William Timberman,

Remember a few days ago when Glenn summarily deleted one (or, a couple) of proximity warning's comments. I was like you, staring at a comment PW had made, crafting a response on a different tab, and working back and forth between the two. When I refreshed the screen with PW's comment... POOF! it was gone. I thought it was a good call on Glenn's part, and commented in agreement. But I did think it was odd... or, out of character. So often, Glenn has graciously offered people a warning - or, two. Summary dismissal seemed unusual. Not so no more.

Note Joan Walsh's column today, linked at my sig.

Joan Walsh

Wednesday February 27, 2008 15:47 EST

Anonymous no more

When I am tipsy, L.W.M., long, nasty, contemptuous screeds about the subhuman nature of Palestinians and their politics is definitely not what I imagine.

Can you imagine what I do imagine?

You're gonna need a couple more characters, I guess, now that the anonymi have been deep-sixed. Why not a contest? You could wind up with a dramatis personae as long as the list printed in the back of my copy of War and Peace. That would be kind of fun, I think -- although not for everyone.

8,400 rockets in 14 months is 'action'. 50 today alone. But if you're willing to agree they're not action feel free to live in Sderot.

I do believe when the shoe is on the other foot, the Palestinians are given the option of -- moving away. No? Else why are many living in refugee camps outside of Israel, and why are they interested in something called the "right of return"? Israel does not deserve violence, but it has been a long time since it cared about the rights, and the lives, of others. As we in the U.S. are discovering, such lack of caring brings antipathy, to put it mildly.

Yes, I remember. At the time, I thought maybe Glenn had warned him privately, which of course was none of my business.

Also, as I understood it, Glenn makes all the choices related to moderation in UT, although the random appearance of the red star fairy probably indicates that Salon is doing some of the sweeping up. Inevitable, I would think, given how busy Glenn is with more important stuff.

I don't mind not being told what's up -- I'm a guest here, after all -- but I do hate it when I leave L.W.M. with the impression that I'm in my cups. ;-)

NOT of Israelis! (if you read the article, it is a poll of Haaretz readers where NO TOTAL is given and no procedure is outlined. "The figures were obtained in a Haaretz-Dialog poll conducted Tuesday under the supervision of Professor Camil Fuchs of Tel Aviv University." what do you think the result would be if the poll were of salon posters? anyhow, if a majority of israelis want to negotiate with hamas for the return of Shalit, what would it be for? perhaps the IDF ought to kidnap one of the hamas, since that would make it quid pro quo.

Finally, the question of whether Obama is pro-Israel enough, has a mate--is he too Islamic. An AP story, Obama Fights False Links to Islam. This is the most absurd dialogue I have ever witnessed. Bending over backward to please Israel, not having an Islamic bone in his body, and still, this stupidity.

I missed out on this conversation today. Saw some very good posts as I read through. And some of the usual garbage.

Oomoex, it looks like you know quite a bit about this subject. I have some friends from Olympia who I'm pretty sure, if I check the calendar, are in Palestine right about now. I'd like to go myself, but I'd want to do a lot more research before I would feel like I'd be able to be much good to anybody. Any suggestions on where to start?

I've often thought that in a place where there are so many people so angry and in such despaur that they're willing to blow themselves and others to smithereens, you'd have a veritable army available for some serious passive resistance. The problem is in convincing people not to take anybody from the Other Side along with them. If the suicide bombers were just that, this would have stopped long ago I think. People willing to suffer genuine martyrdom can accomplish much for a cause in which they hold the moral highground.

It's occurred to me to wonder what the world response would be to a line a mile long of men, women and children with dynamite strapped to themselves, a giant stack of coffins ready to fill and cameras aimed to broadcast the spectacle around the globe. At the signal the first one walks up on top of the hill, says whatever prayers they want, waves goodbye and pushes the button. I don't think I need to fill in the picture much more clearly to see that things would come to a head very quickly.

Gator90 has been around here a long time and has at times taken stubborn positions in support of Israel, only to come back a day or two later having thought about things and become very reasonable, so don't write him off based on today alone.

As for this,

A question for those who decry the "collective punishments" imposed by Israel: Has Israel any right at all to respond to attacks on it from within Gaza or the West Bank, and, if so, what response would be acceptable to you?

I'd say the most productive respone, from a purely pro-Israel perspective would be to immediately start dismantling settlements and packing up.

I understand that you want people to condemn violence, but I can't do any more than Glenn did to illustrate that things are way beyond being able to phrase questions in a narrow way like you have here, expecting some clear-cut denunciation of the Other Side for you. In a situation where two sides are at each others throats, but one side has almost complete power over the situation, which Israel does here, it isn't possible for the side with no power to begin the excercise of negotiation. It is entirely in Israel's power to decide if and when negotiations will happen. That's just a fact. Until Israel is willing to take a major step forward, rockets will continue to fall.