Everyone an Anti-Semite

For reasons I can't quite comprehend, even some pretty hardened TNR-haters seem to see Leon Wieseltier as making a positive contribution to the world. Certainly, some very good stuff appears in the back of the book over there, but the man's own work is a kind of writing-as-thuggery. Anyways, it seems I have to add my colleague Andrew Sullivan to the ever-growing list of people TNR deems motivated by hatred of Jews. The context -- Bill Kristol sitting in his partisan hack armchair and determining that Barack Obama's Christian faith is insincere:

And now for the grossly undialectical bit. The ink on the Times was not yet dry when Andrew Sullivan rushed to the defense of his idol, I mean Obama. When one types all the time, sooner or later everything will be typed, and so Sullivan, in his fury against Kristol, typed this: "A non-Christian manipulator of Christianity is calling a Christian a liar about his faith." Ponder that early adjective. It is Jew baiting. I was not aware that only Christians can judge Christians, or that there are things about which a Jew cannot call a Christian a liar. If Kristol is wrong about Obama, it is not because Kristol is a Jew. So this fills me with a certain paschal wrath. Nice little blog you have there, Obama boy. Pity if frogs or locusts should happen to it. Let my people be!

Um . . . really . . . noting the irony of Kristol's attack is now "Jew-baiting"? We seem to be defining our problems down here. But in Wieseltier's view, this is the equivalent of enslaving the entire people of Israel. And Wieseltier himself is, I guess, Moses? How preposterous. And this isn't a blog post -- Wieseltier has, nominally, an editor who ought to be able to engage in some quality control.

Comments

I am missing something in your argument.

I think that would be a hyperlink to the offending Wieseltier article. It really would help us to judge the merits of your argument. Y'know?

Posted by Jsilverheels | April 20, 2008 5:13 PM

Bill Kristol is utterly loathsome. That Cheshire Cat grin makes me want to throttle him with my bare hands. How is it that such crazies end up in such exalted positions? And all this talk about people and their "idols" just depresses the shit out of me too. What the hell? One can't even favour candidates now, it appears, without being branded some kind of cult follower. Sullivan is an intelligent, rational fellow. Leave em alone ... How about them generals in collusion with Pentagon PR maneuvers? There's a worthy target for some high falutin outrage. Heaven help us.

PS -- "Obama boy ..." Jesus, Mary, and Moses!

Posted by charlotte | April 20, 2008 5:21 PM

Lmao, No. Nobody should link to that sophistic nutjob.

If you 'need a link' to judge the merits of the quoted argument, you're not really an honest broken and you're just trolling for a link to TNR.

Posted by Soullite | April 20, 2008 5:22 PM

Why the hell does TNR have Brad Plumer and Jon Cohn on staff? I wish they didn't -- it'd make it so much easier to hate them.

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | April 20, 2008 5:23 PM

As Gore Vidal has said, Leon Wieseltier has very important hair.

Posted by mad6798j | April 20, 2008 5:27 PM

Yeah, Wieseltier is absolutely right. To say that the Sullivan attack is merely "noting the irony of Kristol's attack" is odd. It's as if Matthew said about the Protocols of the Elders of Zion: "Um . . . really . . . now writing a false history is anti-semitism?"

Posted by Al | April 20, 2008 5:29 PM

TNR is just a rag. Occasionally they'll make a good or insightful point, but most of the time it's just a bunch of nutjobs (i.e. Peretz) sounding off.

Posted by Ivan | April 20, 2008 5:30 PM

Of course Kristol is not wrong because he's Jewish, he's wrong because he's Bill Kristol and being wrong is what he does.

Posted by Kyle | April 20, 2008 5:44 PM

I think there might be an element of technological Ludditism in Wieseltier's anger.

Back a decade or so ago, people like W. and Kristol were the top editors serving as controlling gate-keepers to leading opinion magazines such as TNR and the Weekly Standard. Casually insulting them was very risky for the punditariat since they might blacklist you from their pages and pan your next book so it rarely happened.

Now, TNR's circulation has gone into free-fall, the magazine has eliminated half their annual issues, nobody pays much attention to it any longer, and (who knows) it may even close once the new owners get sick of the huge annual losses.

So after a couple of decades at the top of the punditry food-chain, Wieseltier looks out at the world and sees his opinion-forming gate-keeper replacement as...young Matthew Yglesias, who's even too lazy to worry about spelling and endless typos.

Given this sad picture, I'm a little surprised poor Leon hasn't already gone the Marilyn Monroe route, and departed our ungrateful world through a bottle of sleeping pills...

Posted by RKU | April 20, 2008 5:47 PM

"Nice little blog you have there, Obama boy."

1. Regardless, how is this Obama's fault?! Sullivan is definitely a cheerleader, but I don't see him in any way as a his surrogate.

2. "boy"

Posted by Chasseur | April 20, 2008 5:57 PM

I wrote a hit piece on Wieseltier a little while back that Harper's and The American Conservative were just crazy about, but it was a tad outre for them at the time. Now, I've gotta get the thing out there. I can't remember the exact thing that Christ said, but it fit this little morlock to a T exposing him for the callow sophist and gaudy poltroon he is. Stay tuned.

Posted by Trevor | April 20, 2008 5:57 PM

The best thing about this is that three weeks ago, David Frum was on bloggingheads worrying that in an Obama presidency there would be a tendency to claim all political critics were anti-black. Gawd, I love the neocons. I wish there were some way to pair them up in some sort of "thesis/antithesis/null as synthesis" manner. Just for the humor value.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | April 20, 2008 6:00 PM

TNR is a silly magazine with chauvinist writers that determine anything and everything to be anit-semetic. I mean, no one could ever disagree on issues concerning religion, the Israel-Palestine conflict, the middle east, or war without being anti semitic. It's just a fact. If you dont agree with TNR you are a rabid anti-semite in line with hitler, seeking to drive the Jews into the sea. It's a fact.

I see someone already invoked the protocols...one of the standard trump cards brought out by the anti-semitism baiters.

Leon has been playing this game for so long, it is time he found a better hobby. Knitting maybe?

Posted by jeff | April 20, 2008 6:02 PM

Chausser: He is referring to Sullivan as "Obama boy," not Obama himself.

I also think the last two lines were meant as a joke, not a serious comparison of Sullivan and Pharoah. In general Wieseltier seems to have the better of the argument, in my opinion.

Posted by James Kabala | April 20, 2008 6:03 PM

Andrew Sullivan may be risibly myopic in his hero-worship (Obama, McCain) and excessive in his hatred of allegedly inauthentic politicians like Hillary Clinton, but he's no anti-Semite. And he's right to object to Kristol's steaming pile of crap. (What was Pinch Sulzberger thinking?) Let's recall that it was just a few months ago that Wieseltier described Clinton -- a twice-elected Senator of one of the most powerful states in this country -- a "hellish housewife" to Maureen Dowd.

With Wieseltier, Kristol and NPod, one sees a certain Jewish man of letters who has, frankly, lost it . . . blame it on crazy Israel stuff, deep-seated loathing of the goyim, whatever. I, for one, am thrilled with the new generation of progressive Jewish voices, as in Yglesias, Klein and Marshall. High time for them to assume their rightful place at the pundits' table.

Posted by BryklynLibrul | April 20, 2008 6:04 PM

"Nice little blog you have there, Obama boy."

Wow, the most effective school yard taunt I've heard since 3rd grade.

Posted by Herb | April 20, 2008 6:04 PM

As a practicing Jew, I would personally serve a year in jail if it meant Bill Kristol would be kicked permanently out of my religion.

Frauds like Kristol, Lieberman and right wing radio apologists like Dennis Prager and Michael Medved are the Uncle Toms of Jewry. They sell out their people to Christian power to help their own careers on a daily basis.

They are as shameful as any Jew that has ever lived.

Posted by WinSmith | April 20, 2008 6:05 PM

C'mon, people, Leon is just making the anodyne point that a person need not be part of a group to comment on the group. Really -- does anybody think he would object if somebody said he was an insincere JEW?

Posted by dj moonbat | April 20, 2008 6:08 PM

More TNR/Peretz/Wieseltier bashing please, Matt. You are behind on your quota.

Posted by otto | April 20, 2008 6:18 PM

You know, this question is a bit offtopic, but slightly tangent...

Why is Isreal considered America's "little brother" as it were, which must be defended by us no matter what? Is it because it is our only ally in the region? Must we threaten to defend them from all opponents, even though IIRC, they are well-equipped to defend themselves in most situations?

I just do not understand why politicians go out of their way to pre-threaten any faction that would dare attack Isreal. Is it a strategic reason, or are they just alot of deep seated Jewish lobbyists crying out for these statements?

Posted by LnGrrrR | April 20, 2008 6:19 PM

Oy, I can see it all now. This is going to be the neo-cons' campaign tactic -- same as it was waged against those who were opposed to their crazy ideas which led to the Iraq War. They're already pushing the Obama as anti-semite smear and now it will be extended to anyone who supports Obama and of course, any jew who supports him must obviously be self-loathing, right? Well count me as self-loathing LEON if being jewish means one has to stick up for a thug like Kristol just because he is jewish. Good grief -- if these nuts think they can pull this whopper again, they'll get a rude awakening. The majority of americans now see the disaster they conned this country into -- and the great irony of it all is that it didn't make the US or Israel any safer -- quite the opposite. And oh yeah -- while I am suitably pissed -- that nuclear umbrella Hillary wants to extend over the entire middle east -- lifted straight our of a Krauthammer column! This is shear insanity. Folks, we are going to have to rise up in the streets if the Clintons try to steal this election. Hillary gave away any credibility on her foreign policy insight in this last debate. She's thinking like a neocon. Is it any wonder they've been assisting her during this campaign?

Posted by donna L. | April 20, 2008 6:31 PM

Re Obama

Senator Obama says that, if elected, he will push for a Israeli/Palestinian peace deal starting from day one. The translation of this is that he will show his true colors by leaning on the advice of antisemites Robert Malley and Zbigniew Brzezinski whose aim is to eliminate the State of Israel. A vote for Senator Obama is a vote for Hamas and Hizbollah.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/976437.html

Posted by SLC | April 20, 2008 6:35 PM

SLC= Yigal Amir.

Posted by Freddie | April 20, 2008 6:36 PM

Freddie = Josef Goebbels

Posted by SLC | April 20, 2008 6:39 PM

Is SLC a parody? It's hard to tell if it's a joke, or a raving lunatic.

Posted by Kevin | April 20, 2008 6:44 PM

1) It is not a smear to note that William Kristol has spent years cultivating certain bizarre personalities in the Evangelical right -- and has influenced that Christian faction to develop this insane concept of Israel bringing on the Apocalypse.

Can anyone explain why else someone like Kristol would spend a VACATION with a repulsive creep like Bauer?

2) It is also true that pro-Israel evangelicals like Bauer, Hagee,etc betray some major tenets of Christianity as a result of Kristol's manipulation.

Posted by Don Williams | April 20, 2008 6:45 PM

HA! SLC just proved my point. Smear away until it means nothing anymore.

Posted by Donna L. | April 20, 2008 6:45 PM

SLC = David Duke.

(The whole 'nutjob Jew' thing has to be parody, no? I mean, it's hard to believe that someone who took his religion seriously would be putting on this schtick during Pesach.)

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | April 20, 2008 6:45 PM

Cueing Annie Hall:

"You know, I was having lunch with some guys from NBC, so I said, 'Did you eat yet or what?' And Tom Christie said, 'No, JEW?' Not 'Did you eat?' . . . 'JEW eat?' "He said “No, Jew?” I think he's anti-semitic...I specifically heard him say the word 'Jew!"

Posted by Rid | April 20, 2008 6:52 PM

Isn't Leon Wieseltier's claim that William Kristol is Jewish the biggest anti-Semitic slur in this entire discussion?

Maybe Kristol is Jewish by the Nazis' Nuremberg Laws -- but to say that Kristol's behavior exemplies the Jewish faith seems to me like a pretty nasty smear.

Posted by Don Williams | April 20, 2008 6:52 PM

It isn't a question of standing up for kristol, whether you agree with kristol's views or not, to call him a non-christian manipulator of christianity is wrong, but its a line of thinking sullivan and his ilk have been pushing for a while.

Posted by gordo | April 20, 2008 6:55 PM

Two things: It's very common for people who don't like Obama to accuse everybody who supports his candidacy as some kind of cult follower. It's ridiculous. Also, this would not be the first time I've disliked a column of Leon Weiseltier, and thought it inappropriate. The only one I've liked in recent memory was the one in the last edition of TNR. He's old, he's cranky, and he dislikes Obama. He also makes accusations of anti-semitism quite frequently about people who do not agree with him. It's like a small, but consistent subset of my African-American students who cry racism everytime they get a bad grade or are disciplined. Pathetic, and not exactly conducive to dialogue. Which is exactly why I and many other like Obama. He's not about that at all.

Posted by stimpy | April 20, 2008 6:56 PM

Two things: It's very common for people who don't like Obama to accuse everybody who supports his candidacy as some kind of cult follower. It's ridiculous. Also, this would not be the first time I've disliked a column of Leon Weiseltier, and thought it inappropriate. The only one I've liked in recent memory was the one in the last edition of TNR. He's old, he's cranky, and he dislikes Obama. He also makes accusations of anti-semitism quite frequently about people who do not agree with him. It's like a small, but consistent subset of my African-American students who cry racism everytime they get a bad grade or are disciplined. Pathetic, and not exactly conducive to dialogue. Which is exactly why I and many other like Obama. He's not about that at all.

Posted by stimpy | April 20, 2008 6:56 PM

So.... no answers on that Isreal thing hm? :D

Posted by LnGrrrR | April 20, 2008 7:05 PM

Re Don Williams

What's this? Has Bill Kristol replaced Hiam Saban in the Don Williams catalog of manifest evil? By the way, who the hell is Bauer?

Re pseudonymous in nc

pseudonymous in nc = Don Black

Posted by SLC | April 20, 2008 7:09 PM

To further stimpy's point this is the same as when Clinton's dwindling followers refer to Obama supporters as sexist or misgynists incapable of having an actual problem with Hilary.

Posted by Kyle | April 20, 2008 7:13 PM

Here's the article:

http://www.tnr.com/currentissue/story.html?id=cf73960d-6086-4062-ad63-d9d796e1eff5&p=1

Posted by Bubba | April 20, 2008 7:22 PM

Re gordo's comment "to call him [Kristol] a non-christian manipulator of christianity is wrong "
----------
1) Why? Kristol ISN'T a Christian.

In my opinion, he's not a Jew either. Not, in my opinion, if being Jewish includes a few details like , oh, making a reasonable effort to observe the 10 Commandants.

Posted by Don Williams | April 20, 2008 7:25 PM

Sullivan said nothing against the Jews; he simply noted the irony of a non-Christian daring to judge a Christian's faith. That would have been true had Kristol been a Muslim, atheist, Buddhist, etc.

As for Kristol, he really is a hack. When was the last time he solved any problem, or inspired people?

All he can do is criticize, and as they say, there are no monuments to critics.

Posted by cm | April 20, 2008 7:26 PM

to call him a non-christian manipulator of christianity is wrong

Which part isn't true?

Posted by blah | April 20, 2008 7:27 PM

Correction: "10 Commandants" should read "10 Commandments"

Posted by Don Williams | April 20, 2008 7:28 PM

I don't understand the people trying to defend Kristol here. Assuming their objection to Sullivan's phrasing is offered in good faith, and not just the usual apologetics, I mean. I don't think it's the most witty and pithy thing that you could say to capture the vulgarity of the neo-con set policing Christian sincerity, given their bankrupt alliances, but how is it "Jew baiting" - a nakedly racist practice - to point out that Kristol is in point of fact not a Christian, yet continually engages in Faustian manipulation of dispensationalist and fundamentalist constituencies, who hold a fundamentally instrumental view of Israel as an indicator of end times, in their effort to heighten polarisation and bind political alliances on the right. That type of pact is the true betrayal of Israel and Judaism, but Hawkish players in the Liberal Democratic tradition continue to make wrong-headed apology for the practice by ignoring it and defending the neo-cons.

I think Sullivan's plea that repeated professions of personal faith should receive basic acceptance is generally just good manners, but I don't see that Kristol has anything approaching good manners in any event. The point above stands without expecting basic manner from a crude polemicist like him.

Posted by Will Fettes | April 20, 2008 7:28 PM

Here's something else I am really tired of: the right wing acting as if they have some hotline to God, or some special insight when it comes to religion.

How dare Kristol dare to pass judgement on anyone else's faith? Who appointed him God?

This has nothing to do with whether one is a Jew or Christian or Buddhist or atheist, etc...it has to do with humility vs arrogance.

And it is the height of arrogance for Kristol to judge someone else's faith.

And so far as being religious goes, where were the conservative religious leaders in speaking out against the Iraq war, or about issues like Abu Ghraib and slavery?

People like Kristol have manipulated the media into being dupes for this administration in all sorts of immoral ways.

Posted by cm | April 20, 2008 7:33 PM

LnGrrrR:

To even just *ask* such a monstrously evil and anti-Semitic policy question is to be worse than Hitler and Hamas combined, as Leon Wieseltier would gladly inform you in extremely loud and colorful language...

Posted by RKU | April 20, 2008 7:35 PM

It's also very badly written. It sounds like something from the comments here.

Posted by Exile on Ericsson St. | April 20, 2008 7:39 PM

Does the frogs and locust comment even make sense?

Posted by blah | April 20, 2008 7:45 PM

"It isn't a question of standing up for kristol, whether you agree with kristol's views or not, to call him a non-christian manipulator of christianity is wrong . . . "

Gordo,
If Kristol is a Jew, he is by definition a non-Christian. It's an inarguable fact. Moreover, in his post Sullivan expresses doubts about the appropriateness of someone not an adherent of a faith to be questioning the sincerity of a declared adherent of that faith--or, for that matter, for anyone to challenge the genuineness of anyone's faith. I have to agree with that, too.

Not to psychoanalyze here, but I suspect Sullivan struck out at Kristol as he did not just because of his support for Obama but because I imagine he gets all sorts of mail that questions the sincerity of his own faith. That has to get wearying. I mean, I loathe Pat Robertson; but the last thing I'd do as a fellow Christian--tempting though it is--would be to question his faith's genuineness.

Posted by John B. | April 20, 2008 7:49 PM

This is sophistry. It sounds like Wieseltier has a personal grudge against Sullivan and wanted to insult him in the strongest terms he could think of. Also, if we're talking about discrimination, I find the use of the word "boy" when referring to a middle aged man to be very interesting. Why did TNR print this crap?

Posted by Will | April 20, 2008 7:53 PM

Re SLC's comment "By the way, who the hell is Bauer?"
-----------------
The New York Times had a story in 2002 re the weird ..er.. relationship between Gary Bauer and William Kristol. See http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9505E1D8103FF932A15757C0A9649C8B63&scp=1&sq=%22Israel+Winning+Broad+Support+%22&st=nyt

Some excerpts:

"Gary L. Bauer, the Christian conservative who grew up as a janitor's son in Kentucky, and William Kristol, the scion of New York Jewish intellectuals, long ago forged an unlikely but close friendship as warriors of the right.

They have fought together on issues like promoting family values and the Supreme Court nomination of Clarence Thomas. But the cause that now rivets them both is Israel, and their joint, consuming devotion to it illustrates the deep pro-Israel sentiment in the conservative movement. "
---------
"Republicans attribute the conservative support for Israel to many factors, including the influence of largely Jewish neoconservatives and the rise of the Christian right, with its belief that the Bible mandates support for Israel. The Likud Party in Israel also built ties to conservatives. "
---------------
"''You have one of the most interesting political marriages of all times between the largely Jewish neoconservatives and the religious right in firm support for Israel, embodied by Bill Kristol and Gary Bauer,'' Mr. Wittmann said.
-----------
"Mr. Kristol met Mr. Bauer when the two worked under William J. Bennett, in the Reagan Education Department, and fought together for ideas like bringing traditional family values into the classroom. They became such fast friends that for more than a decade their families have vacationed together at the Delaware shore. "

PS Gary Bauer, along with William Kristol and the usual suspects (Richard Perle, Charles Krauthammer,etc) are on the "Board of Advisors" of the Pro-Israel propaganda organ called Foundation for Defense of Democracies.(FDD).

For details on the funding and agenda behind FDD, see
http://www.amconmag.com/11_17_03/article1.html .

Posted by Don Williams | April 20, 2008 7:53 PM

Snotnose "Pope of the Jews" Leon W. and his bleating shofar could single-handedly make pogroms fashionable again. He hates the goyim with every odious ounce of his being and his spittle on the chin epithet for the Palestinians ("filthy shvatz goyim") is his contribuition to magic realism.

Posted by Trevor | April 20, 2008 7:58 PM

"Cueing Annie Hall:"

If you're going to cue Annie Hall, at least quote something funnier, like this:

ALVY And I love what you're wearin'.

Alvy touches the tie Annie is wearing around her neck.

ANNIE
Oh, you do? Yeah? Oh, well, it's uh
... this is, uh ... this tie is a present,
from Grammy Hall.

Annie flips the bottom of the tie.

ALVY
Who? Grammy? Grammy Hall?

ANNIE
(Laughing and nodding her head)
Yeah, my grammy.

ALVY
You're jo- Whatta yuh kid- What did you
do, grow up in a Norman Rockwell painting?

ANNIE
(Laughing)
Yeah, I know.

ALVY
Your grammy!

ANNIE
I know, it's pretty silly, isn't it?

ALVY
Jesus, my-my grammy ... n-never gave
gifts, you know. She-she was too busy
getting raped by Cossacks.

Posted by Fred | April 20, 2008 8:08 PM

Implying idol-worship ("Obama") is a pretty serious Judeo-Christian insult in itself. From an orthodox perspective, it's not much nicer than calling somebody an adulterer, thief, or liar.

Obama sure is proving to be a polarizing figure, through no special fault of his won. The level of rancor and condescension in Wieseltier's paragraph, toward a former editor of TNR no less, is pretty shocking. But it's not especially out of line with the general level of craziness surrounding the Obama/Clinton slugfest. I really hope the left half of this country's political spectrum regains its sanity by August.

I admire both Sullivan and Obama (in the complicated, adult way one can admire complex, flawed people), so to see them both insulted so crassly in one swipe does not fill me with admiration for the smearer. Sullivan's advocacy tends to be so powerful -- because of his gifts as a writer -- that it often fills his opponents on any given issue with irrational hatred. He takes a lot more and a lot crasser shots than he delivers to others.

Posted by Ban Johnson | April 20, 2008 8:11 PM

It could T.U.C.C.'s church bulletins praising Hamas, Robert Malley's apologia for the second
intifada.(insisting Ehud Barak hadn't given up yet enough land to the P.A.) McPeak echoing the Saudi line, that Jews are the major problem in the Middle East. Samantha Power's insistance on military intervention to force the Jews to give up more land; ignoring the genocidal orientations of the Syrians, Iranians, et al. Seriously Matthew you want Israel to retreat to the '49
armistice line, to the '36 White Paper. What would be considered enough so as to hold these other parties to account.

Posted by narciso | April 20, 2008 8:12 PM

It is funny to see how apoplectic lefty NY Times readers have gotten from seeing Bill Kristol's byline on the Op/Ed page. You know, you can ignore his columns, just like moderate and conservative Times readers have been ignoring Maureen Dowd and Frank Rich for years.

Posted by Fred | April 20, 2008 8:12 PM

you can ignore his columns, just like moderate and conservative Times readers have been ignoring Maureen Dowd and Frank Rich for years.

I think I speak for millions of lefties when I say that Maureen Dowd is--and has been for years--as apoplexy-inducing as William Kristol.

Posted by James Gary | April 20, 2008 8:16 PM

RKU,

Ha! It does very often seem to be taken as a matter of course. It just has never made sense to me, and I've not yet seen the coherent argument put forth for it.

Posted by LnGrrrR | April 20, 2008 8:18 PM

Please excuse me for saying so, but Maureen Dowd is a catty tramp. She is a wonderful reason why our political discourse is so shallow; because she, herself, is shallow, and can not help but wallow in the muck and mire.

"Lefties" do not get apoplectic because Kristol is on the Op-Ed page, per se. They are apoplectic because hearing him talk is like hearing O'Brien convince Winston Smith that 2+2 can equal five, or three, or whatever else the Party wishes it to be. That does seem to be the mindset among current water-carriers for the Administration right now, and yes, it does tend to infuriate those who try to base their worldview in things like logic and experience.

Posted by LnGrrrR | April 20, 2008 8:29 PM

It is funny to see how apoplectic lefty NY Times readers have gotten from seeing Bill Kristol's byline on the Op/Ed page. You know, you can ignore his columns

Well, Fred, those of us on the left generally don't believe in closing our eyes and hoping that bad things magically go away.

But I can understand why you'd want to do that. You'd find it pretty hard to sleep at night if you spent any time thinking about all the people you've killed.

Posted by ML | April 20, 2008 8:35 PM

Re Fred

Maureen Dowd and Bill Kristol do have one thing in common. They are both morons.

Re Trevor

"Snotnose "Pope of the Jews" Leon W. and his bleating shofar could single-handedly make pogroms fashionable again. He hates the goyim with every odious ounce of his being and his spittle on the chin epithet for the Palestinians ("filthy shvatz goyim") is his contribuition to magic realism."

Replace Palestinian and goyim with Jew and this paragraph could have been written by Mr. trevor, Hollywood screen writer and son of a federal judge appointed by Tricky Dick Nixon.

Re Don Williams

I have heard of Gary Bauer. Isn't he under investigation for some influence peddling scheme?

Posted by SLC | April 20, 2008 8:35 PM

I get very puzzled these days about the old terms "red-baiting", "race-baiting" and "Jew-baiting". They seem to be used in so many confusing and inconsistent ways it is hard to know anymore what is being said.

But my understanding is that the origin of the term "Jew-baiting" specifically refers to certain odious traditions of deliberately taunting and mocking Jews during Passover. With his talk about "paschal wrath" is Wieseltier honestly suggesting that Sullivan is not just displaying antisemitism, but is engaged in some kind of deliberate Passover hit job?

Posted by Dan Kervick | April 20, 2008 8:40 PM

Re Trevor
"Snotnose "Pope of the Jews" Leon W. and his bleating shofar could single-handedly make pogroms fashionable again. He hates the goyim with every odious ounce of his being and his spittle on the chin epithet for the Palestinians ("filthy shvatz goyim") is his contribuition to magic realism."

"Replace Palestinian and goyim with Jew and this paragraph could have been written by Mr. trevor, Hollywood screen writer and son of a federal judge appointed by Tricky Dick Nixon." (SLC)

SLC, I love the personal interest. I need a clean, reliable shabbas Jew to do my windows. How's next Sunday?

Posted by Trevor | April 20, 2008 8:46 PM

Re Trevor

Gee, Mr. Trevor is a church-going Christian, rather a rare commodity amongst Hollywood screen writers, or any Hollywood denizens for that matter. Except of course for Mel Gibson, undoubtedly one of Mr. Trevors' heroes.

Posted by SLC | April 20, 2008 8:53 PM

Kahanist or anti-semitic parody? All we know is that SLC is a master of the creepy ad hominem. Oh, and a chickenshit.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | April 20, 2008 9:22 PM

Maureen Dowd doesn't deserved to be lumped in with Bill Kristol.

Kristol is pretty much an unimaginative hack writer whose political agenda is inseparable from his writing, and not even in any impressive rhetorical way.

Dowd may be catty and superficial, but she has an original style and a novelist's gift for the telling detail. There's a place for her approach in political commentary -- I only wish she didn't inspire so many second-rate copycats.

Posted by Ban Johnson | April 20, 2008 9:25 PM

"Gee, Mr. Trevor is a church-going Christian, rather a rare commodity amongst Hollywood screen writers, or any Hollywood denizens for that matter. Except of course for Mel Gibson, undoubtedly one of Mr. Trevors' heroes."

Mel, a very underrrated actor. Met him only once a few years back at his daughter's h.s. graduation. A small private school run by a friend of mine and her mom, and irony of ironies - Mazel tov! They're Jews!

Posted by Trevor | April 20, 2008 9:48 PM

Sullivan's response to Wieseltier is classic horseshit. He claims to not be antisemitic, states that his years at TNR as proof of philo-semitism, laments that he is wounded by the accusation, then rips Wieseltier as anti-homosexual for calling him "boy".

"You called me a nazi!" "You called me a pole-smoker!"

They are both useless, but I have particluar contempt for Sullivan because I've read his stuff. He was a cheerleader for the Iraq war and shined the shoes of all the neocons. Now that the neocons are down and out, this parasite sniffs the throne of Obama. Sullivan has no shame.

Posted by max bootlicker | April 20, 2008 9:51 PM

Re Trevor's comment "Mel, a very underrrated actor. Met him only once a few years back at his daughter's h.s. graduation. A small private school run by a friend of mine and her mom, and irony of ironies - Mazel tov! They're Jews!"
---------
Those tuition bills will make them turn on you every time.

Posted by Don Williams | April 20, 2008 9:53 PM

"Correction: "10 Commandants" should read "10 Commandments""

No, you had it right the first time. If you follow the 10 Commandments, you're following 10 Commandants - because they take over your head like a German invasion (or, updated, a US invasion).

"Is SLC a parody? It's hard to tell if it's a joke, or a raving lunatic."

It's a raving lunatic who is a joke here.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | April 20, 2008 9:54 PM

Just take my gold fillings, why don't you?

Posted by Don Williams | April 20, 2008 9:55 PM

Some people should get a life, fast.

Posted by The sage passed over | April 20, 2008 9:59 PM

I don't believe kristol is a manipulator of christianity. He as a republican operative has worked with some christian groups that are somewhat unsavory, but democrats do the same thing (look at jeremiah wright).

As far as questioning the legitmancy of someone else's religion there is nothing wrong with that. One doesn't need to be a muslim to point out that someone like farrakahn isn't a legitmant muslim.

Posted by gordo | April 20, 2008 11:20 PM

Reading the quote, I suspect "Obama boy" is intended to be a reference to Obama Girl. In other words, it's probably intended to be a veiled homophobic slur, the kind you can righteously deny when you're called out on it..

Posted by ANM | April 20, 2008 11:20 PM

Re Ban Johnson

Maureen Dowd is a moron. I suspect that James Reston turns over in his grave every time one of her inane columns appears on the op-ed pages of a once great newspaper. Although I have to admit that Tom Friedmans' IQ only exceeds hers by single digits.

Re Trevor

Mel Gibson is also a drunk and an antisemitic Holocaust denier, just like his old man. Never having seen any of his movies, I can't comment on his acting ability. But after all, Spencer Tracy, a great actor, was also a drunk. By the way, did Mr. Trevor ever run into his fellow screenwriter Paul Jarrico who died in an automobile accident in, I believe, 1997 on Mulholland Drive returning from a dinner in his honor? Probably a a few too many, just like Mr. Trevors' hero, Mel Gibson. Driving under the influence on Mulholland Drive at night is not a smart thing to do.

Re pseudonymous in nc

Since Mr. pseudonymous also does not comment under his name, calling somebody else a chickenshit is rather like the pot calling the kettle black.

Re Richard Steven Hack

A while back on a previous thread, Mr. Hack informed us that he robbed a bank as a part of a project to overthrow the government, good anarchist he. Somehow, the poor slob of a teller who faced the wrong end of Mr. Hacks gun could hardly be considered a member of the ruling class. No, Mr. Hack just wanted money and was too lazy to work for it and thought that armed bank robbery was easy pickings. His 9 years in Leavenworth should have taught him that crime, at least on his level, doesn't pay. It pays pretty well for crooks like Eric Prince however.

Posted by SLC | April 20, 2008 11:38 PM

I don't believe kristol is a manipulator of christianity.

Then you don't know a damn thing about the Straussians.

Posted by ML | April 20, 2008 11:39 PM

Don Williams,

How many times are you going to post? Why not just kill yourself already? This is just sad.

Posted by Kevin | April 20, 2008 11:44 PM

There is a lot of weirdness to sort through, and the absence of links does not help.

First, Kristol did not say, as Sully claims, that Obama is faking his own faith. Kistol wrote this:

But it’s one thing for a German thinker to assert that “religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature.” It’s another thing for an American presidential candidate to claim that we “cling to ... religion” out of economic frustration.

And it’s a particularly odd claim for Barack Obama to make. After all, in his speech at the 2004 Democratic convention, he emphasized with pride that blue-state Americans, too, “worship an awesome God.”

What’s more, he’s written eloquently in his memoir, “Dreams From My Father,” of his own religious awakening upon hearing the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s “Audacity of Hope” sermon, and of the complexity of his religious commitment. You’d think he’d do other believers the courtesy of assuming they’ve also thought about their religious beliefs.

Clear enough - Obama takes his own beliefs seriously, but no one elses's. Well, not if they are poor.

Secondly, the person who actually accused Obama of a cynical manipulation of his faith was Matt Yglesias, who explained a while back that Obama picked the Wright church to pick up some street cred. Might be true, but it is surely more cynical and deserving of attack than what Kristol wrote. Here we go:

Obama's going to have a hard time explaining that I take to be the truth, namely that his relationship with Trinity has been a bit cynical from the beginning. After all, before Obama was a half-black guy running in a mostly white country he was a half-white guy running in a mostly black neighborhood. At that time, associating with a very large, influential, local church with black nationalist overtones was a clear political asset (it's also clear in his book that it made him, personally, feel "blacker" to belong to a slightly kitschy black church).

Posted by Tom Maguire | April 20, 2008 11:44 PM

There's something rather touching about Trevor and Don Williams as they make bad jokes and rant about the Jews. Post after post... after post. It's approaching the pahtological.

Matt must be proud to offer two such classy guys with such sparkling wit a constant forum.

Posted by Anger Management Class | April 20, 2008 11:55 PM

There's something rather touching about Trevor and Don Williams as they make bad jokes and rant about the Jews. Post after post... after post. It's approaching the pahtological.

Matt must be proud to offer two such classy guys with such sparkling wit a constant forum.

Posted by Anger Management Class | April 20, 2008 11:57 PM

There's something rather touching about Trevor and Don Williams as they make bad jokes and rant about the Jews. Post after post... after post. It's approaching the pahtological.

Matt must be proud to offer two such classy guys with such sparkling wit a constant forum.

Posted by Anger Management Class | April 20, 2008 11:57 PM

There's something rather touching about Trevor and Don Williams as they make bad jokes and rant about the Jews. Post after post... after post. It's approaching the pahtological.

Matt must be proud to offer two such classy guys with such sparkling wit a constant forum.

Posted by Anger Management Class | April 20, 2008 11:57 PM

Matt must be proud to offer two such classy guys with such sparkling wit a constant forum.

Wait for Chris Ford to show up.

Posted by blah | April 21, 2008 12:05 AM

Looks like our friend "Anger Management Class" has an unfortunate stutter...

Posted by RKU | April 21, 2008 12:54 AM

Seriously, with threads like this, it's like getting together at the diner and hanging out with the fellas.

Posted by Freddie | April 21, 2008 12:58 AM

Since Mr. pseudonymous also does not comment under his name, calling somebody else a chickenshit is rather like the pot calling the kettle black.

Save that since it's SLC who takes an inordinate interest in the biographies of other commenters and expelling vast quantities of dogshit in their direction, his/her/its reticence does bespeak a an equally vast amount of cowardice.

I merely speculate on whether SLC is a sick Kahanist or a sick Jew-despising parodist: the sickness itself is defining and self-evident.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | April 21, 2008 2:13 AM

I is an other
jewgreek = greekjew

Posted by rimbjoyc | April 21, 2008 4:53 AM

You gotta laugh at SLC - the one-trick whore, er, pony...

SLC is always talking about the "poor teller" I pointed a gun at. First, I never pointed a gun at any teller in the process of my two bank robberies. Second, I also made sure there was no bullet in the chamber to make sure nobody got hurt who wasn't trying to hurt me.

I doubt SLC's crowd of Nazis down in Israel who routinely beat up and murder little kids and randomly shoot Palestinian civilians are so considerate. Only scum Zionists like SLC don't care who gets killed as long as they aren't Israelis - excuse me, right wing Israelies. It seems most Likudniks don't care if the left-wing Israelis get killed as a result of their policies of apartheid and ethnic cleansing.

As examples:

Our reign of terror, by the Israeli army
n shocking testimonies that reveal abductions, beatings and torture, Israeli soldiers confess the horror they have visited on Hebron
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/our-reign-of-terror-by-the-israeli-army-811769.html

Money Quotes:

And they are certainly criminal: the incidents in which Palestinian vehicles are stopped for no good reason, the windows smashed and the occupants beaten up for talking back - for saying, for example, they are on the way to hospital; the theft of tobacco from a Palestinian shopkeeper who is then beaten "to a pulp" when he complains; the throwing of stun grenades through the windows of mosques as people prayed. And worse.

Then there is the inter-clan Palestinian fight: "We were told to go over there and find out what was happening. Our [platoon] commander was a bit screwed in the head. So anyway, we would locate houses, and he'd tell us: 'OK, anyone you see armed with stones or whatever, I don't care what - shoot.' Everyone would think it's the clan fight..." Did the company commander know? "No one knew. Platoon's private initiative, these actions."

Did you hit them? "Sure, not just them. Anyone who came close ... Particularly legs and arms. Some people also sustained abdominal hits ... I think at some point they realised it was soldiers, but they were not sure. Because they could not believe soldiers would do this, you know."

Or using a 10-year-old child to locate and punish a 15-year-old stone-thrower: "So we got hold of just some Palestinian kid nearby, we knew that he knew who it had been. Let's say we beat him a little, to put it mildly, until he told us. You know, the way it goes when your mind's already screwed up, and you have no more patience for Hebron and Arabs and Jews there.

"The kid was really scared, realising we were on to him. We had a commander with us who was a bit of a fanatic. We gave the boy over to this commander, and he really beat the shit out of him ... He showed him all kinds of holes in the ground along the way, asking him: 'Is it here you want to die? Or here?' The kid goes, 'No, no!'

"Anyway, the kid was stood up, and couldn't stay standing on his own two feet. He was already crying ... And the commander continues, 'Don't pretend' and kicks him some more. And then [name withheld], who always had a hard time with such things, went in, caught the squad commander and said, 'Don't touch him any more, that's it.' The commander goes, 'You've become a leftie, what?' And he answers, 'No, I just don't want to see such things.'

"We were right next to this, but did nothing. We were indifferent, you know. OK. Only after the fact you start thinking. Not right away. We were doing such things every day ... It had become a habit...

"And the parents saw it. The commander ordered [the mother], 'Don't get any closer.' He cocked his weapon, already had a bullet inside. She was frightened. He put his weapon literally inside the kid's mouth. 'Anyone gets close, I kill him. Don't bug me. I kill. I have no mercy.' So the father ... got hold of the mother and said, 'Calm down, let them be, so they'll leave him alone.'"

But Mr Arbel says that most soldiers are some way between his own extreme and that of the most violent. From just two of his fellow testifiers, you can see what he means.

As one said: "We did all kinds of experiments to see who could do the best split in Abu Snena. We would put [Palestinians] against the wall, make like we were checking them, and ask them to spread their legs. Spread, spread, spread, it was a game to see who could do it best. Or we would check who can hold his breath for longest.

"Choke them. One guy would come, make like he was checking them, and suddenly start yelling like they said something and choke them ... Block their airways; you have to press the adams apple. It's not pleasant. Look at the watch as you're doing it, until he passes out. The one who takes longest to faint wins."

And theft as well as violence. "There's this car accessory shop there. Every time, soldiers would take a tape-disc player, other stuff. This guy, if you go ask him, will tell you plenty of things that soldiers did to him.

"A whole scroll-full ... They would raid his shop regularly. 'Listen, if you tell on us, we'll confiscate your whole store, we'll break everything.' You know, he was afraid to tell. He was already making deals, 'Listen guys, you're damaging me financially.' I personally never took a thing, but I'm telling you, people used to take speakers from him, whole sound systems.

"He'd go, 'Please, give me 500 shekels, I'm losing money here.' 'Listen, if you go on - we'll pick up your whole shop.' 'OK, OK, take it, but listen, don't take more than 10 systems a month.' Something like this.

"'I'm already going bankrupt.' He was so miserable. Guys in our unit used to sell these things back home, make deals with people. People are so stupid."

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | April 21, 2008 5:30 AM

Re Richard Steven Hack

1. Mr. Hack quotes from an article in the Independent. This is something less then an authoritative source of information, given its penchant for publishing pseudoscience and medical woo. About on a par with quoting something from the Star supermarket tabloid.

2. Mr. Hack once again claims that he didn't have a round up the spout while he was sticking up the bank. However, he is rather vague on whether the gun was otherwise loaded. Anyone who believes that Mr. Hack stuck up a bank with an unloaded gun has been snorting the nose candy. If he was using an automatic, not having a round up the spout is nothing but good gun safety practice. Of course, the teller had no way of knowing that. And jacking a round up the spout takes a fraction of a second.

3. Mr. Hack says that he had no intention of hurting anybody, unless somebody tried to hurt him. Gee, Mr. Hack makes it sound like he only had the gun for self defense, in case the bank had an armed guard who might have to be blown away.

Posted by SLC | April 21, 2008 7:52 AM

Re Kevin & Anger Management Class

Mr. Don Williams has stated that he is busy campaigning for Senator Obama. That should tell us all we need to know about the good Senator. Now why would a two fisted Israel basher like Mr. Williams be out campaigning for Senator Obama? One guess.

Posted by SLC | April 21, 2008 7:55 AM

"This is sophistry. It sounds like Wieseltier has a personal grudge against Sullivan and wanted to insult him in the strongest terms he could think of. Also, if we're talking about discrimination, I find the use of the word "boy" when referring to a middle aged man to be very interesting. Why did TNR print this crap?

Posted by Will | April 20, 2008 7:53 PM"

They have a long history of hating each other, which is partly why Peretz, as close friend of Wieseltier, fired him as editor of TNR (the other being that while Sullivan had been attacking Clinton as a sexual deviant, he was discovered to have also been putting up ads on AOL personals for barebacking. He might have also deliberately failed to mention that he's HIV+, but that last part might just be a rumor).

Some of Wieseltier's cultural criticisms are actually rather interesting to read, if not a bit overblown, over-rated and overindulgent. However, his knee-jerk reaction to criticism of himself or just about anyone Jewish is to cry anti-Semitism. Can't we just put Chait in charge of TNR and actually make it intelligent again?

Posted by Reality Man | April 21, 2008 8:07 AM

Perhaps Anger Management Class could point to several examples to substantiate his claim that

"There's something rather touching about Trevor and Don Williams as they make bad jokes and rant about the Jews. Post after post... after post. It's approaching the pahtological."
----------
1) While I have , on occasion, ranted about some some Specific Jews, it is not because they are Jews. It is because they are , in my opinion, committing acts of treason that greatly damage this country while claiming the privileges and benefits of being American citizens.

2) Their claim to be Jews is of relevance only insofar as they cite it to justify their acts and/or claim it should exempt them from judgment and public criticism or when they appear to be acting in secret concert with those who do.

Israeli billionaire Haim Saban, in explaining why he dumped $14 million into the Democratic Party, was pretty upfront to Haaretz that he "is a one issue guy and that issue is Israel."

3) No one thinks it is Anti-Arab to point out that 19 of the Sept 11 attackers were from Saudi Arabia. Indeed, if one is trying to determine some of the motivations for that attack, such an association is highly important. The same goes for trying to figure out what is causing the highly damaging and irrational nature of recent US foreign policy.

4) I have never criticized the Jewish American community as a whole --other than saying that i think it should more forcefully and publicly disassociate itself from those who have helped caused the unnecessary deaths of 4000 US citizens.

I have acknowledged that some Jews -- like MJ Rosenberg and even our Matthew -- are among the most scathing critics of the Neocons and that George Soros has probably done the most to stop them.

Posted by Don Williams | April 21, 2008 8:28 AM

Reality Man, Sullivan attacks the Clintons for many things, but I don't think sexual deviancy is one of them. I could be wrong about how he was attacking them 9 or 10 years ago, but I seriously doubt that "sexual deviancy" was the main thrust, since Sullivan is quite liberal on personal and cultural matters.

Personally, I think getting adulterous blowjobs from one's young intern in the Oval Office is really shoddy behavior from the President of the United States, and, even without the lying under oath about it, should be enough to stain his reputation permanently -- and I voted for the man twice! But I think Sullivan was more about the lying, cynicism, constant spinning, short term thinking and selfishness the Clintons bring to the table.

Posted by Ban Johnson | April 21, 2008 8:31 AM

I dont know this "Weasel"- All I know is that he's a friend of Scooter Libby--and that he attended the Yeshivah of Flatbush

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Wieseltier
The former info tells me what character he is, the latter is quite puzzling. I dont know much about judaism, but have always pictured philosophy and logic to be a cornerstone in the education at such schools.

The Weasel's Claim that Non-Christian is synonymous with Jew is nuts.

Truth to tell I dont care much for any Religion. The World would be a better place without these fundamentalists..Whether they are hiding in Tora Bora,harassing Palestinians in Hebron og planning new Atrocities in the White House.

Posted by Daga | April 21, 2008 8:32 AM

"Reality Man, Sullivan attacks the Clintons for many things, but I don't think sexual deviancy is one of them. I could be wrong about how he was attacking them 9 or 10 years ago, but I seriously doubt that "sexual deviancy" was the main thrust, since Sullivan is quite liberal on personal and cultural matters.

Personally, I think getting adulterous blowjobs from one's young intern in the Oval Office is really shoddy behavior from the President of the United States, and, even without the lying under oath about it, should be enough to stain his reputation permanently -- and I voted for the man twice! But I think Sullivan was more about the lying, cynicism, constant spinning, short term thinking and selfishness the Clintons bring to the table.

Posted by Ban Johnson | April 21, 2008 8:31 AM"

IIRC his attack included something to do with the power discrepancy between Clinton and an intern when pursuing a sexual relationship, but my memory is fuzzy on the details. However, he was attacking Clinton back then for his personal sexual behavior, but didn't take it to the extremes of most Republicans. But you are right that the thrust of Sullivan's attack had more to do with the other things you outline.

Posted by Reality Man | April 21, 2008 8:36 AM

Could someone please get Leon's email from Spencer so we can let the man know personally how we feel about him?

Posted by jw | April 21, 2008 8:53 AM

Re Don Williams

Mr. Williams, right on time, raises the specter of his favorite whipping boy, Hiam Saban. He claims that Mr. Saban has only one interest, namely the well being of the State of Israel. If true, he has a funny way of showing it. In the Haaretz interview that Mr. Williams likes to quote ad nauseum, Mr. Saban apparently is of the opinion that the well being of the State of Israel can best be preserved by the US talking to Hamas, Hizbollah, and Amadinejad and that Bush should be less supportive of Israel. That would seem to be more in line with the approach of Mr. Williams' hero Senator Obama then with the approach of Senator Clinton.

Re Reality Man

The attached link appears to confirm that Mr. Sullivan is HIV+ as it was apparently written by him.

http://www.advocate.com/issue_story_ektid17696.asp

Posted by SLC | April 21, 2008 8:55 AM

Re SLC's comment "Mr. Don Williams has stated that he is busy campaigning for Senator Obama. That should tell us all we need to know about the good Senator"
-----------

Sigh. There's times when calling SLC a horse's ass seems like a deeply unfair insult to the equine species.

I am simply one of probably hundreds of thousands of volunteers for Obama. I could be Hitler's long lost love child and it would still be stupid to say US voters should vote Obama up or down because of me.

Hillary Clinton and John McCain rather obviously sent 4000 men to their deaths --and thousands more to be crippled for life with horrible wounds -- as the price of getting power and money from Big Oil, Big Defense, and the Israel Lobby. And they don't have the slightest regret.

I have the forlorn hope that Barack Obama will not be seduced into such murderous psychopathy. At his rally here in Paoli, he noted that Hillary has totally sold herself to the deceitful, amoral, corrupt culture of Washington.

He said the he went to Washington to change Washington --not to let Washington change him.
I know -- I smirked too. Admittedly, It's a long shot but I think we should give him the chance.
God knows we don't have any other options.

Posted by Don Williams | April 21, 2008 9:00 AM

SLC claims to have never seen a Mel Gibson movie. Not one. Ever. He's either a liar or so out of touch with American culture that he's not worth listening to.

Posted by vanya | April 21, 2008 9:14 AM

Re vanya

Mr. vanya considers Mel Gibson the apotheosis of American culture? I have to admit to preferring the New York Philharmonic to Mr. Gibson but that type of culture appears to be in a precipitous decline amongst the vox populi.

Re Don Williams

As expected, it would appear that Mr. Williams supports Senator Obama because he considers him to be the least pro-Israel candidate. On this, we are in complete agreement. Anyone with advisers like Robert Malley and Zbigniew Brzezinski would automatically be in that category.

Posted by SLC | April 21, 2008 9:40 AM

SLC wrote:
As expected, it would appear that Mr. Williams supports Senator Obama because he considers him to be the least pro-Israel candidate. On this, we are in complete agreement.
.....

Strange reasoning. Either you suffer from jewish ethocentrisity or bellicose monomania.

Obama is the best antidote to Fascism which threaten to take Root in US. I admit that "Neocrazies" have close ties to AIPAC/Likud,but Israel is much more than those Warmongers. Fact is that most people in Israel wants peace. The problem is that they suffer from the same Hysteria/Paranoia the American public did after 911.

"Why, of course, the people don't want war, (but) the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
- Hermann Göring, April 18, 1946

Posted by Daga | April 21, 2008 10:16 AM

You know what this thread needs…

Petey

Posted by Sharon | April 21, 2008 10:23 AM

Re Daga

"Why, of course, the people don't want war, (but) the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

But Israel is being attacked every day. Has Mr. Daga never heard of Sderot? Or the recent suicide bombing attack on a crossing point between Gaza and Israel?

http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Security/12797.htm

Posted by SLC | April 21, 2008 10:51 AM

Re SLC
"But Israel is being attacked every day. Has Mr. Daga never heard of Sderot? Or the recent suicide bombing attack on a crossing point between Gaza and Israel? "

----------------

Sure. Sometimes news from the Civilization spreds to this remote place. Luckily we dont have the kind of sensorship you experience in US.
Rockets from Gaza have killed less than 5 persons during the 7 years of Intifada. During the same period 3500 israeli was killed in traffic accidents.
4600 palestinians were killed by IDF,among them over 900 children.

http://www.btselem.org/english/statistics/Casualties.asp

Those rockets are a nuisance..and little more. A foolish act of defyance to the occupation/siege.

The only way Israel can stop suicide-bombing is to let the palestinans have a life worth living..and above all: Talk to the adversary,he is after all the one they can make peace with.

Posted by Daga | April 21, 2008 11:46 AM

Re Daga

1. I don't know where Mr. Daga lives, apparently not in the US (nothing wrong with that) but if some organization was firing rockets into his back yard, I strongly suspect that he would be running hollering and screaming to the gendarmes demanding that they put a stop to it.

2. Mr. Daga seems to forget that the Israelis withdrew from the Gaza Strip 2 years ago. Their reward for this was to be subjected to the qassem bombardments.

3. The Palestinians don't want a life, they want the Government of Israel to go out of business. The Government of Israel will agree to go out of business when Mr. Daga sees the back of his own ear (old Arab saying).

Posted by SLC | April 21, 2008 12:02 PM

"But Israel is being attacked every day".

I just wonder what would happen if the wall separating Israel from Gaza would be replaced with a huge mirror. I bet that Israel would be pretty close to self-annihilation, while Gazans would be relatively in much better shape.

Posted by piotr | April 21, 2008 12:17 PM

SLC wrote:
2. Mr. Daga seems to forget that the Israelis withdrew from the Gaza Strip 2 years ago. Their reward for this was to be subjected to the qassem bombardments.

3. The Palestinians don't want a life, they want the Government of Israel to go out of business. The Government of Israel will agree to go out of business when Mr. Daga sees the back of his own ear (old Arab saying).
-----------

Again you show your twisted logic--or lack thereof. The withdrawal of israelis from Gaza was a precondition to the existing suffocation and indiscriminate shelling of Gaza

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4910810.stm

Ad your pct 3. am I not clairvoyant like you, so I cant tell what the palestinians wants,but if you are interested I recommend the "Doha Debates".
Its better to make a comment based on knowledge,not prejudiced stupidity.
The partition in 48 was a big mistake,a costly mistake we'll have to live with for a while. Israel,like all other institutionalized racism is an abomination.
A Country without history,without constitution,without borders,without justice for all and without moral is a Country without much future.

Posted by Daga | April 21, 2008 12:41 PM

By the way, I disagree with Sullivan. The piece of Kristol looks as if the author was totally ignorant about all religions and Marxism to boot, but somehow got familiar with some famous quotations.

But not too many!

The entire column rides on a similarity of Obama said with a sentence preceeding perhaps the most famous utterance of Jewish German philosopher Marx. Other than that, no familiarity with any theology or ideology is betrayed. "Let us compare again. Let us check how does it sound in German. And let us look at Obama again. And Marx again". And pretty soon the column ends.

His exegesis of Paschal messages in the following weaks is tad better -- seems that he refreshed himself at least on Hagaddah, so he can be a theologian for a day. And the result of much thinking is to categorize Clinton as liberal, Obama is multiculturalist, and McCain as Zionist. The depth of it! Wow!

Posted by piotr | April 21, 2008 12:45 PM

I don't know who posted the "why don't you kill yourself" post, but it sure wasn't the same "Kevin" who made the first post under that name.

Posted by Kevin | April 21, 2008 1:03 PM

Re Dega

Well now, Mr. Dega makes his true intentions known. He agrees with the Hamas demand that the Government of Israel agree to go out of business. Again I have news for Mr. Dega, this time a quote from the late and unlamented Nikita Khrushchev. The Government of Israel will agree to go out of business when the shrimps learn to whistle. Meanwhile Mr. Dega is cordially invited to take his comment and deposit it in his posterior orifice.

Re Piotr

Mr. Piotr, a fellow Russian (actually my family is from the Ukraine, which was part of Russia when they left), makes an interesting observation. I think that what the Government of Israel should really do is to stop fucking around and settle with the Hamas terrorists once and for all by imposing Hama Rules on the Gaza Strip.

Posted by SLC | April 21, 2008 1:18 PM

Piotr: marx wasn't jewish, he was a baptized lutheran from birth. He hated jews and advocated against their emancipation.

Posted by gordo | April 21, 2008 1:22 PM

I get tired of Obama claiming to be Christian, without explaining the theology of his church. Rev. Wright preaches black liberation theology, a very radical form of "Christianity." Here is a quote about black liberation theology from its founder, Rev. James Cone, and you be the judge as to whether it sounds like Christianity: ***

“Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community … Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.”

Posted by Fred Jones | April 22, 2008 11:32 AM