and vile empire that ever existed, Nero, Ghengis Khan, Sadam Hussein, Stalin, Hitler. This interest does not equal acceptance or agreement or support in any way and to argue otherwise is totally illogical!

Five minutes later, on a different thread, I received another missive from “Tom K.” who pasted HRW’s press-release defense of Marc Garlasco.

Both of them happen to have the same IP address.

And that IP address happens to resolve to ….HRW.org!

What this demonstrates is (1) someone at HRW is worried about the story on Garlasco’s Nazi hobby and (2) aforesaid person at HRW does not really understand bloggers if he/she thought that leaving multiple, identical comments with identical wording and an easily traceable IP address was a good idea.

Then again, someone at HRW thought hiring a person with a Nazi fetish as senior analyst was a good idea.

Update: HRW board member Helena Cobban is also disturbed by Garlasco’s Nazi fetish.

There is a huge commotion in the blogosphere about the fact that Marc Garlasco, the senior military affairs specialist at Human Rights Watch, has long sustained a hobby of collecting and writing about Nazi memorabilia.

I’ve thought this over lot since I first learned about it yesterday. Is collecting and writing a long book about Nazi memorabilia in his spare time something an employer like Human Rights Watch ought to be concerned about?
After consideration, I say Yes.

Now, it’s true that here in the US we have very strict protections for free speech. Thus, collecting Nazi uniforms and insignia and even wearing them in public– as Garlasco apparently was in this photo– is not illegal here. (Wearing them in public would be illegal in Germany and several other places.)

But to have him doing work on human rights in the daytime, while carrying on with this intensively pursued hobby in the evening? That is bizarre, and disturbing.

Even more so when you realize that a lot of the work he has done has involved dealing with Israeli officials and citizens, and analyzing the IDF’s operations.

It would be like employing someone to do child-protection work by day who goes home and collects pictures of naked or suggestively-clad children by night. For allegedly “artistic purposes”.

As Ron Kampeas of JTA wrote about Garlasco’s very enthusiastic pursuit of his hobby, “Ewwwww.”

Now, as y’all no doubt know, I’m on the Middle East advisory committee of Human Rights Watch. And I’ve been very disturbed indeed by the attacks the young, aggressively rightwing Israeli organization NGO Monitor has launched against the work HRW has done on the IDF’s combat behavior.

But right now, I’m looking at this page on NGO Monitor’s website, and agreeing with much of what they have there on this topic.

One thing (scroll down to Footnote 1) they have is a copy of a defense of Garlasco’s actions that someone– reportedly representing HRW– has posted into several blogs in recent days.

For NGO-M to post that text is a real service, since I haven’t been able to find an HRW response anywhere else– including on their own website. (I have a request outstanding to HRW Exec. Director Ken Roth for an interview on this issue.)

That reportedly-from-HRW text concludes thus:

Garlasco is the author of a monograph on the history of German Air Force and Army anti-aircraft medals and a contributor to websites that promote serious historical research into the Second World War (and which forbid hate speech). In the foreword he writes of telling his daughters that “the war was horrible and cruel, that Germany lost and for that we should be thankful.”

To imply that Garlasco’s collection is evidence of Nazi sympathies is not only absurd but an attempt to deflect attention from his deeply felt efforts to uphold the laws of war and minimize civilian suffering in wartime. These falsehoods are an affront to Garlasco and thousands of other serious military historians.

Well, I’m not sure about Garlasco’s record as a “serious military historian.” By all accounts, his book, title “The Flak Badges”, seems to be an aid for collectors of such badges, not a work of serious military history.

I also share some of the concerns his critics have voiced about the actual military expertise Garlasco brought to the job at HRW, when he moved there after having worked in the Pentagon for eight years. Between 1995 and 2003 he had various jobs as a civilian employee of the Pentagon, doing military intelligence work including some work on targeting US cruise missiles.

But as I noted on JWN last year (including here), he made some serious– and very basic– mistakes during the Russian-Georgian war in identifying which country various cluster-bomb remnants came from… Even more disturbingly, perhaps, the HRW powers-that-be were frustratingly slow in correcting the incorrect accusations he originally made against Russia on this score, which were used by all the political forces in the west that were trying to mobilize public and even perhaps military support for Georgia at the time…

Looks like Garlasco may be going down like a Messerschmitt.

Update: I think Marc Garlasco was fired from HRW and quickly recruited as an AFP caption writer (click picture to enlarge)

http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2009/09/10/nefesh-bnefesh-jewish-blogging-conference/

Any newspaper articles about blogging naturally catch my eye.  Al achat kama v’ kama (”even more so”) regarding Jewish blogging.  So when I read that Israel would be hosting a conference for Jewish blogging my interest was piqued.  But as soon as I began reading, my interest turned to horror (or something approximating it).

One of the most entertaining parts of writing this blog is bringing my readers unintentionally hilarious bits of Jewish or Israeli life, and this one will tickle your (ironic) funny bone.  Before you begin, keep in mind that the conference sponsor, Nefesh B’Nefesh is the very-same American Jewish non-profit organization bringing new olim from America and other western countries and settling them, with the help of tax-deductible donations from American Jews, in Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territory.  As the saying goes, your tax dollars hard at work.  Here, by the way, is NBN’s little promo for living the phat life in Maaleh Adumim, one of the most contentious settlement projects dividing the U.S. and Israel in the debate over a freeze.

[Silverstein quotes article here, which ends as follows:

Members of Nefesh B'Nefesh explained that the conference's aim is to "deepen collaboration and coordination between Jewish bloggers around the world in order to further join the interests of the Jewish people and the State of Israel."

The conference will host officials from the Prime Minister's Office and the Ministry of Information who will attempt to recruit the bloggers for these goals.]

Now here I was ready to reserve my airline ticket until I read that last line. Am I prepared to be recruited by the PM or PR or Mossad or whoever, to become a hasbarist on behalf of the State of Israel? No thank you. I’ll leave that task to David Abitbol, Aussie Dave and the humus eaters of Nefesh B’Nefesh. I’d prefer to be able to look myself in the mirror and say I’m still my own man, not bought and paid for, whether through mammon or ideology by anyone or anything, except The (Jewish) Good as defined by yours truly.

Ahh, dear. Still bitter and twisted after all these years.

Incidentally, this is what Silverstein sees when he looks at himself in the mirror.

As Yoda would say, if had to look at that in the mirror every day, also be bitter and twisted, you would.  Yes, hmmm.

With the exception of some bloggers who are always looking to link to the posts of others (none more so than this man), I can’t help but notice others who seem more concerned with their posts being read.

I’ll keep it cryptic – you either perceive the same or have no idea what I’m talking about. Either way, I guess it’s a good sign that there are so many of us.

How strange that the Jewish-run Washington Post is critical of the first US president to openly state that what Israel is doing with regards the illegal settlements is just that; illegal.

After it was pointed out to him that the Washington Post’s owners are not Jewish, as well as being generally ripped in the comments for his idiocy, Einstein followed up with this post on his blog (http://would-be-tales.blogspot.com/):

First I wanna tell you about my little wind-up that I orchestrated yesterday for no other reason than to amuse myself. I thought it would be funny to go out of my way to piss off a particular group of people and then sit back and watch them bite to my bait. I wasn’t sure who would give me the most fun, but after writing yesterday’s post, I decided that Israelis would be my target audience. The decision was made easy by the fact that I’d written a small piece about the old Jewish couple that had taken pleasure in the raping of innocent German women by the Red Army after the defeat of the German army at the end of the 2nd World War.

“How can I find them?” was the question I asked myself.
Fortunately I knew of a much-read blog written by an extremely racist Israeli in which his readers regularly referred to Palestinians as animals in the comment section. I also knew that the prefered weapon of these racists to use against anyone who disagreed with them was the word ‘anti-semite’. This has always been something that pisses me off. Anyone who voices a grievance with Israel and Israeli policy is automatically branded anti-semitic and in doing so loses all credibility. I can live with it, though.

So, what did I do to deliberately get a reaction from them and amuse myself?

I went on to the above-mentioned blog, read the day’s posting and then went in to the comment box where I thought I’d put my two-penny’s worth in.

I read the blog often but never usually comment as there’s no point arguing with such racist scum. But just for shits and giggles I decided to post.

Now, reader, please remember that this was purely for my own amusement. I’m not an anti-semite and if I was, I’d probably not post this for you all to read. I’d be a bit more covert. I am, however, anti-zionist and as much as the zionists will tell you, that isn’t the same thing.

Anyway.. In the racist’s post he’d written about the Washington Post writing an article highly critical of Barack Obama’s stance on the illegal Israeli settlements and then he’d also written about a leak from a British diplomat that said that our government was spending £450,000 over four years to support projects in east Jerusalem and the West Bank that help Palestinians better understand and effectively use the Israeli planning laws to gain permission both retrospectively for existing homes, and prospectively for new homes on their side of the Green Line.
My game was to leave a politically sensitive comment that the racists wouldn’t like and to make sure that my name linked to my blog where, after already being angry at me, they’d read my bit about the old Jewish couple.

Juvenile, I know, but for me it was fun.

The first part of my comment was a joke. I referred to the newspaper as being Jewish controlled, part of the whole ‘Jews control the world’ conspiracy that never fails to get a reaction from Jewish people.

Ah yes. He deliberately left an anti-Semitic comment with inaccurate information to bring attention to his blog containing a post about Jews who had taken pleasure in the raping of innocent German women, as well as a post in which he claims he is not anti-Semitic.

To quote Tom Waits: A mental midget with the IQ of a fence post.

Take someone by the name of Abbey Grace (http://abbeyj-randomthoughtsoflife2.blogspot.com/), a pro-palestinian/terrorist supporter who happened upon my site and obviously disagreed with pretty much everything I post. Instead of arguing her case or pointing our where I am wrong, she wrote this:

You should be ashamed to call yourself Australian, spreading this narrow minded, bigoted crap. This is not the mark nor values of an Australian.

In case you are wondering what the “values of an Australian” are, don’t visit her site, where you will see posts denigrating the armed forces, such as this:

I am sad for these peoples [four Canadian soldiers who were killed] families, but they are soldiers who are paid to kill Arabic, men women and children. 1315 civilians were just killed in Gaza, civilians!, not soldiers that take money for blood. I cant mourn for 4 Canadian soldiers

In any event, I replied that she sounded like a terror supporter, prompting this response:

No I am Australian, and I dont hide behind fake icons & before you mouth off, my husband is Israeli. How dare you set up a pro Israeli site masked as being Australian.

Yes, how dare I have a website by an Australian (that would be me) which expresses support for Israel! (Notice how the Far Left try to censor others?)

After I pointed out that launching ad hominem attacks would get her nowhere, Ms Grace developed a case of amnesia:

I would never attack anyones character, certainly a person of Australian background I havnt met.

Except when she told me I should be ashamed to call myself Australian, with my spreading narrow minded, bigoted crap and all.

I, of course, pointed out her – ehhh – bout of forgetfulness, prompting this mail:

You are welcome to your opinion & site

I just dont agree with it

especially tagging it to Australia

I  love my country and to see it tagged with Israel is appauling (as ‘appauling’ as her spelling? ed)

I wish you well…abz

When I pointed out her attempts to censor me would not work, she responded:

How have I tried to censor you
Im assuming each email is private (Bad assumption there; read the Legal section of my site next time – ed.)
I have respectively said & listened to your view
as well as invited you to my own sit
I find it awful that your site links
my country to zionists.

and twice said i wish you well

You see, I had her all wrong. She wished me well twice. What a gal!

Her next mail to me had me really confused.

Dave I am not up for arguing with a goy

I wish you well  on your site

but please dont lik it it to Australia

I know very much what Zionism is,,,

How about the Palestian  “legitimate aspirations for their homeland”

After I pointed out I am very much Jewish and not a “goy,” Ms Grace had this to say:

Laugh go away ‘dave”
I wish you well..what more do u want,,,lol

How about to stop mailing me?

So laughing!

It was at this point of the exchange that I decided the only way to get rid of this pesky terror supporter was to scare the daylights out of her.

What are you? A stalker?

I am sure your employers at AODW won’t be too impressed..

Suddenly, Ms Grace was not so laughing anymore.

What is AODW?. Ive tried to be nice. Please dont email this address anymore.

For the record, AODW is where she works. A simply Google search of her name, and the suburb in which she lives (taken from one of her websites) brings up her LinkedIn profile detailing her workplace.

But for now I’ll let her think I know this because I work for the Mossad.