SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home The Appalling Crusade to Free Jonathan Pollard; Unhappiness...

TEL AVIV JOURNAL MARCH 6, 2012

The Appalling Crusade to Free Jonathan Pollard; Unhappiness in Jordan; and More

BY MARTIN PERETZ

I. 

It is not the business of Israel, although it seems to be the business of the politicians of Israel, to hector and harass President Obama about the release of Jonathan Pollard, who served as a certified espionage agent of the Jewish state in and against its one truly reliable ally, the United States of America. Maybe Pollard’s sentence was a bit harsher than it should have been. But I don’t even concede that. In any case, there are probably hundreds of thousands of convicts now in jail who can argue that their prison sentence was not equable or even just in the first place. Of course, that’s what the Pollard enthusiasts are saying. Frankly, I find it disgusting that so many Israelis and so many American Jews, too, have the chutzpah to besiege Obama with urgent demands to release Pollard now. Sunday, it was Shimon Peres, presumable in his inimitably unctuous way. Next, it will be Bibi Netanyahu, for whom Pollard’s liberty is one of the dozen earnests his righteous coalition allies have dragged out of him. And isn’t Avigdor Lieberman among the truly righteous? As Bibi surely knows, these folk have no end of exactions on their agenda. One of the reasons that they are so eager to press their case is to show how far and how much they can push the prime minister.

Pollard is no hero of Israel, whatever his adulators may say. He was paid for his filthy work which, in any case, he had offered to do for other countries, including Judaeophobic Pakistan. His moral profile is, then, truly disgusting. 

The president has been on a long learning curve with reference to Israel and both its democratic loyalties and strategic importance. This uneasy trajectory, I am certain, was neither straight nor fast, given especially the “progressive” political circles from which he emerged. He should not be asked to free a spy against our own country to prove again that he has become and is an understanding friend.

 

II.

We haven’t heard much from Jordan, have we? Well, now we have. 

There are alive two King Abdullahs, one in Saudi Arabia, a descendant of a tribe of commoners, the Al Saud. The other monarch with the same name, but with a “II” after it, is the sovereign of Jordan, the son of King Hussein (beloved by nearly everyone save the Palestinians) and, most significantly, a descendant of the Prophet. You probably know the story. The Brits, by which I suppose we mean Captain Lawrence, thought themselves indebted to the Al Saud because of their help against the Ottomans during World War I. Thus it was that the Al Saud inherited the Empty Quarter and beyond, and they now do business with the world as its gas station. Very rich, Wahabi pious, entrapped in a curious strand of heterosexuality: No women in their lives except in bed. The Jordanian king is not made of the same mettle as his father, and he is not especially liked by his people. The queen is hated by them. She is also quite beautiful. Like Marie Antoinette, at least in the movies.

Actually, Queen Rania is gorgeous. She is also extravagant, and her husband can’t quite afford this. In fact, he can’t quite afford it at all. People went into the streets—but not to celebrate—after one of her lavish parties. And her husband was forced to appoint two cabinets in the year 2011.

Despite the discontent, the flowers did not quite bloom in Jordan last spring. But the anemones are blossoming on both sides of the river right now. In the kingdom, however, it has not only been accompanied by general discontent but by actual challenges to the monarch and the Hashemite dynasty, descended from the Prophet though it may be. One aspect of this particular discontent is that it is directed at Palestinians in Jordan. Of course, Jordanians weren’t anything other than Arabs until the British foisted the Emir of Transjordan on them after World War I. Much as the newly self-named Palestinians weren’t more than Arabs until they appropriated the symbols of Jewish Palestine unto themselves. The truth is that they want both countries plus Gaza. Palestinian imperialism, shall we say? 

Now, Abdullah II is not that sympathetic to Palestinian nationalism. He knows that Palestinian nationalists are trying to make him an instrument of their aims … or nothing. The Jordanians, which is to say mostly native Bedouins and now Islamists, have come to despise him because he wants a compromise with all the people who hail from west of the river, a compromise with both the Jews and the Palestinians, the Palestinians in Jordan, that means. Wait for the civil war to come. 

Do you recall “Black September” in 1970? To be sure, many of you were not yet born. Anyway, it’s when the Palestinian Liberation Organization rose against King Hussein. Hussein’s troops smashed the revolt and the revolters, driving several hundred thousand Palestinians into Lebanon where they are still. A grumbling group not allowed to work or to vote, their refugee status going back so many decades that no one actually knows why they are in screwed-up Lebanon in the first place. Yasir Arafat said that from 10,000 to 25,000 Palestinians had been killed by Jordanian troops. Probably a characteristic Arafta exaggeration. Syria tried a tank intervention. Israeli aircraft stopped them in their tracks. This is a part of Jordan’s past. It would not be a bit surprising if it were to turn out to be an auguring of its future.

 

III.

In the end, Pastor Jones and his fanatic chorale of nutcase Christians burned the Koran even after Defense Secretary Robert Gates had pleaded with him not to. As I wrote twice in this space, what the Obama administration should have done was to seek an injunction against the destruction of religious books, an act that has a long and ugly history, a very ugly history. Maybe I am particularly sensitive to this because Jewish books have been long-time kindle for this fire, from the Hebrew Bible to the Talmud right up to secularists Albert Einstein and Sigmund Freud and their pious confreres Franz Rosenzweig and Martin Buber, who, had they still lived in Germany, would have gone into the pyre as well. Well, there is a problem with Rosenzweig: He died in 1929 and he also saw Islam as an antediluvian throwback to paganism. The issue is not neat.

In a way, the refusal of the administration to really try to prevent the book burning was cowardice. It would have offended the ACLU sillies who were already furious at President Obama’s retreats from campaign promises he had made about Guantanamo and legislation passed during the Bush administration. Indeed, the civil liberties union had inserted itself into a case in Michigan, where authorities had tried to obstruct the blessed reverend’s intention to burn someone else’s holy book, by forcing him to provide a “peace bond” sufficient to cover the cost of policing. The union won its case. There were several instances of such provocations and legal confrontations around them. None actually stood up to the issue of the freedom to torch ideas at the stake. Elevated freedom, huh? At the time, there were manifestations all over the world against these firings of the holy tome of Islam, which claimed many lives. 

And now we are faced with the awkward situation that six American soldiers stationed in Afghanistan are accused of what everyone sees as a noxious act. Of course, it is a noxious act … if the soldiers actually realized or internalized that there were copies of the Koran amidst the thousands of books which they were to dispose because security officers suspected that Afghan detainees were using hand-written messages in them to facilitate all kinds of transgressions. You can find a clear narrative of the situation in Alissa J. Rubin’s New York Times story, “Chain of Avoidable Errors Cited in Koran Burning.” But, of course, this is not the Afghan readings, of which there are at least two, one harsher than the other. Yes, the president has apologized and so has everybody else. Apparently, however, apologies don’t count in Afghanistan or, for that matter, in other Muslim countries like Pakistan where the burning of Islamic sacred texts has terrible resonance.

And why not? We have seen plenty of images of symbolic pieces of Christian, Jewish, and American culture trampled and otherwise destroyed in Muslim countries. Still, it is not the American way. But, if it is not our way, why should we not have said it from the beginning? Indeed, had the Department of Justice asked the Supreme Court (or, even as starters, one justice) for an injunction against Terry Jones it probably would have gotten it. Army personnel in a war theater, which the president had heated up for political purposes but really wanted to liquidate, as we can see, would have had no difficulty in seeing that the torching of a Koran was also the propagation of a crime. That it was not protected by the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. Do you really imagine that the First Amendment gives the cover of protection to destroying the Hebrew Bible, the New Testament, the Koran?

Martin Peretz is the editor-in-chief emeritus of The New Republic.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 254 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

254 comments

Oh, my God! I am first to comment on a Marty Peretz article. As I've said, this is the "trap crop" forum where all the nuts, pedants, windy bores, compulsive insult-flingers, and other low lives of TNR gather to bash each other so the intelligent, informed, reasonably non-demented participants can carry on civil, sophisticated, useful discussions. At first glance (it's late), the post looks like a pretty good casserole of observations about the Middle East. When I was young and my father (working for a defense contractor) dragged us around the country, we lived for a while in Paterson, NJ, a place described to us as "The Armpit of America." I have never lived in or visited the Middle East, but a different part of the anatomy occurs to my mind (though I am leaving the rest to your imagination). I agree that Israel should not defend Pollard. I think Marty is right on. As a person with no shred of religious belief, I think that anyone who goes nuts because his or her "holy book" is mutilated and anyone who mutilates a "holy book," should be launched into outer space. I don't know if Mary would be on the same page with me in this regard.

- skahn

March 6, 2012 at 12:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I await at least 250 more comments by tomorrow dusk, each more useful, entertaining, informative, and enlightening than mine. If you simply post stupid, vitriolic, and boring comments I will declare an atheist fatwah on you, excommunicate you from the church of secular humanists, and launch the ten plagues of Egypt on you from the Old Testament (though perhaps the current military government matches up to it).

- skahn

March 6, 2012 at 12:50am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Wait a second; wasn't it the Hashemites who helped Lawrence of Arabia? The name Faisal ring a bell? He was a fascinating individual, brother of the future King of Jordan, Abdullah I. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faisal_I_of_Iraq This is how he wound up King of Syria; then, having been chased out of there by the French (consequences of Sykes-Picot) he became King of Iraq; additionally, the Palestine Mandate was carved up and the large portion east of the Jordan, Transjordan, was given to the Hashemites as well and their first king was Abdullah I, who was murdered in Jerusalem in 1951: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashemite http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdullah_I_of_Jordan Now, the Sauds deposed the Hashemites in the Hejaz, the British were involved with the House of Saud also and recognized their territorial gains in Arabia, just as they recognized the annexation of "The West Bank" by Jordan after the 1948 war: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Saud_of_Saudi_Arabia

- Sophia

March 6, 2012 at 12:54am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

skahn, launching people into outer space is expensive. Alas.

- Sophia

March 6, 2012 at 12:55am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There is such a thing as evil, and the Muslim religion is evil. Anti-Semitism, misogyny, ignorance, stupidity and violence are all at its core. The Muslim world is a giant latrine. Surely liberals and conservatives should unite in contempt for Islam. Let's develop nuclear energy and natural gas and continue to research the possibilities of alternative fuels so that we can import the foreign oil that we need from Canada and Mexico and other friendly countries and tell the Muslims to take their oil and shove it.

- bulbman1066

March 6, 2012 at 1:18am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I watched Netanyauh's speech to AIPAC. It was carried by Fox News and CSPAN. It was ignored by CNN and MSNBC. Charlie Rose had a discussion with JJ Goldberg and Denise Ross. Then Charlie Rose dedicated the bulk of the program to the upcoming presentation about the election of 2008. Netanyahu Was articulate as always, and very assertive. A couple of nights ago I enjoyed Charlie Rose interview with Shimon Peres. Checking al Jazeera and al Arabiya I found a couple of articles about the Syrian situation. I have the references below. Al Arabiya published MCain's speech. I will be checking about Bibi's speech and Obama's speech. The view from aljazeera can the Syrian opposition unite http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidesyria/2012/03/20123495447845483.html And here is alarabiya  about Annan mission. They also posted McCain speech  http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/03/06/198854.html In my opinion I don't see any logic for USA involvement in Syria. Is up to the neighbors, the Arab League, and the UN. Anyhow the last two are working together with Annan heading the delegation. As for USA, Israel, Ira. I believe Israel has the right to defend itself. And quoting, more or less, John Foster Dulles : the business of America is to protect American interests. John Foster Dulles was the powerful blunt Secretary of State of President Eisenhower.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 6, 2012 at 2:03am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I meant the HBO docudrama of the 2008 election.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 6, 2012 at 2:04am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I thought that Queen Rania, born in Kuwait to Palestinian parents, was supposed to help unify the Kingdom behind Abdullah II.

- amidut

March 6, 2012 at 6:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Waking up early, I see the Marty Peretz inspired mad hatter's race is starting to lap the track. As in the un-pc child's tale “Little Black Sambo” (which my family possessed when I was a child), the vain [mostly toothless] tigers] chase each other around Marty until by tonight we are reduced to a pool of butter. Far from me to abstain. Sophia, launching people into space – like a bridge to nowhere – will gradually become less expensive and will provide lots of employment, especially for the people who post in Marty-threads. As in the German folk tale “The Valiant Tailor,” the editors of TNR can proclaim, “We neutralized dozens of the most aberrant posters of TNR” in this thread.” For example, we can put Bulbman in charge of the ship that launches the Islamic religion into space.

- skahn

March 6, 2012 at 7:51am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I was speaking with a good friend about the genius of the American system of choosing and disposing of leaders. For thousands of years, humans chose leaders by their skill in leading hordes of killers and then pledged fealty to their offspring. Genetics as method of choosing leaders selects for sociopaths. Heredity chooses at the genetic casino. Eventually the spin of the wheel ensures that we get mad, incompetent killers as leaders, anointed in the blood of their victims. Elections are better, but once in place, leaders tend to stick around, even the occasional brilliant, inspiring leaders. [OK, an oxymoron.] Again we tend to end up with cycles of violent leader change. In America – thank the [probably non-existent] God – we have made it a tradition to accept the elections – even, close, dubious ones – and a tradition for the leader to leave voluntarily and to be term-limited, with the worst [symbolic] regicide being the occasional impeachment. Beautiful, doomed Queen Rania, study history, take the hint.

- skahn

March 6, 2012 at 8:07am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I am appalled by the harshness of this cynicism: "Maybe Pollard’s sentence was a bit harsher than it should have been. " __________ "... the Obama administration should have done was to seek an injunction against the destruction of religious books, an act that has a long and ugly history," Oh yes? And who is to compile a list of what constitutes "a religious book"? I can claim with some justification that any of Jane Austen's books is a religious book for me. Will my case be covered by such an injunction? “What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist.” ― Salman Rushdie Injunctions and laws may have their usefulness but it is a very limited and temporary usefulness. Just consider the popularity of Holocaust denial in Europe to realize how ineffective it is to try to legislate such moral issues. What is needed are not more laws and injunctions but proper education that brings up responsible, knowledgeable adults.

- noga1

March 6, 2012 at 9:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

a) One could make reasoned arguments for and against the release of Pollard. However it should not be colored as a "right vs. left" issue, at least in Israel. The "Pollard lobby" in the Knesset cuts across ***ALL*** political lines (except, not surprisingly, for the Arab parties). b) I remember Black September as I had just arrived in Israel a few weeks before to spend my junior year of college at Hebrew U. I don't think I fully appreciated its significance at the time. Jordan is very much a powder keg waiting to explode. The country is ~70% Palestinian and most of the rest are Bedouin (there are some Christians but negligible numbers; absolutely Judenrein though (except for the Israeli embassy and some visiting businessmen)). The Bedouin hold most of the major government positions, especially in the army (largely British trained & equipped). Generally, the Bedouin view themselves as the "true" Arabs (i.e., descended from residents who came out of the Arabian peninsula to during the Muslim conquest and thereafter) and as a matter of principle often are hostile to other "pseudo"-Arabs (especially the Palestinians), including in Israel (the "pseudo"-Arabs are those who are descended from the various tribes throughout the middle east who were conquered and converted to Islam by the armies of Mohamed and the Caliphs that followed). Hence the potential for explosion. However what really makes the country volatile is a growing Salafi movement, which for now maintains an uneasy, tense modus vivendi with the Bedouin-led monarchy whom they despise for their Western leanings. If the MB led Sunnis take over in Syria (quite possible but not guarantied), the Salafis (who I believe are largely Palestinian) may well try to move on Amman by capitalizing on the general Palestinian resentment of the Bedouin establishment. Then all hell will break loose. It's also quite plausible that the Salafis may make their move even absent an MB takeover of Syria. Stay tuned and get rid of the Pollyannish rose colored glasses. Hershel G. Jerusalem / Efrata

- ginzy

March 6, 2012 at 10:00am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

But for Israeli realists, I do believe we would all be wearing Pollyannish rose colored glasses. Except for Martin Peretz, of course.

- roidubouloi

March 6, 2012 at 10:19am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I have to disagree with Bulbman. The Muslim religion is not evil. Nasty individuals may be members of its faith who interpret its teachings to their satisfaction, but that is not enough to condemn the Muslim religion as evil. I would be willing to condemn individuals who practice human sacrificial witchcraft without believing they are witches.

- Nusholtz

March 6, 2012 at 11:37am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How about Iranian extreme militaristic terrorism? The Iranian apologists are failed distorters.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 6, 2012 at 11:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Netanyauh takes his message to Congress. Bloomberg reports. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-06/netanyahu-takes-iran-nuclear-campaign-to-u-s-congress-after-obama-meeting.html#disqus_thread

- JAIMECHUCH

March 6, 2012 at 12:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Somebody mentioned Karen Armstrong the prolific author of world religions. Judaism, Christian,  Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism. In 2008 Karen Armstrong created the Charter of Compassion, in the spirit of the Golden Rule, to share religions moral values, foster global  understanding and a peaceful world.   Signatories of the treaty included Queen Noor of Jordan.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 6, 2012 at 1:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Some of the other signatories of the Chapter of Compassion were the Dalai Lama, Desmond Tutu, Paul Simon. Source Wikipedia.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 6, 2012 at 1:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Why do I get the sneaking suspicion that Marty's hatred of Jonathan Pollard has less to do with what Pollard did in the '80s and more with what kind of concessions the US would presumably get out of Israel in exchange for freeing him? It's not evident in this little piece, but it has been a more obvious theme in earlier opinions on the subject. As for the Jordan part of this piece, all I can say is that Queen Rania doesn't look at all like the real Marie Antoinette, or the Kirtsen Dunst version of her. But it is nice to point out yet again that some of Syria's neighbors, such as Jordan (and Israel), are not in a terrible rush to help overthrow the Assad regime because they fear that what comes next could harm them too. Hopefully someone told John McCain's staff before they wrote that piece for TNR. And as for the strange detour into Koran-burning and Terry Jones, I'm just glad that Marty didn't opine on how insluting it was for Obama to apologize for the Koran burning to the Afghans and how a really manly President (maybe Norman Thomas) would have told all those medieval savages to shove it and just bring it on if they didn't like it.

- wildboy

March 6, 2012 at 1:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Wildboy: I do not really endorse your speculative reason for it but I do share your suspicion that Marty's hatred of Jonathan Pollard has less to do with what Pollard did in the '80s and more to do with something else. Though what it could be I cannot really think.

- noga1

March 6, 2012 at 1:41pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Do you really imagine that the First Amendment gives the cover of protection to destroying the Hebrew Bible, the New Testament, the Koran?" As a religious Jew, and a lawyer, my answer is yes.

- TARFON

March 6, 2012 at 1:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I agree with Wildboy's "sneaking suspicion that Marty's hatred of Jonathan Pollard has less to do with what Pollard did in the '80s and more with what kind of concessions the US would presumably get out of Israel in exchange for freeing him?" Iranian nukes and other contentions between Obama and Netanyahu are far more consequential for Israel.

- amidut

March 6, 2012 at 1:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Pollard was paid for his espionage services by Israel and he had also delivered classified information to investment advisors in the hope of enabling profitable financial dealings. In addition, the Israelis were anything but helpful after Pollard's arrest, giving only some chickenfeed back and hanging on to the higher-quality intelligence. Clinton says in his autobiography that he was inclining toward releasing Pollard in his second term and deporting him to Israel but got "over my dead body!" responses from other senior administration figures such as Sandy Berger and Madeleine Albright.

- ironyroad

March 6, 2012 at 2:38pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Winter is almost over, but it snowed today, and it is kind of cold. We have a wood stove. I have a Bible around, but no Korans and no Books of Mormon. (I have tried to read both at one time or another, but found them so unreadable that I cannot believe anybody ever actually has waded all the way through them.) Sitting beside me on the table I see the February 2 issue of The New Republic. Will Marty Peretz (or anyone else) come after me if I toss it into the wood stove and try to warm my cold bones by burning TNR?

- skahn

March 6, 2012 at 3:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Winter is almost over, but it snowed today, and it is kind of cold. We have a wood stove. I have a Bible around, but no Korans and no Books of Mormon. (I have tried to read both at one time or another, but found them so unreadable that I cannot believe anybody ever actually has waded all the way through them.) Sitting beside me on the table I see the February 2 issue of The New Republic. Will Marty Peretz (or anyone else) come after me if I toss it into the wood stove and try to warm my cold bones by burning TNR?

- skahn

March 6, 2012 at 3:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

wildboy "Why do I get the sneaking suspicion that Marty's hatred of Jonathan Pollard has less to do with what Pollard did in the '80s and more with what kind of concessions the US would presumably get out of Israel in exchange for freeing him? It's not evident in this little piece, but it has been a more obvious theme in earlier opinions on the subject." From what I have seen Jonathan Pollard has a tendency (and it't not his fault) to make his supporters as well as his detractors unhinged. His sentence was unfair, but he was guilty of spying. No one connected to this affair has done credit to himself.

- arnon1

March 6, 2012 at 3:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well I think Obama was correct to apologize. It was the only intelligent thing to do regarding the culture of Afghanistan. Here, though, I am not an attorney but I should think that the 1st Amendment protects freedom of speech, which includes expression, as well as freedom of (or from) religion; ergo, people sure as heck can burn books in America. Now personally I don't think book burning is right but I don't see where holy books per se are protected from people expressing themselves, and this includes damaging books. After all books are physical objects, not The Word itself, nor the philosophy, nor the people. In fact, didn't Moses have something to say about worshiping THINGS? And me burning a Bible doesn't stop anybody else from practicing their religion. However, if skahn burns TNR I shall be upset and volunteer him for a ride to Outer Space, when it becomes affordable, especially since it will create jobs. That said, since I have commented on this thread as well, I guess I have to go too. But I digress. Maybe the Pollard issue is a hot button for Marty and others because his behavior exposes American Jews to antisemitism and Israel to the charge that she isn't a reliable ally. Both are serious issues. If the punishment doesn't fit the crime, that is one issue; but politically his behavior was treacherous and has ramifications. People in Israel need to realize that factions in America, which are openly anti-Israel, are growing. It's becoming a delicate balance. That's one thing worrying me enormously about Iran, etc. As it is we've been blamed for 9/11 and Iraq already; and there is never a shortage of Jewish/Zionist conspiracy theories. Even before M/W and "the lobby" stuff, and the suggestion of the hard core "realists" that Israel isn't in America's interests, people on the Right were blah blah all time time about The Liberty incident in 1967; there has always been antisemitism, hard core, on the Right in particular; and the Left has issues with Israel due to the Palestinians; and the classical antisemitic memes of "undue influence" and "dual loyalty" are not going away; nor is religious bigotry. So, as was the case in the 1930's and thereafter, Jews in America have had to be careful and not assume too much from the people of America. Pollard may be taking the blame for all of this stuff, perhaps, as well as his actual crime; which isn't fair, but I think that's all an issue. Also, the fact that Evangelicals and other right wing Christians claim to be pro-Israel is a huge problem for the rest of us. If the existence of Israel becomes a right wing Christian cause, it alienates the center and the Left. So I would beware of support from that direction, especially since it's predicated on their idea of The Second Coming, which means the destruction of Israel and the casting of Jews into hell. As for Jordan and the Salafi: one of the issues with the House of Saud is their relationship to the Wahabi/Salafi branches of Islam. The fact that the British (aka Perfidious Albion) supported them in their attacks on the Hashemites may have come back to bite us all in the tuchas. The Hashemites were apparently educated and open minded - don't forget, in addition to the help given to Lawrence and the British in WWI, Faisal had a relationship with Chaim Weitzman and also Felix Frankfurter and attended the League of Nations conference after WWI, where he expressed his understanding of the Jewish situation and hoped for friendship between Arabs and Jews. Anyway, the British empowered warring parties; which is not surprising, look at Iraq. I think it would be terrible if King Abdullah were overthrown by such extremists but given that they seem to be backed by Saudi money and are gaining power in Egypt, and are perhaps a factor in Libya, Tunisia. and Syria (Hafez Assad put down - brutally - a rebellion in Hama that was I think Islamist in nature (something to consider), the threat is probably real. Finally with the Palestinians: people claim that Jordan is or is not Palestine. But the Palestinian majority in Jordan is probably going to assert itself eventually. I remember Black September too and that triggered the Lebanese Civil War; a terrible catastrophe, eventually involving Israel, Syria and heaven knows who else; but, the fact is, the Palestinians had via the Cairo Accords essentially compromised Lebanese sovereignty. When PLO was evicted from Jordan and fled to Lebanon, this destabilized an already delicate situation and it all exploded.

- Sophia

March 6, 2012 at 3:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I am not against Pollard being pardoned if he fesses up to all of his unsuccessful attempts to shop our secrets to the mamsers of this world before he settled on peddling them to some stupid Israeli officials with no memory of the Lavon affair and the lessons of using Jews to work covertly against their own countries. His al chayt should include trying to sell secrets to Pakistan, if that is what he did.

- SFergessen

March 6, 2012 at 4:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How can you get an injunction against book burning if you can't get one against flag burning?

- SFergessen

March 6, 2012 at 4:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm not against freeing Pollard and shipping him to Israel at the behest of its government if that government finally provides the cooperation it promised: returning what was taken and fully assisting US intelligence in assessing the impact. So far, nothing. When and if Pollard does arrive in Israel and is welcomed as a hero, it will be a good lesson for Americans of just what this "strategic alliance" actually consists of.

- roidubouloi

March 6, 2012 at 5:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

So you want Pollard released because it's good for the anti-Israel lobby?

- arnon1

March 6, 2012 at 6:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Do you really imagine that the First Amendment gives the cover of protection to destroying the Hebrew Bible, the New Testament, the Koran?" Doesn't it? I thought it did. There have been so many Bible burnings in the U.S. (Hebrew Bible and New Testament combined) I thought surely something in the Constitution must have protected them. Or, maybe I've misunderstood.

- Tgossard

March 6, 2012 at 6:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

People are mistaking burning a book by individuals and burning books by governments or nay of its agencies. The government has no right to burn books of any kind (it would be like limiting speech). Individuals like that reprehensible minister who burned the koran does have a right to do so. What he doesn't have is a right to harm people who worship with Korans.

- arnon1

March 6, 2012 at 7:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"So you want Pollard released because it's good for the anti-Israel lobby?" Bravo for catching it. And spelling it.

- noga1

March 6, 2012 at 7:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

In talking about burning Bibles and other “holy” books, I can't help thinking about what humans have done to other humans in the name of God. Take for example, William Tyndale, who published the first translations of the Bible into English that worked directly from Greek and Hebrew texts in the 1500s. For his efforts (and other eccentricities such as opposing Henry VIII's divorce): In 1535, Tyndale was arrested and jailed in the castle of Vilvoorde outside Brussels for over a year. He was tried for heresy, choked, impaled and burnt on a stake in 1536. [Wikipedia]. Has anybody ever did a calculation of how many people have been killed and tortured in the name of God? It's just not that old “good-time religion” when we limit ourselves to just burning a holy book or a flag here and there.

- skahn

March 6, 2012 at 7:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's an old story skahn, and people in the West haven't been killed for their religion in a long time. This is not the case in Islam, for example.

- arnon1

March 6, 2012 at 7:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga, I don't want to get sucked into your personal flame wars with Roid.

- arnon1

March 6, 2012 at 7:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Bulbaman: For the overwhelming majority of the people who practice it, Islam is a religion of peace. But you can read passages of the Koran, like the bible, to justify bloody action. But to condemn a billion people because of a few hundred terrorists would be like condemning the United States because some of us like to go into schools and colleges and murder students. Over the centuries Christians have been more intolerant than Muslims. The Christians slaughtered the residents of Jerusalem, Christian, Jew and Muslim at the end of the first crusade. Muslims did not follow that example when they retook the city. We live in unusual times. It was a Christian in the Thirty Years War who said "Kill them all. God will know is own."

- Vekert

March 6, 2012 at 7:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There is nothing personal about my comments to or about roi or anybody here. Whether it is so with others, I cannot say.

- noga1

March 6, 2012 at 7:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I have a hard time believing that when you and Roid can go on for days and days attacking each other on forums where most people have stopped posting (and probably reading).

- arnon1

March 6, 2012 at 8:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I've been thinking about this. Now I'm inclined to say that Obama should release Pollard; within hours he should be taken from his gaol in North Carolina to the nearest air force base and flown immediately to Israel and handed over. After that, who gives a shit? If Israel wants to publicly make a spy who betrayed his country, the United States and Israel's major ally, into a hero, let them.

- ironyroad

March 6, 2012 at 10:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I say: "When and if Pollard does arrive in Israel and is welcomed as a hero, it will be a good lesson for Americans of just what this "strategic alliance" actually consists of." And arnon responds: "So you want Pollard released because it's good for the anti-Israel lobby?" To which I say: Reality got you down? We all know perfectly well that Pollard will be greeted in Israel as a hero, as if he were Gilad Shalit. I hope that, if and when the time comes, Americans understand what that means, because I believe that the relations between the US and Israel should be based on the realities of their respective national interests, not on sentimentality or fantasy. Well, truth is that Israel can base its relationship with us on whatever it wants. I want out relationship with Israel to be grounded in reality. Pollard's greeting will be strong dose of reality as to how Israel actually sees the relationship.

- roidubouloi

March 6, 2012 at 11:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

But, if Israel will not finally honor its promise fully to cooperate with the US in assessing the damage caused by Pollard, the spy the Israeli government now embraces, then he should sit in prison, as he would if he worked for any other country that had nothing to offer us in exchange. We owe nothing in this regard to Israel or Pollard. They have to make it worth our while to release him.

- roidubouloi

March 6, 2012 at 11:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The likely display if Pollard ends up in Israel is probably most of the reason Peretz doesn't want him released. He has figured out what this may well look like to Americans.

- roidubouloi

March 6, 2012 at 11:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Me: “So you want Pollard released because it's good for the anti-Israel lobby?" To which I say: Reality got you down? We all know perfectly well that Pollard will be greeted in Israel as a hero, as if he were Gilad Shalit. I hope that, if and when the time comes, Americans understand what that means, because I believe that the relations between the US and Israel should be based on the realities of their respective national interests, not on sentimentality or fantasy.” Reality, yes, but for one eager for the real thing you need to wait till the reality comes to pass. So far all I am getting from you is the fulfillment of your hopes and expectations.

- arnon1

March 6, 2012 at 11:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Don't worry, arnon. Pollard isn't going anywhere. I am merely pointing out that Israeli attitudes towards him are an excellent mirror of the real relationship between Israel and the US and that the spectacle that would follow his release to Israel would, ironically, serve to wipe away the gauzy film through which Israel's advocates here endeavor to portray it.

- roidubouloi

March 6, 2012 at 11:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

" I am merely pointing out that Israeli attitudes towards him are an excellent mirror of the real relationship between Israel and the US and that the spectacle that would follow his release to Israel would, ironically, serve to wipe away the gauzy film through which Israel's advocates here endeavor to portray it." I see you have adopted the realist habit of spending half a life predicting reality and the other half interpreting events to justify your predictions. This is what realism amounts to.

- arnon1

March 6, 2012 at 11:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Anyway I am off to spectate the realism of the Republican elections. Another trains wreck for many a realist. I am glad the Reps are split. I hope they keep on fighting till the convention. It will help Obama's re-election.

- arnon1

March 6, 2012 at 11:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Seems your notion of realism is not to give any thought to the future at all. But realism and certainty are not the same thing. Only the past is certain and having no thought to the future is pointless. One can, however, be highly certain that Pollard would be welcomed in Israel as a hero. He is already a hero there. Word games make not the slightest difference.

- roidubouloi

March 7, 2012 at 12:51am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I predicted 250 comments by tonight; there are barely 50. I am reminded of my paternal grandmother, Agnes. She was an early feminist, an early pacifist, a movie scriptwriter (before the movie industry moved to Hollywood, and a hideous narcissist. After my grandfather died, she moved from Chicago to live with my aunt in her final years. When she appeared, my aunt warned me (I was then about the age of 12), "Stephen, you were the first grandchild, she always made a horrible fuss about you, so when she sees you for the first time in about 8 years, she will really make a commotion and a scene. Just don't let it get to you; play along; don't get upset." Then Agnes appeared, said, "Stephen, it is so good to see you," gave me a hug, and then conducted herself calmly. My astonished aunt said sotto voce to everyone else, "My God, she is finally growing up!" Today's Peretz thread comments were fairly sensible, restrained, and courteous. Somewhere I hear the ghost of Grandma Agnes faintly declaiming, "My God, they are finally growing up!"

- skahn

March 7, 2012 at 1:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

To the extent that Pollard damaged US intel, that was in the 1980's. He was assumed by the CIA to be responsible for the deaths of some agents in the USSR. That was subsequently disproved with the arrest a KGB double agent or mole within the CIA (i forgot his name). I believe said double agent / mole has since been released from prison, while Pollard is still in prison. And my understanding is that Israel did cooperate in the damage assessment. BTW, if ever look at the roof of the US embassy in Tel Aviv, it's bristling with antennae. They are not there to pick up Monday night football. Also, the US wanted to rent embassy space on one of the upper floors of a hotel in Herzliya which just happens to be in a perpendicular relatively short straight line to the major intelligence bases in Glilot. I wonder why? Israel nixed the request. In case you didn't get the memo, the USSR died so whatever damage Pollard may have done in that regard didn't seem to have a lasting effect. I have been told by a recently discharged soldier (with whom I am very close) who served in a sensitive position in IDF Military Intelligence that the US <--> Israel intelligence relationship is a very very close one, with a lot of two way info exchange (hence the "<-->"). If it were to end or be restricted, the US would lose just as much as Israel, if not more so. By their very nature these sorts of stories don't make it in any detail to the media, even to the ostensibly omniscient NY Times. hg

- ginzy

March 7, 2012 at 4:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"We all know perfectly well that Pollard will be greeted in Israel as a hero, as if he were Gilad Shalit." Once again roi demonstrates how little he knows or understands Israelis. He does what every bigot does: extrapolate from the behaviour or beliefs of the very few to tar an entire society. Pollard does not dominate even a fraction of a fraction of the worry and care that Gilad Shalit did, for Israelis. I'm sure most Israelis would like to see him out of jail. I'm sure most Israelis do not understand why he is being so harshly treated. Even the traitorious Vanunu did not get a quarter of the punishment inflicted on Pollard. And Vanunu caused a great deal of damage to Israel's security. Somehow Ginzy's information seems more reliable than anything roi is telling his avid readership here.

- noga1

March 7, 2012 at 7:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roidubouloi “Seems your notion of realism is not to give any thought to the future at all. But realism and certainty are not the same thing.” I am not a realist, so I have no notion of political realism. Realism is not the same as reality. Political realists objectify reality. They assume that the political is founded on objective laws based on human nature. More specifically, realists assume that human relations are based on power; that the desire for power motivates human action. Realists oppose human hopes and passions as subjective and unrealistic. Yet these hopes and passions motivate political life. Realists who oppose human passions set themselves up against reality itself. By insisting that the desire for power is the sole motivating force of individuals and States they end up suppressing end up suppressing (repressing) all those passions that are not in the service of self-interested policies. On the domestic scene this is a deeply conservative ideology. In international relations it looks to developing scenarios which sees the world in terms of power plays by different States. Realists tend to mistrusts any alliance between States based on other than mutual advantage on the international scene. Yet human passions are as strong a motivating force in human relations as is the desire for power. Human beings don’t behave rationally in politics any more than they behave rationally when making economic choices.

- arnon1

March 7, 2012 at 9:51am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

btw: the US-Israel alliance is based on mutual self-interest. Both power and passion is involved in developing and cementing the ties. The realist attack on this relation has a number of sources but one important source argues that it is unnatural for a large powerful State like the US to align itself with a small country and treat it as an equal. Realist critics such as Mearsheimer who don’t trust passion as a basis of relations between States need to point to (invent) pro-Israel lobbies as an explanatory cause for such an unnatural and unrealistic state of affairs. This is at the root of most conspiracy theories developed to “expose what really” motivates the alliance.

- arnon1

March 7, 2012 at 10:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Peretz must have really been disturbed by the AIPAC speeches to have written this melange. YES is the answer to "...Do you really imagine that the First Amendment gives the cover of protection to destroying the Hebrew Bible, the New Testament, the Koran?" A shame that NO world leader has the guts to tell the world of Islam to stop whipping themselves into medieval murderous rages every time a Koran is accidentally or deliberately burned, for any reason. Human evolution is such a failure.

- K2K

March 7, 2012 at 10:27am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Human evolution is such a failure. You mean: I am not correct? We are not growing up?

- skahn

March 7, 2012 at 10:37am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"btw: the US-Israel alliance is based on mutual self-interest." It should be based on more than just self-interest. It should be based on commonality of values and an understanding of history and the meaning of decency and justice. It should be based on affection, as well. Without affection, no amount of shared self-interest will matter much when it comes to the question of whether Israel will survive or not, the next 5 years.

- noga1

March 7, 2012 at 3:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I see not the slightest sign, none, nada, that Israel's relationship with the US is anything other than exploiting the security that the US extends to it, in a variety of ways, to the maximum, without much regard to our interests. That, in a way, is primarily our own damn fault for failing to assert them. But the idea that Israel deigns to be our client out of affection (for which we have what, Netanyahu's example of disdain?) is ridiculous. Almost as ridiculous is the idea that the US will itself to be taxed indefinitely by Israeli policy regarding the Palestinians. The hope that this will occur out of affection is a vain one. Rather than rely on US affections , Israel would be better served by acting as a member in good standing of the western community. Honoring its treaty obligations would be a good place to start, and not insisting that the Arabs legitimize its treaty violations as a condition to the end of occupation would be an even better place to start. Does Israel care more about its survival or about it colonial ambitions? Under the current right-wing government, dominated by religious nuts and settler zealots, I should say the latter. Perhaps it is Israel's own experience with such people that leads to the conviction that the Iranians cannot be expected to act rationally. They may be thinking, "If we cannot act rationally for our own survival in the face of messianic nuts, why should we expect the Iranians to be any more rational?" Those who want to claim that Pollard would not be greeted as a hero in Israel, why, have at it. I find that quite counter to evident reality to the point of being hugely funny. But, suit yourselves.

- roidubouloi

March 7, 2012 at 3:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Realist critics such as Mearsheimer who don’t trust passion as a basis of relations between States need to point to (invent) pro-Israel lobbies , , , " So AIPAC and the 14,000 gathered in DC for its convention are an invention of Mearsheimer? And if AIPAC does not serve to affect US policy regarding Israel, why does it exist? Just as a figment of Mearsheimer's imagination? I certainly believe AIPAC and the money behind it have an impact on US policy. Otherwise an awful lot of rich and powerful American Jews are wasting their time and effort.

- roidubouloi

March 7, 2012 at 3:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Realists oppose human hopes and passions as subjective and unrealistic." That sure comes as news to me. A realist understands that emotions of all sorts are real, albeit subjective, and can surely affect outcomes. One does not need to share the particular passions of another actor in order to take them into account, both as an indicator of that actor's likely behavior and as an opportunity to affect that behavior. If you cut him, does a realist not bleed? Does he not feel pain. It is a silly over-simplification, a canard, to suppose that a realist outlook is bereft of either feeling or morality. The point, however, is not to invest in other people's passions or moral claims just because they have them, to remain clear about one's own, and to have a realistic assessment of what everyone else is doing, motivated in part by theirs. Thus, for example, when I urge malahat to consider how it is perfectly rational for the Iranians to see us as a threat and the difficulty of understanding their behavior if we cannot see that.

- roidubouloi

March 7, 2012 at 4:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"In case you didn't get the memo, the USSR died so whatever damage Pollard may have done in that regard didn't seem to have a lasting effect." Says nothing at all to the impact on US signals intelligence which was the major adverse impact of Pollard. No doubt still affecting Israeli electronic spying on the US which is why Israel refuses to this day to be forthcoming. In case you didn't get the memo.

- roidubouloi

March 7, 2012 at 4:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

So unimportant is Pollard to Israeli domestic politics that the Israeli government consistently makes a public issue of it with the US, despite the fact that it is an irritant to the relationship. Or maybe it is a feint, Israel giving the US a softball to say no to so that it will feel obliged to say yes to something else. Could be. Affectionately, of course.

- roidubouloi

March 7, 2012 at 4:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"that the Israeli government consistently makes a public issue of it with the US" It's not the Israeli government that makes a public issue of it. Israeli governments have always approached American administrations on this matter in the greatest discretion. When the matter is made public, due to convenient leaking, is when the administration has a bone to pick with the Israelis over a completely unrelated matter. Then it seeks to arouse sleeping rabid dogs who get all out of shape because the Jewish spy for Israel might be set free.

- noga1

March 7, 2012 at 5:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roidubouloi "Realist critics such as Mearsheimer who don’t trust passion as a basis of relations between States need to point to (invent) pro-Israel lobbies , , , " So AIPAC and the 14,000 gathered in DC for its convention are an invention of Mearsheimer?" No, AIPAC is not an invention but it is no more powerful than other lobbying groups such as the AARP, the Polish lobby during the cold war, Irish Lobby till the peace accords, or a number of other foreign and domestic lobbies. There is nothing wrong with lobbying and Mearsheimer and Co. made it seem as if the pro Israel lobby was somehow detrimental to American interests.

- arnon1

March 7, 2012 at 6:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday took a reprieve from his Iran-heavy discussions during his trip to Washington this week to raise another key issue with U.S. President Barack Obama: the release of convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard. During his highly-anticipated meeting with Obama early Monday in Washington, whose focus was nearly entirely devoted to the issue of Iran and the bomb, Netanyahu took time to reiterate Israel’s demand that Pollard, who has been imprisoned in the U.S. for 26 years on charges of spying for Israel, be released, telling the U.S. president, “It is important that [Pollard] comes home.” http://www.algemeiner.com/2012/03/07/netanyahu-asked-obama-for-pollard%E2%80%99s-release/ Or this one, from haaretz no less: Published 21:32 22.06.11 Latest update 21:32 22.06.11 Netanyahu makes call to release Jonathan Pollard on YouTube. Prime minister says in video that the convicted spy's sentence is disproportionate to the severity of his actions, and urges U.S. President Obama to release him for humanitarian reasons. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/netanyahu-makes-call-to-release-jonathan-pollard-on-youtube-1.369123 ________________________ I suppose that must be the "discreet" video that Netanyahu posted on Youtube. What a clumsy oaf Netanyahu is, but somehow, no matter what he does, there will be someone there to claim that it never happened, or it was the opposite of what happened, or Israel's survival hangs in the balance, or someone else somewhere is much worse. The entertainment never stops.

- roidubouloi

March 7, 2012 at 6:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday took a reprieve from his Iran-heavy discussions during his trip to Washington this week to raise another key issue with U.S. President Barack Obama: the release of convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard. During his highly-anticipated meeting with Obama early Monday in Washington, whose focus was nearly entirely devoted to the issue of Iran and the bomb, Netanyahu took time to reiterate Israel’s demand that Pollard, who has been imprisoned in the U.S. for 26 years on charges of spying for Israel, be released, telling the U.S. president, “It is important that [Pollard] comes home.” breakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreakbreak http://www.algemeiner.com/2012/03/07/netanyahu-asked-obama-for-pollard%E2%80%99s-release/ Or this one, from haaretz no less: Published 21:32 22.06.11 Latest update 21:32 22.06.11 Netanyahu makes call to release Jonathan Pollard on YouTube. Prime minister says in video that the convicted spy's sentence is disproportionate to the severity of his actions, and urges U.S. President Obama to release him for humanitarian reasons. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/netanyahu-makes-call-to-release-jonathan-pollard-on-youtube-1.369123 ________________________ I suppose that must be the "discreet" video that Netanyahu posted on Youtube. What a clumsy oaf Netanyahu is, but somehow, no matter what he does, there will be someone there to claim that it never happened, or it was the opposite of what happened, or Israel's survival hangs in the balance, or someone else somewhere is much worse. The entertainment never stops.

- roidubouloi

March 7, 2012 at 6:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

AIPAC is detrimental to American interests as it is an agent of a foreign power, unlike AARP (although some of those retirees are pretty alien). It is only because of political pressure that the Dept. of Justice has failed to enforce our laws as applied to Israel and American Jews. Lobbying for a war on behalf of a foreign power? I find that quite objectionable. "The Foreign Agents Registration Act is a United States law (22 U.S.C. § 611 et seq.) passed in 1938 requiring that agents representing the interests of foreign powers be properly identified to the American public. . . . The act requires people and organizations that are under foreign control ("agents of a foreign principal") to register with the Department of Justice when acting on behalf of foreign interests. This law defines the agent of a foreign principal as someone who: Engages in political activities for or in the interests of a foreign principal; Acts in a public relations capacity for a foreign principal; Solicits or dispenses any thing of value within the United States for a foreign principal; Represents the interests of a foreign principal before any agency or official of the U.S. government." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Agents_Registration_Act Now tell me that doesn't describe AIPAC to a tee. If it were duly registered, the great unwashed public would have a much clearer understanding of what is going on.

- roidubouloi

March 7, 2012 at 6:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roidubouloi ""Realists oppose human hopes and passions as subjective and unrealistic." That sure comes as news to me. " I am not talking about you. Realism in foreign affairs goes back to at least Thucydides and certainly Thomas Hobbes and Machiavelli, there is a long tradition and much writing on the subject and most agree that realist see the world as a contest for power and that any kind of ideals are to be shunned as illusory. President Wilson was an idealist he came in for severe criticism by realists of all political persuasion. I happen to think that neither the realist school nor the idealists are completely wrong.

- arnon1

March 7, 2012 at 6:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The Polish lobby? Surely you jest.

- roidubouloi

March 7, 2012 at 6:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roidubouloi "AIPAC is detrimental to American interests as it is an agent of a foreign power, unlike AARP (although some of those retirees are pretty alien). It is only because of political pressure that the Dept. of Justice has failed to enforce our laws as applied to Israel and American Jews." In that case we have nothing more to talk about. In any case Jews have every right to lobby as do the Irish, the Cubans.

- arnon1

March 7, 2012 at 6:38pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Okay, fine. I don't really feel the need to debate a whole philosophical approach in order to make a small point. My small point was only that Pollard would be greeted as a hero if he ever arrives in Israel and that, if that should occur, it will be a good lesson for Americans as to the true nature of the relationship with Israel. Do you believe Pollard would not be greeted as a hero?

- roidubouloi

March 7, 2012 at 6:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I would like to be able to say that AIPAC has every legal right to lobby, but it doesn't, because it is not properly registered. If it were, then it would have the legal right to do whatever registered agents of foreign powers have the legal right to do. I know of no lobby for the Cuban government or the Irish government in the United States. Do you?

- roidubouloi

March 7, 2012 at 6:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

| roidubouloi "The Polish lobby? Surely you jest." My last reply: you need to brush up on American history. I don't think you know as much as you think you do. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8rg9c4pUrg Besides, what makes you are better American than tens of thousands of American Jews who fought for this country and also helped Jews in Israel? When and were did you fight for America? Did you serve in the countries armed forces? What gives you the right to scapegoat Jews who did?

- arnon1

March 7, 2012 at 6:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I know of no lobby for the Cuban government or the Irish government in the United States. Do you?" You didn't grow up among Irish nationalists as I did, otherwise you wouldn't make such silly comments. The Irish counted once upon a time the Kennedy clan as politicians they could rely on to help the Irish cause which was thought to be counter the interests of the US and its alliance with Great Britain. The same with Cubans who fled to the US after Castro took over. They too were accused by the left of being anti-Americans because they worked against better relations between the US and Cuba. If you are going to condemn Jews as traitors you need to condemn these other groups as traitorous. Pollard isn't so much the issue as an excuse to attack supporters of Israel. And make no mistake those who attack Aipac today will attack J Street tomorrow.

- arnon1

March 7, 2012 at 6:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Any way I am done.

- arnon1

March 7, 2012 at 6:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I now have no idea whatever what you are talking about, arnon. Is there a powerful lobby for the government of Poland somewhere here that we don't know about? Was there during the Cold War? Do you seriously want to argue that the Foreign Agents Registration Act does not clearly apply to AIPAC according to its terms? Yes, it is detrimental to the United States when its laws are flouted by groups representing foreign powers that should be declared and registered as such. The history of AIPAC is that its predecessor was about to be required to registered when it was disbanded and the same people then reorganized as AIPAC. The ruse worked. "Michael Oren [yes, the Israeli ambassador, surely no fan of Mearsheimer] writes in his book, Power, Faith, and Fantasy: America in the Middle East 1776 to the Present, “Though founded in 1953, AIPAC had only now in the mid-70s, achieved the financial and political clout necessary to sway congressional opinion. Confronted with opposition from both houses of Congress, Ford rescinded his “reassessment”.” ____________________ Now, what does any of that have to do with "tens of thousands of Jews who fought for this country?" Not a bloody thing. If it makes you happy, I was draft eligible, classified 1-A, during the height of the Vietnam War. Got a high draft number, wasn't drafted, didn't volunteer. And what does that have to do with anything being discussed here?

- roidubouloi

March 7, 2012 at 7:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Just for the sake of argument, in the case of Irish nationalists or Cuban nationalists, who would have been the "principal" in whose behalf they were working do as to oblige them to register as agents of a foreign principal?

- roidubouloi

March 7, 2012 at 7:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"... achieved the financial and political clout necessary to sway congressional opinion. " I don't see where the criminality is in this achievement. Were there bribes involved in the persuasion process? Was there some underhanded way in which these Jews held power over the elected officials whom they swayed in favour of Israel? Did they meet at some cemetery in Washington, assigning the job of subverting and corrupting the good Americans to their Jewish schemes?

- noga1

March 7, 2012 at 7:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Subsection 611 defines the term foreign principal as (1) a government of a foreign country and a foreign political party; (2) a person outside of the United States; or (3) a partnership, association, corporation, organization… organized under the laws of or having its principal place of business in a foreign country.[3] An agent of a foreign principal is defined as “any person who acts as an agent, representative, employee or servant, or any person who acts in any other capacity at the order, request, or under the direction or control of a foreign principal…whose activities are directly or indirectly supervised, directed, controlled, financed or subsidized in whole or in major part by a foreign principal.”[4] The term "political activities" means any activity that the person engaging in believes will, or that the person intends to, in any way influence any agency or official of the Government of the United States or any section of the public within the United States with reference to formulating, adopting, or changing the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or with reference to the political or public interests, policies, or relations of a government of a foreign country or a foreign political party;[5] ______________________ Violation is a criminal offense. See, for example: United States v McGoff: 831 F.2d 1071 (D.C. Cir. 1987). This criminal case shortened the statute of limitations for agents who refuse to register, contrary to the express language in Section 8(e) of the Act. ________________________ The amazing thing about Israel is that, in order to support its right to self-defense, its right to live within secure and recognized boundaries free from threat or intimidation, its right to participate on an equal basis in world commerce and affairs, one is then supposedly obliged public to affirm things that are manifestly untrue. For example: That Israel is a strategic asset to the United States (for what exactly?); That Israel is not in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and a raft of UNSC resolutions regarding its illegal settlements as well as undertakings made at various times to the United States; That AIPAC is not an agent of a foreign principal; That AIPAC does not influence American foreign policy; That AIPAC is no different than any other lobbying organization; That American interests and Israel's interests are the same; That the US president's responsibility is to protect Israel rather than to protect the US; and so forth and so on. Apparently, the case for Israel is so weak that, unless one is prepared publicly to affirm ridiculous things, it cannot be sustained. And anyone who refuses to demonstrate loyalty to Israel by publicly affirming ridiculous things can expect to be targeted with the standard epithets, etc., etc. Well, screw that.

- roidubouloi

March 7, 2012 at 8:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

So how come AIPAC has escaped being prosecuted for its crimes against America? What kind of power does it wield that it can corrupt and subvert the legislators of the very laws you cite as proof of AIPAC's criminality? How come Obama did not realize that in speaking to an AIPAC conference he was in fact pandering to an organization of agents of a foreign principal, in full violation of American law? Doesn't that make him an accomplice in their crime?

- noga1

March 7, 2012 at 10:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If you don't think Obama was pandering, then you're a bigger fucking moron than I thought. He was pandering. As was Romney. And any other politician who sucks up to Netanyahu. It's an election year. The Jews give a lot of money to candidates, and South Florida is pretty important. Oh, and before you can reply, fuck you, too.

- MOLLYSIMON

March 7, 2012 at 11:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Once again I stop into check on the astonishing conversation that follows a Marty Peretz post. No group should be persecuted on on the basis of their ethnic background and/or religious beliefs. No group should persecute on the basis of their ethnic background and/or religious beliefs. As a non-believer, I am suspicious that probably the most religious part of the world is also the most conflict-ridden. If you are a believer, I presume you want me to admire, tolerate, support, and protect you and your kind. For starters, stop the hating.

- skahn

March 7, 2012 at 11:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hi, Molly. I am now too old to enjoy it fucking as much as I once did, but isn't fucking SUPPOSED to be an act of love? Somehow, when I read Oh, and before you can reply, fuck you, too. (even though I realize i probably isn't addressed to me), I am doubtful it is said in a loving way. For your sake, I hope you have a rich and rewarding fucking life with some man or woman. Perhaps you should log off TNR and engage in some loving "motion of the ocean" with an attractive person of your preference?

- skahn

March 7, 2012 at 11:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"So how come AIPAC has escaped being prosecuted for its crimes against America? What kind of power does it wield that it can corrupt and subvert the legislators of the very laws you cite as proof of AIPAC's criminality?" Because this is America, the great bankocracy. Money talks, nobody walks. With enough money and the willingness to use it for political clout, you can corrupt just about anything. The trick is only to do it in plain sight, not with cash in paper bags. MollySimon is of course quite correct. Unfortunately, due to the corruption of our political process by monied interests, the American president cannot simply stand up and say, "As president of the United States, my job is to see to the security and well-being of the American people, and that is what I am going to do." Obama knows he is pandering, giving AIPAC the velvet glove treatment. But with some steel in the velvet glove. Good for him that he did not shrink from the political task of pandering as necessary in order then be left free to do his real job. He's learning.

- roidubouloi

March 8, 2012 at 12:26am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roi, your view of the great American nation is only a tiny step behind the jihadists and other Mullahs who consider it to be the greatest Satan. You actually agree with the premise of their anti-Americanism, (and anti-Semitism, so it seems, you actually accuse American Jews of corrupting the American people's highest leadership). So you and Molly are saying that Obama is a corrupt politician. Where then does the corrupt politician end and the great American president of hope'n'change, commander-in-chief tactician begin? How do we know he is not corrupted by Saudi money and Pro-Palestinian poisoners when he humiliates the Israeli PM and insists that Jerusalem is a colonized city? BTW, I of course agree that Obama is a panderer of the first water. He is not learning anything he didn't know when he was running for President and doing a great job pandering to Jews successfully then. But if you know what you know about his pliable ethics then probably many other Americans know the same. We'll see how successful his pandering will be this time around. You are a very poor semi-professional politician, you know. No wonder your campaigns were a failure if this is how you conducted your affairs. Instead of supporting Obama you are actually undermining his credibility. I hope people are listening and reading what you are saying here. Bottom-line, what it means is: Don't trust Obama when he says he will deal Iranian nukes effectively. Don't trust Obama about anything he says or promises this year.

- noga1

March 8, 2012 at 7:30am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

In reviewing the Peretz thread carefully again, I see it actually has gone fairly well, though I think it got bogged down a bit on AIPAC and went astray somewhat on “realism.” I am distrustful of any nation-state that bases its existence and purpose on ethnic and/or religious identity, whether Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Israel, etc. The “genius” of the United States has been the development of an inclusive “civil religion” that transcended individual beliefs and identity loyalties, though our good sense in this regard has gone astray a bit (though not for the first time in our history).

- skahn

March 8, 2012 at 8:36am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Corrupting America's highest leadership with money is as American as apple pie, but far moreso on the right than the left. Right-wing American Jews happily partake of this pastime. If that somehow justifies anti-Semitism in your mind, noga, that is your problem. I think it is good reason to be appalled by rightists such as yourself of whatever religious persuasion who have no faith in democracy and expect those with the money to call the tune. Obama, who actually has some ethics unlike the absolutely corrupt right, is constrained to fight back with rhetoric that works. I ask nothing more from him. Were some Israelis pushing him to do what he is doing, then I might worry. I am not concerned in the slightest about Obama's credibility. If the American right has taught us anything since Reagan it is that you can tell completely preposterous lies, even about the laws of physics, and people don't care at all about truth or falsity as long as you keep repeating them. My concern therefore is only that Obama say what is politically necessary and keep repeating it. Credibility is not an issue. (And how can any Israeli jabber on about credibility when Israel is led by Netanyahu? If Netanyahu said it was raining outside, you would have to look before you believed him.) Hard as it is for you to accept, I conducted three successive campaigns that were complete routs of the Republicans (until there were none left). Lost one. Then won 2 out of 3 races -- the two that I personally conducted; the lost one was in someone elses hands. That gives me a track record of 11/15, a 73% success rate in the face of an evenly divided electorate. I can live with that.

- roidubouloi

March 8, 2012 at 8:36am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Or maybe I should say I am 11/14, 79%. Either way, that is a rate of failure I find quite manageable. I am sure you wish you could succeed nearly as well as I fail.

- roidubouloi

March 8, 2012 at 8:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Most of us strive to be moral as individuals (don't kill, care for family, etc.); as a community (don't discriminate/persecute, care for hungry, sick). We strive to be realistic (lock doors, use seat belts, imprison criminals, etc.). As a nation dealing with other nations, morality and realism become more and more difficult and problematical. Most of us would not choose to live in a community of psychopaths, though as a recent discussion of Detroit illustrates, we can find ourselves in that position even in America. The Middle East is a psychopathic area, so our identity links (Jewish, Arab, Iranian ethnic; Jewish, Muslim religious) our material links (oil, mostly), and our humanistic links (opposing murder/genocide, oppression, etc.) place us in great turmoil and anguish. This is, I think, why Peretz' posts and the ensuing discussions suffer from so much angst and conflict.

- skahn

March 8, 2012 at 8:48am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Corrupting America's highest leadership with money is as American as apple pie, but far moreso on the right than the left. " You were the one suggesting that the most leftist president in US history is corrupted by Jewish money to say things he does not really mean and to make promises he has no intention of keeping. I understand perfectly your position. You consider Obama to be doing the right thing by lying to his prospective voters. He will dupe them into filling his election campaign coffers and then when he has used that money to get elected, again, he will kick them in the teeth. This is YOUR representation of an ethical and credible president, one who lies and pretends for money, plays along with bribers and traitors, in order to do "the right thing" which is .. what exactly?

- noga1

March 8, 2012 at 9:15am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This gem of moral perspicacity needs to be separated and highlighted for our delectation: "I am distrustful of any nation-state that bases its existence and purpose on ethnic and/or religious identity, whether Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Israel," The axis of evil, according to skahn's view of the universe.

- noga1

March 8, 2012 at 9:25am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga, thank you for your comment. It is a huge leap from my saying that I am "distrustful," to inferring that I consider states such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Israel as the "axis of evil." I appreciate that you read my comments. I respectfully suggest that you restrain what you imagine about what I believe. My understanding is that you live in Israel. The world in general is a dangerous place no matter where we live. I hope you are safe where you are. I presume that you take reasonable precautions.

- skahn

March 8, 2012 at 9:35am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I respectfully suggest that you restrain what you imagine about what I believe. My understanding is that you live in Israel." One needs not imagine what you believe. You spell out your beliefs pretty explicitly and proudly. No, I do not live in Israel. I live in Montreal. And no amount of precaution is going to be very effective against terrorists as I learned a few years ago when my son's Jewish school was firebombed by a couple of Palestinian immigrants. The library was totally burned but fortunately, as it was a Jewish holiday, the school was empty of kids. A few month later a small bomb went off in the Jewish community center where my daughter takes art classes. But I thank you for your great solicitous concern on behalf of my safety. I'm touched.

- noga1

March 8, 2012 at 9:55am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"You were the one suggesting that the most leftist president in US history is corrupted by Jewish money to say things he does not really mean and to make promises he has no intention of keeping." I didn't say anything of the kind. Obama is facing down the corrupt political power of AIPAC (as to which AIPAC is hardly unique) and Israels interference in our internal political affairs. I don't consider AIPAC legitimate even within the very loose bounds of American law on money and politics because it is not registered as an agent of a foreign principal as our law plainly requires. No one is paying off Obama to do this. If he had the "ethics" of the political right, where money talks, nobody walks, he would go ahead and shamelessly tell AIPAC just what it wants to hear, rather than what he can manage to say to the point without abandoning his responsibilities as president. Good. My main gripe with Obama has been that he has been way too ingenuous about the good faith of the right and unwilling to do what it takes to defeat them. I see that he is learning. My estimate is that he successfully threaded the needle.

- roidubouloi

March 8, 2012 at 10:33am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Perhaps you should return to Israel, for your safety. Canada will get by.

- roidubouloi

March 8, 2012 at 10:34am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"in order to do "the right thing" which is .. what exactly?" Incredible that you can even pose this question, noga. You cannot figure out what is the right thing for an American president to do? Let me tell you then: To use his best judgment, based on the best information and advice he can obtain, within the bounds of law, to defend and protect that American people, their well-being, and their interests. It is not to protect the privileges and power of those with the most money, the perpetual project of the right. Nor is it to protect Israel at the expense of the well-being of the United States. It is certainly not to protect Israel's colonial ambitions at the expense of the well-being of the United States, the perpetual project of the Israeli right.

- roidubouloi

March 8, 2012 at 10:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"03/08/2012 - 10:34am EDT | roidubouloi Perhaps you should return to Israel, for your safety. Canada will get by." Really? You think it is safer to live in Israel, with a soon to be Iranian genocidal nuke threat looming over the country?

- noga1

March 8, 2012 at 11:04am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"You were the one suggesting that the most leftist president in US history is corrupted by Jewish money to say things he does not really mean and to make promises he has no intention of keeping." [roi]I didn't say anything of the kind" [roi] "AIPAC is detrimental to American interests as it is an agent of a foreign power, unlike AARP (although some of those retirees are pretty alien). It is only because of political pressure that the Dept. of Justice has failed to enforce our laws as applied to Israel and American Jews. Lobbying for a war on behalf of a foreign power? I find that quite objectionable." [roi] "If the rhetoric of Obama's speech is satisfactory to noga, even while she distrusts his intentions, then it was a very successful speech. We can likely expect this shortly to become a non-issue through the election, and Obama will not be under untoward pressure to do damage to US interests for domestic political purposes. Goodbye, AIPAC. Have a pleasant trip home." As I read it, roi hails Obama for dancing to AIPAC, a traitorious body full of perfidious Jews who bribe and corrupt politicians in order to foment more war in the world. Why? Because Obama needs their money. And this is not only perfectly fine with roi, but actually proof of the moral superiority of Obama as a president who will go to any length, including complicity with foreign agents working against American interests and security, to be re-elected, and do "the right thing" for his people. And this, according to roi, is the greatness of an American President. Not world peace. Not standing by your friends when they are threatened by genocidal bullies. Not justice. Not decency. But slyness and shiftiness in pretending to be what he is not, in order to gain more money and power.

- noga1

March 8, 2012 at 11:38am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Lobbying for a war on behalf of a foreign power? I find that quite objectionable." I'll remember that next time Roid lobbies for a war on behalf of the UN. In fact Roid should register as a foreign agent for supporting UN sponsored international law. As for corrupting agents how are right wingers different from Soros and other left wing millionaires? antisemites have always accused Jews of having a corrupting influence on society. Though they never made any differences between right and left Jews. Right wingers corrupted with money left wingers corrupted with alien ideas like socialism, etc. Roid doesn't seem to know much about the history of antisemitism otherwise he wouldn't bring up the hateful nonsense he does. It's going to bite you back, someday Roid. You accuse right wing Jews and they will accuse left wing Jews of being un-american. Guess who is going to lose? Both sides that's who. You people are playing a pretty dangerous game.

- arnon1

March 8, 2012 at 11:48am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Roid doesn't seem to know much about the history of antisemitism otherwise he wouldn't bring up the hateful nonsense he does. " Or he might be all too familiar with it, which is why he knows how to inflict further pain in just the right moments. I tend to believe the latter. Everyone has been at great pains to compliment roi on his sophistication, eloquence, knowledge. I see no reason to argue with these praises. They apply just as much in the case of his knowledge of antisemitism. And how effectively it was used in history against the Jews.

- noga1

March 8, 2012 at 12:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Or he might be all too familiar with it, which is why he knows how to inflict further pain in just the right moments." He is not inflicting pain, not on me anyway. I am pretty secure as a man as a Jew as an American. I don't need to justify my actions actions for Israel to anyone. If Roi is getting to you, Noga, I suggest you stop answering him. These debates you are having with Roid are a masochistic affair as well as interminable. It's the kind of thing that might show up in Sartre's No Exit. Two stubborn half knowing individuals unable to convince the other, unable to be alone, unable to keep quiet drive themselves miserable repeating over and over the same warmed over half truths. Pascal was right all the trouble in the world has its cause in human beings being unable to sit quietly in a room by themselves and think.

- arnon1

March 8, 2012 at 12:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

[The following mostly in response to Noga's comments.] Being alive is dangerous. Harm can come by accident, by carelessness, by malice. Some places are more dangerous than others, but no place is “safe.” Our three hens are protected by mesh, by fence, and by electric wires. Even so, a chicken hawk penetrated the mesh and attacked my wife's favorite hen. “Big Mama” lost some feathers; but she's a sturdy hen; she's out scratching and pecking at this moment. Yesterday, a few blocks from where I was helping volunteers cut wood for the needy, I saw aid cars rushing, I didn't know (but guessed) it was toward a serious motor vehicle crash not very far away. I don't know the extent of injuries. I live on an island where people are mostly peaceful and kind, and mostly regard themselves as safe from violence and malice. Our local newspaper, which mostly caters to that optimistic mind frame, recently ran an in depth recapitulation of the story of a local horrible murder (from nine years ago, story appearance prompted by some recent arrests). Many comments from readers reflected repugnance and distaste, as if not talking about violence and conflict will make it go away.

- skahn

March 8, 2012 at 12:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

We know very little about each other, even when we are dealing with people we know intimately and in person in non-virtual life. I have been married 46 years. We have gone to marriage counselors twice. Even now we learn things about each other; correct errors and misapprehensions; make adjustments and corrections. In a forum such as this, where most of us have never talked to each other, prejudices and projections run amok. Noga wrote: No, I do not live in Israel. I live in Montreal. And no amount of precaution is going to be very effective against terrorists as I learned a few years ago when my son's Jewish school was firebombed by a couple of Palestinian immigrants. The library was totally burned but fortunately, as it was a Jewish holiday, the school was empty of kids. A few month later a small bomb went off in the Jewish community center where my daughter takes art classes.

- skahn

March 8, 2012 at 1:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Speaking of terrorism, I think I unleashed the italic bug.

- skahn

March 8, 2012 at 1:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yup, I did. Now the thread is ruined, if not by my demented comments, than by my carelessness. Anyway, I am foolish. I press on. That is information I did not have, and corrects misapprehensions. When my granddaughter, AE, was about three, she went (by coincidence and for convenience) to a daycare center run by a local synagogue. My daughter does not think of herself as Jewish (and technically she is not, as my wife is not Jewish). When I asked, “Do you worry about her safety at that day care center?” my daughter asked “Why do you ask?” After a few moments of thought, she said, “Oh.” Now AE goes to an exclusive private school for high-IQ children. Many of the children there are children of billionaires and millionaires, including children of a a very famous couple well-known for software and, of late, philanthropy. The lure for kidnappers and terrorists must be as great at that school as it is at the Jewish Center day care center. The problem is: how do we make ourselves (and our children) safer, without in the process putting ourselves in more danger? I fasten my seat belt; I lock my doors; I try to be alert to my surroundings. I recommend an excellent book The Unthinkable by Time Mazine writer Amanda Ripley, recently profiled on PBS.

- skahn

March 8, 2012 at 1:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Now that I ruined the comment thread, it is time for Marty to write a new post. Let loose the dogs of war and of comment flame wars loose upon the world. Woof, Woof.

- skahn

March 8, 2012 at 1:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Here is a typical weird perversion/inversion of the truth by noga: "As I read it, roi hails Obama for dancing to AIPAC, a traitorious body full of perfidious Jews who bribe and corrupt politicians in order to foment more war in the world. Why? Because Obama needs their money. And this is not only perfectly fine with roi, but actually proof of the moral superiority of Obama as a president who will go to any length, including complicity with foreign agents working against American interests and security, to be re-elected, and do "the right thing" for his people. And this, according to roi, is the greatness of an American President. Not world peace. Not standing by your friends when they are threatened by genocidal bullies. Not justice. Not decency. But slyness and shiftiness in pretending to be what he is not, in order to gain more money and power." ______________________ I am supposed to be suggesting that Obama is working with AIPAC? That he expects to get money from AIPAC? Come now. Both are absurd. Obama faced them down, which is exactly what he should have done, without committing to do a single thing other than protect American security. Israel thought maybe it had Obama in a box where he would have to commit to support Israeli military action against Iran. But he is too smart for that. Obams is not working with AIPAC, he is stymieing them, the reason for noga's fury. And that is so that he can do his job of protecting American security and interests without being subjected to corrupt pressure by AIPAC. AIPAC doesn't support US presidents. AIPAC works the Congress on order to frustrate US presidents at Israel's behest, uniquely among foreign powers. To interpret anything I say as implying that Obama is working with AIPAC is both ludicrous and dishonest. Good try though, noga. At least on this occasion it is yonly our interpretation that is twisted beyond recognition. You did not, as is your custom, invent words I never uttered and attribute them to me.

- roidubouloi

March 8, 2012 at 1:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Arnon says: "You accuse right wing Jews and they will accuse left wing Jews of being un-american. Guess who is going to lose?" Arnon, right wing Jews constantly accuse left wing Jews of being un-American, anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, self-hating. These are staples of right-wing rhetoric, including amongst right-wing Jews and non-Jews for at least three generations. You have only to read Martin Peretz to get a good dose, to which his merry band of right-wing acolytes here invariably applauds. Tactically, I believe in an eye-for-an-eye when dealing with this rabid crowd. Nothing else works and we cannot afford to let them occupy the rhetorical stage let alone control events.

- roidubouloi

March 8, 2012 at 1:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Not standing by your friends when they are threatened by genocidal bullies. Not justice. Not decency." Standing by your friends apparently requires allowing Benjamin Netanyahu to sit in the Oval Office and decide how to dispose of American power. As for justice and decency, you have no right to speak of them, you who justify endlessly, with every more convoluted formulations, the colonization of Palestinians in the West Bank, in unambiguous violation of their human rights, and insist on the indefinite prolongation of a conflict that slowly is threatening to engulf the world in order to satisfy your illicit desire for land that is not yours. Israel is losing the sympathy of the entire world, with but a single important friend left -- and it taxes that one -- because it has forgotten the meaning of justice and decency. You threaten us by your shameful pursuit of what justice and decency will not allow.

- roidubouloi

March 8, 2012 at 1:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I hope everyone realizes that the italic bug at TNR is a genetically modified herbicide created by MONSANTO (the most evil corporation in America) and released at TNR for testing. Fortunately, the intelligent, perceptive comment posting people at TNR are so resilient and so sturdy, they post right through it all. Frankly, I think the world has gone mad, but just doesn't realize it yet.

- skahn

March 8, 2012 at 2:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I love how this fuckwad's idea of a leftist president is Obama. Nixon was leftist, you asshole.

- MOLLYSIMON

March 8, 2012 at 2:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Skahn, you're such an ass. You use every opportunity to deny any Jewish heritage, to talk about how at peace you are with your lesbian daughter, and now to brag about your grandchild's intelligence. Hooray to the superior Skahn. Would that we could all be so thoughtful and enlightened. I happen to believe that sexual identity is genetic, but you make a great case that some men really can induce women to seek other women. If I'd had you as a dad, I'd also be playing for the other team.

- MOLLYSIMON

March 8, 2012 at 2:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Also, I love how shit nugget makes Obama out to be corrupt. Not one scandal during his term. But yeah, the guy is filthy with corruption.

- MOLLYSIMON

March 8, 2012 at 2:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Also, I love how shit nugget makes Obama out to be corrupt. Not one scandal during his term. But yeah, the guy is filthy with corruption." I was being ironic, Molly darling, interpreting roi's intemperate fulminations to their maximum absurdities, you idiot. It was roi' who proposed that Obama was pandering to AIPAC (according to roi, a criminal, anti-American subversive organization of phantasmagoral power and connections) because he needed their money and once he got that money and was re-elected, he would kick them in the teeth. So I ask you, according to this, wouldn't you say Obama was a corrupt politician, willing to engage with a foreign agency, to fill up his election campaign coffers? You are such a silly person. Coming here with nothing but cursewords and other insults that fall well short of their target. Why are you so mad at skahn for bragging about his granddaughter, a very natural inclination in normal grandfathers? Why didn't you fly at roi when he bragged about how much money he had, several houses in several countries and the leisure to do whatever he pleased? Was that a more acceptable and elegant kind of bragging in your ethical universe, Molly?

- noga1

March 8, 2012 at 2:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga, I appreciate you're taking my back against the charming (and foul-mouthed) Molly. Molly, dear, do you have pets? (As you probably know, my wife and I keep chickens. When my granddaughter visits us, she likes to pet the chickens. They squat down in a friendly fashion, which delights her. I refrain from explaining to her that when any of us pet the chickens, the are "assuming the position" (that is, assuming we are roosters about to mount them for copulation). Anyway, given your apparent bad temper and generic hostility toward everyone, if you don't already keep a pit bull or a jaguar as a house pet, you might want to consider one of the creatures profiled in this article: http://www.cracked.com/article_19719_6-terrifying-new-creatures-science-just-discovered.html [On the other hand, perhaps you qualify as one such creature and deserve to profiled in this web site's next article of frightening creatures?] Seriously, Molly, I try to read everyone's comments with an open mind and a willingness to appreciate whatever nuggets of logic, insight, and information they may have to offer (no matter how rude their manners and posting style), but you make it very, very difficult. Why do you sound like such an unpleasant harridan? Are you OK? I know a little more about Noga's experiences and reasons for her comments, but I am curious about your reason for sounding so resentful and hostile.

- skahn

March 8, 2012 at 3:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://www.cracked.com/article_19719_6-terrifying-new-creatures-science-just-discovered.html Here is the link. I messed up and didn't post it. Enjoy.

- skahn

March 8, 2012 at 3:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I said nothing about the extent of AIPAC's power other than a quote from Michael Oren. If this characterizes AIPAC's powers as phantasmagorical, take it up with the Israeli ambassador to the United States. I also said not a word about Obama needing, seeking, or expecting any money out of AIPAC. It would be ridiculous to suppose that he would seek or receive anything from that crowd. Nor did I suggest that Obama would take any money from AIPAC. Nor did I say that Obama would kick AIPAC in the teeth. These are all inventions of noga. What I said, as distinct from the standard noga-ish inventions, is that any perceived promise, as none was given, to go to war on behalf of a foreign power, if not at the time in the interests of the United States, is worthless. This is so obvious as only to be worth mentioning to very foolish and stupid people. It is, for example, widely understood that the stationing of American troops in Europe and Korea had as its primary purpose putting them in harm's way to be killed if the Russians or North Korean's should attack. In that manner, the promise to go to war, which by itself would not have been credible, was made credible by the inevitability of Americans being killed if war were to break out. It is, however, a feature of political life surrounding Israel that people are obliged by the likes of AIPAC to stand up and say stupid things, incredible things, things that are obviously untrue in order to demonstrate that one is not anti-Semitic and should not be regarded by the "friends of Israel," with whatever political power they wield, as an enemy of Israel. Who needs political enemies? Fortunately, or unfortunately, these people are fairly easily bought off. Some belligerent language suffices. The trick for someone such as Obama, who does not want to make military threats he is not prepared to carry out, is not to make such threats while still sounding sufficiently belligerent to satisfy the AIPAC crowd. That AIPAC demands to be pandered to in this way, the insistence on the ritual recitation of stupid things in order to reassure it, is pretty embarrassing. But I give credit to Obama for being willing to play the game out of political necessity and for doing it so well. Contra noga, this has nothing at all to do with money to or for Obama. Obama is properly resisting the political power of AIPAC which is based, as with the power of most lobbying groups, on the suborning of Congress with money. AIPAC is pretty much unique, however, in that it is almost the only lobby, and the only powerful lobby, doing this on behalf of a foreign power and is also in rather clear violation of our laws in doing so. This is what the friends of Israel expect. It is part of the ritual demonstration of their power that they are not required to obey our laws. To some extent, this interferes with the making of US foreign policy, which is very unfortunate. Ironically, even to suggest this is to invite the usual charges of anti-Semitism. Being a friend of Israel always demands such a degree of stupidity that one must continuously deny the obvious. If AIPAC were not affecting US policy, why would it exist? Withal, noga is again up to her usual tricks of inventing things, inverting the truth, perverting the truth because she cannot bear reality and cannot defend in any rational way the positions to which she is deeply emotionally attached. This drives her into a frenzy which typically culminates in name-calling, the false attribution to me or others of opinions that anyone would find repellent, or both. Let's see how long it takes for both to turn up on this thread. Try as she will to behave appropriately, the strain is too much. In the end, noga must ever be noga.

- roidubouloi

March 8, 2012 at 4:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Can't have it both ways, shit nuggets. You were damn well finding a way to indict the president, otherwise you wouldn't have brought it up as an argument.

- MOLLYSIMON

March 8, 2012 at 9:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Skahn, I owe you an apology. What I said about your daughter was totally indefensible.

- MOLLYSIMON

March 8, 2012 at 9:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

From your articulate writings one is to conclude you don't like AIPAC, you don't like Netanyahu, you don't like Israel. Your distortions are so elaborate that you are totally confused. Galicianer dishonest self hatred Jew. But why should the obsessed "internationalist (rimes with neo-fascist)" distract us from meaningful discussion . Here are a couple of meaningful comments. JJ Goldberg interpretation of Obama Netanyahu meeting, gift from Bibi to BHO.   http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-07/netanyahu-gives-obama-a-purim-message-to-heed-jeffrey-goldberg.html Then the Israeli Prize to Rabbi Druckman , the man that headed conversions of Russian immigrants to Israel. They love Israel, and they were not even born Jews.  However you already know the situation with the Galicianer dishonest self hatred Jew .  http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4200306,00.html These washes the venom of the king of rotten baloney. Dishonest Galicianer self hatred Jew.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 8, 2012 at 9:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

MS you don't have to apologize, you didn't say anything wrong. The whiner has been enmerdering this site with his hypocrisy for a long time. He is never on subject. A bigot indulges in discrimination , anti religion diatribes, talks ad nauseum about helping others when it is a lie. And falsely states the genius of his granddaughter, an imaginary dream of his. Even his chickens don't exist. All is invented. Although you bring an interesting point. Somebody mentioned Oedipus mental sickness in a previous blog. According to Freud if not cured can produce homosexuality. But whining and trying to show off about living with the very rich. There is something very wrong with this person. His whining mask gave up when he demonstrated bigotry and evil discrimination.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 8, 2012 at 9:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Molly, I appreciate your apology and I accept it without any reservations or cavils. Frankly, I think that human beings are about 1,000 times oversexed for our current needs as a species (and are about 1,000 times overpopulated for our most comfortable and survivable habitation of our planet and ecosystem). I grew up with some mindless prejudices (not from my parents, just society in general) against homosexuals. By the time I was in my twenties, various experiences including working with homosexuals and being around fairly rough and tumble heterosexual people without such biases had mostly removed such prejudices from my system. Whatever my faults and flaws, my daughter and her partner are intelligent and decent people and they are doing a fine job of bringing AE. As we are so easily sexually aroused, it is not uncommon for many people to have some sexual experiences with both sexes. Also, it seems to be a bit more easily accepted in our culture to accept lesbian sexual activity (and a bit more of a fetish in male pornography and fantasy), but in general, I think most people have a definite sexual orientation, consistent with what you said in one of your comments, a tendency which is probably genetic. I have known and conversed with quite a few homosexuals, and this seems consistent with they have told me. There are a very few women – I have known several – who might be called “ideological lesbians – who “hook up” with other women more as a statement of their independence from men and as a gesture against male oppression. I hope they still manage to have a good time when fucking, whatever their motivation. Quite a while ago, I read an article about children raised by homosexual parents in the New York Times Magazine. The general take was that such children experiment with their sexual identity more than children of heterosexual parents, in part because they often feel they SHOULD be gay, but after the sorting out period, they settle down with what naturally feels good. I would not be surprised if my granddaughter goes through such a stage and outcome. I know her mommies will support her in whichever direction she wants to “swing.”

- skahn

March 8, 2012 at 10:08pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Of course, Molly, you are not obligated to take my back against comments such as The whiner has been enmerdering this site with his hypocrisy for a long time. He is never on subject. A bigot indulges in discrimination , anti religion diatribes, talks ad nauseum about helping others when it is a lie. And falsely states the genius of his granddaughter, an imaginary dream of his. Even his chickens don't exist. All is invented, but in the usual dodge ball free for all of a Marty Peretz discussion thread, perhaps you would like to toss a ball at him. However, I am "loyal" to no one here, and I will agree with what seems like a sensible statement from anyone, so obviously I may have no principles and cannot be trusted or depended upon.

- skahn

March 8, 2012 at 10:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

From the Foreign Agent Registration Act: The term ‘‘political activities’’ means any activity that the person engaging in believes will, or that the person intends to, in any way influence any agency or official of the Government of the United States or any section of the public within the United States with reference to formulating, adopting, or changing the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or with reference to the political or public interests,policies, or relations of a government of a foreign country or a foreign political party; From the AIPAC website: AIPAC’s mission is to strengthen the ties between the United States and its ally Israel. As America’s leading pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC works with Democrats, Republicans and Independents to enact public policy that enhances the U.S.-Israel relationship. AIPAC’s staff and citizen activists educate decision makers about the bonds that unite the United States and Israel and how it is in America’s best interest to help ensure that the Jewish state is safe, strong and secure. Cooperation between the two countries is advantageous for both nations. AIPAC urges all members of Congress to support Israel through foreign aid, government partnerships, joint anti-terrorism efforts and the promotion of a negotiated two-state solution—a Jewish state of Israel and a demilitarized Palestinian state. Working with Congress to ensure that Israel is able to defend itself. The Jewish state needs more than $3 billion in critical security assistance to remain capable of facing increased threats posed by terrorist groups and those sworn to its--and America's--destruction.

- roidubouloi

March 8, 2012 at 10:38pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The whiner doubles now as a coward asking others to defend him. He has been doing it all the time. Even I felt into the trap. This anti religion bigot and discrimination activist keeps whining ad nauseum. Is never on subject. The world is he and only he. Whines and whines so people will feel sorry for him. Himself doesn't give a damn for anybody else but himself. Empathy deficiency syndrome is his illness. He whines of living among the very rich. He brags about a non existent lesbian daughter and non existent genius granddaughter put into a private school of the super rich. He has repeated now too many times about their preferred chicken pet being attacked by a hawk. The whiner repeats the same every few weeks. Then whiners about his upcoming dementia. He wants compassion from others, compassion he gives to nobody. And repeats lies about helping others. Nothing can be done about it, he will continue whining until the next SUN flares. Ignore him , bypass him, don't waste energy on him.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 8, 2012 at 11:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Look what you get for your troubles, skahn. Are these really the people you want to hang around with? You should know by now that Peretz attracts them like flies to shit.

- roidubouloi

March 9, 2012 at 12:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Thank you for your gracious comment, Jaime. If I spent many hours, I could not write as articulate, elegant, and convincing a comment. I will make a suggestion though. If you want to talk about whining, I think there is something especially refined and pungent about the British locution "whinging." For your information, though. The chickens are real. There are three adult hens, from a breed called "Dominique." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominique_%28chicken%29. We have three hens left: Big Mama, Moll, and Lucy. Two hens died of illness: Ethel and Little Peep. We now have two baby chicks, not yet named. My wife, in a daring departure from her usual loyalty, picked up two baby chicks (ever so cute) from a breed known as "Black Sex-Link." They are called thus because the baby hens and the baby cocks have different markings. Otherwise it is difficult to determine the sex of little chicks, leading many people to be stuck with roosters they don't want. They are about three days old. Jaime, your comments to TNR are ever so interesting and rewarding, but you might want to consider broadening your horizons by raising a few chickens. Also the eggs are very good for you, they droppings make good fertilizer, and watching them peck and scrach is almost as entertaining as reading comments such as your excellent ones. And if you feed them, they are not as picky as many of the people here at TNR.

- skahn

March 9, 2012 at 12:12am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roi, thank you for your comment. I live in the woods, surrounded by crows, hawks, eagles, chickadees, coyotes, deer, chickens, slugs, and owls. The chickens drop lots of chickenshit, which makes excellent fertilizer for our plum tree and apple trees. I am sure there is some way I can use the comments from these posts and threads, perhaps for killing slugs.

- skahn

March 9, 2012 at 12:16am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The whiner finally answered me. From the time he begged from me to buy the Alzheimer's report from John Hopkins as a gift to his wife because he could not afford to spend $20. To the moment he stopped commenting to me when he realized although am secular, I have respect for religion . This whiner is just another bigot anti religion . He is asking people for compassion while he suffers from empathy deficiency syndrome. He is incapable to have compassion for any human. He believes he is the center of the universe. Just read his blogs, he only talks about himself. The rest are just inventions asking for pity, misericory, compassion from others. He doesn't deserve it. Doctor my wife thinks she is a chicken. Let her in. Enters a chicken. Gone With The Wind best nasty scene , when they served the cooked chicken.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 9, 2012 at 1:00am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Galicianer dishonest self hatred Jew hater of Israel. You have it right, you are the shit we are the flies.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 9, 2012 at 1:03am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Whiner you lied, you previously stated you were surrounded by some of the richest people in America. Even your imaginary high IQ granddaughter was now going to private school with the children of those super rich Americans. You are afraid of becoming senile and demented. You should. In the meantime you are a whiner, beggar, dishonest. Not only about the facts, but about your feelings for others, yes right lack of feelings for others. Why do you blog, you don't have other place to do your lamentations.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 9, 2012 at 1:13am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Whiner I am convinced you are now in a cell in a mental institution where you are allowed to use a computer where you blog all your imaginary whinings. your empathy deficiency illness is, I am sorry to say, incurable. Bye. I don't feel sorry for you. Neither the Galiciener dishonest self hatred Jew violent hater of Israel, frustrated failed internationalist, self declared shit attracting flies.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 9, 2012 at 1:22am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Whinner your patronizing will lead you nowhere. You are a lost cause. Even in his envy of the super rich he included the millionaire, selfish/mean, husband of his wife cousin living in Taiwan. He never gives nothing even a penny to help his whining relative.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 9, 2012 at 1:32am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Whinner you dwell about sexuality. I am surprised you had no comments about the Iranian dictator Ahmadenijad stating that there are no homosexuals in Iran. Watch it your imaginary lesbian daughter doesn't visit Iran. On the subject of sex and your imaginary chickens, and as a degenerate, do you indulge in fucking, as you stated it, with your beloved chickens? Is it part of your genes? What did your marital counselor about it? Are you the subject of my joke about you, the psychiatrist, and the chicken? Don't by shy, don't be coward, above all stop being a whiner.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 9, 2012 at 1:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What the Galicianer dishonest self hatred Jew slandering Israel, does not tell you is the truth. Israel was attacked in 1967 by Jordan, Egypt, Syria and troops from Iraq and Saudi Arabia. Israel defended itself and won capturing Jerusalem, the liberated territories, Gaza, and the Golan Heights. Under Jordanian rule from 1948 to 1967, Jews were not allowed to pray at their holly sites, historical synagogues were destroyed by the Jordanians. The UN and international organizations the Vatican, did nothing about this travesty. It has been the liberation by Israel that has provided freedom and respect of holly sites for all religions Jewish, Christian, Moslem. Palestinian construction workers earn 1.4 billion dollars by working in the ever expanding liberated territories. Recently taxes collected by Israel at the tune of $100 million were handed to the Palestinian Authority, w/o which the PA can not exist. This doesn't stop the PA of continuously promoting hatred and violence against Israelis, against Jews, against USA. Where are the international organizations saying anything about the Palestinians ill behavior but condemning Israel. The vitriol of the Galicianer dishonest self hatred Jew slandering Israel, slandering Netanyahu. Posting distortions with his failed obsessive broken international agreements by the Arabs, fall flat on his face. The liberated territories are here to stay liberated, never to go back to Moslem dictators, they will remain free. Palestinians don't want peace. Iranians don't want peace. Hamas don't want peace. Hizbollah don't want peace. Syria is busy massacring their own civilians, Moslems massacring Moslems. Galicianer dishonest self hatred Jew slandered of Israel, you have to drink your own vitriol.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 9, 2012 at 5:04am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Galicianer de merd. Je suis surprise tu est tres bien a la langue et tres imbecile a la tet. Arret toi d'être mechante au Israel, au Juive. Bien sure, tu est la merde nous some les flies.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 9, 2012 at 5:18am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Whiner you can go no further but use your own posts to kill your imaginary slugs.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 9, 2012 at 5:24am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When I was younger, people spoke of the decline of people's mental functioning as we age as “senility.” A variety of conditions such as Alzheimer's Disease can contribute to dementia. http://www.medicineonline.com/articles/s/2/Senility/Dementia.html. Today, the more commonly used term is “dementia.” As I get older, I realize that I will die, and that I may decline into dementia before something else kills me. My genetics are not promising in this regard. Both my mother and my father's oldest sister died of Alzheimer's Disease. My wife works as a volunteer for a program at the local senior center where she helps with respite care for people who suffer the burden of caring for sufferers of dementia. I don't think I suffer from dementia yet, but I worry about it. I hope I have enough sense to stop posting comments at The New Republic before I might reach the point when my mental decline is obvious to everyone but me. Jaime Chuch, I have read comments from you that make good points and provide useful and interesting information. However, and I do not mean this in an unkindly or hostile way, your last few comments are disturbing to me. I am not bothered by your personal attacks on me. Three or four other TNR readers have attacked me. This does not much perturb me; after a while they tire of it and stop (as in the case of Arnon, for example), or we begin to establish a little better communication and understanding of each other, as may be happening in cases such as Noga and Molly Simon. Jamie, if you want to keep posting negative and hostile comments addressed to me, that is your privilege, and TNR seems to have adopted a kind of libertarian approach to moderating comments (which I support), so people can use any language they like and can post any insults they like. However, Jamie, with all due respect, I suggest you talk to your doctor and ask him or her to evaluate your medical condition. Also, you might want to print out your last dozen or so comments you posted here, and ask your doctor and your family to provide you with feedback on them. However, carry on as you consider best.

- skahn

March 9, 2012 at 8:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Not a great fan of chickens, skahn, except to eat. Long ago, I spent one long night in a chicken house on Kibbutz Amir in the Huleh Valley, up by the border with Lebanon and Syria. Back and forth through a haze of chicken shit helping to transfer young chickens from one chicken house to a larger facility for finishing. That was enough to convince me I had no interest in chickens. But it remains one of the most memorable experiences of my life.

- roidubouloi

March 9, 2012 at 8:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I believe the French word you are looking for Jaime is mouches, not flies. But I am not all that sure myself. My French was never that strong and I have lost a lot since leaving. But I shall return!

- roidubouloi

March 9, 2012 at 8:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

To the whining one. We had good communications before. I felt compassion for your eternal complaining about Alzheimer's, and I provided you with references and such. Suddenly you stopped communicating with me, in one post about if we would reach 200 you wrote somebody mentioned. It was obvious something tickled you against me. Don't be an hypocrite and excuse that you are forgetting things. You got disturbed when I posted the passing of Gunther Plaut the reform Rabi author of the Torah a Modern Interpretation and it's influence on me as a New Born Jew. Although I am secular, I respect all religions. You are against religion, lacking an explanation about your discriminatory behavior my conclusion stands? You assume an attitude of utmost arrogance. You tend to give the last word during discussions. And you patronize everybody. You use your mask of humility hiding the illness you really have called empathy deficiency syndrome. You talk about homosexuality and lesbianism like if that made you somebody special, or unique. Using your family to show off your bad conceived complexes. You never cover the subjects under discussion. You really believe you are the center of the world and are continuously looking for others to give you compassion that you lack completely for others. You show off living among rich people, and jealous of your wife cousin super rich husband from Taiwan never given a cent to you . Then as a good beggar you ask me to buy as a gift to your wife the John Hopkins 2012 Alzheimer's studies, claiming you could not afford $20. that you had to spend for manure. And continuously advertise the charity work you claim be doing. Your illness is not dementia or Alzheimer's you claim are afraid off. Is just another way of your desperation for empathy from others that you yourself lack. Since you are unable to pray to the Almighty you so sorely need, you try other forms of escapism. Don't be patronizing on your cowardly ways, and go around making suggestions to others, hiding your true lowdown feelings. Realize your deficiencies, try to correct them. And above all stop being a bigot and do not discriminate. To tell you the truth, sorry to say, I find you a person to be avoided. I will bypass you always from now on.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 9, 2012 at 11:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

With the news this morning that TNR is changing hands, I do hope the policy of not moderating or editing these boards will continue. I have likely been called as many names and subjected to as many attacks as anyone here. But I still consider the opportunity to speak freely, without external control, far and away worth it. I also perceive that this community is slowly learning to self-regulate (to which skahn has contribute by poking gentle fun at the foibles of excess and Jaime has contributed by holding up a mirror of extreme excess). This is a much better outcome than having regulation imposed by TNR. After all, what we say here is not a life and death matter, not does it result directly in harm to anyone. I don't think anyone here is under-age. In the real, non-cyber world, people display all the excesses we see here, but with much greater opportunity for harm. It is manageable and overall a credit to TNR that it exercises self-restraint.

- roidubouloi

March 9, 2012 at 12:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roudubouloi, just as I was thinking that I hope under the new management TNR will maintain its free speech and lack of moderating, I read your comment that expressed such thoughts better than I could. Thank you. I think your comment "this community is slowly learning to self-regulate" is pertinent as well. By nature I am a pessimistic and skeptical person. Just as the world has moved from the horrors of the Holocaust, Stalin, Mao (and so many other similar monstrosities) to perhaps a little kinder and more civilized world, I hope this is a sign we are starting to "self-regulate" as a species and a planet. Is TNR a "Jewish" magazine? I don't know. Am I a "Jew"? When I ponder this question, some people get upset. I think the main point is that we are all human beings, and we need to learn to live together and care for each other, with as much tolerance, generosity, and love as we can. I read comments here from people who identify themselves as Jews, as Protestants, as Catholics, and, of course, as non-believers. Perhaps in a fairly soon time under the new management, we will begin to read posts from Muslims and members of other religions. Perhaps even the first post from an artificial intelligence, and from a genetically enhanced non-human animal. Perhaps we will find a post from a whale, a chimpanzee, an octopus, or raven one of these days. Or even a visitor from another solar system. TNR has focused quite a bit on the Middle East, and on the survival of Israel, and its relations with its neighbors. Many people participating here are much more familiar with this area than I am (as roidubouloi's sardonic post about chickens in Israel illustrates). But I hope that the Arab countries, Iran, Israel, Turkey, and all the squabbling and divided countries, people, and religious groups of that area can learn to self-regulate a little better. Though, given the energy resources, armaments, and skills the Middle East possesses, if they all learn to live in peace and work together, will we (the United States) be safe? As the old saying goes, "Be careful what you ask for."

- skahn

March 9, 2012 at 1:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well r and s have assumed the senior high ground of TNR, as they deserve it. They feel that the new owners will bring changes and youth, and they will. Future and changes makes one apprehensive. I surely wish the best of the best to the new TNR. And as Walter Houston said in The Treasure of The Sierra Madre we will wait and see.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 9, 2012 at 3:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Every time Jaime says "Galicianer" as an insult I'm reminded of the once-great Scottish stand-up comic Billy Connolly, who had this gag: "You know those Irish jokes about the Irish being stupid -- a lot of people have been saying they are racist and unacceptable. I've been thinking about it, and they are right -- I have a lot of Irish fans and I want to keep them. So I've been wondering, is there a European people one CAN make jokes about? Yeah, the Lapps. But I want to be certain -- [shouts] Anyone from Lapland here in the audience? No? Great. So, there were these two Lapps . . . called Mick and Seamus"

- ironyroad

March 9, 2012 at 7:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When we were young and beautiful, I decided it would be a good idea to introduce my friend Oded, to my friend Safira. The introduction worked and a couple of years later they were married. They were both second-generation sabras. Her grandmother, when she heard about the match wanted to know who he was and after a short investigation it turned out his grandpa was a Galicaner. Azoy, she told her grandaughter, we are Litvaks. We don't marry Galicianers. But since he is such a nice boy, from a good family and comes with a good fortune, I will welcome him to the family. His revenge was to repeat the tea trick that works so well on me every time. But it didn't work on her. She knew what to expect from Galicianers and be prepared.

- noga1

March 9, 2012 at 8:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Anyway, I too hope the board remains unmoderated. However, I'd like to say that the comments about AIPAC are getting pretty ugly. This is a slippery slope people, you know that. Please be careful. Imagery of Jooz corrupting people is an old, old meme, ditto, the "dual loyalty" stuff; so many supposed critiques of Israel are warmed over judenhass. Noga, I've seen synagogues and schools firebombed too, not far from where I live; and the office of a Jewish alderman disfigured with antisemitic graffiti.

- Sophia

March 9, 2012 at 10:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roi says: “I am supposed to be suggesting that Obama is working with AIPAC? That he expects to get money from AIPAC? Come now. Both are absurd.” Here are a few quotes, selected from various comments by roi: "If the rhetoric of Obama's speech is satisfactory to noga, even while she distrusts his intentions, then it was a very successful speech. We can likely expect this shortly to become a non-issue through the election, and Obama will not be under untoward pressure to do damage to US interests for domestic political purposes. Goodbye, AIPAC. Have a pleasant trip home.” “Because this is America, the great bankocracy. Money talks, nobody walks. With enough money and the willingness to use it for political clout, you can corrupt just about anything. The trick is only to do it in plain sight, not with cash in paper bags.” “Obama knows he is pandering, giving AIPAC the velvet glove treatment. But with some steel in the velvet glove. Good for him that he did not shrink from the political task of pandering as necessary in order then be left free to do his real job. He's learning.” __________________________ According to roi, then: AIPAC is a criminal organization of rich American Jewish traitors serving for a foreign interest. Obama makes a public speech to AIPAC. The purpose? To pander to this organization. Why? Because, roi says, in "America, the great bankocracy. Money talks" And Obama, according to roi, "did not shrink from the political task of pandering as necessary in order then be left free to do his real job." _________________ Seems to me that roi is “suggesting that Obama is working with AIPAC... That he expects to get money from AIPAC ... " which is why Obama panders to this criminal organization (roi's definition of AIPAC). ___________________ So why did Obama address and pander to AIPAC? It could be that he wants to persuade American Jews that he is genuinely concerned for Israel's security and working to ensure that this security remain as strong as ever. Or, as roi believes: He is deliberately duping American Jews because he needs their support (=money) in seeking re-election. If the first, then Obama is an ethical leader. If the second, then he is a corrupt politician perfectly willing to deceive and to pander for money and power. _________________ Roi believes the second proposition explains Obama's positive speech about Israel. How else to interpret roi's statement that Obama's pandering was "necessary in order then be left free to do his real job."? In what way is AIPAC preventing Obama from being free to do his job? Is Obama afraid of AIPAC? If not, then why does he need to pander to them? Does Obama not know what is so obvious to roi, that AIPAC is a criminal organization in the service of a foreign power? Why the need to pander? Why not just issue warrants for their arrest? Wouldn't that be the ultimate freedom from such a malign organization?

- noga1

March 9, 2012 at 11:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

AIPAC is pretty ugly. Israel ought to dump it and engage in bilateral diplomacy with the US just like every other nation in the world. But if it is to have a lobby here, it should be registered as such. Political privileges of this kind are also ugly and are ample reason for other Americans to be angry with Israel and by extension with Jews. We have no just claim to such political preferment within our own society. If we are illegally lobbying on behalf of a foreign power, other Americans have every right to be resentful. Mearsheimer and Walt are not entirely wrong that the charge of anti-Semitism is deployed to quell that resentment or at least its pubic expression. This too falls in the category of obvious realities we are obliged stupidly to deny in order to demonstrate loyalty. I have no stomach for standing up and spouting falsehoods on demand and I care not at all if the price for not standing up on command and spouting falsehoods is to be called an anti-Semite or a self-hating Jew. This are the sorts of charge -- anti-American, unpatriotic, enemy -- that the right has always deployed in order to impose silence. I'm not playing. One of the problems with Israel is that it still behaves like the Yishuv. It seemingly cannot accept that it is a real sovereign state and should behave like one rather then endlessly playing the sort of cat-and-mouse games that it played with the British mandatory government.

- roidubouloi

March 9, 2012 at 11:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh, well, let us try to clear up the miasma of confusion that is noga. AIPAC is a lobby. It says so. Right on its website. Lobbies do much of their work by directing money at legislators that they want to influence. AIPAC is no exception. I regard this as a corruption of democratic government -- bankocracy -- whether it is AIPAC doing it or some other lobby. However, to the extent that this behavior is permitted by our laws, it is permitted. One can criticize it and one can work to see the law changed. AIPAC, however, is not merely another lobby, because it is a lobby on behalf of a foreign power. Our law also permits this, but it requires that an agent, most particularly a lobby, of a foreign principal be registered as such. This is a form of disclosure law, a method that we often attempt to cure various political ills. One can argue about whether this is a successful method standing alone of preventing abuse, I tend to think not, but the law is the law on this too. And it is hardly without impact. You can be very sure that legislators would be at pains to keep AIPAC at arms length if it were a declared agent of a foreign power, as it should be. If it didn't matter, AIPAC wouldn't evade the law. I quoted the law and portions of AIPAC's website, without comment, to make clear how obviously AIPAC evades its lawful responsibility to register. It seems to astonish noga that the law can be so easily evaded based on political power, but that is exactly a large part of the problem with political power based on money. It neuters democratically adopted law and the power of democratic self-governance as applied to those with financial power. Are we supposed to be so naîve as to deny that such financial and political power exists? Or that Jews do in fact wield it on behalf of Israel? So, despite the fact that foreign policy is the province of the executive in our system, and that AIPAC's power is in part illicit because grounded in a clear evasion of law, Obama has to contend with it in order to do his job. In a just world, where he did not have to make choices between critical American interests and using the power of law to bring to heel a law-breaking organization, we might wish that he would indeed tell AIPAC to register or be prosecuted. Robert Kennedy did. But that would require sacrificing many other important interests. He would be a fool to do so, and he is no fool. What then? If he is to be able to conduct his foreign policy free of the improper influence of an agent of a foreign power that improperly lobbies our legislature and government, he has to do something. Not for money, not for political gain, but so that he can fulfill his responsibility to the security of the entire American people. Rather than a public row with AIPAC, he bends the knee, just enough to shut them up without making commitments he is unwilling to keep. Then, of course, the nogas and halevi's of the world start complaining that his word cannot be trusted. Well, too bad. This is the sort of ridiculous ritual display that AIPAC requires. I cannot imagine that Obama does not resent having to engage in this. But he is responsible enough to do what is necessary under the circumstances. If he succeeds in beating AIPAC at its own disreputable and dishonest game, as I think he does, then good for him. That makes him a faithful servant of the United States of America. The essence of the complain by noga is that Obama does not allow AIPAC to succeed at a corrupt game. Sort of like the old joke about having stolen something "fair and square" and so not having to return it. One thing is for certain: Obama does not seek or expect any favor from AIPAC, and you can be drop-dead sure that none will be forthcoming.

- roidubouloi

March 9, 2012 at 11:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

However, Jewish Americans are as entitled to organize and lobby for U.S. government support for their cause as Irish-American citizens and Iranian-American citizens, both of whom have been active in that way -- the Irish for around 150 years, in fact. The fact that AIPAC's cause involves the security of a particular nation (Israel), as opposed to, say, the creation of an extended nation (United Ireland) or the removal of a nation's current regime (Iran) doesn't make it less legitimate. Palestinian-Americans can organize and lobby also, and could potentially have some success if they could show that an independent Palestine would be a good partner in the region for the U.S.

- ironyroad

March 10, 2012 at 12:10am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The fact that AIPAC is quite clearly obliged to register as an agent of a foreign principal under the Foreign Agents Registration Act makes it less than legitimate. It does not matter whether every member of AIPAC is an American citizen. The law is not written to apply to foreign nationals but to domestic agents, including Americans, of foreign powers.

- roidubouloi

March 10, 2012 at 12:29am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Right this minute it would appear to be an interpretation, roid, rather than a fact. But while its supportive relationship to the state of Israeli does make AIPAC something a little different from, say, a political organization that is seeking American support to overturn an oppressive government abroad, I think it's a fuzzy line to draw at whether one is agitating for a political cause -- the security of country X -- or engaging in representative activity for that country's government. AIPAC could become an albatross, however, if another espionage case similar to the one a few years ago comes up. Then it might begin to depreciate in value rather quickly.

- ironyroad

March 10, 2012 at 3:36am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yes, it is an interpretation. And just how would you interpret this? the term ‘‘agent of a foreign principal’’ means any person who acts as an agent, representative, employee, or servant, or any person who acts in any other capacity at the order, request, or under the direction or control,of a foreign principal . . . and who directly or through any other person— (i) engages within the United States in political activities for or in the interests of such foreign principal; (ii) acts within the United States as a public relations counsel, publicity agent, information- service employee or political consultant for or in the interests of such foreign principal; (iii) within the United States solicits, collects, disburses, or dispenses contributions, loans, money, or other things of value for or in the interest of such foreign principal; or (iv) within the United States represents the interests of such foreign principal before any agency or official of the Government of the United States. _______________________ A foreign government is a defined foreign principal. Does anyone want seriously to claim that AIPAC does not take direction from the Government of Israel as to its legislative agenda?

- roidubouloi

March 10, 2012 at 7:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Oh, well, let us try to clear up the miasma of confusion that is noga." There is no need. Your words stand by themselves and speak for themselves and no amount of forceful re-inventions of new meanings is going to help you live down their malice. It seems to me that you are the most pathetically confused poster on these boards. This, for example: "Obama does not seek or expect any favor from AIPAC, and you can be drop-dead sure that none will be forthcoming." stands in stark contradiction to these earlier statements of yours: "We can likely expect this shortly to become a non-issue through the election, and Obama will not be under untoward pressure to do damage to US interests for domestic political purposes. Goodbye, AIPAC. Have a pleasant trip home.” “Obama knows he is pandering, giving AIPAC the velvet glove treatment. But with some steel in the velvet glove. Good for him that he did not shrink from the political task of pandering as necessary in order then be left free to do his real job. " _____________ If he expects that no favour will be forthcoming from AIPAC, why is he pandering to it? If, as you suggest, there will be no favour coming from AIPAC, why then did you suggest in the second quote above that a favour nonetheless will be forthcoming as his pandering, according to you, will be successful enough not to elicit the results that will not at the very least disrupt his re-election chances?

- noga1

March 10, 2012 at 9:34am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roi , notice I don't call you Galicianer the distorter anymore. Would you care to comment in your one sided attacks on AIPAC and Israel in particular about the Arab/Iranian world? http://www.aapac.org/ This is the Arab American Political Action Committee invitation to their upcoming get together. Do you plan to attend? Do you plan to speak and slander Israel and Jewish supporters? I urge to attend . Those are the people you belong to. Tell them your brilliant interpretation of liberated territories. Tell them that AIPAC is wrong and AAPAC is right. Tell them that Iran is a peaceful, loving country, and that an Iranian nuclear bomb would be an asset for peaceful coexistence in the ME and the world. Tell them how you single-handedly, stopped Netanyahu and AIPAC from manhandling Obama to wage war against Iran. You are on the same wavelength, as declared yesterday after prayers by Ayatollah Khameini. Was I wrong in calling you an Iranian apologizer? You have joined the distinguished ranks of the NYT, Roger Cohen and last but not least Thomas Friedman. All of you are honest criticizers of misguided Israeli policies, and erroneously called anti Israel self hatred Jews.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 10, 2012 at 1:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Not all Galicianers are bad. My late father in law was an honest Galicianer, an exception to the rule. On the other hand the king du rotten baloney fits the rule perfectly. Dishonest distortions is his modicum operandi. And as in the case of Pinocchio his nose must be a mile long and still growing.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 10, 2012 at 1:41pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And here you have a list of Palestinian American Action Committees. http://www.pac-national.org/index.php?option=com_sobi2&Itemid=121

- JAIMECHUCH

March 10, 2012 at 1:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And here you have a list of Palestinian American Action Committees. http://www.pac-national.org/index.php?option=com_sobi2&Itemid=121

- JAIMECHUCH

March 10, 2012 at 1:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"If he expects that no favour will be forthcoming from AIPAC, why is he pandering to it?" He is going through the necessary ritual to shut them up, neutralize their political power by leaving them little opportunity to bring political pressure to bear, nothing more. I suppose you could consider that a favor, but not to Obama, rather, to the United States. It gives Obama the freedom to make military decisions in the best interests of the United States which is what he is supposed to do. Is this really beyond your understanding or, as is your custom, are you simply laboring to substitute your own meaning for mine and then attribute it to me? Oh, I know, dumb question. We all know that when you become frustrated, which typically doesn't take very long, the latter is exactly what you do. AIPAC exists to distort American foreign policy for the benefit of Israel. Any American would be justified in thinking that is damaging to the United States. In the case of AIPAC, it isn't even legal as, by rights, it ought to be registered as an agent of a foreign principal but evades the law.

- roidubouloi

March 10, 2012 at 3:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Just to be clear, AIPAC is not going to get off Obama's back as a favor to him, but because he has backed them into a corner where they don't have and more immediate ability to threaten him. Pandering to their belief that American foreign policy as regards Israel should be dominated by Israel's interest, rather than American interests, without making any commitments he won't honor is the surest way to do that. He showed up and did his political job. You are frustrated, even more than usual, because he has neutered their ability to threaten him even though they, like you, don't believe him. Too fucking bad. They have no business trying to subordinate American interests to those of Israel in the first place. __________________ Jaime, I have many disagreements with Thomas Friedman. But I sure as hell would rather have my name associated with his than with Benjamin Netanyahu.

- roidubouloi

March 10, 2012 at 3:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Just to be clear, AIPAC is not going to get off Obama's back as a favor to him, but because he has backed them into a corner " What a strange and malevolent formulation of this event! How has Obama backed AIPAC into a corner? Was it a hostile speech he delivered? Were veiled threats made under a velvety voice? Here is how Michael Totten represents the affair: http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/blog/michael-j-totten/aipacs-victory "Barack Obama delivered the most pro-Israel speech of his presidency to a bipartisan round of applause. I objected to one or two lines, but that was it. He seemed to relish picking public fights with the Jewish state and its prime minister early in his presidency, but he hasn't been doing it lately. So there's a case to be made that he really has changed, that his caustic relationship with Jerusalem is a thing of the past. I can be as cynical about politicians as the next person, and of course it's entirely possible that he was just telling everyone in the crowd what they wanted to hear, but the speech was broadcast on television. When the president of the United States speaks, the entire world hears him. “When the chips are down,” he said, “I have Israel's back.” Those words were heard not only at the AIPAC conference, but also in the heartland of America, in Jerusalem, in Cairo, and in Tehran." _______________ "Those words were heard not only at the AIPAC conference, but also in the heartland of America, in Jerusalem, in Cairo, and in Tehran." This is how ironyroad characterized the thrust of the speech earlier somewhere in this thread. I tend to agree with bot of them.

- noga1

March 10, 2012 at 3:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

He got them off his back not by threats by telling them what they wanted to hear, which is what they demand, conformity, without however, committing the United States to any particular action or timetable other than "not now." No red lines, no agreement to provide support for an Israeli attack under any given set of circumstances, no commitment to attack, no bargain that if Netanyahu will refrain, the United States will agree to anything at all. Netanyahu went home empty-handed as he should have. I don't myself think Obama has changed his views at all (of course I don't know as he didn't tell me). I think he has become shrewder about how to play the game, and I welcome that. When you appear in front of AIPAC, there are magic words you have to utter. He did his job.

- roidubouloi

March 10, 2012 at 7:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Do you think Netanyahu went home the slightest bit mollified by that speech? I don't think so for a minute. That is as good a measure as any of whether it was successful.

- roidubouloi

March 10, 2012 at 7:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

At least you are now criticizing my actual words and intentions rather than inventing your own and placing them in my mouth. I have no problem standing by my own words. I quite like them.

- roidubouloi

March 10, 2012 at 7:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What you wrote, roi, was that "Obama ... has backed them into a corner where they don't have and more immediate ability to threaten him". That implies a hostile confrontation between two opponents, where one backs the other, who threatens him, into a corner. This does not represent the AIPAC event by any stretch of imagination and you know it. So now you are trying to persuade your readers that what you said was actually what happened, by changing the meaning of words, such as "back into a corner" and "threaten". "back somebody into a corner - to force someone into a bad situation" (The Free Dictionary) How did AIPAC threaten the American president? What did the members of AIPAC say that may be construed as a threat to Obama? "Threat (thrt) n. 1. An expression of an intention to inflict pain, injury, evil, or punishment. 2. An indication of impending danger or harm. 3. One that is regarded as a possible danger; a menace." ________ What do you call someone who uses words with different meanings to the ones provided by the dictionary and commonly used and understood in everyday language by all people who speak the same language?

- noga1

March 10, 2012 at 8:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'll help you. Someone who uses words with different meanings to the ones provided by the dictionary and commonly used and understood in everyday language by all people who speak the same language, is either a liar or suffers from some psychological incapacity to use words in their correct form. So which one are you, roi?

- noga1

March 10, 2012 at 8:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

r. How about your love for Abbas an Ahmadinejad. Watch recent Bill Maher on HBO guest Michael Oren. Netanyahu is more popular than ever in Israel. The brilliant Prime Minister first Israeli born. His accomplishments are many. As finance minister he fixed Israel's economy, such that is now one of the most advanced in the world. His father is the renown scholar specialist on the Spanish inquisition. His late brother lead the Entabe rescue mission, and was the only one killed. A hospital in Ariel was named after him in 1991, we were there and had the great honor to meet Bibi and his adorable wife Sarah. Bibi grew up in Philadelphia where his father was head of the Jewish historical academy. He has a Philadelphia accent in his superb English. He graduated from MIT and Harvard. I am sure he shares his memories with those of Obama, also a Harvard alumnus. In the Israeli army he attained high levels. The IDF is the toughest army in the world. All of Israel's leaders come from distinguished careers in the IDF. So what can the Galicianer dishonest, distorter, self hatred Jew, slandered of Israel, demonize Netanyahu? The Galicianer venomous parasite is just that a failed parasite.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 10, 2012 at 9:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Stop wasting time with the Galicianer. Go to more substantive subjects. Know your enemies. Al Jazeera analyzes the first ever Arab opinion survey http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/03/20123793355501965.html Israel and the plight of Christians in the MidEast  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203960804577239923033348982.html

- JAIMECHUCH

March 10, 2012 at 9:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Threaten him politically or, as I have made abundantly clear, interfere with his ability to decide on the use of military force in the best interests of the United States and the security of the American people. What do you think it means? That AIPAC was threatening Obama with bodily harm? Do you read at the level of a six-year old? Here is a headline picked almost at random: Poll: Economy Political Threat to Obama Re-Election but Still Ahead of Republican Rivals Posted by JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief in Economy, Media, Politics. Apr 19th, 2011 | no responses So, what do you think? Was the economy expressing an intention to commit harm or inflict pain on Obama? Was it threatening him with bodily harm? Was it malevolently seeking his political undoing? Or is this just a perfectly well-understood phrase in colloquial English about something that may cause loss of some kind -- a threat? You are a moron, truly, if this sort of utterly absurd behavior is the best you can do.

- roidubouloi

March 10, 2012 at 9:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

As a native speaker of English, Jaime, let me assure you that Netanyahu does not have a Philadelphia accent.

- roidubouloi

March 10, 2012 at 9:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ex-girlfriend of mine was from Philadelphia, very socially prominent family. SHE had a Philadelphia accent. But keep up your great work Jaime. You are noga's unbound id and you are great at it.

- roidubouloi

March 10, 2012 at 9:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I do think Netanyahu sounds a bit like Sylvester Stallone as Rocky Balboa. He was supposedly from Philadelphia.

- roidubouloi

March 10, 2012 at 10:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Is this supposed to be an insult, roi? Shocking, shocking, that on top of everything else you are also a snob. Reminds me of your new friend, prof. Abukhalil's pained sensitivity to Israeli accents: ""Is there any act of violence by any Palestinian that Israel does not consider an act of "terror", or tewwoww, as pronounced by Shimon Peres"

- noga1

March 10, 2012 at 11:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Roi. Read the Wikipedia there it says Bibi has a Philadelphia accent. Even your biblecthe NYT says bibi has a Philadelphia accent. As always youbare dead wrong. Next.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 10, 2012 at 11:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Darn iPad keeps interfering with my typing, actually I am too fast and give no time where I put my fingers. Roi maybe you did not talk too much with your high society girl friend from Philadelphia. Next you will be telling us she was Grace Kelly. I actually live in south Philly , one mile from society hill one way, one mile from rittenhouse square the other way. Half mile from pats pjhilly cheese stakes. Funny Al Gore and George W Bush stayed in Rittenhouse Square famous hotel during the 2000 campaing at different times. During the 96 campaign Bill Clinton while in Philadelphia went to Pats and Ginos to have the cheese steaks, that was before his bypass. While campaigning in Philadelphia neither Al Gore, George W Bush or Obama went to Pats or Genos (they are across from each other). Even the Galicianer with his new title, snob, can conclude that Bill Clinton is a men of the common people. But to roi (king in French ha he hi) Is in good company he joins Buba in the hate Netanyahu groupies. NYT, Thomas Friedman, Gideon Levy (Haaretz). Maybe Abbas, Ahmadenijad. How about Obama? Nobody knows. Did you read my references roi ( king ha he hi), or you are going to tell me that in the MidEast the Arabs and Christians are irrelevant in your articulate discussions, even Iran is irrelevant. My my my , the liberated territories. With all this time discussing le roi du spoiled foi grass, a few dozen apartments were completed in the liberated territories by well paid Palestinian construction workers. Ah yes AIPAC. Are you going to the yearly banquet of AAPAC , I sent you the invitation, American Arab PAC. BTW there is also an Iranian PAC. But you already knew about for an Iranian sympathizer like you. Le roi du malodeur stinky baloney.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 12:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hey, I wasn't boasting about Netanyahu's supposedly refined English. That was Jaime. South Philly, I guess. I did say he sounds like Rocky Balboa. Not sure he has Rocky's brains or wit though, even after Rocky gets pounded in the head a few hundred times. Neither MIT nor Harvard seems to have done Netanyahu any good at all. He remains a clod, and Israel elected him. "Netanyahu, Churchill, and Iran" Op-Ed, The Times of Israel March 7, 2012 Author: Shai Feldman, Member of the Board, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs (Harvard University, Kennedy School of Government) "Finally, even if only a fraction of what Netanyahu’s former national security adviser, Uzi Arad, recently told Yediot Ahronot is true, the manner in which the prime minister has been mismanaging his national security team appears inconsistent with the requirements of orchestrating a major military confrontation. Instead of focusing on what is billed as an existential threat, Netanyahu’s office appears to be embroiled in intrigue and deep personal distrust [and, in the words of Martin Peretz, "building a few apartments in Jerusalem]. There is no denying Arad’s rather difficult personality and his own contribution to the unacceptable modes of behavior that have become the norm in Netanyahu’s Byzantine court. But Netanyahu’s willingness to dismiss the sole truly strategic thinker in his inner circle, who has worked tirelessly – possibly even obsessively – to address the Iranian nuclear threat, raises some question as to whether Israel’s prime minister takes the threat as seriously as his public persona would have us believe. Seeming to apply best-case analysis to the possible ramifications of a military strike against Iran, a reluctance to prepare the homeland’s defenses for the possible fallout of such a strike, a willingness to consider cutting the defense budget, and the dismissal of key members of Israel’s national security apparatus may all be part of a grand effort to confuse Israel’s adversaries. But if a military strike against Iran’s nuclear installations will be launched, leading to Iranian and Iranian-inspired retaliation, and if the aforementioned Israeli deeds and misdeeds turn out not to have been part of a Barak-conceived, super-sophisticated attempt at strategic deception, but rather the result of supreme human stupidity, Benjamin Netanyahu’s place in Jewish history will most likely not be described in Churchillian terms." Seems Netanyahu has a reputation for stupidity in Israel too. Perhaps there is hope then.

- roidubouloi

March 11, 2012 at 12:16am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Next roi is going to tell us he is a hunk. Posed nude in Palestinian Cosmopolitan and bared ass. An apologizer of Iran. Or like Barry Goldwater used to say there are little nuclear bombs to be used in Vietnam. Lyndon Johnson used them in his tv adds, remember the little girl with the flower and the little bomb exploding in the background. It scared the hell out of skahn, he hasn't been the same since then. Correction le roi du dormant entire salami.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 12:24am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yeah I missed it le roi whole Monty , tiny but effective. Grrrrrr AIPAC, Netanyahu, Liberated Territories. I told you le roi du dormant salami brings with his evil the best from his opponents. Keep the good work.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 12:29am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The Galicianer dishonest self hatred Jew can not stand being inferior to Netanyahu. You don't even qualify to handle Bibi's galoshes. It is all confirmed le hemo..roid du dormant salami, is also half brain damage. Ah.... The liberated territories, AIPAC, AAPAC, apologizer of Iran, Grrr. Hey the Mideast Arabs and Christians are irrelevant to roident Iranian apologizer. In the meantime a half dozen new apartments were completed in the Liberated Territories by well paid Palestinian construction workers. Eat your guts hemor...roi..du...dormant...salami.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 12:41am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I understand Shimon Peres is to receive the highest American honor from Obama. Hopefully Netanyahu will be next. You know Bibi and Obama often chat about their Harvard old days. Suggested reading by you all. I give you the Honorable Prime Minister of Israel. A pride of the Jews. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Minister_of_Israel For all to enjoy Benjamin Bibi Netanyahu the great Prime  Minister of Israel it makes us all to be proud Jews. God bless the bright, the honest, the just. A light upon Nations. A great friend of America. Now I understand why the USA Congress gave him multiple standing ovations. 

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 1:00am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This is the connection I wanted to post about the great Bibi Netanyahu. Enjoy it you all lovers of Israel . Self hatred Jews not invited. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Netanyahu God bless Israel. God bless America.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 1:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Thanks for the wikipedia link, Jaime. It in turn provides links to many of the more sordid aspects of Netanyahu's career. For example, I found this, by TNR's own Peter Beinart, that I do not recall reading before: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/09/27/us-jewish-groups-help-make-palestinian-state-impossible.html How U.S. Jews Stymie Peace Talks Sep 27, 2010 2:35 AM EDT Mideast talks fall apart, as Israel lets West Bank settlements begin anew. Peter Beinart on how American Jewish groups tie Obama’s hands—and work against peace. Of course, Beinart's language is much more restrained than mine, but I share his view on the subject, and I believe I have just been making similar comments about AIPAC. The only explanation must be that Beinart too is an anti-Semite, hates Israel, hates Jews, hates Jewish Americans Here's a good quote: What would it take to make American Jewish groups admit that an Israeli prime minister is not serious about peace? You could hardly find a better test case than Benjamin Netanyahu. Until last year, Netanyahu had not just spent his entire political career opposing a Palestinian state; he had repeatedly compared such a state to Nazi Germany. He opposed the Oslo peace talks at their inception, and as prime minister in the late 1990s so consistently reneged on commitments made by his predecessors that U.S. envoy Dennis Ross later noted that “neither President Clinton nor Secretary Albright believed that Bibi had any real interest in pursuing peace.” In 2005, when Prime Minister Ariel Sharon proposed dismantling Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip, Netanyahu resigned from his cabinet in protest. Netanyahu was still on record as opposing a Palestinian state in 2009, when he again ran for prime minister. He hewed to this position when forming his coalition government, even though doing so helped keep Tzipi Livni’s centrist Kadima party from joining his cabinet, thus preventing Netanyahu from assembling the national unity government he claimed to want in order to confront Iran. Through all of this, the major American Jewish groups still refused to publicly entertain the idea that Netanyahu was anything but a champion of peace. * * * Extending the settlement freeze might have prompted some of Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition partners to quit his government. But a prime minister genuinely interested in a final status deal would have said good riddance, and brought in Livni’s Kadima instead, thus creating a government composed of people who actually support a Palestinian state. Netanyahu, however, has not done that, just as he refused to create a centrist government during his first stint as prime minister. The reason is that he likes governing alongside racist, pro-settler parties like Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu and Ovadiah Yosef’s Shas. They give him political cover to do what he has wanted to do all along: Make a viable Palestinian state impossible. __________________________ Yup, that's Netanyahu alright. Dishonest and rotten to the core. And there are any number of other sordid things one can find linked to the wikipedia article. A pride of the Jews? Rather more the shame and embarrassment of the Jews.

- roidubouloi

March 11, 2012 at 1:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Q: What do you call a guy from South Philly in a jacket and tie? A: The defendant. I wonder if there's a Tel Aviv version of the joke . . .

- ironyroad

March 11, 2012 at 1:50am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Netanyahu is not only Prime Minister, but also carries the health, veterans affairs, and economic planning portfolios. The thing he is most proud of is ,his teenage son winning second place in Israel's contest on knowledge of Tanach ( Hebrew Bible) by high school students. As you know, it is required in high schools in Israel to study the Tanach as a literary document of the history of the Jews. I am not an expert. My preferred book is Genesis because it is to the point and very human and logic. I find it fascinating and enjoyed it enormously in my Torah classes in the Reform Synagogue. Although I am secular but very much Jewish and fervent Zionist. USA citizen, I love also America. Of course Gunther Plaut's Torah a Commentary in English and Hebrew allowed me to become a new born Jew. I am now 75. I find leaders like Benjamin Netanyahu, Shimon Peres, Martin Peretz, a real mehei , pleasure. These are Jews that are very intelligent, make me proud to be a Jew. These are mentschen, veritable human beings. I am proud of Michael Oren, and the son of Ariel Sharon, who I have seen in recent tv interviews, HBO and C-SPAN. Other Jewish luminaries I enjoy is Ed Koch , former NYC mayor, and Allan Dershowitz. Fortunately this washes negative karmic entropy (an oxymoron) like the Israel haters Thomas Friedman and the distorter dishonest Galicianer roi du merde supreme, self hatred Jews.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 5:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ironyroad pretty good, pretty good. I can not top it at present. However Jackie Mason said it all: He is half Jew, half Italian. If he can not get it wholesale, he steals it !!!!!!!!

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 5:45am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Interesting. They have not changed yet the daily savings time in TNR. Sh Sh don't tell the new owners savvy in new technology.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 5:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Interesting. They have not changed yet the daily savings time in TNR. Sh Sh don't tell the new owners savvy in new technology.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 5:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Hey, I wasn't boasting about Netanyahu's supposedly refined English." Talk about missing the point. ______________ ironyroad: I don't know of an Israeli version but could easily think of one. However since I no longer am as familiar with Tel Aviv as I used to, I may well miss the mark. It's interesting how it is always the south of a city that gets all riff raff. There is such a phrase in Hebrew as "South Tel Aviv" which alludes in particular to one neigbourhood "Shechunat Hatikva" which is all you need to know about a person once you hear they come from that place. The famous Israeli singer (dead now) Ofra Haza, hailed from that place. Here she she singing in Spielberg's "Prince of Egypt": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnPf5ccP3BA&feature=related And here she is before she became a star, singing more traditionally a Yemenite song with a group called "The Hatikva workshop", an experiment in cultural integration that was very successful. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2xNTzlFSk0

- noga1

March 11, 2012 at 10:07am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I wonder about the north/south thing. It's true that North London suggests "cool" (and has done so for a long time) while Sahf Lunnon consists entirely of working-class criminal types, tatty pubs, and buses traveling to destinations where nobody would ever want to go. In Dublin, though, it's reversed -- the mythology is that the riffraff come from the North Side, and the South Side is all respectable middle-class suburbs, so their version of the joke reflects that. Nice clips.

- ironyroad

March 11, 2012 at 12:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sanctions Schmanctions. TEHRAN - Tehran and New Delhi plan to hit $25 billion in annual bilateral trade in the next four years, said Joint Secretary of the Indian Commerce Ministry Arvind Mehta, while heading an 80-member trade delegation to Iran. The Indian official said the current annual trade between the two countries was around $15 billion, IRNA news agency reported. The delegation was in the country to explore commercial opportunities created by the EU and U.S. sanctions against Tehran over its nuclear program. The five-day visit by the delegation, which comprised representatives from the public and private sectors, included President of the Federation of Indian Export Organizations (FIEO) Rafeeque Ahmed. Iran is India's second-largest oil supplier after Saudi Arabia, providing around 12 percent of the fast-growing country's crude needs, according to the Economic Times. India has been examining ways to step up trade with Iran amid problems in settling its oil bills from Iran as a result of the intensifying sanctions campaign aimed at forcing Tehran to abandon its nuclear program. Indian Commerce Secretary Rahul Khullar last month said New Delhi would send a delegation to Iran to "promote our own exports" and investigate business opportunities created by the sanctions. He said there were "huge opportunities" to be reaped by India. The two countries, which have long-standing historic ties, hope to settle around 45 percent of their oil trade in rupees by increasing exports, according to Indian media reports. The Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India said Iran offers great potential for

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 1:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

On the other hand India and Israel, are doing just fine. Shall we call it the three I's? Israel, India sign joint water technology memo Jerusalem, New Delhi boost bilateral R&D ties in the fields of resource management, sewage and drainage News agencies Published:  02.20.12, 07:14 / Israel Environment Israel and India have inked a key agreement on water treatment technologies last week. The deal includes the development of joint research and development ventures in the fields of resource management, sewage and drainage.   According to Indian news agency PTI, the deal was signed by Director of International Trade at the Industry, Trade and Labor Ministry Boaz Hirsch and Indian Minister for Urban Development Kamal Nath, during the latter's visit to Israel.   Partners Israel, India to expand agricultural ties  / News agencies Following success of 2008-2010 agriculture support plan, Jerusalem and New Delhi agree to widen bilateral cooperation; 20 projects in the works Full story "The economies of India and Israel are considered to complement each other. Accelerated economic growth in India poses many challenges, but Israel with its knowledge and technologies can help us cope with these challenges," Nath said.   Israel and India enjoy robust collaborations in the fields of water, high-tech, nano-technology and agriculture and both sides agree there is still "a huge, untapped potential."   An Industry, Trade and Labor Ministry statement said that Jerusalem and New Delhi will form joint work groups "to examine ways to deepen cooperation between the two countries in a variety of areas related to water.   The two sides will also discuss establishing Israeli technology centers in India "in order to promote the integration of these technologies in projects that will help India cope with the challenges in water management," the ministry said.   AFP contributed to this report   Follow Ynetnews

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 1:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I wonder if there are commercial opportunities for Israel in the EU and U.S. sanctions against Tehran over its nuclear program ...

- noga1

March 11, 2012 at 1:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If Iran were a normal country with a reasonable democracy it would be Israel's most natural and closest friend in the region. It almost happened under the Shah. Many Iranians I know remember with nostalgia the time when there was quite a busy economic and cultural cooperation between Israel and Iran.

- noga1

March 11, 2012 at 1:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And after Fridays prayers The Leader Ayatollah Kahmeinih congratulated Obama for his successful stand against aggressive Netanyahu and AIPAC pressures. I told you roi is an Iranian apologizer.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 1:38pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Netanyahu's Strength Under Fire http://www.ifcj.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=35553&news_iv_ctrl=1481&s_src=EN1&s_subsrc=EN21203XXEXXX Netanyahu’s Strength Under Fire Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on email Share:  March 8, 2012 Dear Friend of Israel, It was a week filled with impassioned leaders and strong words. The annual meeting of AIPAC (The American Israel Public Affairs Committee), which took place in the nation’s capital this past weekend, brought together more than13,000 people, including grassroots pro-Israel activists and high-level public officials and decision makers. President Obama was one of the first to address the crowd, taking the podium to reassure those gathered of his commitment to a strong U.S.-Israel relationship, and determination to stop Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons.  While Obama’s pledge was well received, the crowd really seemed to be waiting for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, who spoke the following day. Throughout his statements, Netanyahu repeatedly asserted one principle: Despite the strong, enduring nature of the U.S.-Israel relationship, Israel must reserve the right to defend herself as she sees fit. “The purpose of the Jewish state is to secure the Jewish future,” he said. “That is why Israel must always have the ability to defend itself, by itself, against any threat. We deeply appreciate the great alliance between our two countries. But when it comes to Israel’s survival, we must always remain the masters of our fate.” These are the words of a man who is sensitive to political realities, determined to maintain the strong ties between two historic allies, but, above all, determined to protect his country and his people from the hateful radical Islamists of Iran and elsewhere. It is a huge responsibility, and one can only imagine how it must weigh on the Prime Minister. But it is a responsibility he discharges admirably, with great passion, intelligence, and conviction.  Everyone at the conference has now returned home – inspired by the words, strengthened in their resolve to support Israel. The Jews in attendance join their friends and family today in celebrating Purim, a festive holiday that recalls the Jewish people’s deliverance from their enemies in ancient times. We mark this occasion by, among other things, reading the biblical account of the Purim story from the book of Esther. In that story Mordecai tells Queen Esther, “Who knows but that you have come to your royal position for such a time as this?” (Esther 4:14). As I reread these words this year, I know I will think of Prime Minister Netanyahu. Surely he is a leader for Israel “for such a time as this,” when existential threats to the Jewish people are as real and pressing as they have ever been. May God continue to give the Prime Minister strength, wisdom, and courage as he seeks to work together with the U.S. to ensure a peaceful and secure Israel. And may we all take comfort in knowing that no matter what, Israel is never truly alone in “securing the Jewish future,” as “he who watches over Israel never slumbers or sleeps” (Psalm 121:4, NLT). With prayers for shalom, peace, Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein President

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 2:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"And after Fridays prayers The Leader Ayatollah Kahmeinih congratulated Obama for his successful stand against aggressive Netanyahu and AIPAC pressures." Seems that Khameini understands the politics, who succeeded and who failed in the stare-down between Netanyahu and AIPAC, even if noga and Jaime don't. Of course, as they are both indifferent to American interests, at least where they perceive them to diverge from those of Israel, they would naturally interpret these events as some sort of victory for Iran. The very notion that Obama would skillfully pursue American interests, which after all is his job, is almost unthinkable for them. Fortunately, there do also seem to be voices in Israel, such as Dagan, who are aware that the right-wingnuts are loose again, working themselves into their pre-war frenzy, and once again trying to drive us into a stupid war. Stupidity is what the right does best. I like to call it, "Fighting terrorism with stupidity." But they are also so malignant in their intentions that they consider even the failure to be as stupid as they are treasonous. We must all hold hands and jump over the cliff together with them.

- roidubouloi

March 11, 2012 at 2:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"While Obama’s pledge was well received, the crowd really seemed to be waiting for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, who spoke the following day." I love the unconscious irony of this. Their Master's Voice.

- roidubouloi

March 11, 2012 at 2:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Eckstein is the son of Rabbi Dr. Sy and Belle Eckstein of Florida.[1] He is married to Joelle, lives in Jerusalem, and has three daughters and four grandchildren.[2] Eckstein holds dual citizenship in the U.S. and Israel, having become an Israeli citizen in 2002. His bio says he was a sometime adviser to Sharon and Israeli goodwill ambassador to Christian evangelical communities in South America. And, what do you know? He is also a slavish follower of the Netanyahu line (although by twitter so it is as good as the word of god). Why don't they just leave the whole thing to god? If god can give wisdom or strength to Benjamin Netanyahu, as Eckstein prays for, then he clearly is omnipotent.

- roidubouloi

March 11, 2012 at 2:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"who succeeded and who failed in the stare-down between Obama and Netanyahu in front of AIPAC"

- roidubouloi

March 11, 2012 at 2:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This is an invitation roi missed. Did you? American Arab Political Action Committee. Of course he did not attend AIPAC. He is a slandered of Israel, a Netanyahu demonizer, and a Galicianer dishonest self hatred Jew. All packed into one. He claims to have been a hunk, and failed to identify Netanyahu's Philadelphia English accent. But most of all he is the king of the stinky baloney. Le roi du malodeur baloney. Claims falsely to have had Grace Kelly as girl friend. Please Join Us AAPAC's 14th Annual Banquet Friday, October 28, 2011 @ 6:30 p.m. at the Bint Jebail Cultural Center 6220 Miller Road, Dearborn, Michigan 48126 $50/Person. For reservation call 313.582.4888 or email RSVP@aapac.org This site best if viewed full screen in   Site last updated on March 20, 2011

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 5:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Seems that Khameini understands the politics, who succeeded and who failed in the stare-down between Netanyahu and AIPAC, even if noga and Jaime don't." roi shares Ayatollah Khamenei's understanding of Obama and AIPAC. According to this understanding, then, Halevi's article in which he casts serious doubts on Obama's commitment to Israel's security was spot on. Or, maybe this poster's reading of the speech is more accurate: "03/07/2012 - 11:49am EDT | ironyroad Oh yes, I'd also like to point out something that keeps getting missed here: the process by which Obama is reframing the Iranian threat from something that hangs over Israel into something that hangs over the region and, ultimately, U.S. national security interests at the highest level. Friedman laid it out this morning in the NYT quite effectively and I'm pretty damn sure that Netanyahu knows exactly what the president is doing. This changes the nature of the whole discussion and gets it out from under some "Mirror mirror on the wall / Who's the more pro-Israeli of us all?" competition in which the one who shouts loudest wins. If carried out effectively, it makes Iran realize that Israel is only one aspect of what they have to deal with. Teheran can bluster, but they understand that (a) they have to decide if they really want to base their future on some Islamist fantasy and (b) they are not going to get the free ride they got between 2001 and 2008." To which I responded by: "03/07/2012 - 3:27pm EDT | noga1 "Oh yes, I'd also like to point out something that keeps getting missed here: the process by which Obama is reframing the Iranian threat from something that hangs over Israel into something that hangs over the region and, ultimately, U.S. national security interests at the highest level" Yes, that is a good reframing of the Iranian threat and one that Israel has insisted upon for many many years now. Obama, until a while ago, chose to create a non-existent linkage between the Iran threat and the building of a few apartments in Jerusalem. Maybe he HAS learned something but what I'm hoping is that it not too late now. If he really means it, if he really meant what he said to AIPAC, then it is not too late. And there is no way we can know that, is there?" To which roi responded by: "03/07/2012 - 4:11pm EDT | roidubouloi If the rhetoric of Obama's speech is satisfactory to noga, even while she distrusts his intentions, then it was a very successful speech. We can likely expect this shortly to become a non-issue through the election, and Obama will not be under untoward pressure to do damage to US interests for domestic political purposes. Goodbye, AIPAC. Have a pleasant trip home." roi never fails to misrepresent, slander, distort, slander, lie, slander, misspeak, lie, slander, misunderstand, slander etc etc. Just saying.

- noga1

March 11, 2012 at 6:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

In the meantime the massacre continues. http://blogs.voanews.com/breaking-news/2012/03/11/uns-annan-leaves-syria-empty-handed/ UN’s Annan Leaves Syria Empty-Handed Posted Sunday, March 11th, 2012 at 5:10 pm U.N.-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan has left Damascus without securing a deal to end Syria's nearly yearlong conflict. Meanwhile, President Bashar al-Assad's troops continued to pound opposition areas, clashing with rebels throughout the country. The former U.N. secretary-general said Sunday he left several proposals with Syrian officials and that he remains “optimistic” about the possibility of a resolution after a second round of talks with Mr. Assad. But he said ending the violence will be “tough.” Annan said he called for an immediate halt to the killings and that he urged the Syrian government to “embrace change and reform” as part of a political solution to its deadly crackdown on an opposition uprising. He appealed to Mr. Assad to heed an old African proverb that says: “You cannot turn the wind, so turn the sail.” Syrian state media said Mr. Assad told Annan that a political solution is impossible as long as “terrorist groups” threaten the country. Identical comments were reported after the two met Saturday. Syria's main exiled opposition group also rejected talks with the government. The Syrian National Council said negotiations can never take place between a “victim and torturer,” and it demanded that Mr. Assad and his aides step down before a dialogue can begin. Annan flew to Qatar Sunday to meet that country's emir, a leading critic of the Syrian government who has called for arming the rebels. As their talks took place in Damascus, Syria's military continued an offensive on rebel strongholds in the north. Activists reported that several areas were attacked, including in and around Idlib, Hama and Homs, as well as Daraa in the south. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights says fighting Sunday killed at least 25 civilians and five soldiers. Activists said at least 90 people were killed in nationwide unrest a day earlier, many of them in Idlib. Also Sunday, Syria's state news agency said gunmen killed local boxing champion Gheyath Tayfour in the northern city of Aleppo. Opposition fighters associated with the rebel Free Syrian Army have claimed responsibility for some of the assassinations that have become more frequent in the city, including those of prominent businessmen they say support Mr. Assad. International rifts have paralyzed action on Syria. Russia and China blocked two U.N. Security Council resolutions on the Syrian crisis in recent months, saying they were biased against the Assad government. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will meet her Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, in New York Monday when the Security Council holds a special meeting on Arab revolts, with Syria likely to be in focus. Washington is pressing the Council to adopt a resolution calling on Syria to let aid workers reach civilians affected by the government crackdown. The United Nations says Mr. Assad's forces have killed more than 7,500 people since the crackdown on protesters and insurgents began last year. Authorities say rebels have killed 2,000 soldiers during that time. ### Tags: St, Syria, Upd, V Posted in Middle East

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 7:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama was going to hug Peres. His advisors told him better not. Instead he is giving him the USA Medal of Freedom. BTW to shaking roi, and drinking compadres, that is Shimon not Martin . http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/week-s-end/both-in-israel-and-the-u-s-peres-is-loved-and-beloved-1.417512 Peres was all over the place praising Obama. At 92nd Y, with Charlie Rose on PBS, at AIPAC speech. Still not clear if Israelis have warmed up to Obama. Yes roid yes roid, how about American Jews? Israel is not the new USA State!!! Isn't?

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 10:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What happened to roid? He left an unfinished comment at 1:36pm, and we haven't heard from him. I hope it isn't a heart attack, I told him not to get exited on his anti Israel hatred. Eventually negative karma and entropy will get to you. Remember make love not war.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 11, 2012 at 10:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I will confess ignorance. With such educated and knowledgeable people here, my education may be improved (though it is a bit late, both for me to grow up and for me to be educated.) In a charming fashion, Jaime wrote 03/08/2012 - 10:03pm EDT | JAIMECHUCH "Galicianer dishonest self hatred Jew hater of Israel. You have it right, you are the shit we are the flies." (I suspect that comment is aimed at me, though no matter to whom it is addressed, it is rather rude.) I may at one time have known what "Galicianer" refers to, and why it is being used here as an insult, but the information escapes me. Apparently it refers to some part of Eastern Europe that has been bounced around among Ukraine, Poland, Austria, and who knows what, and terribly punished and oppressed in various wars. Apparently, while lots of people suffered, the Jews got some of the worst of it.) Anyway, can somebody explain briefly and coherently why "Galicianer" is being tossed around here, and what the issue is? As a child, I was told that my ancestors were Ukranian, Polish, Latvian, and Hungarian, so all of the flames flying may have something to do with my ancestry. Am I a Galicianer? Should I care? Should I apologize? Should I feel proud? Should I bore my granddaughter with the history of Galicia? Also, apparently, there is a part of Spain known as Galicia, also, though I am not sure what that has to do with anything.

- skahn

March 11, 2012 at 11:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Aha, interesting point (about Galicia in Spain). A friend of mine was visiting Moscow in 1983, when the U.S. invason of Grenada took place. She was looking at the 6 p.m. news that day in the hotel and, as the news broadcast started, a map of Spain with the city of Granada was shown on the screen. There was about a minute of mysterious silence, the screen went dark for a few seconds, and then a map of the Caribbean appeared instead.

- ironyroad

March 11, 2012 at 11:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Although you spend most of your time smearing and slandering and lying here, noga, it appears that yet again you do not understand the meaning and usage of common English words. In the paragraph of mine that you quote, who is being slandered? You? Obama? There has to be a person, or at least a group of persons, being characterized, and characterized falsely, for something to be a slander. That is the meaning of the word. My statement is not even about a person or persons, but a characterization of the political effect, most notably upon AIPAC, of Obama's speech irrespective of his intentions that are unknown to us. Hence, by definition, it cannot be slander. There is no human being characterized. As well, what is distorted? Do you think it is not the case that Obama has laid this to rest as an election issue? Do you think Netanyahu will continue his agitation between now and the election? Do you think AIPAC will publicly attack Obama? You are so desperate to smear me with something or other, and so completely incapable of discerning the meaning of a factual claim, or even what constitutes a factual claim let alone rebutting it, that you can do nothing but tie yourself into rhetorical knots. You are completely ridiculous.

- roidubouloi

March 12, 2012 at 12:39am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And you, roi, are completely desperate. You cannot hide from the meaning of your own words, immortalized on cyberspace. You should stop trying to deny what you write. Face up to the fact that you wrote what you wrote and now regret the stupidity and rashness of your statements.

- noga1

March 12, 2012 at 12:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ironyroad, I have a much better story than that about a CBC newscast as few years ago that reported a clash on the border between Israel and Afghanistan.

- noga1

March 12, 2012 at 12:51am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, noga, since your efforts to mischaracterize what I wrote are an abject failure, you now peddle your delusion that I am somehow trying to deny my own words. I am happy to let them stand, but clean of your idiotic re-inventions of them. I regret not a word because I have no reason for regret. Your dishonesty, and your depravity, are appalling. Plus, you really are a very stupid person, hopelessly unable to untangle yourself from your disordered thoughts and disordered words. (Tell the truth, you are medicated, aren't you?) That's a good thing though. As you are without scruple, totally devoted to lies and smears as your contribution here, you would be dangerous if you were not so stupid. Your incompetence is as much a blessing as your incontinence and obsession are a curse.

- roidubouloi

March 12, 2012 at 2:10am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Young, staying with my Monterrey (CA) aunt, I observed a group of people on a nearby porch, all shouting loudly at each other and gesticulating dramatically. Unable to understand their language (which sounded a little like Spanish to me), I could not tell what they wee saying, but they seemed angry with each other, and about to burst into a dreadful, perhaps violent, conflict. That night with some concern, I asked my aunt about the family. She said, "Oh, don't be perturbed. It's a Portuguese family; they're mostly fishermen. That's just how they converse and communicate in their culture; they're kind of drama queens, but they are perfectly nice and likeable people. As I guess, are the people flinging insults at each other in this discussion thread (and many others) at The New Republic. By the way, how did the italic disappear? Was it a miracle cure? An Act of God?

- skahn

March 12, 2012 at 10:04am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

skahn, the miracle cure was crossing the 50-post limit and opening up another page -- the html glitch and its terrible effects are limited by the page frame (or whatever it's called). Noga, I strongly believe that Israel-Afghanistan border security needs tightening up. All those mountains!

- ironyroad

March 12, 2012 at 12:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ironyroad, than you for the enlightenment on the italic cure. When are the next Nobel Prize ceremonies? I await with interest to see if the Nobel prize for formatting goes to someone among this perceptive crowd, whether the Peace prize goes to someone who pasts a couple of hundred comments in a row without insulting other comment posters? Never mind. How boring peace would be! Why is there no Nobel War Prize, for devising the best new weapon?

- skahn

March 12, 2012 at 1:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Did anybody see the interview with Meir Dagan last night on Sixty Minutes? He seems to think that Israel bombing Iran right now would be a disaster.

- MOLLYSIMON

March 12, 2012 at 3:41pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"He seems to think that Israel bombing Iran right now would be a disaster." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/9132629/Israel-wont-strike-Iran-in-coming-weeks-Benjamin-Netanyahu-says.html ""I am not standing with a stopwatch in hand. It is not a matter days or weeks, but also not a matter of years. Everybody understands this," Mr Netanyahu told an Israeli news programme."

- noga1

March 12, 2012 at 4:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Netanyahu backing up because he has been made to look the fool with his hyper-ventilating.

- roidubouloi

March 12, 2012 at 4:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The reason why one opinion poll shows that a majority of Israelis actually prefer to rely on Obama's judgment in this matter than on Netanyahu's. Clod.

- roidubouloi

March 12, 2012 at 4:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sidebar: This is an interesting article by Martin Kramer about a connection between Martin Peretz and Martin Luther King, with regards to the verification of a historical (and dubiously disputed) quote: http://www.martinkramer.org/sandbox/2012/03/in-the-words-of-martin-luther-king/

- noga1

March 12, 2012 at 4:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga, You linked an interesting article, and it raises interesting questions. I did not know Martin Luther King, Jr., though not long ago I talked to a recent acquaintance of mine who told me about going on a freedom march with King (many years ago). My main point is that it is dangerous to idolize people too much. MLK, Jr. was a great man who made great strides for human rights. He was not a perfect man; his faults are well known. I don't know if he made the quote referenced in the article or not. Both Jews and black people have been unfairly persecuted. It's not a justification for prejudice to be aware that at times black people have expressed prejudice against Jews and at times Jews have expressed prejudice against blacks. I always like to know the truth about the past as much as possible, It's more important, though, to act as well and as truthfully in the present as we can, toward everybody we can. Skahn (soppy cliches and platitudes are us).

- skahn

March 12, 2012 at 5:38pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

No, last night he said a couple of years. He's all for continuing with the sanctions.

- MOLLYSIMON

March 12, 2012 at 5:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I told you roi du merdant baloney. Galicianer dishonest, slanderer of Israel, self hatred Jew. You are an apologizer for Iran. Shame on you.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 12, 2012 at 8:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I told you roi du merdant baloney. Galicianer dishonest, slanderer of Israel, self hatred Jew. You are an apologizer for Iran. Shame on you.

- JAIMECHUCH

March 12, 2012 at 8:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Whether King did or did not say this is of no particular importance. He said it, or didn't, shortly after the Six Day War. The occupation has now continued for 45 years and has included the transfer of Israeli population to occupied territory in flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. It is difficult to believe that, were he alive today, Martin Luther King would not be critical of Zionism. Peter Beinart is. He's Jewish. I don't think he would agree with King that one cannot criticize Zionists without criticizing Jews as such. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/jun/10/failure-american-jewish-establishment/?pagination=false _____________________ Netanyahu's threat of unilateral action was not directed at Iran; it was directed at the United States. As a threat to Iran, it would make no more sense than it would have to tell Saddam that Israel was going to destroy Osirak. Nothing to gain and tactically stupid. Addressed to the United States, the clear purpose was to extort a US commitment to military action against Iran. The gambit failed. Netanyahu left empty-handed and the world was not impressed by his bellicosity. He therefore had to back-up and pretend that, when he said urgent, he didn't really mean it.

- roidubouloi

March 12, 2012 at 11:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Whether King did or did not say this is of no particular importance. " Truth does not matter. What matters is what spin you put upon it. Is that what you are saying, roi? Anything goes, if it serves the need to score points, even if those are based on lies, distortions and slander, right? It is not important that something was said by someone at a certain time, witnessed and heard. What matters is to allow those who, for their own ends, deny that something was said by someone at a certain time, witnessed and heard, a bona fide place in the records of history, is that it? Please note what roi is saying: "I don't think he would agree with King that one cannot criticize Zionists without criticizing Jews as such." Note that according to roi, it is Zionism that is a legitimate subject of criticism, not certain Israel's policies vis a vis the Palestinians, not this Israeli government's policies but ZIONISM. Zionism that was the political expression of the Jewish people, the right of Jews to self-determination in their historical land, this is what can and should be criticized. Didn't I say, a long time ago, that roi shares a sensibility with the likes of Abukhalil? Apparently there is a space open in the pro-Palestinian solidarity movement, after Norman Finkelstein fell from grace for basically coming out on the side of Zionism. They will welcome someone so dedicated to their cause of canceling Israel as our roi here.

- noga1

March 13, 2012 at 7:16am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga's constant attempt to find an anti-Semite in the woodpile. Weak even for her. Of course Zionism, as it exists today, is legitimately subject to criticism. Shall we say that, "While the policies of the Soviet Union or communist China are the legitimate subject of criticism, communism cannot be criticized as it is the political expression of millions of people for economic justice. The aspiration of the vast majority of the world's people to a decent life and a future for their, this is what should be criticized?" Here is Peter Beinart: Among American Jews today, there are a great many Zionists, especially in the Orthodox world, people deeply devoted to the State of Israel. And there are a great many liberals, especially in the secular Jewish world, people deeply devoted to human rights for all people, Palestinians included. But the two groups are increasingly distinct. Particularly in the younger generations, fewer and fewer American Jewish liberals are Zionists; fewer and fewer American Jewish Zionists are liberal. One reason is that the leading institutions of American Jewry have refused to foster—indeed, have actively opposed—a Zionism that challenges Israel’s behavior in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and toward its own Arab citizens. For several decades, the Jewish establishment has asked American Jews to check their liberalism at Zionism’s door, and now, to their horror, they are finding that many young Jews have checked their Zionism instead. Morally, American Zionism is in a downward spiral." Oops. How dare Beinart criticize Zionists and Zionism rather than the particular policies of the government of Israel? (Although we know perfectly well how the drill goes: You can criticize Zionism, but not Jews. The latter is anti-Semitic. Well, actually, you can criticize Israel, but not Zionism. The latter is anti-Semitic. Well, really, you cannot criticize Israel until you have first identified and criticize anyone and everyone else in the world. That would be singling out Israel (sure, it's not perfect, but who is?) for criticism and would be anti-Semitic.) Indeed, the problem is less the policies of Israel than the political ideology, Revisionist Zionism (you have to look it up) that has become dominant in Israel. The ideology of Zionism that currently dominates Israel and Jewish mainline organizations in the US, that has rendered itself incompatible with the human rights of others, deserves not just criticism, but excoriation. Criticize it, criticize it, criticize it, or become part of the problem. Let the propagandists and smear artists like noga, the McCarthyite's of Judaism, discern "shared sensibilities" with this odious character or that. So what? They are so morally compromised by their support for racist domination of Palestinians that they account for nothing. Their moral sensibilities have vanished under the weight of their über-nationalist excesses. Their smears are nothing.

- roidubouloi

March 13, 2012 at 8:25am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

As ever, noga the propagandist and smear artist, selectively edits to impart her meaning to the words of others. The text from which she has clipped only the first sentence: "Whether King did or did not say this is of no particular importance. He said it, or didn't, shortly after the Six Day War. The occupation has now continued for 45 years and has included the transfer of Israeli population to occupied territory in flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. It is difficult to believe that, were he alive today, Martin Luther King would not be critical of Zionism." Quite clearly implied by my first sentence is this: "Whether King did or did not say this is of no particular importance any longer." That is obvious from what follows immediately, that King's reported words were uttered in a very different context than the one that exists today and that someone who gave his life fighting racism could hardly fail to criticize Israel's latter-day colonialism. This hardly needs explanation for adults. But one often has to reduce language to elementary school level for noga's benefit (or so that her opportunities for distorted, selective, and tendentious quotation are more circumscribed).

- roidubouloi

March 13, 2012 at 8:39am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I can see why human sacrifice has become so significant in human history, and why an entire religion was built around the idea of person so wonderful and noble that he took everyone's guilt on himself. Didn't work, but it's a charming idea. As far as I can see, Noga has some good points and Roi has good some points. None of their good points are enhanced or made more persuasive by their insults addressed to each other. Don Ameche and Frances Langford as John and Blanche Bickerson. The Bickersons was a radio comedy sketch series that began in 1946 on NBC, moving the following year to CBS where it continued until 1951. The show's married protagonists, portrayed by Don Ameche and Frances Langford, spent nearly all their time together in relentless verbal war. We have our own Bickersons here. Maybe they should get married? Well, you can always say it's Marty's fault. Or my fault.

- skahn

March 13, 2012 at 10:22am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Not only that. I italicized again. It really is all my fault!

- skahn

March 13, 2012 at 10:24am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't agree, skahn. Noga has no point but these: -- As Israel faces real threats, it is and ought to be exempt from the obligations of human rights law (at least until all worse violators are brought to the bar of international justice) and from criticism gnereally. -- Criticizing Israel is therefore indistinguishable from desiring its destruction. -- All critics of Israel are therefore anti-Semites to a greater or lesser extent (correlated with the extent of their criticism) and the appropriate response to any criticism of Israel is to find some means or other of claiming that the critic is an anti-Semite, hangs out with anti-Semites, "shares sensibilities" with anti-Semites, etc., etc. -- As any critic of Israel is by definition an anti-Semite, there is no rhetorical tactic, no matter how corrupt, dishonest, or besides the point of the criticism, than cannot and should not be applied to the critic, and she does, freely. I don't consider any of those points worthy of respect. Her behavior here is execrable. I have no interest in insulting her other than my commitment to not allowing such behavior to go without a condign response. Otherwise, it is a waste of time and energy. It never fails to be the case, ever, that noga responds to claims or criticism she doesn't like with ad hominem attacks, because she is unable or unwilling to muster any argument in rebuttal. She is always the first to resort to this. Typically, she then whines about ad hominem attacks. She doesn't need your help to play the victim. She does this very nicely on her own. But your even-handedness is admirable.

- roidubouloi

March 13, 2012 at 10:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Stop italicizing. You should know by now that this is always the consequence.

- roidubouloi

March 13, 2012 at 10:50am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

skahn would have a point if he could point out where I hurled insults at roi. Does he consider an insult the fact that I speculated he is an anti-Zionist at least in the making by relying on his own formulations? Roi takes pride in every word and position that he promotes so being an anti-Zionist a la Beinart is nothing but a badge of honour, in his own eyes. Today, there can be no criticism of Zionism that is not antisemitic, that is, criticism that is based on the aprioi assumption that Jews are not entitled to what is freely given to every other ethnic group - self determination and nationalist aspirations. We are no longer in the 19th century when Herzl's nationalist aspirations on behalf of the Jewish people were assailed by a number of Jewish thinkers who saw the diaspora as the most fitting place for Jews to live, provided antisemitism could be diminished or removed from it. Then criticism was not based on a negation of Jewish right to self-determination. The debate was about what best form of self-determination would serve Jewish interests best. So the only legitimate for of criticism of Zionism is now obsolete. Since 1947, anyone who criticizes "Zionism" is de facto criticizing Jewish presence and existence in Israel. No more and no less. And no amount of casuistry from roi can change this very simple and basic fact. Today the criticism of Zionism comes principally and possibly ONLY from those who wish the State of Israel gone, dissolved, preferably destroyed. They do not deny it. They take pride in their aspirations. Roi should know that he is helping them by his irresponsible use of terminology and arguments about Zionism, about American Jews being foreign agents who work through corruption and subversion on behalf of the nefarious interests of another power, etc etc . Maybe that's what he intends. No one can hate Israel as much as he does and remain detached from other haters. He is not that clever.

- noga1

March 13, 2012 at 11:50am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How many times, skahn, are you going to make this error with the italics? You should have learned that lesson by now.

- noga1

March 13, 2012 at 11:52am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Enduring antisemitism: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/03/13/MJ%20Rosenbergs%20Flimsy%20Apology "This is a typical MJ Rosenberg half-truth. He is correct when he says Sachar used the term "Israel firster," but he didn’t use it the same way MJ and his MMfA buddies throw it around. For Sacher the term represented the tension between the American Jewish Community and Israeli Jewish Community in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Sacher's "Israel firsters" were mostly Israeli Jews who felt the Jewish people could never have a fulfilling life outside of Israel. It was never used by Sacher to impugn Jewish Americans as being some how less than loyal to America." This type of slanderous distortion is of the same kind we have come to expect from roi's creative interpretations of AIPAC's threats to Obama, and other such "truths", as illustrated a plenty in this thread and the Halevi thread. MJ Rosenberg is EXACTLY th ekind of journalist who would appeal to roi: no limitation, no ethical constraint, anything to score a point, and the well with the consequences.

- noga1

March 13, 2012 at 12:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Wow, noga, that's great! Now you're really out the closet. Having a good wallow in the Breitbart pigsty are we? Everyone should go take a look at breitbart. See the Ann Coulter ads! Read all about "Obama's War on Women." Here is a perfect McCarthyite smear of Rosenberg, straight from the Breitbart article linked by noga, exactly the disgusting tactics she employs on these boards with great gusto. Rosenberg ignores his other antisemitic smears--such as, for instance, that American Jews control the media, or that American Jews control foreign policy (and caused the rebellion in Egypt). [and then quoting Rosenberg] I am often accused of harping on the lobby's baleful influence. I plead guilty. But it's my obligation because (1) I know from personal experience — 15 years on Capitol Hill and four at AIPAC — how it operates, (2) I know how little it really cares about Israel, and (3) I am free to tell the truth about it. If I worked in the mainstream media or in the U.S. government, I wouldn't be. See the disjunction? See the noga-like lie? Does Rosenberg say that "American Jews control foreign policy" as Breitbart claims? He doesn't say anything of the kind. He laments the "influence" of AIPAC? Here again the ritual stupidity demanded by noga and the rest of the McCarthyite savages. We are all not supposed to notice that AIPAC has influence in Congress, that it exists to have influence in Congress. Merely to observe the obvious, and not like it, is re-created as the claim that American Jews control foreign policy. And how is this quote supposed to support the claim that Rosenberg says Jews control the media? Because he says he couldn't speak his mind if he were working for mainstream media, vulnerable to pressure? Just look at the way the ADL et alia attacked US ambassador to Belgium, Howard Gutman, for daring to state that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict gives fuel to Moslem hatred. Duuuuuh! More ritual stupidity demanded of us. And if you aren't ritually stupid, you are an anti-Semite. Noga tries to attach me to AbuKhalidi because she, with her sensitive nose, detects "similar sensibilities." I don't read AbuKhalidi (I only went and looked after noga kept bringing him up). I don't cite him. I don't link to him. I have no interest in him. (I did find interesting various opinion pieces in The Economist that he linked. The Economist.) But here is noga directing our attention to Breitbart's filth. That Breitbart calls someone an anti-Semite isn't evidence of anything other than what I describe about as noga's four points, and the McCarthyism of the Jewish right. Here's another Breitbart smear of Rosenberg: Rosenberg also uses the blog post to reinforce some of his other common lies: "One monumental thing has changed in 43 years. In 1969, neither any Arab country nor the Palestinians accepted Israel's right to exist. Since then, Israel, Jordan and Egypt have signed bilateral peace agreements, and remain committed to their terms. The PLO recognizes Israel's right to exist securely within the '67 lines. The entire Arab League (every single Arab state) is offering Israel peace, normalization and security in exchange for ending the occupation. As Shimon Peres says, Israel now has "partners for peace."" Well, haven't they? Oh no, says Breitbart. This is a "lie" because, "As far as the PLO, both Fatah, the party of Prime Minister Abbas, and Hamas, the terrorist thugs running Gaza, have refused to recognize Israel as a Jewish State." Of course, there is no such thing in diplomatic practice as recognizing a state as a "Jewish state" or "Christian state" or anything else. This was an invention of Netanyahu to frustrate negotiations by demanding it of the Arabs as a condition. His ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, helpfully explained in an Op-Ed in the NY Times that this formulation of Netanyahu's meant the Arabs abandoning their claimed right of return west of the Green Line. The status of refugees, however, is a major claim of the Palestinians and was consigned by Oslo to final settlement negotiations. So, the right-wing, noga, Breitbart reinterpretation of recognition is that the Palestinians must surrender one of their most important claims in advance of negotiation. Then, because Rosenberg doesn't toe their corrupt line, he is branded by them, these fascist fucks, as an anti-Semite. Pretty disgusting, noga. Why don't you go climb back into your private sewer and find some other turd to dump here. Try the Ann Coulter links. They should give you lots of material.

- roidubouloi

March 13, 2012 at 1:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Nice try, roi. MJ Rosenberg is exposed as a liar and a mishandler of historical records. and an antisemite to boot. roi's response? "Oh look, Breibart"! The fact is that roi cannot explain away his odd fulminations in this thread and tries to distract and blur our sharp memory of he said about AIPAC and Obama "staring them down" by bringing up all sorts of issues which have nothing to do with Rosenberg's abusive distortion of the history of the term "Israel firster", directly, btw, from the regular arsenal of bona fide vile anti-Zionists. roi has to be encouraged by any kind of prompter to express as openly as possible his views and positions about Israel. He needs to be seen for what he is, not what he claims to be.

- noga1

March 13, 2012 at 2:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh, and about that Palestinian "one of their most important claims" , here is a relevant bit of information, to illuminate the morality of such claims: http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=6541 "A Judean Shekel coin from the year 66 CE, the first year of the Jewish rebellion against Rome, was sold for $1.1 million this past week at an auction in New York. The words in Hebrew "Shekel of Israel [Year] 1" are printed on the front of the coin, and "Jerusalem the holy" appears on the back. [New York Post, March 10, 2012] The official Palestinian Authority daily in writing about the auction described the Hebrew coin from the Second Temple period as an "ancient Palestinian coin" and as being part of the "Palestinian cultural tradition." The coin, with the ancient Hebrew lettering, can be seen to the right."

- noga1

March 13, 2012 at 2:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

According to roi's bag of tricks, history is established not by facts, and verifiable records but by lies, distortions and a lot of noise.

- noga1

March 13, 2012 at 2:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Heeeeeere she is. Goebbels' little girl is back, exposed in all her glory. How many smears and lies can you squeeze into a single post? I think you have exceeded yourself here. First, your intimation that I am somehow hiding my opinions from view as if I believe them to be discreditable. Do you really expect people here to believe that my opinions are not clearly stated, that there is some obfuscation on my part? Oh yeah, I won't cop to being an anti-Semite or self-hating Jew as per your ritual accusations. Hence, the case is proven, because I won't confess, and I am simply hiding it. McCarthyism, in its purest form. But you, you vile liar, can tell. You can detect "similar sensibilities" between me and someone else, AbuKhalidi (who may or may not be an anti-Semite, I have no idea, as I never read him). Classic fascist smears, guilt not even by association, but by your detection of sensibilities. This isn't even Goebbels lite any more. It is the real thing Then you have the chutzpah to cavil at my association of you with Breitbart because you yourself are quoting from an execrable piece on Breitbart that is filled with obvious lies, as quoted above. You chose the association. You cited this piece of obvious swill with approval. They quote something said by Rosenberg and then make claims about it that the quoted text self-evidently will not support. This is exactly your creepy modus operandi here. No need to detect similar sensibilities. It is what you do all the time. And THEN you claim I am bringing up all sorts of irrelevant issues because I quote from the rest of the Breitbart piece that you cited and linked as worthy of our attention. The inversions of the inversions of reality in that sick, malign crazy-house imagination of yours really do boggle the mind. MJ Rosenberg isn't exposed as anything at all by the piece of filth that you are wallowing in. Even if the man were in truth a raging anti-Semite, nothing at all quoted by Breitbart goes to prove anything of the kind. If that is the best they can do, then one has to believe there is no there there. Just a classic set-up that would make the propaganda master, Goebbels, proud. I have no need to explain away my so-called "fulminations," because I stand by every word. I make no effort to explain them, as I think the are pretty clear, but I do make the effort to keep my words clean of the smears and lies with which you attempt to drape them, exactly in the manner of this Breitbart piece that you, in your depravity, think proves anything at all. We cannot even call this a nice try on your part, noga. You are back rolling in the filth where your cold, black heart inevitably takes you given enough opportunity. You are a McCarthyite enforcer of right-wing Israeli extremist ideology, deploying every abusive rhetorical technique of fascism -- with great relish.

- roidubouloi

March 13, 2012 at 2:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You are insane! Caught dead to rights rolling in Breitbart's filth, you give us some story about an ancient coin as though this somehow establishes your devotion to truth and history. Are you sitting there in Montreal having a psychotic breakdown before our eyes?

- roidubouloi

March 13, 2012 at 2:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"First, your intimation that I am somehow hiding my opinions from view" No. What I said was: "He needs to be seen for what he is, not what he claims to be." You often claim that you are a friend of Israel. You need to be seen, and recognized, for what you are, not what you claim. You are not a friend of Israel. And no matter how many chickens you helped move one night in a Kibbutz in Israel, you are no friend to Israelis, or their children, or their future. On these boards you are actively engaged in demonization of Israeli society and more recently it seems you have also joined the ranks of anti-Zionists. There are people here who are willing to trust your professions of friendship to Israel, despite your assiduous daily, nay, hourly, work of its delegitimization. My statement was meant for them.

- noga1

March 13, 2012 at 2:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

'Caught dead to rights rolling in Breitbart's filth, you give us some story about an ancient coin as though this somehow establishes your devotion to truth and history. " It's hard to know what to make of such wild eyed accusations. I provided the story about the coin for two reasons: 1. You just made a plea on behalf of Palestinians' right to distort Jewish history for political gain; 2. The Palestinian paper's complicated "explications" as to why a Hebrew coin from a Judean era is a tool of "Israeli propaganda" reminded me very strongly of your type of argumentation.

- noga1

March 13, 2012 at 3:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga wrote, with considerable justification: How many times, skahn, are you going to make this error with the italics? You should have learned that lesson by now.. Probably about as often as you and roidubouloi will post insults against each other. (Which perhaps will be as many times as the Palestinians and the Israelis will attack each other. Isn't there some combat going on right now?) Oh, look! From CBS news: "Egypt has mediated a cease-fire between Palestinian militant factions and Israel after four days of violence, an Egyptian security official said." Well, I'm pretty sure I have no Egyptian blood in my veins. (What color is Jewish blood?) "I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes?", etc. Anyway, if Egypt can get the Palestinians and Israel to agree to a peace fire (with no incentives offered by Egypt as far as I know), I will offer an incentive to achieve peace in the silliest discussion thread of TNR. [Sorry, Marty.] As long as the two of you can communicate without insults at TNR, I will refrain from using italic in my comments. I can hardly think of a more useless bribe, but as you considered it worth insulting me over, perhaps it has some value. Can we get to 250 comments in this thread? Can we get to 250 comments in this thread without any further insults? Can the Middle East achieve peace and cooperation? Will I live that long?

- skahn

March 13, 2012 at 4:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

My "plea on behalf of Palestinians' right to distort Jewish history for political gain?" What fresh insanity is this? And then, once again, we get the smear artist's forté: "So and so said this awful, or silly, or stupid, or dishonest thing. You didn't say it. You didn't cite it. You didn't approve it. But it reminds me of you. Hence, you are responsible for it, and you and whoever wrote this thing are indistinguishable." Pure, malign Goebbels. __________________ Up above, noga inadvertently confesses her malign purpose. Referring to me, she says, and then repeats, "He needs to be seen for what he is, not what he claims to be." But who I am, or who anyone else writing here is, or claims to be, is actually not a proper subject for discussion here. The things people claim or argue, or even the behavior of people in this forum, are proper subjects of discussion, but who they are is beside the point. The words are on the page. If factual claims are made, anyone is free to dispute them by marshaling contrary evidence and presenting it. If there are arguments offered, counter-arguments can be offered. There is plenty of room to deplore sentiments with which one disagrees and to explain why, or not. This, however, does not even occur to propagandists, smear artists, McCarthyite goons and thugs such as noga. Waste of time and breath form their point of view. They want to get immediately down to the business of trying to discredit what is said -- with which they are unable or unwilling to argue -- by discrediting the person who said it and, if they are lucky, to drive them from the forum altogether or, failing that, to compel them, by abuse, to recant or moderate their thoughts. Nothing else matters to them. The feel not the slightest need actually to respond to argument with counter-argument or factual claim with facts. That is all irrelevant to them. In this, there is no lie or fabrication or smear or slander that they will not deploy. Because they are convinced of their absolute truth and anyone who takes issue with them must be gotten out of the way, by whatever means possible, and as soon as possible. Noga's frustration and suffering, her incessant whining, are due to the fact that I resist her abuse by abusing her right back, and I am much, much better at it than she is. She is hobbled in this, as in everything she undertakes here, by the disorder of her own mind that has difficulty stringing two coherent thoughts together or understanding the implications of the things she herself says. She is frequently blind-sided by her inability to see the often obvious counter-attack that her abuse affords. Too stupid. ____________________ As for the claimed Palestinian right of return to West of the Green Line, they don't claim that right based on ancient coins. They claim it based on the fact that they were living in Palestine and were made refugees by war. It is Jews who are inclined to claim their right to the land based on ancient coins. The legal claim of a right to return to live west of the Green Line is a major "claim" of the Palestinians, just as the necessity for a de-militarized Palestine is a major "claim" or Israel, in both cases meant to be settled by the negotiations of a final peace agreement and settlement of outstanding claims. Oslo consigned Palestinian refugee status to the final status negotiations. The dishonest Netanyahu spikes the possibility of negotiations and of peace by demanding that the Palestinians surrender this claim in advance of negotiations for a final settlement. I don't want to argue the strength of the Palestinian claim. I consider it a bona fide dispute, in contrast to the illegitimacy of Israeli settlement in occupied territory which is beyond dispute under the Fourth Geneva Convention. However, among the legal sources of the Palestinian claim is resolution 194 of the UN General Assembly of December 11, 1948: The main Article of Resolution 194, for the purpose of this article, is Article 11 which deals with the return of refugees. Article 11 of the resolution reads: (The General Assembly) "Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible." This is sufficient to make clear that the Palestinian claim is not a mere fabrication or invention. There is legal basis. Hence the claim must be taken seriously and should be resolved as part of a final settlement, as the parties have previously agreed. It is plainly contrary to the purpose of peace negotiations, and a patent subversion of the possibility of negotiations, to demand that the Palestinians concede a major claim of theirs in advance of the negotiations. Israel of course wishes to claim that too much time has gone by to permit such a right of return, that if it existed, it has lapsed. This is not an easy argument to make when the Jews claimed a right of return after 2,000 years. The strength of the Palestinian claim is a good part of the reason why I say that Netanyahu is a fool. If he were able to resolve, and largely extinguish this claim, as part of a final settlement, that would be a major achievement of incalculable value. To fail to undertake to do so in order to retain possession of illegal settlements east of the Green Line is an error of Biblical proportions.

- roidubouloi

March 13, 2012 at 4:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Before I decided that the whole business of arguing over who one is is merely a trap, I offered some personal information to rebut the charges of noga and the rest of the vile Spinesters that I am an anti-Semite, etc., etc. Now I don't much care. I take it as a given that they will engage in these smear tactics and that persuading them otherwise is impossible and pointless. They will continue to levy the charge of anti-Semitism against anyone who will not recant criticism of Israel. However, for those whom noga imagines she is addressing on the subject of "who I am: My sister and her husband made aliya nearly 35 years ago to help found a kibbutz in the desert. I have a niece and two nephews all of whom served as officers in the IDF. My niece was decorated for her service by the president of Israel. They are all there still. My niece and nephews and their children in Israel are all of the living descendants of my parents beyond my own generation. If Israel were to be destroyed, that would be the end of my family. I consider the Israeli right, as I consider the American right, religious nuts both here and there of all persuasions, and right-wing ideological zealots, of which both we and Israel have an abundance, to be destroyers, wreckers, blinded by their own unquenchable bellicosity and hatred of all "others" to realities of geopolitics that, if ignored, inevitably lead to loss and ruin. They are in control of Israeli society, as they were here for eight years of disaster under Bush, to its great detriment and peril, and to our peril as well. My argument is with them. I have no problem debating at length the merits of what I believe with anyone who wishes to take issue with me. I have zero tolerance for the abusers like noga who cannot or will not debate the merits but attempt to achieve by abuse the illicit object of silencing criticism. Them, I kick the living shit out of.

- roidubouloi

March 13, 2012 at 4:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

". Them, I kick the living shit out of." That's funny. Tens of Thousands of words, who knows how many hundreds of comments, and you are still in full defensive-pugilistic mode, your bullets not even making a dent.

- noga1

March 13, 2012 at 5:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh no, your incessant whining makes clear that there are plenty of dents in you. And the circle of disgust around you only gets wider with time. Slowly, to be sure, but the movement is all in one direction. Little by little, everyone here, including those who share many of your views, is figuring it out. Your rising hysteria, and the increasing stupidity and transparency of your attempted smears, is the best evidence that you too are increasingly aware of your own impotence. The trend will continue.

- roidubouloi

March 13, 2012 at 5:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"your incessant whining" says the tearful whiner who never fails to sob that HE did not start this fight.

- noga1

March 13, 2012 at 5:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You of course fail to understand the difference between whining -- your own constant complaining about how awful it is and how much it hurts -- and the importance of making clear to observers what the stakes are and that you are lying. That's good. It is but another example of your stupidity, on which I can always rely.

- roidubouloi

March 13, 2012 at 6:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think your many admirers probably wonder why, then, you devote so much time, energy and word-power to dealing with my stupidity. Why are you exhausting yourself in this manner? Surely a man of your position in life, as you have made sure to inform us, with so much studying to do, papers to write, algorithms to concoct, many houses abroad to manage, vacations to take, political fortunes to make, what does a man in that position, with that outstanding brain power, with all that success and eloquence, many friends and admirers -- all facts about yourself you freely volunteered on these boards -- why does he spend days and nights writing copious reams of comments in response to one stupid, little, insignificant Israeli housewife?

- noga1

March 13, 2012 at 6:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's fun. And a service to the world to smack around a repellent creature like you. Actually, you are just overhead. There are things that I want to say and you do your best to interfere, in a dishonest and corrupt manner, with my ability to say them. So, I have to spend a certain amount of time and effort repressing you. It's an imperfect world.

- roidubouloi

March 13, 2012 at 7:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

251 comments. Will this be the final comment in this thread, or will we surpass 300. Somewhere in space, in another star system, some alien creatures are reading these comments. Science fiction writers of a religious bent once pondered whether they would find Jesus on other planets. I also wonder whether each species have the equivalent of Jews

- skahn

March 13, 2012 at 8:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I was just going to note, skahn, that we have hit your mark. Congratulations!

- roidubouloi

March 13, 2012 at 9:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When I was young, I subscribed to a hawkish liberal magazine published by Max Ascoli called The Reporter. Ascoli, a fervent liberal anti-Communist born in Italy, strongly supported the Vietnam War, making very unpopular in America as opposition to the war grew. (I don't know if there is any historical connection between Peretz and Ascoli.) http://www.bu.edu/bridge/archive/2001/11-23/connections.htm At the time I was very divided. At least from the time of reading 1984 and Animal Farm and supporting books and documentation, I had been very anti-Communist. (My parents and family, children of Jewish refugees from Eastern Europe had been both very liberal and quite anti-Communist, so even though my relations with my family had been quite troubled, I no doubt was influenced by them.) At the same time, especially after a brief stint with required ROTC at the University of California at Berkeley – shortly before I flunked out and shortly before the “free speech movement” erupted – I realized that I would have been the worst soldier in the history of the United States military and would probably have led to the destruction of dozens if not scores of fellow soldiers. All my dithering and angst about whether to flee to Canada or allow myself to be drafted (after I passed my draft physical and mental exam) was conveniently (if not morally or ethically) resolved when my daughter – unintentionally conceived on our honeymoon – was born. I received a parental deferment while thousands of other American young men served (and often died or were gravely injured) while I was settling into marriage, graduate school, fatherhood, and being a lifelong nudnik, Ascoli closed down The Reporter (because of age and because the zeitgeist had moved on from him) and about that time I subscribed to The New Republic replacing an anti-Communist liberal magazine with an anti-Communist/pro-Zionist/pro-Israeli magazine. For the most part my family were not religious or practicing Jews, and as far as I knew, none had been caught up in The Holocaust, but I had grown up with a strong sense of the persecutions suffered by Jews, and I grew up with a potent narrative of the founding of Israel as a tale of heroism and triumph (much buttressed by reading screenwriter Ben Hecht's memoir Child of the Century. It was easy for me to plug into the narrative not only of Israelis as the “guys in the white hats,” but also of the Arabs, personified by people such as Nassar and Arafat, as the “black hat guys.” My perception of the Middle East plugged in closely to the narrative presented by Marty Peretz and other writers of TNR. While I still try to conduct myself as a decent person, over time, I more and more regard life as a nihilist tragedy; thus to the irritation and dismay of many I describe myself as an “ethical nihilist.” I have yet to read a coherent definition of what it means to be a Jew. Any murder – whether it is one murder – such as a young aunt of mine who was murdered in the 1950s – or if it is the genocide of millions – such as The Holocaust – or the Rwandan genocide – or the Armenian genocide, or any of the other genocides is a tragedy. I have been spared, but my wife and I have a close friend who narrowly escaped from Sri Lanka when the Civil War began and in her childhood saw both Hindus and Tamils being burned alive in street riots. As Conrad so pungently said, “The Horror. The Horror.” As I so often mutter to myself, “How can we stand ourselves.” I don't know Mary Peretz. He seems like an intelligent and decent and articulate person, who is trying to say and do the decent thing. My perception of the world has moved a bit away from his, but I appreciate all he has said. We are both getting old. He is six years older than I am. This may be his last column. One of these days – I will try not to hang on so long that I become a complete junior Lear-ish spectacle of myself – I will stop posting comments. I don't know what the “answer” is to the Israeli-Arab-Palestinian-Iranian-Turkish-Jewish-Muslim-etc. conundrum is. I try to live in the present. I think the Middle East consists of the peoples and nations and religions that live there. Exterminating each other is not particularly desirable or particularly feasible. Either they figure out a way to coexist, or they destroy each other, and perhaps the rest of us in the process. This may actually be the last comment to this article. No one may read it. This may be Marty's last article. I feel like I should close this turgid comment with an italic tag to ruin it for everybody (Samson pulling down the Temple?)

- skahn

March 15, 2012 at 1:25am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close