My Wardian Case | Main | At Last

February 18, 2006

Okay, so here is the story:

I had frankly never heard of Debbie Schlussel before John linked to Misha about Debbie's demand for a retraction and that retraction. I think I have all that outlined in this post.

Well, being a curious person, and wondering what kind of a conservative Ms. Debbie is, I went to her site and read her blog. I had a question about her supporting evidence for her story that

in the 1980s an FBI investigation uncovered Arab-owned gas stations throughout the Mid-West doing the same thing as the Dawoods (giving customers less gas than they were paying for). That money was then sent to Islamic terrorist Abu Nidal and his terrorist group of the same name. The money was used to finance Palestinian terrorist attacks on Israelis in the first Intifada ("Uprising").
in this post. I had never heard that story, so I searched all over trying to find some reference to her statement. All I could find was Debbie's statement.

So, I very politely asked her for her references in a comment on the post:

Hi, Debbie,
I don't remember the gas station owners sending money to terrorist organizations in the '80s - and I'm 52 - and it sounds like a really interesting story. Could you give me an idea where I can find some information on that? I've been searching, and I'm probably looking for the wrong thing.

Thanks!

Interestingly, she removed the link to my blog that was there. Apparently, she does not want any of her fans to find out how questionable her facts and her tactics are.

Sadly, this woman is a conservative. She doesn't seem to realize that I am also a conservative.

Anyway, here is the first email she sent me after I asked for some supporting documents:


> On 2/17/06, Debbie Schlussel < dschlussel@yahoo.com>
> wrote:

Beth:
I note that you posted a message asking me for information about one of my posts. In general, I think it's a bad idea to call someone on my website
"off-balance" and an "idiot" among an entire insulting (and completely mis-informed) post . . . and then have the gall to ask them for information and research.

Point of fact - I did not call Debbie an idiot - she called herself an idiot when she signed her last email to John. I *did* say that she appeared to be somewhat off-balance. And to anyone who read her email to John, I think you would agree with my characterization of the woman.

I wouldn't trust info from someone I openly considered "off-balance" and an "idiot." Besides, I'm consistent. I ALWAYS do my research. So I wonder why someone who doesn't when writing about me, suddenly wants the underlying info about my work. Looks like someone is a hypocrite, and it isn't me. Debbie Schlussel

Please note that Debbie claims she "ALWAYS" does her research. Well, as any lawyer should know, that research needs to be documented, and available for all to see to verify the veracity of any claims made.

Well, I was rather perturbed the Debbie did not have any links or references to her story - which again, I was interested in learning about, but I wanted to be sure it was true before I commented on it. So I replied to Debbie with this email:

Well, Debbie, Thank you for verifying for me that you don't have any references that indicate that gas stations were overcharging and sending the overages to terrorist groups in the 80s. Perhaps you are unaware that it is generally a good idea to link to a reference when one is claiming that something happened - I can't find any references to your FBI story anywhere, and I just wondered where you got the idea that this occurred.

And yes, I think you are off the charts in your lack of rationality. You
jump to all sorts of conclusions without any proof. If I state something as
a fact, I link to my supporting data.

You don't.

You just make all kinds of statements that are really out there. And what
really upsets me about your 'blogging style' is that you are a conservative,
like me, but you are making all conservatives look like crackpots.
Especially women conservatives like myself and many other women bloggers.

I understand that you are in Detroit and live among a lot of Arab Muslims.
I'm not terribly comfortable when I go there for business either, but not
all Muslims want to kill us all.

And if you had a sense of humour, I could probably be okay with your
shtick. But from what I have read, and from the emails you sent to my
husband, it appears that you are a bitter, mean, rude woman. Get a grip,
Debbie. Get a sense of humour. There is so much invective in your writing
that I might as well just go read the Democratic Underground. I would love
to see some logic in your thinking ... but I don't.

Before I sent that email, I went to Debbie's site again. And I noticed that she was comparing the American Citizenship of an Olympic Skater to that of an Islamic Terrorist in this post. so I continued my email to her:

How can you compare the Citizenship of a Canadian skater to that of an Arab terrorist? How unfair and illogical is that?

Oh, well. I have learned in my life (I'm a lot older than you are) that you
can attract more people to your point of view with facts that are
supportable, humour and kindness.

Obviously, you are a bright woman, but there is something just not right
with your way of expressing yourself.

Regards,

Beth Donovan

So Debbie didn't like what I had to say and within a few minutes, I got this email from her:

On 2/17/06, Debbie Schlussel wrote: I have confirmed NOTHING to you regarding my references. There is a reason I'm invited all over the world to talk about terorrism and am consulted by federal agents all over. They know I know what I'm talking about. I frankly don't need to prove it to you. And I certainly don't need to emulate what you do on your website, of which I never heard, and to which I went once, to see the screed you took great pleasure in writing on me.

Oh, golly, where do I start? First of all, Debbie has no proof that her claims are correct. She has absolutely no supporting references. And she says she doesn't need them because federal agents consult her? Really? More likely she calls them up.

Really? You do your research? Where are the e-mails you claim to have seen that I sent to Misha? Where was your research on that? Still waiting.

Umm, Debbie, I never claimed to see any emails you sent to Misha, though I have seen them now that Misha has posted them. I saw the emails you sent to my husband, John Donovan.

So first I am an "idiot" on your website and then I am "bright" in a private e-mail? You can't seem to make up your mind on me, and frankly, it doesn't make a difference. If you don't like what you read on my site, no-one is putting a gun to your head to read it.

I never called Debbie an idiot. I was quoting her email to John.


After your hateful post on me, you are worried what people think of conservatives and lecturing ME on "kindness"?! Hello? Look in the mirror, if you have one. That's where you'll see the hateful, bitter woman who spews venom and whose husband needs his own wife to defend him.

Yes, I think that Debbie Schlussel makes conservative women look bad. She is darned embarrassing - she even writes in all caps in people's comments and 'yells' at them. Indicates to me that she is not terribly web-literate.

But now I know that someone who claims to be conservative is soft on immigration and thinks we need special exceptions for ice skaters and everyone else.

I'm not soft on immigration. I merely pointed out to her that granting citizenship to a skater is not equivalent to granting citizenship to a terrorist (or who she determines is a terrorist, after all, the federal agents consult her on terrorism)

And thinks the kind of gutter language and utterances that sleazebags engage in is something worth defending, and a valid reason to attack me. I'd have happily supported giving Tanith Belbin U.S. citizenship if that means you have to give up yours.

Goodness, isn't that a terribly vile thing to say? For one, she seems to be thinking along the lines that I am not a native American Citizen, but a naturalized Citizen (not that makes any difference) - I think she thinks I'm married to Misha! Poor Misha's wife!
Secondly - she thinks I should have to give up my U.S. citizenship?
Just where does this woman (who, after all, is consulted by federal agents all over) get off thinking that she is capable of determining who should and who should not be a US Citizen? I have to wonder if she has served in the Armed Forces - I have.

Sorry, but it is NOT schtick to say people are "off-balance," "idiots," "cunts," "whores," get where they got because they "give good head," etc., merely because you don't agree with them about Denmark. Is
that the "humor" and "kindness" you are now lecturing me about? That's what you are defending AND engaging in, and yet YOU are worried what people think of conservatives from looking at MY website?

Okay, this pisses me off - I have never used any of the above words or statements anywhere on my blog - I have never, ever printed the "C" word until today - and it is a direct quote of this woman's.
She is, quite simply, lying.

52 years old and still not a lady. So sad. The kind of behavior you engage in tells me you need help very badly, not to mention some heavy duty prozac. And after all the sailor-talk and hate-talk you defend and engage in, perhaps some female hormones would be a better prescription for you than instructing me on how to be a conservative woman.

Hmmm. "sailor-talk and hate-talk"? I admit to occasional sailor-talk - I have used the "F" word in 16 posts out of 1,620 posts.

But hate-talk? I don't think so, Debbie.

Again, if as you claim, you do not like the way I express myself, why in the heck did you come to read my site? And then even post on it? So what was that you were saying about dishing it out but not being able to take it. Reading your letter below, you are the blackest pot I ever heard from.

Hmmm. Well. I came to read her site because I was curious as to why she was so rude to my husband. I posted about her because of that, too.

I have no idea why I am 'the blackest pot' she has ever heard from. My point is simply that this woman is quite rude to people, doesn't have references to back up at least one of her claims, and mostly that she embarrasses me because she is a conservative.

There are some conservatives who are so beyond the pale, that they make all of us look bad - Pat Robertson, Pat Buchanan and now, Debbie Schlussel.


UPDATE: For more on Debbie and her reputation, check here.

technorati tag:

Posted by Beth at February 18, 2006 4:43 PM

Comments

Yeow! I have been following this over the different blogs and this lady has the paraniods bad. She is feeling so beset by imagined enemies that anyone who questions her stance on anything is percieved to be out to destroy her career.

It's like she's in over her head and trying desperately to keep her head above water.

Posted by: SoCalOilMan at February 18, 2006 5:39 PM

Good Lord - the woman is spinning outta control. Wait - she prolly never was *in* control, so that's moot. But her invective against you proves that (a) she doesn't read your blog regularly (or John's) and (b) she is deranged and over her head as SoCalOilMan surmises.

Very sad that she carries the label Conservative - I don't want her associated with me at All!

Posted by: Barb at February 18, 2006 6:23 PM

Eeep, it's even worse than I thought. I still want to presume that this is a giant misunderstanding; that Debbie simply misunderstands your motives. But when you ask nicely "can you send me a link to a source for your story", she doesn't even say something like "you wont find much because the details are classified, I could only write about it very generally". No, she goes right into "I don't have to explain myself to yoooo" mode. Yikes. I read her bio from her website (and just lampooned it a bit on mine, mwheh), and now I'm starting to wonder if she she ever did go undercover in the local Detroit mosques like she claims. Hmmm. The woman's a bit unhinged. She doesn't even attempt to have a civil meeting of the minds, as it were. Maybe she's just wired to be one o'them junkyard dog lawyers -- the kind you want on your side when you want to put the screws to that auto mechanic who put used sparkplugs in your engine at your last tune-up. I dunno. I just don't know...

Posted by: Tuning Spork at February 18, 2006 6:29 PM

Did she ever claim to have a security clearance? If people are feeding her *classified* info... more fun!

But I think I'm just running with TS's words. I don't recall she's claimed classified access to info, etc.

Based on my dealings with the FBI when working with them (pre-9-11, to be sure), I tend to doubt they call her up and *give* her info - though they may well call her up and ask for it.

Posted by: John of Argghhh! at February 18, 2006 6:34 PM

I am not a political blogger by any stretch of the imagination, but I am a woman and a citizen and an English professor, and if I had to grade that woman's emails according to grammar and logic, I would not be seeing any A's, B's, C's, or D's in the immediate future.

Posted by: Mamacita at February 18, 2006 8:06 PM

You should send this thread to many of Debbie's biggest supporters, especially Michelle Malkin. This is disgraceful. We conservative bloggers whack on liberals who present hearsay without references to back up their assertions. All you did was ask her for those.

The best bloggers tend to link _everything_. They take nothing for granted. Read Malkin's website, she rarely leaves a point unlinked to some concrete reference(s).

Two words describe Debbie: PRIMA DONNA.

Posted by: gutshot at February 18, 2006 8:25 PM

Interesting. Shall we go all out and expose a fraud? Be the honorable defenders of our own perspective? But, is she a fraud? She's supposedly got some readership (although the comments to her posts aren't much to scream home about). Michelle Malkin links to her occassionally. Even though she's apparantly thin-skinned, could it be that she really is on the ball about all of this? Just once I'd like to see a message from her that wasn't petty and laughably threatening. As Beth suspects, she's prolly a pox on conservative commentators. Shall we be the ones to expose our own sophist and cheat? Is she a sophist, cheating, cornered, fraudulant faker or a legitiment slayer of tyrants? I hope she can still come around, but I'm losing hope. She's on the defensive because she knows she's wrong but still wont soften. At a time like this she's opted to be silent rather than consilitory. She's got issues.

Posted by: Tuning Spork at February 18, 2006 8:30 PM

I've been following this at Misha's and the Castle. Debbie does appear to be a little unhinged in this matter. Misha uses "sailor-talk" in the majority of his posts. When I questioned the date on one of his sources back in June and defended the person he was writing about, he found a more recent source. He was very caustic about it, but I could see the humor in his invective.

He did not send me e-mails like Debbie is doing in this case. Misha, who uses "sailor-talk" responded maturely.

Posted by: seawitch at February 18, 2006 9:09 PM

That's exactly it, Seawitch. Misha is handling this maturely even though he admits to being overly hyperbolic. Schlussel is handling this immaturely even though she's supposedly in the proverbial loop. If bona fides are on the line then I lean toward Misha. He's bent over backwards to allay her paranoia and she's still, to this point, unyeilding in her blustering abject toothless threats. Screw 'er.

Posted by: Tuning Spork at February 18, 2006 9:42 PM

Beth,

I suspect that part of her problem in keeping track of things is that you an John use the same email (at least for these things). If she's just looking at the return address that could explain a bit.

Or she could just have a bug up her butt.

Posted by: KCSteve at February 19, 2006 10:11 PM

I think there's a generational gap going on here. See, I kinda see where she's(Schlussel) going, and I kinda see why she's going 'huh?' with some of the things Beth concludes. For instance, I see exactly where the insult is going with the 'fine the Canucker can have her citizenship if it means you have to leave' thing. She's calling you an-unreal American, like, saying you're the equivalent of Alec Baldwin or MikeMooreon. (I don't agree with her on this point(and it's entirely juvenile), but methinks it's an under 35 way of thinking and insulting someone. Either that or something someone who listens to a lot of talk radio would get. Guilty of that here. I'm not into country and I don't like mullet rock. That's all there is here where I live really.). I saw it as plain as day and am wondering where Beth got the idea that Schlussel thought SWWBO was naturalized as well. Odd induction from where I sit.

Another thing, Schlussel is part of the Sean Hannity type republican/conservative faction. They kinda have some group think going on, reminds me alot of fundementalists saying that Catholics aren't Christians. So she calls you a faux American, ain't true and is stupid to say.

I think John had the best way of handling this before the new flair up. Let it go. It don't mean nothing and it doesn't matter. A year from now we won't even remember it. So why sweat?
Beth, those of us who come here do so because you bring something more to our lives than just stoking up the fires of nationalism and hate. We come for the vignettes, for learning about love and loving, for good humor(someimes naughty), and (entirely proll'y only true for me) what it means to be genuinely good people and how to fit the values our parents gave us into a world that doesn't quite make room for them anymore.

So don't sweat this. Let it go. Take the high road.

Posted by: ry at February 19, 2006 11:49 PM

KCSteve, actually, she just has a bug up her butt.

SWWBO hardly *ever* uses the confusing email address (which dates back from the very early days, before she struck out on her own.

She just has a bug up her butt.

Posted by: John of Argghhh! at February 20, 2006 4:57 AM

Heh. Best part, Ry - I *am* naturalized, because of a quirk in the system, having been born overseas. Even though to American parents abroad on government business.

That's a quirk they fixed in the 70's after some people like me sued, pointing out that the technical outcome of the was things were going is that people like us couldn't run for President.

As for the rest, yeah, yer right. But SWWBO's gotten a lotta traffic for doing this... and I ain't hardly got none fer my way o' dealin'.

Snerk.

Posted by: John of Argghhh! at February 20, 2006 5:16 AM

Here's the problem I see with some of your analysis John: I don't know this stuff about you and I talk to you more than Schlussel does. how the hell is she supposed to know that you, and not Beth by the way, are naturalized instead of 'native son'(you sure it isn't having a Canucker in the woodshed? No punching in the face please, not in the face.), and all that entails in this discussion? When trying to understand someone trying to understand you only what they know about you is germane. Not the whole story. I'm used to being an idiot, so it's easier for me to figure out what idiots do than you and SWWBO, apparently.

Posted by: ry at February 20, 2006 12:45 PM

You're suffering from fractionated data, Ry.

Schlussel has been conflating Misha and I all through this, as when she threw in the line about "your precious Denmark" in her response to me early on.

Then, in the brou-ha-ha with SWWBO, she was questioning citizenship again (and I *still* see that as a conflation issue).

The irony (in terms of her tirade) is that technically I *am* naturlized, though not in the manner, nor for the reason, she thinks.

She only brought it up because she was questioning SWWBO and I's patriotism and bona-fides in a childish way.

And despite KCSteve's gallant defense, she still has trouble separating Misha from me in regards who it is that Beth is married to.

She hasn't figured out that Misha ceased being anything in this conversation but a catalyst long ago.

Posted by: John of Argghhh! at February 20, 2006 1:15 PM

Dang, she was awful rude to Beth, who was nice (or at least indulgent) to me when I made silly remarks on her blog and she dint know me from Adam.

The "nicedoggie" thing reminds me of a Stephenson novel, "Snowcrash." In that book, a cyborg dog/security-robot remembered that a human girl was nice to him, and when that human girl was in trouble, actually violated his firmware, exceeding the speed of sound in built-up areas in order to avenge the nice girl who was nice to him.

I trust this is over now, and I won't have to violate any sound (or unsound) barriers to go bite the bad human who was mean to Nice Girl Beth?


Posted by: Justthisguy at February 21, 2006 10:38 PM

I think, JTG, you may go about your regular duties.

But keep a channel open.

Posted by: John of Argghhh! at February 21, 2006 11:09 PM

In these sorts of communications I tend to assume ignorance rather than malice as the first explanation for things. Saves time and bile for where it's worth using.

Occasionally someone figures out that I really do try to live by what I later learned was the old English Gentleman's credo:

"Try to never be unintentionally rude"

I also enjoy turning to Monty Python for inspiration in saying things that have absolutely nothing that exceed a 'G' rating (PG at worst). But only when it's worth taking the time.

Posted by: KCSteve at February 22, 2006 2:47 PM