[The following, by Zach, is crossposted from The Brothers of Judea.]

The Arab-Israeli conflict is an issue about which a large number of people have very strong opinions. I am as familiar with the pro-Palestinian point of view as I am with the pro-Israel point of view, and I have come to accept that from a certain point of view free-thinking, moral, intelligent people can come to support the Palestinians over Israel. Even though that is not my particular view, I can see how others can come to the conclusion.

That being said, I have noticed among the HPers at least, the more scurrilous debating tactics are used far more often by the pro-Palestinian commentators than by the pro-Israel ones. I know that I am not the most objective of observers, and I know that I have my own biases. But in my experience (and I think most objective observers would agree as well) someone who is pro-Palestinian/anti-Zionist is far more likely to use the following tactics:

1. Ad Hominem attacks and insults: This covers everything from "you're an idiot," to "you need to read a book." Of all the tactics, this is the one that Zionists use the most as well, but insults are just part of the discourse on the Internet. I am not going to get too hung up about it. Here's an example.

2. The "Hasbara" accusation: Say what you will about the HP Zionists, but they never accuse their opponents of being paid propagandists in place of a rational argument. In contrast, even the most moderate of pro-Palestinian posters have used it at least once. Even if their opponents are hasbara, people who are (a) well informed and (b) in the right should be able to win the argument anyway. In the interests of full disclosure, Matt and I sometimes accuse people of "Palsbara" but that is intended to be ironic. Here is an example.

3. Copy-Bombing: Zionists use this one every now and then as well, but I have seen pro-Palestinian posters far more often use the tactic of copying and pasting large sections of text with which to spam a thread. Some posters like "eileenflemingwawa" only communicate in that way. Sometimes with the use of a plagiarism detector Matt has found that they get their copy-bombs from sites like Stormfront and Electronic Intifada. No lie. Here is an example.

4. Waving the bloody shirt: In place of a rational argument pro-Palestinian commentators will demand that their opponents feel sorry for the Palestinians, otherwise they will accuse them of being "heartless" and "racist." This is a failed tactic because most people do feel sorry for the Palestinians. I certainly do. That doesn't make them right. Here is an example.

5. Playing the race card: As much as the pro-Palestinian HPers claim that they are falsely accused of anti-Semitism, they will accuse their opponents of racism (or "Islamophobia") at the slightest provocation. Zionists do accuse their opponents of anti-Semitism/having a prejudice against Jews, sometimes not always fairly. But as I said, I go by what I see, and I see the race card being used by the AZs far too often for them to complain about the other side doing it. Here is an example.

6. Dredging up the past: Pro-Palestinian posters love talking about what is (for this conflict) ancient history. Things like the USS Liberty, Deir Yassin, Sabria and Shatila are all copy bombed or spammed about, even though they don't have anything to do with the subject at hand. In contrast, Zionist posters don't dredge up Arab atrocities like the Hebron Massacre or the Munich Olympics attack, though they very easily could. Here is an example.

7. False Choices: A new tactic that I have noticed among the HPers is the use of the false choice: Their opponents must either agree that Israel is evil or be labeled "racist," "uncivilized," "immoral," etc. This argument most normally takes the form of the HPer saying, "The whole world condemns Israel for it's actions during Cast Lead," or more often, "all civilized people are sick of Israel's continual occupation of Palestinian lands." It is a pretty transparent form for an argument to take, and in my experience it is done exclusively by pro-Palestinian commentators. Here is an example.

Does all of this mean that Israel is right and the Palestinians are wrong? I don't know for sure, but I'm just saying....I don't see the Zionists using these debating tactics. They don't need them. I think that should tell you something.