Scary

Last week, a sign showing a guillotine was held aloft at the anti-"Netanyahu-is-Corrupt" demos:

Now we have Eran Volkowsly's caricature today in Haaretz, with left-wing humor:

A double-bladed battle axe.  

And, by the way, Persians and Mamelukes used them and they were termed tabarzin.

The text reads:

This will scare them

What scares me is either the obliviousness of Israel's leftists - and that includes most of the media which provided protective cover for that guillotine by pooh-poohing the whole incident (in democracies we change leader wither through the ballot or a judicial process) - to the seriousness of introducing bloody violence into the public discourse, something they always blame the right-wing for doing or, the possible encouragement Volkowsky lends to even worse characterizations.

Netanyahu was displayed with a noose last year.  That was "art".

Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked was drawn naked.  Art.

It keeps getting worse.  And the Left demands morality and ethics in public life.

And they are hypocritical as when President Rivlin was portrayed in a keffiyeh because that's as we all "know", is incitement to murder.

Sure, for Volkowsky and his editor, it's "funny".  Funny as only the Left defines humor.

That's scary.  Really.

^

Moral Poison

From Dennis Pager:

...I have concluded that leftism is a form of moral poison. It causes otherwise decent and kind people who take it into their systems to say and/or do cruel and sometimes evil things.

...a major new scholarly book, "Pathological Altruism" (Oxford University Press), explores this phenomenon of people wanting to do good things yet ending up doing bad...When good people adopt the leftist worldview, they eventually support ideas and say things that are cruel.

...Leftism poisons everything it influences -- from journalism to the arts to universities to religion to government to male-female relations. And ultimately leftism poisons character. This does not mean that everyone with left-wing views becomes a bad person...But it does mean that leftism leads to pathologic altruism, i.e., bad things done by people with pure intentions...leftism [has] led decent people who would weep at Israel's destruction to mouth the very same lies about Israel as those who seek its annihilation.

You aren't leftist, I hope.

^

On De-Mock-Racy

From Emilt Amrousi's article on left-wing language laundering:

The leftist organizations that are weakening Israel have, in one felt swoop, become "social organizations." Organizations that have brought us the Goldstone Report, that have chased after our senior officials, and that have bound the hands of the Israel Defense Forces in their fight against terrorism, have now turned into "human rights organizations." First spray it, then throw it in the wash...

Those who bothered to actually read the law prohibiting the funding of NGOs by foreign governments found that it refers only to political organizations, those that seek to "influence the political and security agenda of the country," and that these same organizations will be able to continue on with any number of their destructive activities, yet will be forced to do so without the funding of foreign governments.

Israel is one of the only countries in the world that allows other nations to stick their noses in its business, to rummage through its organs, and to intervene in domestic affairs in a manner that overlooks minor details such as sovereignty, democracy and the will of the people. A negligible minority, rich with resources from abroad and possessing little support for Israel, is granted such a massive power of expression and assembly that voting at the polls has become just a symbolic act...

Topping the list of countries who have effective operative proxies here are Norway, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Sweden, Ireland, Spain, and Germany...Millions of euros have been transferred from the hostile and commissioning nations of the EU to "social and human rights organizations" like Yesh Din, Mossawa, Adalah, Ir Amim - City of Nations, Shovrim Shtika, Bimkom, B'Tselem, Public Committee Against House Demolitions, Public Committee Against Torture, and Physicians for Human Rights. These organizations do not run drama classes in development towns or seek just compensation for farmers. No culture, no education, nada. Their declared goal is political change. Their hidden goal is the destruction of Israel as the Jewish state.

Welcome to "de-mock-racy."

^

So, It's To Be "Heil Bibi"?

Carl Strenger has a blog at Haaretz and his latest post is entitled

Israel's rightists are living in a colonial past

Strenger is "a psychoanalyst, philosopher and public intellectual engaged in the defense of individual liberty, a high level of public discourse and a sane solution of the Israel-Palestine conflict. A professor of psychology at Tel Aviv University, Strenger is the author of seven books".

As, then, a psychonanalyst, he can't avoid recognizing what this accompanying photograph is conveying:

Being "left" means you can be... (you fill in the the rest).

Anyway, here's an example of his "logic":-

In the end, Palestinians will not change their ethos and aspirations because they love Israel, but because of their long-term interests.

Well, if "long-term" is an aide, why have the past 9 decades been wasted? That's a long time, no?

His main thesis come here, when he expresses his dislike for those who quote Jabotinsky:-

...who, after all, developed his doctrine when Europe was still expanding its colonies and any non-European populations were largely considered as primitives that needed to be ruled rather than human beings with the same needs and right to dignity as Europeans. They haven’t realized that the world has moved into a very different era; that Europe has divested itself of all its colonies after WWII, and that nowadays human rights are universal: the Palestinian right for self-determination is no longer questioned by anybody except Israel’s right wing.

Of course, regardless of whether that is a fair representation of Jabotinsky's thinking, could it be that Europe's "progress" has been to a more invidious form of "colonialism", one of the mind?

^

Evelyn Gordon Is Logical On Pro-Pal. Illogic

In her "How to Tell that Pro-Palestinian Activists Don’t Care About Palestinians"

Do pro-Palestinian activists actually care a whit about ordinary Palestinians? An implicit acknowledgement that the answer is “no” came from a surprising source this week: Haaretz journalist Amira Hass...

...Since the cost of the rocket fire far outweighs its benefits, Hass argued, anyone who cares about real live Palestinians should be denouncing it in an effort to pressure Hamas and other terrorist organizations to stop it. Instead, she charged, pro-Palestinian activists have given it tacit consent...public criticism of the tactics used in the struggle of an occupied and dispossessed people is taboo. It is as if criticism would create symmetry between the attacker and the attacked...She therefore ended her column with a challenge:

So for all those who demonstrated in support of the Gazans when they were trapped under Israeli fire, all those planners of past and future flotillas, this is your moment to raise your voices and say clearly: The Qassams merely feed Israel’s madness. It is not the Qassams that will ensure the Palestinians, both in and out of Gaza, a life of dignity. It is not the Qassams that will topple the Israeli walls around the world’s largest prison camp.

But will other pro-Palestinian activists take her up? I wouldn’t hold my breath.

I for sure won't either.

^

Their Bite Is Indeed Worse Than Their Bark

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 21, 2011

STANDWITHUS CONDEMNS ANTI-JEWISH HATE SPEECH AND VIOLENT ATTACK AT SCHOOL OF ORIENTAL AND AFRICAN STUDIES, UNIVERSITY OF LONDON

A small number of pro-Israel protestors, including supporters of StandWithUs, participated in a peaceful protest against the “Celebrate Palestine Festival” event held at the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies [SOAS] on March 20th. The event included calls for boycotting Israel and libeling it as an “Apartheid” country.

...Anti-Israel activists then engaged them in conversation. One man verbally assaulted them with anti-Semitic slurs, saying, “the best thing that Jews have ever done was to go into the gas chambers. It was the best thing to happen to Germany to have been cleaned of Jews. The same thing needs to happen in the Middle East.” Another anti-Israel activist then punched and bit a Jewish member of the group, who was hospitalized. This was an unprovoked attack. His attacker was later arrested by police.

StandWithUs unequivocally condemns the disgusting act of violence against peaceful Israel supporters on the SOAS campus. The attacker evidently was spurred on by the hate-filled, one-sided event taking place at SOAS.

...reported StandWithUs-UK Coordinator Gili Brenner who was one of the pro-Israel demonstrators. "It is unacceptable that violent rhetoric by Palestinian supporters spills over into violent actions. We expect the university to condemn this attack and those who incited it. Universities must have a policy of zero tolerance policy for hate speech and anti-Semitism. They should carefully monitor incendiary events like ‘Celebrate Palestine' to ensure that hate speech, violence, and suppression of free speech do not occur,” said Michael Dickson, StandWithUs-Israel Director who was in London during the incident.

“Unfortunately, the kind of blatant anti-Semitism, bigotry, and incitement to hatred that occurred at SOAS lurk at the bottom of far too many anti-Israel events on campuses...It is important that the right to challenge anti-Israel events be protected, and Israel’s supporters must not be intimidated or silenced by the mindless violence that occurred on Sunday,” commented Joy Wolfe, UK Chairman of StandWithUs.

Pics:

^

Anyone Know This UnFAIR "Karen"?

I left his comment at this blog post:

"@Karen  I will assume you are actually female and not disguised.  In any case, (a) I am amazed that this site permits such an ad personam calumny; (b) I am glad that left-wing progressive facism is willing to reveal its illiberal bias and willingness to demonize; (c) I also note your inability to counter or dispute what I wrote in any rational logical factual fashion; (d) for the record, to you approve, sympathize or advocate murdering Jewish babies."

The site is FAIR's which is a

national media watch group, [and] has been offering well-documented criticism of media bias and censorship since 1986. We work to invigorate the First Amendment by advocating for greater diversity in the press and by scrutinizing media practices that marginalize public interest, minority and dissenting viewpoints. As an anti-censorship organization, we expose neglected news stories and defend working journalists when they are muzzled. As a progressive group, FAIR believes that structural reform is ultimately needed to break up the dominant media conglomerates, establish independent public broadcasting and promote strong non-profit sources of information.

Uniquely, FAIR works with both activists and journalists.

Do you think Karen was fair?

Was I unfair?

^

"They're Just Dogs"

Here is a screen snap of an English-speaking lady, who probably considers herself "liberal", as she appeared tonight, Wednesday, on the IBA Hebrew Channel One TV News program, "Mabat", which you can view for the next 24 hours at IBA (the site has been redone, so look for מבט which is on the home page it seems).

She was observing the Jaffa walk-through of Marzel, Ben-Gvir, et al. and she is saying that the Jews exercising their right to free assembly, free expression and yes, even a bit of Zionism which the state secures as part of its responsibility to protect civil liberties and human rights, are "just dogs".

"These people are just dogs", she said.  "It's a joke".

At 9 minutes.

Didn't the Left go crazy when Rabbi Kahane called Arabs demonstrating against him at Hebrew U. as "dogs"?

So, anyone know who she is?  Anyone recognize her?

^

Dumb Stalinist Lefties Rant About Hebron Visits

From Evelyn Gordon:

...Equally outrageous, however, is the claim that visiting Machpela educates against tolerance and coexistence. Admittedly, Jewish-Arab tensions run high in Hebron, though “the occupation” is hardly the sole culprit: even before Israel was founded, Arab Hebronites periodically massacred their Jewish neighbors (see, for instance, 1929 and 1936).

But Machpela itself is an unparalleled example of coexistence: the only holy site in the world that is simultaneously an active synagogue and an active mosque. Usually, it’s open to Jewish and Muslim worshippers alike; on a handful of Jewish and Muslim holidays, it’s reserved for members of the celebrating faith. True, there is no intermingling; Jews and Muslims are kept separate for their mutual protection. Yet both can worship freely at their shared holy site.

Contrast this with the situation on the Temple Mount, where Israel abdicated control to the Muslim religious authorities. Jews and Christians are strictly forbidden to pray on the Mount; they can’t even open a Bible or move their lips in silent prayer. If they do, they are immediately thrown out. Nor can Jews even visit freely: only a few at a time are allowed in.

And perhaps that’s why the left is so upset: visiting Machpela might give students the idea that while Jewish control protects both Jewish and Muslim freedom of worship, Muslim control protects only the latter. Worse, it might give them the idea that leftists care only about Muslim rights, not Jewish ones: after all, they applaud the ban on Jewish worship on the Mount, yet are outraged by the Israeli-enforced freedom of worship at Machpela.

^

Tweeting Terror with Comrade Taher

Ever wonder how far Israeli radical progressives go?

Well, here's a tweet:

I've pointed out "PFLP".

What does that stand for?

Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

That organization is

a Palestinian Marxist national liberation movement, founded in 1967. It is considered a terrorist organization by more than 30 countries including the U.S., European Union, Australia and Canada.

More:

The PFLP has generally taken a hard line on Palestinian national aspirations, opposing the more moderate stance of Fatah. It opposes negotiations with the Israeli government, and favours a one-state solution to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. The military wing of the PFLP is called the Abu Ali Mustapha Brigades.

Here's from its site:

The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine said on February 6, 2011 that it is an urgent Palestinian national task to discard the Oslo Accords and the entire path that followed, and called upon all Palestinian forces and factions to meet and officially declare the death of these agreements, ending their compliance with these agreements and their consequent disasters for the Palestinian cause.

Comrade Dr. Maher al-Taher, member of the Political Bureau of the PFLP and leader of its branch outside Palestine, issued an official statement in which he said the Oslo accords were the beginning of a criminal process to force Palestinians to recognize the "right" of the Zionist occupation state to exist on the land of Palestine.

...In this historical moment for the question of Palestine and the Arab nation, the Popular Front calls for all Palestinian forces and factions, without exception, to come together to a comprehensive national forum to announce the death of the Oslo accords and end their compliance with those accords and their consequent disasters for the Palestinian cause, said Comrade Taher.

And how does the PFLP go about its business?

Here's one portrayal:

and here's another:

Background on its terror campaign.

The PFLP has been in the news this week:-

A Palestinian whom Israel’s Supreme Court has described as a “Jekyll and Hyde” of international terrorism has been appointed by Human Rights Watch (HRW) to its advisory board that oversees the sensitive reporting on Arab-Israeli affairs.

The symbiotic love affair (we once called it the radical chic mode) of the left/progressive camp with violence is well-researched and documented with the predictable results of crossing over to kill and maim but they won't learn.

Will we learn?

^

Is Israel Undemocratic?

On the issue of the investigation of left-wing groups in Israel, complaints are sounded off.

It's undemocratic.  It's fascism.

Is it?

Here's Evelyn Gordon's simple explanation:

...foreign governments fund left-wing NGOs exclusively. They don’t fund groups that, for instance, build Jewish housing in East Jerusalem. Hence, to investigate this issue, the Knesset has to focus on left-wing groups.

Simple, really.

Could it be the left is subversive?


^

There's a Virus Going Around

Remember when Moshe Yaalon was excoriated?

...The Prime Minister's Office announced Wednesday that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will summon Ya'alon for a face-to-face talk on the backdrop of statements he made against Peace Now at the conference when the prime minister returns from vacation.

During the meeting, part of which was broadcast Wednesday evening on Channel 2, Minister Ya'alon used particularly harsh words against left-wing activists and Peace Now members.

When asked by one of the attendees about plans to dismantle the Bnei Adam outpost, he responded, "We again are dealing with the issue of the virus, Peace Now – the elitists, if you may – who have incurred great damage. From my perspective, Jews can and need to live in all of the Land of Israel for all eternity."

and the follow-up:

Netanyahu: Ya'alon remarks unacceptable

Prime minister condemns vice prime minister's statement that Peace Now is 'a virus', while left-wing politicians claim remarks inflaming violence. 'He should not be part of the Israeli government,' says Labor MK Pines-Paz. Kadima: These are Netanyahu's true colors

Now read this:

The disengagement plan was full of flaws...[but] The disengagement plan did have a strength, though: It was a bold attempt, the first of its kind, to deal with the lethal virus. The basic logic behind it was valid and remains so...Israel has a crucial and moral obligation to end the occupation...

Virus?

Virus?!

So, who is going to exorciate...Ari Shavit of Ha-Ha-Haaretz?

Pssst. No one. He's of the leftist elite.


(Kippah tip: Carl)

- - -

A Reply to Yonatan Shapira

Yonatan is the anarchist Israeli who sprayed pro-Pal. grafitti on the Warsaw ghetto wall remains.

Here:-

The Warsaw Ghetto never benefitted from so much international sympathy and generosity when it existed.

- Elliot Green


- - -

Non-Violent Lefties Get Aggressive and Threatening

As blogged, there was a complaint made against the TV coverage by Channel Two News of a left-wing demo in Silwan some weeks ago, the claim being that Channel Two TV news "railroaded" a non-violent protest movement by using archival footage of stonethrowing:

...they used B Roll from the archive. Fair enough. They could have used, for example, their own footage from previous protests and marked it as archival.

Not only was the B Roll not labelled. It was highly unrepresentative of the event — prayers at an open-air mosque, followed immediately by children throwing stones at Police jeeps. End result: For the the lay viewer, the protest is associated with violence (preceded by Islamic religious incitement, no less).

Was this done with intentionally?

...the Israeli mainstream media tends to serve as dutiful stenographers of government information, especially on security and foreign policy issues.

It’s doubtful if anyone was briefing in this instance, however. My hunch is that someone at Channel Two was pandering to his audience’s sensibilities (or to his own), consciously or subconsciously averting cognitive dissonance...The demonstration at Silwan, like the dozens in Sheikh Jarrah that preceded it, was organized with nearly no outlay using Facebook and other social media.

Facebook also enabled many supporters who could not be present to support the demonstrators. Not only through the sharing of reports and images. On Saturday afternoon, one of the organizers — Daniel Dukarevich — sent out a note (Hebrew) describing what Channel Two had done and asking readers to e-mail the relevant ombudsmen with complaints. Twenty-four hours later, he reported that the Israel Press Council had received the largest number of complaints over a single incident ever and that Channel Two News had contacted him: They had gotten the message and really needed to unclog their inbox.

Well, Golan Yochpaz, the editor of Ulpan Shishi, is complaining that he's being threatened by left-wingers - the non-violent type? And that he is the object of aggressive behavior by these non-violent lefties.

He also is insistent that the violent-appearing footage was indeed from the demonstration at the center of argument. He wrote a letter (here in the Hebrew) that Police Spokesperson Shmulik Ben-Ruby confirmed there was stone-throwing that day.


- - -

Leftwing Liberal Thinking

Okay, The Nation is far-out radical, progressive left.

But it pretends to be fair, democratic, pluralistic and intellectual.

Well, here's an exchange betweeon someone wishing his article to be published and an editor:

In response to the article's submission:

Thank you for thinking of The Nation. Your proposed article is diametrically opposed to our opinion on this blockade, so we will be unable to take you up on your offer of this article.
--jl
Submissions

Author's response to the editor:

Hi Jl,
That is a very interesting email. Never before have I ever been told that a news website or publication wouldn't publish an article of mine because they oppose my point of view. How does your response and refusal to publish my article, based on political reasoning, fall in line with The Nation's founding prospectus?

"The Nation will not be the organ of any party, sect, or body. It will, on the contrary, make an earnest effort to bring to the discussion of political and social questions a really critical spirit, and to wage war upon the vices of violence, exaggeration, and misrepresentation by which so much of the political writing of the day is marred."

It seems to me you are diametrically opposing your own prospectus?

All the best,
Jacob Shrybman

The Nation editor's response to that:

We are a journal of opinion--usually dissenting opinion. You espouse the run-of-the-mill mainstream views that we are here to correct, as they are based on misinformation/propaganda. It doesn't need repeating.

Jacob's response:

The funny thing about opinion is, if you ask me I would say your view is "run-of-the-mill" and that is the one I am here to influence. That's how opinions work, everyone has one. So you should be ashamed that you call your site a "journal of opinion" when you don't allow for opinions other than the decided upon stance to be represented.

If you believe Osher and Rami Twito's rocket maimed legs are misinformation, I invite you to Israel to come and see them for yourself.

JL would seem to be Copy Chief Judith Long.



And here are "5 Questions with Judith Long" who has been a copy editor for The Nation for more than twenty years.

Q: What is your preferred environment for writing?

A: Home, either out in the yard (weather permitting) or inside by a crackling fire.

Q: What punctuation mark are you fondest of?

A: Em dash (you didn't ask, but my least favorite punctuation mark is the semicolon—although it has its uses).

Q: What punctuation, spelling, grammar, style, or usage error annoys you the most?

A: When "I" is used instead of the correct "me," as in "They slid the secret file to Boris and I." Also, when people are over-sticklerish, as when they freak out at "Who did you vote for?" I also hate the incorrect "chaise lounge" for the correct "chaise longue" and the incorrect pronunciation of "forte" (basketball is not my forte) as "for-tay" instead of "fort." Also, it's "different from" not "different than," and never, ever say "the reason why ___ is because . . ."

Q: If you weren't in your current line of work, what would you be doing instead?

A: Teaching English (which I spent many years doing before my current incarnation as a copy editor).

Q: What drove you to become a writer?

A: Love of words, writing, language, publishing, and making a silk purse out of a sow's ear—which is what editing is.

Not a word about ideological fanaticism. Hmmmm.

She thinks that there were "terrorists occupying the White House".

Thinks? Is that the correct term?


- - -

The Slogan

The slogan of the so-called Zionist Left today is: Israel - Hate it or Leave it! My country must be attacked, right or wrong. The enemies of my country must be supported, right or wrong.

- Steve Plaut

Get This Book

Remember, we don't steal.

Get this book:-

Post-Zionism, Post-Holocaust
Three Essays on Denial, Forgetting, and the Delegitimation of Israel
Elhanan Yakira

This book contains three independent essays, available in English for the first time, as well as a post-scriptum written for the English edition. The common theme of the three essays is the uses and abuses of the Holocaust as an ideological arm in the anti-Zionist campaigns. The first essay examines the French group of left-wing Holocaust deniers. The second essay deals with a number of Israeli academics and intellectuals, the so-called post-Zionists, and tries to follow their use of the Holocaust in their different attempts to demonize and delegitimize Israel. The third deals with Hannah Arendt and her relations with Zionism and the State of Israel as reflected in her general work and in Eichmann in Jerusalem; the views that she formulates are used systematically and extensively by anti- and post-Zionists. Elhanan Yakira argues that each of these is a particular expression of an outrage: anti-Zionism and a wholesale delegitimation of Israel.

Contents
Preface; 1. Holocaust denial and the left; 2. The Holocaust and the good Israelis; 3. On the political and the anti-political: Hannah Arendt, Eichmann, and Israel; 4. Post-script: 1. '67 or '48?; Appendix of biographical notes

.

And now read the interview with the author.

Like:

...Israelis are nurtured by an international community: a huge subculture devoted to the de-legitimation of Israel, the Zionist idea, and the Jewish nation. What I did in the book was essentially to take one element of this campaign-the manipulation of the Holocaust-and show how it was morally and intellectually wrong...

...what the capital-O[pprobrium] crowd advocates is the now fashionable “one-state solution.” It’s completely unworkable. Daft! They also refer to Zionism as guilty of “original sin.” Their opposition to Israeli policies is so visceral that it carries them to the point where they support policies that are, in effect, annihilationist.

You write that “there is not much point in talking with the anti-Zionists.”

That’s right. There is no point. They can’t be swayed by facts. Their anti-Zionism has a structural affinity to anti-Semitism. It is irrational. I don’t want to speculate or indulge in psychoanalytic explanations. Instead, what I do in the book is to talk about anti-Zionism.

- - -

Loving Islam - And Blindly Paying For IT

Melanie Phillips in an interview with Daniel Allott, senior writer at American Values, a Washington, DC-area public policy organization:-

Why are Western progressives so inclined to defend Islam—you call it a “love affair”—given that progressive values are so often at odds with Islamic values?

Phillips: Well, it’s a puzzle because it is extraordinary to find the left—which is so committed to equal rights, minority rights, gay rights—literally marching arm-in-arm with people who would kill gays and treat women as half the value of men and for whom there is no such thing as religious liberty. There are a number of reasons. First, one shouldn’t underestimate the effect of simple fear. It is human nature to appease and cozy up to the people you fear. [Progressives] think that by reaching out they will kind of neutralize the really bad stuff. Of course that doesn’t happen. What happens is they basically surrender.

Another factor is the terrible moral confusion on the left, which can no longer distinguish between wrong and right, justice and injustice, and inverts it so that it becomes the opposite. And then they can’t deal with the inversion that the Islamic world goes in for, in which the wrong deeds, the bad deeds done by the Islamic world are always someone else’s fault and where the Islamic world is always the victim.

The third factor is a continuity between Western leftists and radical Islamists—they’re all basically in the business of overturning Western values. They don’t see it like that, but that is exactly what it is. So it’s not really surprising that they are drawn to each other.

And the fourth factor is that the progressive left, going back at least to the French Revolution, has always been drawn to nihilism and violence. The reasons why are complicated, but it is drawn to tyranny, to suppression, to violence, and to death cults. Far from being truly progressive, the left has often been on the side of darkness rather than light, historically, when you look at the causes with which they have aligned themselves. And here we are again.

- - -

Will She Become a Shaheed - or Just Another Battered Woman?

Leftist Tali Fahima converts to Islam

Woman who had affair with al-Aqsa Brigades commander Zubeidi, served time for aiding terrorists converts to Islam at Umm al-Fahm mosque. 'From now on she is a full-fledged Muslim,' sheikh says

- - -

Verbal Violence

MJRosenberg is a Jew, liberal, progressive, radical and well, the list can on and on.

He's Left.

Usually, because of his political orientation and ideology, he is left out.

That may explain his need to utilize verbal violence.

Like "Smashmouths" as a verb.

As in this:

J Street Smashmouths The "Israel-Can-Do-No-Wrong" Boys