Arguing with the New Anti-SemitesAs I related in an earlier post, I stopped to engage some New York City terror supporters in debate. My wife and I were in New York, you see. (This was back in early June.) We were strolling down the avenue, way down the avenue, from midtown down to Chinatown. Along the way we stopped to look at things, and to rest. It was a really hot day. We took the subway back uptown from Chinatown, and in Chinatown, we watched some fascinating musical performances, from, what I assume were traditional Chinese musicians. But that's not what I'm concerned with today.
Passing through Union Square on our way down, I noticed a Palestinian flag and a small crowd protesting Israel. This was after the flotilla debacle, but long enough afterward to know the facts, you know the ones that clearly demonstrated that these were not "peace activists", but terrorists looking for trouble.
This was the usual bunch of moral retards demanding that the U.S. end its support for Israel, and that we all boycott Israel and Israeli products, you know, like the Nazis urged their followers to boycott Jewish owned businesses . . . not that I'm trying to connect the two anti-Jewish causes. They've done that on their own.
Seeing these idiots made me angry. I was in a fine mood up until that point, but now I could feel the bile rising and the need to do something. I tried to keep walking. I told my wife I was angry. She knows how I get when I see things like this. I didn't want to mess up her day though by getting into a tussle with the terror supporters, but we discussed it for a minute and she let me stay for a few minutes, not for a long time, but just enough time to get out some of my anger.
One of the participants offered me one of their flyers. I skimmed it as he held it out. I was mostly trying to formulate the correct response. Maybe it was the heat, the long walk, or just the inner anger, but I gave the the wrong one. I told him that I didn't support their Nazi inspired hatred against Israel - or something to that effect. Yes, I established my point, and let him know where I stand, and it began the argument, but thinking about it later, and realizing that I began incorrectly, I asked myself, "What would Michael have done?" He's great at this kind of stuff.
Michael would have asked this enemy of civilization to defend his positions. He probably would have, as I should have, asked what makes Israel an "apartheid state". I've noticed that once these dopes start trying to defend their inaccurate and illogical claims, they're easy to refute. They go from one ridiculous claim to another as each one gets shot down, or they try to make you feel like you don't know the facts. Or, like one woman I argued with a while back, they go off on a tirade of non-sequiters. This particular woman started yelling about how we in the U.S. live in a fascist state. Since they're usually only familiar with their own talking points, they have to assert new points as each one gets shot down, or try to change the discussion altogether.
Eventually (usually) they get to the point where they either call you names, agree to disagree, or walk away. This guy ended up walking away as I was able to shatter his claims, but I could have done it more easily and with more panache, had I required him to defend his position. Plus, it would have taken him longer to understand that I was working against him and may have thrown him off once he realized that he was talking to someone hostile to his view of a Jew-free Middle East.
I found another person to argue with, but my wife was starting to walk off, so I went to join her. I merely let the woman who was trying to hand me a flyer know that I was a supporter of Israel. I know I didn't convince anyone of anything that day, but I did let them know that there are those of us battling their neo-fascist agenda.