The lame tweeting of Israeli SF editor Nir Yaniv on this blog. Laura Anne Gilman adds her asinine slur. Yaniv slips up: acknowledges the Mieville series. Oops can’t unscramble that egg

They turn into a wine shop where Insult Contests are held. These contests are illegal by order of the Board of Health on the grounds they pollute the atmosphere. But in this quarter anything and anybody goes. It’s an art rather like flamenco.

William S Burroughs
The Western Lands

 

So Nir Yaniv, a big fish in Israeli SF (well yeah it’s a very small pond, more like a bathtub, or a goldfish bowl) responds to this article of mine here. To summarize, I was replying to his Israeli mate, SF editor (notably of The Apex Book of World SF) and writer Lavie Tidhar’s tweeting on my Catherynne Valente article. I then updated that article with a reply to Tidhar’s further tweeting on my reply to him. I also noted that Yaniv and a few others like Catherynne Valente and Apex head honcho Jason Sizemore made a few remarks via Tidhar’s twitter feed and I added some comments.

So here is how Nir Yaniv responds via twitter to my remarks directed Nir’s way (that whole article is recommended for the reader, so as to appreciate more fully this article):

nyfiction Nir Yaniv
My “position in Israeli SF is kinda equivalent to the senior editor at Asimov’s SF Magazine or interzone.” Really! seasonoftheredwolf.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/a-r…

4 Jan

Well yeah I guess. I mean if you are the editor of the Israeli SF rag Chalomot Be’Aspamia, it’s a professional position. You get paid for it, not much I’m sure. Of course the market in Israel is much much smaller, to put it mildly! The difference is one of scale, not status.

Nir Yaniv
nyfiction Nir Yaniv
I love being Sheila Williams!
4 Jan
Nir Yaniv

Uh okaaay Nir.

nyfiction Nir Yaniv
I know I shouldn’t be feeding the troll, but I can’t resist it. @lavietidhar – thanks for finding this one!
4 Jan

Yeah Lavie. Toda.

nyfiction Nir Yaniv
I mean, this guy is trying to protect me from China “Mieville’s rabid anti-Semitism”. Read a dictionary, boy, find out what the term means.
4 Jan
Nir Yaniv

I’m not trying to protect you from anything or anybody. Your response here is simply nonsensical. Spare me the condescension you know-nothing. Don’t call me boy. I’m older than you. You’re the same age as my younger sister. I’ll call you boy.

I know exactly what anti-Semitism means. Yeled. Do you? It means prejudice against Jewry. What do you think it means? Prejudice against Semites, ie Arabs and Jews? Well there is anti-Arab racism, but more accurately that is not anti-Semitism per se, it is anti-Arab racism or prejudice. Anti-Semitism is actually a relatively new term, and its contemporary usage (the last century or so) is widely recognized as the allusion to anti-Jewish prejudice and solely anti-Jewish prejudice or bigotry.

The word was coined in the nineteenth century (some scholars assert that the word ‘anti-Semitism’ can be traced to circa 1860, where it was used by the Jewish Austrian scholar M Steinschneider). However the terminology came into prominence through the founder of the League of anti-semites (Antisemiten-Liga) , the Jew-hating German Wilhelm Marr. The term was used by Marr to describe his and his League’s open hatred and contempt for Jewish identity, Jewish culture and the Jewish religion. Marr and his league were not referring to Arabs, their culture or their religious identity in any way. Marr would later recant on his prejudice against Jews, coming to regret it in later life.

The origins of the term (even though surprisingly recent) and its usage is largely forgotten. I doubt Nir had a clue. Yaniv is being entirely incoherent here anyhow, something of a meltdown. Are you saying one shouldn’t use the term anti-Semitism unless one means to include prejudice against Semitic Arabs, along with Jewry? That’s absurd and stupid in equal measure. In fact the term ‘anti-Semitism’ (or anti-semitism) is used in the academic and scholarly literature and in fact-finding missions, reports, conferences, symposiums and studies on Jew-hatred, as referring solely to anti-Jewish prejudice. I choose to write it as ‘anti-Semitism’, many prefer anti-semitism. In oral conversation of course, it’s the same. No difference. This specific meaning of the term ‘anti-Semitism/anti-semitism’ applies to both the highbrow commentary on the subject (academic books, scholarly articles and reports that I very much doubt Yaniv is remotely familiar with) along with the more pedestrian media, bloggers etc. The use and meaning of the terminology ‘anti-Semitism/anti-semitism/anti-Semites’ as referring to anti-Jewish prejudice alone, applies in both Israel and the Diaspora. After all, it is stating the obvious that people can and do hate Arabs but don’t hate Jews and vice versa – that is have a prejudice against Jewry but not against Semitic Arabs. I just cover these very obvious points because Yaniv is being – how to put it as politely as possible? – disingenuous. And not a little obtuse.

Does Yaniv want to split hairs here with his trumped-up blather – even as he fouls it up completely – in order to avoid facing uncomfortable truths about Mieville? Why would China Mieville’s anti-Semitism/Jew-hatred – take whatever term you would prefer – be uncomfortable for you Yaniv? Any reason/s? Or do you beg to differ in this respect re Mieville’s Jew-hatred? I mean I’m just asking…

I did ask in the relevant article (that you tweet on) whether you had anything to say on Mieville’s uh prejudice that I have heavily documented at this blog. I continue to do so. This is what I wrote:

Still no twitting/tweeting on my ongoing China Mieville series Lavie? Jason, Stross, Catherynne? Nir? Uh guess not.

So what do you know, Yaniv actually mentions Mieville in his tweeting re my blog! I’m gobsmacked. Truly. That’s a first.

[Actually Tim Lieder, my favourite idiot attack chihuahua mentioned in passing that I was blogging on Mieville at his blog, but naturally had nothing to add on that front. Anyway Lieder is a nobody, a wannabe hack. It’s worth checking that same link though at Lieder’s blog ‘Is that you Furry Jew?’, where he posts up in its entirety a scathingly funny and succinct critique from somebody – I have no idea who it is. Lieder thought it could have been me – that cuts Lieder down to size. It was originally posted up elsewhere. Lieder in some kind of subconscious mea culpa copies and pastes up the whole thing at his blog! Hilarious. I digress.]

Well Yaniv mentions Mieville and the fact that I accuse Mieville of ‘rabid anti-Semitism’ (would you prefer Jew-hatred Yaniv?). That’s a huge step for these guys. Well for Nir at any rate. Lavie still ain’t got nothing to say. Remember Yaniv is a big fish in the goldfish bowl of Israeli SF. Don’t underestimate it. I mean Yaniv and crew can’t give an inch.. Yaniv doesn’t say whether my claim on Mieville’s bigotry is justified or not. Yaniv just spits it out – I make the claim that Mieville is rabidly anti-Semitic. A cheer goes up from the stands. Yaniv sees the four hundred pound gorilla in the room. Can’t take it back now Yaniv. It’s out there – a public acknowledgment of the Mieville series! Nir have you even read the ongoing series on Mieville that genre folk are going out of their way to ignore (as with my series on HOLOCAUST REVISIONISM from within the genre community)? Have you even read a single article in either series Nir (Lavie too for that matter)? Or would you prefer not to?

Yaniv remains noncommittal however where it counts. Yaniv is not saying whether he agrees with me on Mieville’s prejudice or whether I’m blowing smoke and he thinks my charge an unfair slur, a slander on Mieville’s name. My advice to you is to actually read my articles on Mieville before you even think of crossing that line. Repercussions, repurcussions.. That’s what somebody with sechel would do – read the articles. You think you have sechel Nir?

So Nir, why don’t you commit yourself? Do you or do you not think the red wolf blogger is being fair in his exhaustive assessment of Mieville and the assertion of the latter’s anti-Jewish prejudice? Yes or no? Ken ou lo? Come on, out with it. Or do you think that Mieville is anti-Semitic but not rabidly so? You don’t like my use of the word ‘rabid’? Or no Mieville is not prejudiced against Jewry at all, the red wolf blogger is telling lies?

Or are you just chicken Nir? Pachdan ou lo? K’mo chaver shelcha Lavie.

Personally I think you don’t have the balls to cross that line. Scamper back behind the trenches, join your chaver Lavie in the safety of the billet. Put on the blinders, just like Lavie and the rest of the gang. They’re probably pissed at you for letting the cat out of the bag. Oh no, Yaniv let it slip out. Nir mentioned red wolf’s blogging on Mieville! Didn’t you get the memo Yaniv? Sheket. Shtum. Keep a lid on it. Keep it in the backroom. Next to smell, the sense of hearing is the most acute of the wolf’s senses. Didn’t you know that Nir? A wolf can hear six miles away in the forest and up to ten miles away in open land. Talking about smell, man do I smell the fear on you lot, like a bunch of beggars who haven’t washed in a year. Worse. Of course you lot don’t smell it. You think you’re all wafting in roses.

Or is there more to it than that? More than just yer yellow mellow bellies? Is it that you don’t want your house of cards to topple Nir (and gang)? I mean if Mieville falls, who comes down with him? What comes down with him? You don’t want to give an inch to the red wolf blogger Nir? Fuck no. You’d rather cut your pecker off to spite your face.

4 Jan
Nir Yaniv
nyfiction Nir Yaniv
Must say, though, that the only reason I’m twitting about it is that it’s either that or getting out of bed. So far, the bed is winning.

4 Jan
Nir Yaniv
nyfiction Nir Yaniv
@
@LAGilman If you read the post to which I was referring, you’ll see how this innocent remark makes you a rabid anti-semite. #andalsoafish

Yaniv tweets this one above to Laura Anne Gilman, Jewish NY based imaginative fiction writer. The article/post that Yaniv is referring to is of course this one again.

What innocent remark? You’re on Tidhar’s side here, against me. That much is obvious. Clear as day. Where do I state or imply that you are an anti-semite, never mind a rabid one? I don’t. You are being ridiculous. You repeat the same MO as Lavie Tidhar, who also tweeted dishonestly that I was calling him an anti-semite. You and Lavie are my antagonists, otherwise we wouldn’t be feuding see? That doesn’t mean I’m calling or implying that you and Lavie are anti-semitic! I do think you and Tidhar are clueless PC Leftists in over your heads and you have no idea at all what you are doing. I think you are going out of your way to ignore anti-Semitism among your genre peers because to relent here, at this stage, would mean having to eat crow. Your ego couldn’t stand it. Lavie’s neither. There are also other reasons that you (that’s you plural) stay shtum that I don’t even touch on.

Lavie messed up as soon as he made his blog post ‘Elizabeth Moon on Islam’ back in September 2010. That’s because as I have been at pains to stress, he never had and has anything PUBLIC to say about rabid (yes rabid) anti-Semitism among his genre peers (any more than you do Nir). A lot of this extreme anti-Jewish prejudice from genre professionals I have documented at my blog. There is more to come. Wait till you see what’s coming.

Given that Lavie is an Israeli Jew, this PUBLIC SILENCE (note the word ‘PUBLIC’) from him on often extreme anti-Jewish prejudice among his genre peers – that I have written about and continue to write about at my blog – whilst censuring Moon PUBLICLY for her comments on Islam/Muslims is rank hypocrisy and double standards (even if one considers Moon’s remarks bigoted). It’s pathetic. Of course it’s not just Tidhar who messed up in this exact fashion. Hardly. Deep deep down Lavie probably has an inkling that he messed up. Deep down maybe so do you, realize that Lavie messed up that is. However Lavie decides to keep digging his grave, keeps shooting the messenger. He makes things worse for himself. He cannot see what he is doing. His ego and his castles-in-the-air naïve liberalism blind him.

You yourself Nir, out of a misguided loyalty and shared liberal know-nothingness with Tidhar then decide to publicly ally yourself with Tidhar in his tête-à-tête against me. So now you are marked with Tidhar’s mess. That’s what I was getting at, nothing more nothing less. The thing is – it would be funny if it wasn’t so sad – you don’t know it. Not consciously at any rate. Neither do likewise mindless liberals such as Gilman who does the same thing as you Nir. Spread the foul stench further.. Hey it’s fine by me. Keep spreading the manure around. It’s like an army of zombies out there.

Hence your incoherence and nonsense Nir, that has no bearing on anything I have written. Think before you tweet. Actually just think. Clear the cobwebs of your mind. Or not. It’s in your hands. Boy. I mean you can plunge off the cliff if you would prefer?

The thing is it’s not just Tidhar who messed up. It’s the whole Apex SF crew (and not just them of course), Valente with her special Apex Mag Arab/Muslim issue. It’s the thing she is most proud of in her year and a half as senior editor there. Where’s the all Jewish issue in light of the extreme harebrained anti-Semitism among genre writers and editors, that I have documented for one? Remember it’s inclusive of Holocaust Revisionism! (that you all go out of your way to ignore) Best-selling writer James P Hogan reaffirmed his Holocaust Denial at his blog six months (March 2010) before Moon made her ‘citizenship’ comments at her blog. Heard nothing *public* from the Apex crew, and other genre folk likewise. Sounds of silence. I cover all this – and more – in detail here. Tangent editor Dave Truesdale’s Holocaust Revisionism that I have exposed since then? Total silence. Actually it’s been worse than silence, but that’s a whole other thing... I don’t want to repeat all this here, and in fact I go into details on these specific things in my concluding chapters 10 and 11 in my Mieville series. So I will leave it for those chapters…

Let me just say this: it is only going to get worse, that is the glaring inconsistencies and double standards that I am going to continue to show up among the PC genre Left. That’s because there is more indisputable anti-Semitic prejudice and related dimwittedness among genre professionals that I haven’t even gotten round to publishing. I mean you can all look away in awkward embarrassment – your default position – and stay shtum but there is no getting away from it for all that.

You are caught in a trap, in a bind, Nir and gang? That’s not my problem. It’s yours (plural). You yourselves set the trap. The trap you snared yourselves in is only going to get tighter, even as you deny it, even as you hate me for it and launch rage or condescending dismissal in my direction or just plain ignore me. Whatever you do only makes things worse for you, but you have to have a bird’s eye-view to see that and you don’t. You have to be out of the circle to see it, and you’re not.

You can hate me for bringing all this Judenhass among your genre peers to light, you would prefer if it stayed hidden, buried? You are going to deny the blatant Judenhass? It doesn’t make you look good then.

This is what happens when you get caught up in the ‘progressive’ liberal mindset of PC Islamophilia, moral and cultual relativism and a hear-no-evil see-no-evil approach to anti-Semitism (that’s Jew-hatred Nir). You end up trapping yourselves, and indulge in lame slanders and desperate evasions and distractions against the guy who points out what you’ve done.

You are playing in a game and you don’t even know the game is on. You think it’s a funny joke. The joke’s on you and it’s not funny. Well except in a black comedy kind of way. There is a game afoot and you don’t know if it’s chess or poker or bridge. You don’t know the rules. Hey maybe there aren’t any. There are two things to keep uppermost in mind – not that you will even comprehend vaguely what I am getting at – firstly, in this game there are no free lunches. There is no getting away from your shadow. Not for you, not for me. It is always there. The check always has to be cashed. That’s because it’s your check and mine too (Burroughs again).

Another thing about this game, and here’s a paradox. It’s not a game. This will be entirely lost on you, like so much else. You can’t see two feet ahead of you, so blinded are you lot by your inflated self-assessments, your twits-of-a-feather-flock-together worldview built on lies. It’s not about me, I’m a nobody here. It doesn’t matter if you ignore me and what I write, or misrepresent and distort what I write beyond recognition. Or both. And you lot do both. It is what it is. I can’t win this game that is not a game neither, because it’s not a game anybody can win. It’s not a game when we all lose. It’s not a game. Your self-absorption is so extreme, your liberalism so enveloping, that you don’t see the tidal wave coming…

The bigger real-life horror picture that you have so desperately lost sight of, if you ever had sight of it, even as it stares us all in the face. Maybe that’s why Lavie Tidhar for one twits trivial crap every bloody five minutes, like a silly airhead schoolgirl. Keep the mind off what matters. At all costs. All of the time.

Here let me spell it out – not that you will get it anyhow, you are lost beyond lost, this is for those who have eyes to see.

Max Nordau, a famous 19th century European Jewish philosopher once remarked to one of the famous fathers of Zionism, the great Vladimir ‘Wolf’ Jabotinsky, that “the Jew learns not by way of reason, but from catastrophes. He won’t buy an umbrella merely because he sees clouds in the sky. He waits until he is drenched and catches pneumonia.”

Does that help at all? No? Never Mind.

nyfiction Nir Yaniv
@
@LAGilman But I advise against it. Believing me, in this case, is easier, faster and probably cheaper.
4 Jan
Nir Yaniv

Nir tweeting to Laura Anne Gilman. Yeah take Nir’s word on it. He knows of what he speaks. Not. Just believe Nir ’cause he says to believe him. It’s so simple when you just do as you’re told. It’s much easier that way, will calm your mind. Nothing troubling the waters.. Easier, faster and cheaper to just trust Nir. Of course since Gilman ‘thinks’ like Nir, he didn’t have to warn her off, she is one of the faithful.

Gilman can be trusted to echo the gibberish mantras of Nir (and Tidhar) even if she reads my blog for herself and doesn’t heed Nir’s transparently desperate warnings off. She’s loyal and she knows the score. She knows what is acceptable to think and what is not. She has finely honed critical thinking skills. Well she thinks she does at least, just like everybody else. How they prop one another up with such transparently pathetic desperation, as true believers do. Like in religious cults. I have more to say about Gilman below (in response to her tweet).

So summing up, addressing this to Nir Yaniv:

Since you just walked into the hornet’s nest or to put it another way, cracked the eggshells you were walking on (you have to tread oh so lightly on those eggshells Nir, the shells are paper-thin), that is you acknowledged that I’m writing a series on Mieville and his ‘rabid anti-Semitism’; let’s not take our eyes off that ball...

Nir Yaniv, do you think Mieville is a Jew-hater in light of all the evidence I present in my exhaustive (still ongoing) series?

Take your time Nir. Mull over it, digest it. Read the articles that you probably haven’t read. Think of the repercussions. Big repercussions and that’s if you give the right answer. No? If you give the wrong answer, well in the short-term it may be an easier thing to do, but take it from this middle-aged wolf (who is older than you let’s not forget), in the long run, heck in the medium run, it’s a big mistake. And remember you don’t just lose your queen in this game if you give the wrong answer, you lose much more than that. And you lose more than that whether I call you out on it or not. That’s because it’s not a game. Just ask your Ka. If he’s still around and he hasn’t slunk off in disgust (that’s The Western Lands riff again).

Of course, you can get out of the combat zone and run home to eema. That’s what I reckon you’ll do. Your Ka don’t care for that neither. No free lunches, not even if you slink away on your yellow belly. Slinking away or hurling yuck-yuck insults my way (same thing you know) that don’t address this thorny issue of Mieville’s anti-Semitism is still better than giving the wrong answer. That you don’t want to do. Give the wrong answer. For your sake man. It’s not about me. Just ask your ka/nefesh if it’s still there.

Slink away, yellow belly.

So NY Jew and fantasy author Laura Anne Gilman adds her voice. Her novel Flesh and Fire was nominated for the Nebula shortlist in 2010, the winner was Mieville for The City and the City. Another headless chicken. Gilman that is. She is responding to Nir’s tweeting on my blog (the tweet above).

LAGilman Laura Anne Gilman
@
@nyfiction I read it, yes. I’ve seen related rants from the same person. I prefer more logic and less flailing, myself.
4 Jan

Yes she is referring to myself and my blog. I double-checked. @nyfiction is Nir Yaniv. Plus the dates match. And Nir informed her of my article via twitter.

What related rants Laura Anne? You don’t inform us. One assumes not on my ongoing China Mieville series where I expose his extreme anti-Semitism, or do you beg to differ Laura Anne? One assumes not my lengthy series on Holocaust Revisionism. My articles on Nick Mamatas? Who knows? One can reasonably deduce it is most probably my articles on the genre thought police, more likely than any other. Such as this one here and this one here on Catherynne Valente. Well a cookie-cutter liberal – with her liberal arts background – such as Laura Anne Gilman wouldn’t care too much for such articles one supposes.

Not that she acknowledges, never mind refutes, any of their content. Gilman typically ‘thinks’ that if she accuses me of a lack of logic and ranting, sans evidence, that’s good enough. It must be so then, like a divine fiat. Anybody can accuse anybody else of illogic, ranting and flailing or anything else for that matter. It’s as easy as breathing. Where is your evidence Gilman? Where is the beef? Give us the paragraph, the sentence. Hey why bother when you can just make the accusation and not back it up with anything whatsoever. That’s just soooooo much easier. It’s also the typical modus operandi of ideologues – dogmatic liberals and conservatives alike.

Here is Laura Ann Gilman getting personally involved in the Occupy Wall Street protests in New York (isn’t she such a chic radical or is that radical chic?). Although she wrote about it at her blog, the link I give comes from the radical Left Daily Kos.

She also signed her name to the ‘occupywriters’ list. http://occupywriters.com/

That’s where in big bold letters we are informed that:

We, the undersigned writers and all who will join us, support Occupy Wall Street and the Occupy Movement around the world.

Hey I’m no fan of Wall Street and its rich-get-richer-poor-get-poorer every-man-for-himself ruling ideology, yet Gilman appears oblivious to the thick streak of anti-Semitism among a significant (or at least vocal) segment of the OWS crowd. Or maybe it’s a case of having common enemies means sweeping all that under the carpet?

Also as with the Tea Parties, I find OWS superficial, a way of letting off steam, too much finger pointing and buck passing. Understandable frustrations and yet ultimately empty. The problems with Wall Street and stock markets lie deeper than these shallow ideologues would know – complex economic, social, political and cultural issues (media, consumerism, educational institutions included) are all involved and intertwined. The 99% are hardly innocent, very few of us are (I don’t pretend to be). Unless we are children. Gilman like her fellow ideologues prefers  simplistic slogans and self-righteousness to deeper reflection and nuance. It’s so much easier that way. Kind of like making claims that I’m illogical and flailing without any evidence at all. There’s nothing behind Gilman’s bluff, because it’s all bluff.

At least Gilman is politically consistent. I would expect somebody whose shallow unreflective paint-by-the-numbers fill-in-the-dots liberal identity politics I have very briefly sketched above, to dismiss myself without a second thought. She doesn’t want her safe little world disrupted by uncomfortable facts. Who can blame her? The thing is Laura Anne your worldview is built on quicksand…

Maybe Gilman will tweet on this? My advice if you do Laura Anne, is not to follow the dishonest MO of your buddies Nir Yaniv and Lavie Tidhar, who both twitted (not tweeted) that I called them anti-semites. I did no such thing. I didn’t even imply it. Although they read it that way. A knee-jerk reaction. Awfully oversensitive now aren’t we? Tidhar also brazenly lied and obscenely so, when he twitted that I accused Catherynne Valente of supporting terrorism. Not that Tidhar’s shameless lying bothers you at all, Laura Anne (any more than it bothers Valente who retweeted his lying crap in this regard). Hardly. And no Gilman I am not writing that you support terrorism neither. Of course you don’t. I write this because the shameless dishonesty along with the obtuseness in your camp (Tidhar notably) is quite something to behold. Naturally you can garble up this article in your own headless mother hen fashion if you so choose. More evidence free and very lame slurs perhaps? Well what else do you have really?

I asked Lavie Tidhar if he would have a go at answering these questions I addressed to Nick Mamatas over here (scroll down to the lowest part of the article), since Mamatas won’t answer them himself (while playing at being upfront and transparent). Lavie like his mate Nick ain’t got zilch to say on this front any more than he has anything to say on Mamatas’s NAMBLA phraseology (see same article). Naturally. Why don’t you give it a shot Laura Anne, wrestle with those questions I ask Mamatas? Nir too is more than welcome to lend a hand, if he’s up to it. Don’t think neither of you are up to the task. I mean if you are prepared to sink Mamatas, it ain’t a problem. Then again you ain’t prepared to do that, are you?

You can always e-mail me the answers Nir and Laura Anne as I realize twitter is not appropriate for lengthy responses (to readers out there, yes both Yaniv and Gilman have my e-mail address). I will then post up your replies here at my blog.

Here is the crunch question though – maybe you can let us know if you consider Mieville anti-Semitic or not, Laura Anne Gilman?

I ask because Yaniv let the cat out of the bag. Here’s some free advice, I give it to Nir too (further up). Make sure to read all the articles in my Mieville series before committing yourself, so you don’t mess up (or do you think that my Mieville articles are rants, lack logic and I’m just flailing around?) You can still mess up of course. And very badly. You can give the wrong answer. And this ain’t no dress rehearsal. We don’t want to have to call the road crew, clean up the mess, the bloody intestines, split liver and brain all over the road… It’s ugly. Not a sight for the fainthearted.

Lavie has gone into hiding on this front – re Mieville’s anti-Jewish prejudice that is – and I reckon Yaniv ain’t got a pair likewise. Valente is too busy organizing RiyadhCon or at least she should be, if she’s going to walk the walk. You got more of a backbone than the two Israelis put together Laura Anne? No I really don’t think so, that’s assuming you can even give the correct answer… There’s only one correct answer. You give the wrong answer, that’s even worse than cowardice. Like I tell Nir. Like I say, road crew clean-up.

Surprise us Laura Anne. We await with baited breath. Just tweet the answer (or e-mail it to me). I’ll find it sooner or later if you tweet it. Heck I’m sure it will make waves beyond my little marginal blog. Is that what you lot are SO AFRAID of? Are you so scared of what anti-Semites in the genre community would think (Jew-haters Nir)? Who else would possibly be offended by calling a spade a spade here regarding Mieville’s prejudice, except Jew-haters (or simpletons at best)?

The headless chickens really are coming out of the woodwork. Good. Ain’t TWITter just great?

 

Neferti adjusts an imaginary monocle. “Let’s toddle along and leave these rotters to stew in their own juice. They’re filthy.”

William S Burroughs
The Western Lands

This entry was posted in Anti-Semitism, Politics - General, Science Fiction and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.