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 Tel Aviv Journal: The Atrocity in Itamar

TEL AVIV JOURNAL MARCH 17, 2011

Tel Aviv Journal: The Atrocity in Itamar

BY MARTIN PERETZ

Most of this country is still grieving for the five people in the Fogel family who were murdered late Friday night in the religious settlement of Itamar, near Shechem (or Nablus) where, more or less, Jewish history began. This last assertion is probably thought by many readers—and maybe by you—to be reprobate. Still, it is a fact, and the one basic truth that you should remember is that Itamar, like other Jewish communities built deep in the West Bank, was actually started when there were literally no Palestinians who even mumbled the word “peace” but were vaguely enlisted in the kind of war called “terror,” either committing it or cheering it. Yes, of course, there were Palestinians who wanted to make peace with Israel. But they were silent for the reason that most good people are silent when the society is run by a tyrant or, as happened during the early years, a tyrant and a mob.

In any case, Itamar, again like the other Jewish villages in the area, is not a building site. Its residents may be hoping against hope that when (or if) Israel and the Palestinian Authority reach an agreement Itamar will be allowed to remain. But the fact is that, given any kind of understanding between the parties and not necessarily a formal peace pact, there will be no new construction in this settlement ever again. After all, there is none now. The construction now being done in the territories is only in the larger towns cleaving to the 1949 armistice lines which no one—yes, no one—believes will ever be a part of Palestine. Not Abbas, not Fayyad, not Bibi or Ehud Barak, not even Barack Obama who probably still wishes it was otherwise.

So the atrocity committed against Ruth, the mother, aged 35, Udi, the father, aged 36, and two children, Elad, aged 3, and Yoav, aged 11, was simply an atrocity, and it was claimed by the Al Aqsa Brigade, an armed rump of Fatah run until his death by Yassir Arafat. Hadas Fogel, the last of the victims, was three months old when the brave Palestinian freedom fighter slit her throat. Two other children went unnoticed by the fanatic, and the oldest wasn’t home.

I am now taking sides in one of those perfectly asymmetrical disputes that always rages around Israel. Recall these scenarios: Hezbollah continually bombards the Galilee with rockets and missiles. Hamas does the same but over a much longer period. And the liberal world immediately demands to know why Israel uses disproportionate power in retaliation. As if a country dragged into war by its tormentors should limit its retaliatory power to that which will give it no military advantage. This is the one really new ethical problem of our time. It is an issue that two people very close to TNR—Michael Walzer and Moshe Halbertal—have elucidated more than any other contemporary thinkers.

Israel has not taken any punitive action. But what it has done is release photos of the dead just as they were found. Here they are:

And the faint-hearted are up in arms. If you read Ha’aretz, the newspaper which the editor of The New Yorker, David Remnick, thinks is the last honest daily in Israel, you will find that the release of the pictures is thought by many of its writers to be a more heinous crime than the murders themselves.

(I have a different view of Ha’aretz than Remnick. In fact, I think that many of its columnists are intellectual psychopaths. From this cohort you have to exclude Aluf Benn and Ari Shavit. But if you like grim fantasies all you have to do is read Amira Hass, Akiva Elder, or Gideon Levy, now doing honest reporting from Tokyo, or Amos Harel. If you want one reason for why the international press is so hostile to Israel, it is because the only paper foreign journalists read is Ha’aretz in English. It is an exemplar of Jewish self-hate, full of ridicule, righteousness, and loathing. Its circulation is going down, down, down. It would have already gone broke if it hadn’t invested in a spiffy new printing press on which it produces Israel Hayom, a free right-wing daily owned by Sheldon Adelson who, from the casino business, was said by Forbes this year to be worth $23.3 billion, which makes him the sixteenth richest man in the world.)

In these days of reality TV and other insidious intrusions into peoples’ lives—the watched and the watchers—I see no reason to censor intimate views of innocent victims of the death-hand of ideological murderers, or, for that matter, of any human beast of prey. The corpse is the imprint of the killer. This one wanted to end the life of one family in an especially macabre way, a gruesome way. Like the Jew-haters of the Nazi era succeeding in doing in the millions. (I remember arguments about whether we should let people see the mass deaths. Of course, we should, rather than leave it to description and statistics.) When the 9/11 eighteen struck, they wanted their victims to vanish as they planned for America itself. And vanish they did. No one published or otherwise showed a single body, skeleton, limb. It was all anonymous, so to speak, like the picture of the lonely silhouette flying through the skies at the World Trade Center: a great evocative image. Maybe it’s already in the collection of the Museum of Modern Art.

In the last sentence of his proclamation of complete disgust with the Jewish state, “A Man, A Plan,” one out of three articles he’s written recently on this subject, Remnick puts a particularly onerous burden on Israel and the world. They “owe justice—and a nation—to the Palestinians.” I am sorry to say this. But, alas, it is a stupid sentence. It is difficult to keep many nations together. And Israel did near-magic in reconstituting its nation from the ends of the earth, forgive the cliché. Yes, there are sundering forces in Jewish life and in Israeli life. But no one can say—I suppose some people actually do say—that the Jewish nation is nonexistent or that the nation of Israel is nonexistent.

It’s a sad fact to have admit, as Remnick does, that the Palestinians are not a nation. One of the great acts of Zionist statesmanship was when the Jewish Agency for Palestine accepted the parsimonious cartography of their future state. Chaim Weizman, who later became the first president of Israel, said it with heavy heart: The Jews would take a state even if it were the size of a tablecloth. If the Palestinians were constituted as a real nation they would have long ago come to a similar conclusion and not go whining into the seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth decade of Jewish state-building.

I want to say something about the politics of the settlers. Like every interest group and especially ideologically motivated interest groups, they want to create faits accomplis.And the settlers have. They are something of an impediment to Palestinian statehood. Nonetheless, since there is agreement in the wider Israel, a Palestinian state will at last be carved out of the old lines of Canaan. The settlers’ objections will simply be overlooked, and good money will be paid for their failed dream. 

But they are not an impediment to Palestinian nationhood. Palestinian nationhood is not a product built from outside. And it won’t be reinforced when and if the General Assembly will declare Palestine a state. This will be the third, fourth, fifth time that an Arab state has been declared in Palestine, the first time in 1947 when the G.A. sanctioned two states in the British Mandate: one, a Jewish state for which the Zionists has been preparing for a half-century; two, an Arab state (not by the way a Palestinian state) and nothing happened except that the surrounding states fought against Israel only on their own behalf. Where were the Palestinian nationalists? You ask me. I ask you.

Palestinian nationalism, such as it is, is a psychodrama. My God, there are probably a hundred states—most of them, by the way, also not nations—that recognize a country called Palestine. Maybe a half-dozen others will be added to the list. Mazel tov. Nothing will have changed.

Nevertheless, the settler issue nags at the Jewish nation. The settlers themselves are morally haughty, believing that they are what impedes Jewish alienation from God. There are many other religious Jews in Israel who do not care a fig about Zion. All that interests them is their relationship to the Lord Almighty. The Zionists run the police and the mail service, which is enough for them, although some still use United Nations stamps as a symbolic rejection of Jewish sovereignty.

I like neither of these groups. But, in the early arguments among Zionists, there was established the point of view that modern society must recognize the right to be different, a view furthered by Simon Rawidowicz, Mordechai Kaplan, Hans Kohn, and Horace Kallen, an early editor of TNR. (A new book, Zionism: The Roads Not Taken, by Noam Pianko, confronts just these matters.) The religious nationalists and the ultra-religious anti-nationalists now lay claim in Israel to that right; but, as sometimes with multiculturalism in Western societies, this right almost axiomatically intrudes and imposes on the majority. So the settlers are hijacking the politics of the state although they are a small minority in a parliamentary system that is dependent for a coalition majority on tiny groups of Knesset members willing to join up for exorbitant stakes.

A small Jewish minority will not and cannot rescue the Palestinians and their national dream. Nor are these troublesome Jews the great impediment to their arrival as a state, if even not a nation-state. The fact is that the Palestinian Authority is reluctant to go into negotiations where the difficult matters will be on the table: Israeli security needs (including protection from mayhem in the rest of the Arab world), refugees, borders, and the city of Jerusalem, where trust is more important than maps.

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

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 139 comments

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

139 comments

These pictures are tough to look at, but they do tell the story in ways that words alone cannot.

- wkwami

March 18, 2011 at 6:06am

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

I agree with wakwami - these pictures are horrific, but they are important because of that. I do have a problem with MP's logic when he writes, "If the Palestinians were constituted as a real nation they would have long ago come to a similar conclusion and not go whining into the seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth decade of Jewish state-building." So Palestinians are not a nation if they keep "whining" about land? It's only if they accept what Israel gives them that they can be seen as a nation...?

- NR851651

March 18, 2011 at 6:14am

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

Mea culpa, compared to many on this site I am a neophyte on this issue...but it appears that in the unique conflict that is the Israeli/Palentinian problem, there are, as always, no heroes. Only soulless murderers and their victims. On both sides. Thus it will always be in this one tiny corner of the world where what passes for leadership in each camp regards land as more important than the lives of children. God have mercy.

- Tristan

March 18, 2011 at 9:00am

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

In Israel, this issue is a week old. Still, it's good to see it IS being covered in TNR, well done. One thing I still do not know is the size of Itamar. Google Earth shows that the city of Nablus is quite large. It looks like one of a tiny little collection of houses on a hill in the middle of the Palestinian West Bank got attacked from a large Palestinian city, but I don't know what the truth really is. The Israeli-Palestinian issue has no permanent solution yet. The Israeli's want Jerusalem and defensible borders. The Palestinians want Jerusalem, and 1/2 want the destruction of Israel, 1/2 want peaceful co-existence. Given that this is true, there's no "compromise" position today or in the near future that achieves all these goals. The most practical solution I see is for Israel to get Jerusalem and defensible borders, to establish a Palestinian state, for Israel to stop making new settlements in Palestinian territory, and then everyone calm down and resume trading with each other. As long as some Palestinians use their freedoms to launch rockets, send in suicide bombers, and kill a family in their beds, and be PROUD about it, all Israel can do is build their wall and prevent people getting killed as best they can. And allow time to pass so that all Palestinians realize killing Israeli's is a stupid and self-defeating act. I think almost all Israeli's realize killing Palestinians is self-defeating already.

- AllanL5

March 18, 2011 at 10:15am

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

Marty needs to get over the notion of whether or not "Palestinians" constitute a nation or a people -- neither of those criteria are a prerequisite for international recognition of a state. Their international legal status, rather than their precise ethno-religious identity, is what is relevant. That status is the crux of the problem that Israel has been confronting since 1967 and continues to confront today and will confront indefinitely until it can reach some kind of binding agreement with some organization who are internationally recognized as representatives of those Arabs who live on those portions of the Palestine Mandate (as it was constituted in 1948) that were part of Egypt and Jordan between 1948 and 1967. It can give them Israeli citizenship and civil rights, the way Israel did with those Arabs who remained within its borders in 1948 and the way it did with Arab residents of East Jerusalem (and the small rump population of Druze and Arabs in the Golan Heights in 1981), formally annex their territories and ask the international community for legal recognition of the same. Or Israel can relinquish its claims on these territories, remove settlers from places where no Arab state will have them (such as Itamar) and negotiate with the Arabs over retaining settlements along the Green Line (knowing that Israel is negotiating from a position of weakness, as those settlements have never been recognized as legal by any other country). Israel can retain security control over all the pre-1967 areas until a final peace settlement is approved, as it should have done in Gaza. But Israel should not expect to facilitate the settlement of its own citizens and their children on land it knows it will need to relinquish, allow those citizens to retain all of their Israeli civil rights and privileges, deny those rights to the surrounding Arab population and not expect violence to ensue and continue. I get no satisfaction in writing these words, and would brook no excuses for the barbarity in Itamar, except that, in similar circumstances, it is in the nature of many human animals to perpetrate such crimes and for their fellow human animals to approve of it (or at least not criticize it sufficiently).

- wildboy

March 18, 2011 at 12:26pm

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

Jews should be allowed to live wherever they want without fear of having their throats slit while they sleep. Why do alleged "western liberals" never protest the concept that palestine be Judenfrei? or that palestinian national identity has to be 'granted' by Israel. David Remnick is abusing his position at The New Yorker - his personal editorials on Israel belong ina clearly noted editorial section, NOT as the opening entry in "Talk of the Town". Yes, I am being selfish in wanting to continue enjoying the weekly arrival of The New Yorker, because Remnick's abuse of TotTown means I have to start with the movie reviews and work my way backward so as to blot out Remnick's presence, which, so far, has not infected the rest of the content. "...The victims are five members of the Fogel family who had recently moved to Itamar. The family previously lived in the Gush Katif settlement of Netzarim in the Gaza Strip. After Gush Katif was evacuated in 2005, the family moved to the settlement of Ariel, and finally settled in Itamar in 2009. ..." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itamar_attack

- K2K

March 18, 2011 at 12:51pm

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

"Marty needs to get over the notion of whether or not "Palestinians" constitute a nation or a people -- neither of those criteria are a prerequisite for international recognition of a state." Of course, international recognition is all important, and I think Mr. Peretz knows that. Yet in real terms the international community cannot determine what is a nation and what is not a nation. The Kurds are a nation without international recognition and on the other side Belgium is not a single nation even though it has international recognition. I agree though that Mr. Peretz spent too much time on this issue.

- arnon

March 18, 2011 at 1:34pm

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

K2K, I fully agree that Jews should be able to live everywhere without fear of having their throats slit while they sleep. But you probably appreciate that the issue isn't that simple, is it? The Fogels and other Jews of Itamar were not in the same boat as the Jews of New York, the Jews or Paris or the Jews of Tel Aviv and Beersheva (or the Jews of Berlin in 1938) -- citizens of their respective countries who are entitled to the exercise of full civil rights (including the right to be free of crime and violence and to expect their elected governments and their police forces to prevent such crimes and violence and punish the perpetrators in accordance with due process of law). They are also in a different boat from the Jews of New York, Paris, Tel Aviv, etc. who are traveling or sojourining temporarily abroad whose passports entitle them to the safe treatment and protection of duly constituted civil authorities. They are Israeli citizens who are living on land over which Israel does not exercise (or even attempts to exercise) civil control or authority, but instead maintains under military occupation, ostensibly to safeguard its own citizens within its own internationally recognized borders from attacks from such lands. In this regard, we should compare their status to that of Americans (even American Jews!) who decided to move to an area of Afghanistan outside the control of the Afghan state and which is currently occupied by American troops fighting the Taliban insurgents. Those Americans would still be entitled to the exercise of their civil rights as Americans and could expect the American army to protect them from the danger that would be all around them, though they should also expect the American army to prohibit their permanent settlement there -- which it would surely do. What they should not expect is to live in peace as armed American citizens on territory that country doesn't legally claim as its own and whose residents don't have American citizenship or civil rights on their own soil.

- wildboy

March 18, 2011 at 1:44pm

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

wildboy "K2K, I fully agree that Jews should be able to live everywhere without fear of having their throats slit while they sleep. But you probably appreciate that the issue isn't that simple, " It's not that simple, with these five words wildboy justifies murder. These goddam liberal pacifists are at heart nothing but a bunch of wild murdering savages. I'll remember these words next time you accuse Marty of being a racist.

- nr106646

March 18, 2011 at 3:59pm

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itamar_attack So, apparently Itamar IS a small Jewish settlement on a hill south-west of Nablus. And the Itamar murders HAVE prompted the Israeli leadership to authorize 500 new houses -- none in Itamar, apparently it's too small in area or too hard to defend, but in some other Jewish Settlements in the West Bank. AND they've re-established a check-point for Nablus that they'd taken down in February. AND they locked-down Nablus for 4-DAYS while troops searched. And NONE of this has been reported in the Western Media (until now). Tragic.

- AllanL5

March 18, 2011 at 4:01pm

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

What was tragic was the near extinction of a whole family, by Arab fanatics. AllanL5 doesn't think the murder of babies matters and that the leaders of the murderers should be rewarded for such a heinous act.

- TomLessing

March 18, 2011 at 4:41pm

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

Allan is another armchair web barbarian who is justifyig murder.

- nr106646

March 18, 2011 at 5:16pm

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

K2K: The Ha'aretz article was NOT in talk of the town. It was a much longer article. Did you read it? Also, I had a chance yesterday to check out that website. I perused the blog section, did a search on Israel, and saw absolutely nothing harsher than somebody using the word "Zionist" in an ambiguous manner. Do you have a link to the nastier stuff? I'm really curious that the DNC, with so much Jewish support, would allow that sort of thing on their website. That said, ,it was all pretty tame stuff.

- MOLLYSIMON

March 18, 2011 at 5:41pm

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

Thank you! Too bad you do not use the real names of the land of Israel: Judea and Samaria. "The West bank" name was invented in the 60's to erase the connection of Jews to their land.

- Poupic

March 18, 2011 at 5:57pm

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

poupic: Peretz agonizes over his support for Israel and his disgust for the ultra-Orthodox who dare to want to live in Judea and Samaria. Peretz wants all of Israel to be like Tel Aviv. MOLLYS: Yes, I did read the New Yorker article about Haaretz. Must have been difficult for Remnick to allow a reporter to admit that Haaretz has almost no readership inside Israel :) What I object to is David Remnick using "Talk of the Town" for his very personal editorials on Israel. He should create an Editorial Page feature, like James Surowiecki has for "The Financial Page". As to the MYBO website? I stopped going there in 2008. But each Group has a Group Email function, and that is where the worst Israel-bashing has shown up in the one foreign policy group I still allow into my alias mailbox (actually the worst was in a different foreign policy Group that I moderated in 2008, so I shut down that Group email function, and then closed off Group blog comments). It was the comment thread on this MYBO homepage post on May 8, 2008 "Obama on the Israel's 60th Independence Day" that started my disillusionment. I reported this particular comment dozens of times as "objectionable", but it is STILL there today: http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/gGBYYR/commentary#comment-gyghk "21,915 BLACK BALLOONS OVER JERUSALEM | Report to Admin By User from Covington, LA, May 8, 2008 at 11:57:42 PM ET To celebrate 60 years of independence, Israel is planning a large-scale birthday bash with events taking place in many different countries around the world. In Jerusalem, a 3-day conference, under the title “Facing Tomorrow” is planned from May 13 – 15, to which many world leaders, such as U.S. President Bush, and French President Sarkozy, and celebrities such as Barbara Streisand and Steven Spielberg have been invited and plan to attend. It is wrong to celebrate and we need to do something BIG to make the world, and those gathered to celebrate Israel, see and hear us. We* have this idea and we need your help to make it happen! On May 15, we will launch 21,915 (365 days x 60 years) black balloons over the skies of Jerusalem. We aim to turn the skies over Israel’s celebrations black to let people know that there is another side of the story, a side of heartache, suffering and dispossession. At the same time, each balloon will carry a letter from a Palestinian child expressing his/her hope for the future, to let the world know that we believe in and dream of justice. Please help us make this happen by buying a balloon! $1.00 will help us cover the cost of 3 balloons. Please buy 3, 6, or 9 balloons (or more!) and be part of our action. Donation information below. Other things that you can do: * On May 15, we are asking everyone, wherever he or she is, to wear back. PLEASE WEAR BLACK! * WRITE LETTERS, or help collect letters from Palestinian children. You can email us the letters and we will print them out and attach to the balloons that we will launch; * If you are in Palestine, volunteer to help us inflate and LAUNCH the balloons on May 15; * Wherever you are, consider doing an action in SOLIDARITY with our action (in addition to whatever else you may be planning). For example, you can launch your own balloons, fly black kites, march with black banners, etc. To donate to the cost of the balloons, you can: * Use Paypal: Donate online at Link or at www.paypal.com and list the beneficiary as balloons@60yearsofnakba.org * Make a bank transfer: + HSBC Bank -- Ramallah Account name: Palestinian Strategic Initiative Acct No: 011-026630-087 Swift Code: BBMEPS22 Contact Number: +970-599-130-426"

- K2K

March 18, 2011 at 6:56pm

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

K2K: I checked out the entire thread. It looked about three people were anti-Israel, Covington guy being one of them. I don't understand why the DNC did not scrub that comment. It was creepy. And asking for money for a cause that had nothing to do with the Obama campaign. The creepiest part being the HSBC Ramallah link. I can just imagine where that money went to. As for the other two? Not that bright--I could easily have disputed many of their points. Which does not mean everything they said was wrong--factually or morally. The rest were pretty much pro-Israel or simply devoted to raising more money for Obama and what Obama's strategy looked like. Based on this exchange, it's purely ridiculous to talk about Obama's base being the far left. Two posters, and suddenly Obama hates Israel. You put Israel in any blog headline, and you're inviting comments. The two other commenters were not offensive in the least. They were arguing. They have a right to their point of view, and on some points, I really can't blame them for being angry. I don't agree with them, but they have every every right to be there--same as you and me. Obama's got a big tent. He shouldn't have to kick out pro-Palestinians.

- MOLLYSIMON

March 19, 2011 at 12:01am

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

"nr106646 wildboy "K2K, I fully agree that Jews should be able to live everywhere without fear of having their throats slit while they sleep. But you probably appreciate that the issue isn't that simple, " Wildboy should have the courage to take these five words to their logical conclusion. In these words he has shown a sentiment that I suspect is similar to the sentiment crystallised in the following quote found on one of those "Peace" loving blogs: http://jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com/2011/03/criticism-of-criticism-of-criticism-of.html#comment-167058617 "Even though I am of course appalled by the slaughter of babies, I am not going to condemn anything here, and I am certainly not going to shed a tear for the death of Mr. and Mrs. Fogel. Not because I, pace Reider, doubt or ignore their humanity, but because they have dedicated their very human lives to destroying others who have done them no harm. My world has lost little with their passing.(*)" And here is Norm Geras, explaining why: http://normblog.typepad.com/normblog/2011/03/from-the-letters-pages-to-itamar.html "The details of the murder are horrific and I won't dwell on them: suffice to say that three of the family's children, 10-year-old Yoav, 4-year-old Elad and 3-month-old Hadas, were stabbed to death. If this was an act of Palestinian terrorism, then it was just the sort of act that Ted Honderich, a well-known philosopher, argues to be morally justified, and was given space to argue in January in the letters pages of the Guardian. Not only that - following criticism for doing so, the Guardian readers' editor, Chris Elliott, defended the paper's decision. Elliott tried to obscure the issue by suggesting, as was not true, that Honderich was questioning the definition of terrorism. But in any case on behalf of the paper he, Elliott, took the view that this was 'a legitimate area of discussion', even if one shouldn't infer from publication of the letter that the Guardian endorsed Honderich's view. So, drawing out the connections that matter here: there are philosophers willing to defend the deliberate murder of children; and people in editorial positions on reputable newspapers willing to treat the justification for murdering them as 'a legitimate area of discussion'. Oh, MaryAnne, what do you think? Is it OK to butcher Jewish children (if they're settlers)? A bit much I reckon, Christopher; though it's a point of view I'm happy to allow room for at my weekly get-togethers. Ever thus. Some carry out the crime of murder; others justify them; yet others think it's an understandable point of view even if it isn't their own, or obscure it by means of euphemism or just looking away. If what Yaacov relays here is accurate, it's good to know that there are Palestinians in numbers who openly condemn the murder of children, displaying a moral consciousness superior to that of people who probably think themselves of great... sophistication."

- noga1

March 19, 2011 at 9:58am

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

You know, I can't help noticing that Marty slides easily from the discussion and the photos of this savage murder to calling those colleagues on a newspaper whose opinions he doesn't share "intellectual psychopaths." Thus, reading his piece again, I get to wondering if it's just possible, just faintly possible that he is trying to use the juxtaposition of the photos and the term "psychopaths" to create an associative connection between journalists with whom he disagrees and the vicious insane killer(s) of innocent children. Nah. Probably just another of those malicious and deliberate misreadings of Marty's innocent prose.

- ironyroad

March 19, 2011 at 7:46pm

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

It's quite an inspired descripition, to call Amira Hass, and Gideon Levy intellectual psychopaths. Akiva Eldar and Amos Harel, however, as far as I know, do not belong into that category. They are Far leftist, Israel-style for sure, but they are Zionists.

- noga1

March 19, 2011 at 11:36pm

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

The inference, then, is that any journalis who is not a Zionist is a psychopath and any journalist who is a Zionist cannot be a psychopath. Interesting point of view.

- roidubouloi

March 19, 2011 at 11:52pm

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

“It's quite an inspired descripition, to call Amira Hass, and Gideon Levy intellectual psychopaths.” I don’t know if “intellectual psychopath” is the right description, but there is some kind of psychopathology at work there. Amira had written to a colleague in Sri Lanka that if those whose “rights” they support ever took over they would be among the first who would be killed. And Gideon Levy has used terms like Nazi to describe the IDF in their attempt to defend Israel from Hamas’s almost daily bombardment of Israeli villages and towns in the Negev. This same champion of Hamas also said that he didn’t believe that the Palestinians would never institute democracy if they gained control of Israel. The problem with Peretz isn’t that he is wrong but that he tends not to offer detailed evidence for his judgments. There is plenty of evidence to support the charges against Haas and Levy.

- TomLessing

March 19, 2011 at 11:56pm

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

roidubouloi "The inference, then, is that any journalis who is not a Zionist is a psychopath and any journalist who is a Zionist cannot be a psychopath. Interesting point of view." This is a bizarre inference from a bizarre poster.

- Newly84

March 19, 2011 at 11:58pm

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

Let's render it for you in English, newly: "Amira Hass, and Gideon Levy intellectual psychopaths. Akiva Eldar and Amos Harel, however, as far as I know, do not belong into that category. They are Far leftist, Israel-style for sure, but they are Zionists." The inference is rather obvious if not entirely intended or understood by the author. I expect though that it is quite over your head. Most everything is.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 12:10am

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

Haaretz was founded as a leftist Zionist newspaper. The paper has lost its way since then. That's what the sentence means. He is speaking only of reporters on Haaretz and not about non Zionists in general. Reporters who condone murder are psychopaths. To you the murdered babies and their parents were less than human. That makes you bizarre and I am being polite here.

- Newly84

March 20, 2011 at 12:58am

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

Is there any evidence that the Ha'aretz columnists -- not specifically named by Marty, incidentally -- have condoned murder, Newly? He doesn't offer any, even in a general way, so I still say that the juxtaposition of the photos and the discussion of the killings to the term "intellectual psychopaths" looks awfully like an attempt to smear colleagues whose political opinions he doesn't share as morally on a level with the blood-soaked killers of innocent children.

- ironyroad

March 20, 2011 at 1:33am

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

ironyroad "Is there any evidence that the Ha'aretz columnists -- not specifically named by Marty, incidentally -- have condoned murder, Newly?" I don't know how familiar Ironyroad or Newly84 are with Haaretz, but I do read it regularly online. Peretz mentioned specifically Haas and Levy who are the most anti-Israel and pro Palestinan reporters there. (They are probably more anti Israel than pro Palestinian. They seem to hate Israei bourgeois culture and are always excusing Palestinian attacks on Israelis. You need to read the paper before you decide that Peretz' charges are without merit. There are good reporters there also and Peretz mentioned two fo them, there are others. Still, Haas abd Levy are read in Europe and elsewhere and have had a huge impact on leftist anti-Israel views of Israel. Ironyroad you seem to ask naive questions which are not that naive. They have implications of dishonesty without which are not there. You should familiarize yourself with the material you criticize, Ironyroad.

- TomLessing

March 20, 2011 at 6:32am

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

Here is another critic of Haaretz that looks at how it handles facts: Sunday, March 20, 2011 "Haaretz Obfuscates Matters" "A primary task of a high-level newspaper is to clarify complicated ongoing issues. Or at least, that's what you'd think. With newspapers such as the Guardian and Haaretz, however, the main priority is to bolster an ideological agenda, and facts are a mere handmaiden." http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/2011/03/haaretz-obfuscates-matters.html

- TomLessing

March 20, 2011 at 6:36am

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

Another view of Palestinian people's reaction to the ghastly murders: "Palestinians Condemning Murder" http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/2011/03/palestinians-condemning-murder.html "I've been reporting in the Palestinian territories for many years, and the responses I recorded today in Shchem (Nablus) really surprised me. They seem to show a substantial distance between the PA leadership and regular people. The leadership (he cites Abbas and others) are muttering a condemnation of the murder, mostly not in Arabic and not in front of their public, and then they're condemning Israeli settlements. Nothing new here. On the other hand, I went to Shchem today, and was very surprised. People on the street were willing to condemn the murder unequivocally, in Arabic and in Hebrew, with no embarrassment, in front of the camera, and even identify themselves. [He shows some examples]. I've been covering the Palestinian territories for years, but this I've never seen before. In the middle of town, publicly, people had no compunctions openly to condemn the murder of children."

- TomLessing

March 20, 2011 at 6:42am

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

The blog linked does not even begin to prove the claim that Haaretz is irresponsible and and ideologically driven simulacrum of journalism (you know, like Fox News), but it does have very interesting speculations (ruminations as the blogger refers to them) about the reasons for Israeli policy in East Jerusalem that would not be considered appropriate for a news article as they are as unsubstantiated as they are reasonable and interesting. The second blog, also interesting, contained a very depressing passage. The author speculates as to the reasons that Palestinians are willing, even publicly, to condemn the Itamar murders. Among the possible reasons he gives: "Settlements aren't as aggravating as we've endlessly been told. If there really is a sea change underway in the West Bank, it has started even though the Jewish settlements are still there." This is the bind in which Israel places the Palestinians. If, in anger over the settlements, they scream for violent revenge, Israelis insist that they cannot possibly be so incensed over "a few apartments" and therefore peace is impossible. If, on the other hand, they cease to scream for violent revenge and in fact publicly abhor heinous acts, then Israelis say that the settlements must not be so aggravating. In effect, Israelis are saying that the only way in which the Palestinians can effectively express their continued anger at being colonized in a manner that will be understood as such is to continue at least rhetorically to applaud violence, with the inevitable consequence that there is more violence which then frustrates progress toward peace. The Israeli paradigm for the Palestinians is that only violence will be heard and the absence of violence is to be understood as Palestinian acceptance of Israel's domination and/or of its territorial demands. That is very sad. It begins to sound as if Israel can only make peace when its provocations cease to provoke, and that the absence of a response to provocation is taken as license for more, a deadly cycle. Kind of like refusing to join a club that would have it as a member. Of course, I am but ruminating aloud on a blog, as does yaacovlozowick. This is not journalism and proves nothing about Fox News.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 8:04am

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

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/itamar-massacre-was-borne-on-a-wave-of-pa-incitement-1.349709 "Even the most basic journalistic urges aroused by the murder of a tiny infant are suppressed for the sake of upholding the last remnants of that delusional idee fixe, and in the (justified ) hope that the public's attention will be diverted from the political and moral significance of the murder to more recent events. The massacre in Itamar cannot be denied, but it is eminently possible to downplay its importance, or to argue (gently, gently ) that the victims brought it on themselves. Even as the bodies were still lying in their pools of blood, the propaganda machine had already begun casting the blame on the victims' surroundings. How perverted. How utterly vile. Heaven, beg mercy for them. "

- noga1

March 20, 2011 at 8:22am

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

What is not clear from noga's post is that the quoted passages are not about Haaretz but from the Haaretz piece that she links. Not at all consistent with the narrative of Haaretz depravity being advanced here. What is certain is that there will be no shortage of people willing to use these heinous murders "(gently, gently)" to advance a variety arguments in favor of their own political points of view, drawing conclusions and linkages not necessarily justified by the horrific deeds themselves but seeking to add veracity to their own claims by their abhorrence of these acts. I would include Martin Peretz among them.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 8:47am

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

"What is not clear from noga's post is that the quoted passages are not about Haaretz but from the Haaretz piece that she links." http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/itamar-massacre-was-borne-on-a-wave-of-pa-incitement-1.349709 Right. It's not at all clear from the provided link that contains the secret code "haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion" and that the first heading that jumps to the eye when opened is: Haaretz.com in very large letters. What is really not clear is why anyone would make such idiotic statements, especially someone who is always desperate to prove to all that he is incomparable when it comes to intelligence and savvy. It must be the semi professional politician in roi, that cannot resist the irresistible pull of the spin. (I guess now ironyroad will ride to the rescue by dropping in his two cents about the commenter's dishonesty in not pointing out the the link, which contains "haaretz.com/print-edition/" for anyone who has eyes and half a brain to see was deliberately deleted so as to distort the message.) ___________ As for the matter itself: Haaretz is a Left to left-of center publication and often makes its pages available to adverserial opinions. Thus you are likely to find articles even by VERY hawkish authors like Moshe Arens. I have not seen an attempt to smear Haaretz as such but the commenters have taken issue with the two journalists Amira Hass and Gideon Levy, who would make the Stephen Walt's "Righteous Jews" list (maybe they did, or maybe they were considered too deranged even by Walt's criterion). No one here suggested that they be sacked from their job. But I certainly think their type of journalism ought to be challenged relentlessly by anyone who even remotely cares about Israel's future.

- noga1

March 20, 2011 at 9:16am

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

It's understandable why many posters despise roid. He does his subjective analysis in order to come up with his preconceived conclusions. He doesn’t address the murder of the infants, he would rather spent time about someone who is “wrong” in his view and they are wrong because they don’t share his prejudices about the settlers who are to him non-human untermenschen who if they are killed it’s because they had it coming just for being there. This is the mindset of a racist antisemite.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 10:38am

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

"It's understandable why many posters despise roid." It's not so understandable, 106646, as you might think. There has to be a good reason why there are seemingly thoughtful and intelligent commenters who do not despise him. They even seem to admire, to court, and to solicit his opinions. He is heartened and encouraged by these posters to continue in his ways. So I'm thinking that he must be serving some purpose for these posters who do not mind at all what you find so understandably repellent. What would that purpose be?

- noga1

March 20, 2011 at 11:22am

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

I can think of nothing so honorable 106646 than to be despised by you and the rest of your crowd. To be anything other than despised by you would be evidence of moral depravity. Typical of the wretched excrement that is the sum and substance of your mind is the accusation that I think the victims of these hideous murders, including mere babies, "had it coming" for any reason at all. You are filthy, an intellectual vulture. Like the rest of the filthy amongst whom you dwell, you are as eager as can be to exploit these murders for political effect no matter how bizarre or strained the connection. You cannot wait to feed on their blood, can you? ________________ As for the puerile noga, Gargoyle of the Spine, I now see that we idiots are to understand that when Peretz says that "many" of the columnists at Haaretz are "intellectual psychopaths" that is not an indictment of Haaretz. And, given that noga will generally defend any raving of Peretz, no matter how odious, because he is a self-declared "lover of Israel," we should understand that the critical comment quoted by her was by Haaretz, not about Haaretz, a distinction that becomes clear only by reading the link. And, of course, when it is pointed out that this undermines the very indictment leveled by Peretz, noga is embarrassed that she might have contradicted him and hastens to assure us that Haaretz will EVEN print opinion contrary to its own intellectual pathology. _______________________ I don't know enough to judge Haaretz, but one can be certain that whenever Peretz speaks, he will immediately elicit all sorts of pathological display from his pathological admirers. Doesn't take long.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 11:33am

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

"What would that purpose be?" They agree with Roid's bigoted ravings but would never come up with it themselves.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 11:39am

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

"You should familiarize yourself with the material you criticize, Ironyroad." Well, indeed, Tom. I'm quite familiar with Marty's columns over the years. Thank you. However, if you are referring in a slightly awkward way to Ha'aretz, then your comment is fair -- I read occasional pieces in that paper, as well as in the JP. So I confess to a much more superficial acquaintanceship than with, say, the New York Times. Nevertheless, that said, the term "intellectual psychopaths," especially in juxtaposition to the material on the killings, is so extreme that I believe that the evidentiary responsibility -- if I may call it that -- is on the other foot. "Psychopath" is not, where I come from at least (don't know about you), a casual description that one might, as it were, take on trust.

- ironyroad

March 20, 2011 at 11:42am

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

I see it somewhat differently. As long as there is roi and his lunatic ravings around, they stand to look respectable, rational, reasonable, moderate, credible, preferable in a discussion. It;s like placing a not so good looking person next to a really ugly person. The first person appears so good looking.

- noga1

March 20, 2011 at 11:51am

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

Now we have both the Gargoyle of the Spine and the Vulture of the Spine. What a happy couple. The mutual admiration is as nauseating as can be. You couldn't get your head out of a carcass long enough 10646 to discern anything at all, let alone raving or bigotry. But your record of never having anything whatsoever to say other than an attack on another poster remains absolutely unblemished. It becomes ever clearer that you never express an opinion about anything, other than to attack other posters, because you are terrified that you will embarrass yourself if you do. Your terror is fully justified. You will.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 11:52am

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

Thank you for that explanation, noga. Now we know exactly what you are doing here. Your mission is to make the disgusting and the disgraceful look good by comparison. You are excellent at your work.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 11:59am

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

That's a reasonable point, Noga, but for any relative newcomer to TNR it's not going to be obvious that everyone always lines up on the same teams. For example, blackton's passionate arguments for intervention in Libya were not only passionate but suprising too, as they didn't seem quite to fit his known persona, as it were. If anyone had looked in, it would have seemed as if blackton's posts would always be the measure of vehemence and staking out an uncompromising position. What I mean is, there are different kinds of ugly/good-looking pairings in a board community of this size visible to different people. And good looks have something to do with inner vitality too (I always say when I look in the mirror).

- ironyroad

March 20, 2011 at 12:07pm

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

roidubouloi is both the vulture and the gargoyle. He pecks at dead babes and has his perpetual grin on his stony puss.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 12:07pm

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

"If anyone had looked in, it would have seemed as if blackton's posts would always be the measure of vehemence and staking out an uncompromising position." I am moved to profess absolute astonishment that you would, even for a fraction of a second, entertain any similarity between blackton and roi.

- noga1

March 20, 2011 at 12:27pm

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

Just keep lapping at their blood, 106646. It is you, not I, who cannot wait to exploit dead babies to score points and did so. I made no reference to them at all, for any purpose as I wouldn't dare foul their memory as you do. And you relish it. You want them dead just to feed your consuming hatreds, you putrid ghoul.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 12:34pm

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

A young friend of mine has remarked upon the rare occasion that this year St. Patrick's Day and Purim line up. I suggest that in deference to this important coincidence noga and ironyroad will declare an Jewish/Irish, absolutely temporary, truce. L'chaim!

- noga1

March 20, 2011 at 12:35pm

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

And I profess absolute astonishment that anyone would, for even a fraction of a second, entertain any similarity between the psychotic noga and a human being. Too far gone.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 12:36pm

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

Even the word l'chaim from your lips is a curse, noga. You are still a suicide Jew who worships death.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 12:41pm

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

"It is you, not I..." This Roid's answer to everything. The murdered babes are a fact, they are not something created by Martin Peretz. They are a fact that Roid can't deal with since he has been one of the posters dehumanizing the Israelis living on the West Bank. This is also Haaretz' point of view which is why Roid and Irony are defending that paper. Gargoyle Roid has got blood in his eyes, his mouth and on his fingertips.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 12:44pm

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

roidubouloi "Even the word l'chaim from your lips is a curse, noga. You are still a suicide Jew who worships death." This is another psychotic comment by gargoyle Roid. Noga isn't suicidal, Roid is suicidal. And Noga’s l’chaim sound like a curse only to the gargoyle roid whose ears echo his own curses.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 12:48pm

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

The fact that there are babies horribly murdered is quite distinct from the fact the you NR and Martin Peretz are disgustingly eager to exploit their deaths to make irrelevant political points. You are a putrid ghoul. Never have two thoroughly debased shells of human beings so deserved each other as you and noga. You and she are both death worshippers and carrion eaters. Nauseating and utterly repellent.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 1:09pm

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

"The fact that there are babies horribly murdered is quite distinct from the fact the you NR and Martin Peretz are disgustingly eager to exploit their deaths to make irrelevant political points." What horse shit. The one exploiting the murders are you and your psychotic friends at haaretz. Blaming the family for living in the West Bank and calling them suicidal. You feed excuses to murderers and these words apply to you; you Roid, and Haaretz are death worshippers and carrion eaters. Nauseating and utterly repellent.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 1:33pm

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

None of your mirroring of what I say (as you have not the wit to think up anything to say) and none of the dust and smoke that you are hurling into the air obscures the fact that there are exactly two people on this thread, Martin Peretz and you, exploiting these murders to make irrelevant political points. No one here has blamed the victims nor called them anything other than you. You are who you are, NR, as you make abundantly clear to anyone who can read: A putrid ghoul lapping at the blood of martyrs in your pathetic efforts to score idiotic political points. Did I once call you a moron? Far too generous. You are just slime.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 2:15pm

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

Mirroring of what you say? Everything you say mirrors what others have said. Your insults are just words and not original at that. At least Peretz tells it as he sees, and he sees straighter than a hypocrite like you could ever know. All you do is borrow “analysis” form other leftist psychos and use insults which are mere words, and poor words at that: “Did I once call you a moron? Far too generous. You are just slime.” Gee, next you will say “Did I once call you a slime? Far too generous. You are just a moron.” This is supposed to wound? This is what you are: a coward and an impotent Gestapo like character (along with your double Icarus) who would like to exterminate any poster who holds opinions contrary to yours. You excuse gruesome murders because it satisfies your vanity. You have made it clear that you hold the murdered children and their parents responsible because they were “living illegally on foreign soil.” By your standards any illegal immigrant anywhere in the world can be murdered with impunity and are the ones who asked for it. You see the Israelis on the West Bank as “inhuman scum.” This is what you are, and what you stand for, and no amount of childish insults will ever change that. The rest is just words.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 2:46pm

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

I am waiting for another round of trash posts by the funny gargoyle, mad roid.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 2:51pm

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

You're right, nr, slime really is far too generous for. But there are no words in English that I know of adequate to describe what a cretinous toad you are. Words fail. I am, however, heartened that you are at the point where you must invent out of whole cloth the bare, unadorned lie that anyone here, including me, has suggested that the victims, including mere children, bear any moral responsibility for their own deaths. No one has said anything of the kind or anything that might possibly be so interpreted. You are depraved and completely debased. But then, you always were. Now it is patent. Even you now are compelled to recognize that you have nothing with which to defend your execrable behavior here other than lies. As for scum, the only scum in this picture is you, you miserable parasite.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 3:08pm

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

Anyone who says there are mitigating circumstances for the Itamar murderers is suggesting that because the Fogel family was living outside their nation's internationally recognized boundaries, their deaths, while tragic, were not unjustified. By the same logic, Americans would be justified in slaughtering Mexican families living in the United States illegally. The irony, of course, is that the condemnations of the settlements echo from the same end of the political spectrum that howls when police so much as ask suspected Mexican nationals for their papers. The only commonality here is a hatred of white people.

- drheingold

March 20, 2011 at 3:09pm

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

Well, nr, you have found just the company you need here.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 3:17pm

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

"because the Fogel family was living outside their nation's internationally recognized boundaries," Well, there is no internationally recognized boundary between Israel and what would be Palestine if Palestinians were interested in their own statehood.

- noga1

March 20, 2011 at 3:26pm

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

Any one's company is more welcome than yours. I don't take to people who excuse murders. Go ahead an insult me some more. It will show people what you are really made of.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 3:32pm

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

Noga, I didn't realize we were at war! But I'm all for truces, especially one jointly blessed by Saint Patrick and Saint . . . er, do you guys have saints? Oh, prophets. Well, they'll do. And I didn't suggest any "similarity" between blackton and roid. I just said that it's not all permanent and unchangeable line-ups and some people are more passionate on Issue A than on Issue B. NR, you know what? It's a great idea to actually read the comments people post before commenting on them yourself. I am not defending Ha'aretz but asking what the basis might be for the extreme and over-the-top deployment, by Marty, of the term "psychopaths" which seems (as a result of a presumably deliberate juxtaposition) to go beyond expressing even strong disagreement with opposing political positions to suggest that columnists writing in a national daily are on some kind of moral par with those who commit premeditated killings of young children and their parents.

- ironyroad

March 20, 2011 at 3:43pm

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

"I don't take to people who excuse murders." says the carrion eater NR10646. But you do enjoy making what use you can of vile murders, don't you? As we can all read right here. irony has just patiently explained to you again the difference between questioning Peretz's lurid writing and florid accusations and defending Haaretz or, for that matter, defending murder. But it is all the same to you. You can no more than Peretz distinguish murder from holding an opinion you don't like. That's what makes you a moron, NR. Do you really think it is possible to insult you? I wish I knew how. I cannot think of anything awful to say about you that is not the literal truth. That makes insulting you extremely difficult. But any suggestion as to some wretched, disgusting, vile characterization of you that would be undeserved would be welcome. I confess, I cannot think of a one.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 3:58pm

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

This atrocity was greeted in Israel with horror and with resignation: It's not the first one and unfortunately will not be the last. Just like other such atrocities commited by Palestinian against Israeli civilians it is usually justified by Palestinian sympathizers as being a result of occupation/frustration/colonization/impatience/road blocks/etc. Anything but the real reason, antisemitism, barbarism and Judeophobia of Palestinians in general and the Islamists in particular. The destruction of Israel and elimination of the Jews from the Middle East is never mentioned by those in whose eyes Palestinians can do no wrong, like some on this blog. Those who point out the murderous character of the Palestinian "resistance" are "exploiting their deaths". In his book "Terror and Liberalism" Paul Berman touches on this issue in reference to Palestinian atrocities against Israeli civilians. The issue of Haaretz's , Gideon Levy and Amira Haas and other correspondent's and editor's anti Israeli positions is old and painful. Haaretz is an old institution in Israel, however, over the years it moved away from the traditional leftist positions,(labor, the working classes, social justice, etc.) and focused on one issue only: the Palestinians. Nothing else matters, no other issues are even entertained. Haaretz's circulation today is miniscule, it's influence minimal with the exception of foreign "chattering classes". As Remnick's toadying description of Haaretz in New Yorker shows, Haaretz is a bastion of illusion. Ben Dror Yemini described the dishonesty and mendacity of Gideon Levy in his response to Levy's interview in the Guardian. It should be a required text for anybody concerned with veracity and truthfullness of media. Hebrew: http://www.nrg.co.il/app/index.php?do=blog&encr_id=f2b4c1b55be76d1e6d7b777256ea0370&id=1725 Translation: https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1gPg475n2hm0aLc0sjVk26OkXWuilfSb7bX2zeNU9C2w

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

March 20, 2011 at 4:01pm

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

Sorry, it's not the "Guardian", its the "Independent". Two sides of the same coin.

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

March 20, 2011 at 4:03pm

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

"Those who point out the murderous character of the Palestinian "resistance" are "exploiting their deaths"." No, those who attempt to attach those deaths to various political opinions that they don't like or to the people who hold those opinions are exploiting their deaths. I do not recall anyone here questioning the heinousness of these murders. But please correct me if I am wrong by directing my attention to the posts that do. Yet, it is quite easy to find here efforts to associate these murders with opinions or people that Peretz or certain posters here don't like. Indeed, the will without compunction invent things never uttered here for that very purpose.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 4:19pm

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

roidubouloi is still here. The carrion eating Gestapo man says he hates it here, but can't stop posting. This is his psychopathology. Justifying murderers is what he does best.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 4:35pm

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

And disseminating baseless lies is what you do best, NR, other than babbling incoherently. We have in noga Goebbels little girl. And now we have in you Goebbels little boy. The Gargoyle of the Spine and the Vulture of the Spine locked in hideous embrace. Have I ever said that I hate it here? Not a bit. It is a public service to wipe the floor of excrement like you.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 4:42pm

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

Peretz shows the murderous face of the Palestinian "resistance", it's revanchist character, it's extremism. He does not "attempt to attach those deaths to various political opinions that [he] don't like". No, no one is "questioning the heinousness of these murders" but their condemnation is just as hollow as the condemnation by the Palestinian leaders. Yes, they did not need this attack, yes this attack was not in the "interests of the Palestinian people, yes, it is easier to de-legitimize Israel in Berkeley and in Yale and in Harvard. However the incitement did not stop for one moment. Not for a second. It continuously pollutes the airwaves and the Internet. From body parts harvesting to GPS equipped sharks.

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

March 20, 2011 at 4:48pm

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

Is this what you mean, in this context makover, by Peretz "showing the murderous face of the Palestininan 'resistance', it's revanchist charcter, it's extremism." "I have a different view of Ha’aretz than Remnick. In fact, I think that many of its columnists are intellectual psychopaths. From this cohort you have to exclude Aluf Benn and Ari Shavit. But if you like grim fantasies all you have to do is read Amira Hass, Akiva Elder, or Gideon Levy, now doing honest reporting from Tokyo, or Amos Harel. If you want one reason for why the international press is so hostile to Israel, it is because the only paper foreign journalists read is Ha’aretz in English. It is an exemplar of Jewish self-hate, full of ridicule, righteousness, and loathing." I take it that Haaretz is part of the murderous, revanchist, extremist Palestinians resistance.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 4:56pm

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

roidubouloi the Gestapo man speaks: "Have I ever said that I hate it here? It is a public service to wipe the floor of excrement..." Yes, rolling around in excrement is what you love best. You are in your element.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 5:03pm

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

And disseminating baseless nonsense is what you do best, roidubouloi, other than babbling incoherently.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 5:05pm

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

We have in roidubouloi a gestapo man. The Gargoyle and the Vulture of the TNR.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 5:08pm

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

If anyone here were like Goebbels Roid would embrace him as a brother, the Gestapo man.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 5:09pm

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

Did Peretz said that "Haaretz is part of the murderous, revanchist, extremist Palestinians resistance"? Either, I must have missed that or you need to get some reading comprehension classes.

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

March 20, 2011 at 5:09pm

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

NR, here are a couple of good ones of which you can make excellent use: "I know you are, but what am I?" "I am rubber, you are glue. Whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you." These will allow you to make your same kindergarten points with greater poetry and, dare I say, originality. It's past your bedtime junior. It is always past your bedtime.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 5:12pm

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

No, makover, Peretz chose to weave his ruminations about the murders with an attack on "intellectual psychopaths" at Haaretz. I think this is properly characterized as attempting, viciously, to associate these murders with political opinions with which Peretz disagrees. Else, what is this passage doing here. You decided to characterize Peretz's largely incoherent ramblings as making some statement about Palestinian resistance. This, of course, gives Peretz far more credit for coherence than he is due. It is then appropriate to inquire whether Peretz's attack on Haaretz is part of what you think of as the characterization of Palestinian resistance. (The rhetorical device used is called "sarcasm." If you are unfamiliar with it, then I am afraid it is your reading comprehension that necessarily suffers.) If it is not, as you wish us to believe, then what is it doing here? I would say exploiting these heinous murders in order to tar political enemies. Wouldn't you? But then, that's the sort of chap that Peretz is. Just the sort of fellow you so admire. I don't think that Haaretz is the reason it is easy to demonize Israel in the West. I think the reason is that the face that Israel shows to the world is so much like that of Peretz.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 5:19pm

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

The reason Haaretz is justifiably in Peretz's article is that Haaretz is able to indentify only with Palestinian pain. Israeli pain and suffering is for Haaretz an evidence of Israeli sin. Similarly in in this case Haaretz criticized only the publication of the pictures but none of the atrocity itself. Haaretz is not the only reason for demonization of Israel. But Haaretz is a great contributor to this demonization through it's lies, distortions and propaganda. It's elitist ethos and a continuous anti Israeli tone makes Guardian and the Nation feel almost Zionist.

- rmakover@swbell.net-OLD

March 20, 2011 at 5:33pm

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

"It's elitist ethos and a continuous anti Israeli tone makes Guardian and the Nation feel almost Zionist." makover: I think you are overcooking the goose. I'm with you and Ben Dror Yemini on Gideon levy but not in this statement. The Guardian remains the leading antisemitic publication and no paper in Israel or elsewhere in the civilized world compares to it. http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/2009/feb/26/caryl-churchill-seven-jewish-children-play-gaza Though, I have to say, there are moments when I'm pretty shocked at how extreme Haaretz editors can be: "Friday, December 28, 2007 -- Ha'aretz editor David Landau told US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice at a recent private dinner that Israel "wants to be raped by the US" and needed more vigorous American intervention to resolve Middle East conflicts, according to a report in the New York Jewish Week. Landau made the remarks at a confidential gathering of Israeli guests at the home of US Ambassador to Israel Richard Jones on September 10, the Jewish Week reported on its …"

- noga1

March 20, 2011 at 6:16pm

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

"...and some people are more passionate on Issue A than on Issue B." blackton is a passionate DECENT poster. roi suffers from a passion of an altogether different dimension.

- noga1

March 20, 2011 at 6:20pm

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

roidubouloi is ridiculously insane and ignorant of history. He calls some posters Goebbels without realizing that the Nazi had more in common with him than with the people he cites. They both shared a hatred of Jews and believed that if they were killed it’s because they were living in the “wrong place.” They both believed that any one especially Jews who opposed them was inhuman and should be exterminated. The list goes on.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 6:31pm

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

makover "The reason Haaretz is justifiably in Peretz's article is that Haaretz is able to indentify only with Palestinian pain." Peretz did a good job explaining in his post why Haaretz is a contemptible paper that publishes some psychopaths. People who read Haaretz or are familiar with its publication history know that. Others either don't now or don't want to know. If they do know they don't care. Roid is a Jew hater and like Goebels would blame Jews for whatever is done to them.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 6:35pm

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

"...and some people are more passionate on Issue A than on Issue B." "blackton is a passionate DECENT poster. roi suffers from a passion of an altogether different dimension." This is the truce? I never compared roid and blackton in any way, Noga. I never even mentioned roid. YOU are the one who has brought them into the discussion as a joint pairing, in two posts so far, but you keep sniping at me as if I did. I didn't, however -- a small and provable fact that I believed, in my innocence, might mean something. Apparently not.

- ironyroad

March 20, 2011 at 7:11pm

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

noga: 'As long as there is roi and his lunatic ravings around, they stand to look respectable, rational, reasonable, moderate, credible, preferable in a discussion. It;s like placing a not so good looking person next to a really ugly person. The first person appears so good looking." ironyroad: "That's a reasonable point, Noga, but for any relative newcomer to TNR it's not going to be obvious that everyone always lines up on the same teams. For example, blackton's passionate arguments for intervention in Libya were not only passionate but suprising too, as they didn't seem quite to fit his known persona, as it were. If anyone had looked in, it would have seemed as if blackton's posts would always be the measure of vehemence and staking out an uncompromising position." noga: "I am moved to profess absolute astonishment that you would, even for a fraction of a second, entertain any similarity between blackton and roi." ironyroad: "And I didn't suggest any "similarity" between blackton and roid. I just said that it's not all permanent and unchangeable line-ups and some people are more passionate on Issue A than on Issue B." noga: "blackton is a passionate DECENT poster. roi suffers from a passion of an altogether different dimension." ironyroad: "I never compared roid and blackton in any way," etc etc etc _______________ You must excuse me if I thought, wrongly and stupidly, that we were talking about the same issue here. It looks that somewhere in this conversation you took off in another direction while I was still dwelling on the initial one. What can I say, you are far too shrewd and clever for me to keep up with ... (Like I said, a temporary truce)

- noga1

March 20, 2011 at 7:38pm

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

As if, noga, mired in your masochistic dementia you could possibly discern decent from indecent. You and your Nazi admirer, the blood-lapping NR106646. What a tragedy for Israel. How can there be hope for it when it is defended by sick savages such as the likes of you two? How could there not be Jew haters when you purport to speak for Jews and deploy against other Jews the tactics of Goebbels? That requires the world to discern that you are not representative of us. But given the manner in which you belligerent zealots deploy your endless lies and smear campaigns to cow both decent Jews and decent non-Jews into silence, that is a tall order. What did the State of Israel and the Jewish people do to deserve you? You are worse than the anti-Semites because you destroy from within. If there is even a shred of sympathy in this world for the plight of the Jews, you are determined to extinguish it, and you do a very good job. Don't expect sanity from noga, irony. Not in this world. Not in this lifetime.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 7:40pm

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

If you want to understand why Israel is increasingly regarded in the civilized world as an ugly mistake, makover, you don't need to look to Haaretz. Look here. Look at Peretz, noga, NR106646. They are your nightmare. Unless of course you believe with Netanyahu that all that Israel requires is its own might. In which case, it matters not that these hideous defenders of Israel, and other right-wing beasts like them, repel the whole world, does it?

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 7:45pm

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

I thought we were having the same conversation too, Noga, but to have the same conversation doesn't mean taking on the other's exact references. I deliberately wanted to avoid mentioning roid -- mainly because The Blackton File has been quite interesting and unusual this last week -- so I was especially taken aback and frustrated because you kept saying that I had made a suggestion of similarity that I had intentionally gone out of my way to not make. Temporary in the sense of still on, or temporary in the sense of just ended?

- ironyroad

March 20, 2011 at 8:01pm

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

The "civilized world" also managed to kill 6 million Jews, but never mind.

- TomLessing

March 20, 2011 at 8:05pm

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

Oh sure, I am responsible for all the antisemitism in the world. Not Ahmadinejad, not Hamas, or the Muslim Brotherhood and not Stalin or the Nazis, not Haaretz, not Roid and his ilk. Just me and Peretz. What power I have.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 8:07pm

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

None-the-less, the civilized world is the best we have. Tragically, we have suicide Jews such as noga who are determined that Israel not be a part of it, that Israel become a pariah. And when they are done with their work, then we can expect the end of Israel. Contrary to Netanyahu's reactionary bluster, it will not survive in isolation.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 8:09pm

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

Yes, you are responsible NR. Because it is impossible not to despise a ghoul such as you and difficult even for people who know better to remember that, no matter how much you purport to speak for the Jews, you don't. You are just a sick, twisted vulture, a feeder on death, who, like noga the gargoyle, justifies his disgusting behavior with his bottomless sense of victimhood, as if the martyrdom of other Jews allows you to be the demented goon that you are. But one more way in which you are a parasite.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 8:13pm

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

"... so I was especially taken aback and frustrated because you kept saying that I had made a suggestion of similarity that I had intentionally gone out of my way to not make." Does it happen to you a lot that people misunderstand your intentions, ironyroad? Or is it just me that doesn't "get" you? Just wondering.

- noga1

March 20, 2011 at 8:18pm

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

THe ghoul Roid posts the first thing that comes into his sick head.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 8:20pm

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

roidubouloi "Yes, you are responsible NR. Because it is impossible not to despise a ghoul such as you..." So you count yourself among the antisemites? That's what I thought. Roid you may not know this but you are beyond insane and it's a lot of fun keeping you insanely angry. You must think that I am your father. What else could explain such rage?

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 8:26pm

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

now that I have caught up on this thread (thanks TomLessing!), now returning to reading Timothy Snyder's "Bloodlands; Europe between Hitler and Stalin", trying to view the murder of fourteen million people between Berlin and Moscow, not as "the political geography of empires but from the human geography of victims". a concept that might tip into all sorts of other conflicts.

- K2K

March 20, 2011 at 8:33pm

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

Well, I'm almost afraid to answer that, Noga. Let me put it this way, other people have evaluated my writing for lack of clarity (before editing and revising, of course) before, so it's not an unknown criticism. But on TNR there seems to be a particular difficulty that my comments create now and again for your and my particular communication traffic. I haven't experienced it with other regular posters. I don't think so, at least. Once I was at a meeting when someone tried to explain something and nobody got it. Eventually (after everyone was practically shouting "yes but why?") she realized what she wasn't saying because she had just assumed that everyone was already clued in. Sometimes I feel like her. Why didn't you answer my query about the truce?

- ironyroad

March 20, 2011 at 8:37pm

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

106646, don't feed roi's habit. There is no insult you can say that he can't say better. He has been trained to do so and he thrives on these exchanges. Already he is successfully choking this thread which was supposed to be about the murdered family. ________________ From a Turkish journalist: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/turkish-columnist-slams-erdogan-for-ignoring-itamar-attack-1.349764 "Bekdil quoted yet another instance in which Erdogan reprimanded Israel for its alleged war crimes from June of last year: "I am speaking to them in their own language. The sixth commandment says 'thou shalt not kill'. Did you not understand?" "I'll say [it] again. I say in English 'you shall not kill'. Did you still not understand? So I'll say to you in your own language. I say in Hebrew 'Lo Tirtzakh'," he said in a televised speech to supporters of his Islamist-leaning AK Party. However, in his column released earlier this week, the Turkish journalist, addressing Erdogan wrote: "Most predictably, we have not heard Mr. Erdoğan saying 'You shall not kill' in Arabic, and we probably never will." "That’s hardly surprising since we have never heard Mr. Erdoğan speaking 'indiscriminately' in the past against the killing of children and defenseless people in Itamar, or elsewhere in Israel – for Saturday’s attack in Itamar was not the first of its kind," Bekdil added. Quoting a statement by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, regarding his hopes for a "bright day" without Israel, the Turkish columnist said ironically: "With five 'Jooos' having disappeared from earth after the Itamar attack, that bright day must be arriving sooner." "I am still curious, however, about what rank the 3-month old Israeli 'soldier' held," Bekdil said, adding: "Captain? Lieutenant colonel? Certainly too young to be a general."

- noga1

March 20, 2011 at 8:41pm

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

"Why didn't you answer my query about the truce?" I thought you said you hadn't realized we were at war ...? Oh Ok, I'm prevaricating. Because I'm wondering how long it can hold, especially if, as you just said, you think I am particularly prone to not understanding your comments. I don't suppose it could be the other way around, eh?

- noga1

March 20, 2011 at 8:45pm

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

Supposed to be about the murdered family, my ass noga. What it is about is you bunch of sick, twisted, demented ghouls taking the earliest opportunity to exploit the tragedy to attack political opinions you hate. You couldn't care less about some poor murdered baby. What you care about is feeding your own narcissistic sense of victimhood, and you are ready and willing to use dead children and their dead parents to do it. And lucky you! You have in NR106646 discovered another poor soul as diseased as you. You can now proceed together to perfume yourselves with anti-Semitism. ______________ I understand, NR606646, that you are deeply intellectually challenged. However, the concept is very simple. Despising you because you are a despicable, blood-sucking parasite who feeds off the martyrdom of Jews is not the same thing as hating Jews. Not a bit. You are your uniquely execrable self and to fail to despise such as you would be a form of moral depravity. Any decent person should despise you. You of course wish to equate this with hatred of Jews, and that is a tragedy for us. Because there are many who will not pause to recognize that you are not representative of the Jewish people. You are one peculiarly sick wretch (although, alas, not without company). It is unfortunate in the extreme that ignominy should attach to us because of you and even more unfortunate that you actively cultivate and seek to demean the Jewish people in this way.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 9:45pm

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

Speaking of irony, I vividly recall you, noga, insisting that you will not add one more straw to the pyre being built around Israel. And yet you do nothing but.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 9:48pm

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

Hate filled pathological roidubouloi was told once that pretending to be an intellect makes him an Übermensch. Gives him the right to exterminate all lower life forms. He believed it. The dumb Kopf.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 10:10pm

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

I bet he will stay up all night to make sure he gets in the last word, the pathological loser.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 10:10pm

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

Gotta love morons like nr who are desperate to have the last word and so try to bait others into refraining from saying anything further. Noga likes this game too. No matter what crime you may have committed or may yet commit, nr, extermination would be much too merciful for you. A full lifetime spent being you is a far more horrible punishment. Surely you could not endure being you if you were not in fact a moron. Thus, we see that the mercy of the Almighty works in unexpected ways.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 10:35pm

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

"I don't suppose it could be the other way around, eh?" Of course it could be the other way around, and I'm sure it often is. That's why I couched my response in a way that I took responsibility for the problem myself rather than slinging it into your lap. Didn't you notice? May I say though, as you've opened up the issue, that it's only a few days since you responded to some comments I made about ambiguity by saying in effect that you write the way you write and you weren't damn well planning to take my unwanted advice anytime soon? You seemed to think I was trying to patronize you (I wasn't), and I think I might have taken on board a similar criticism, rather than rejecting it out of hand (I've sort of had to do that, in the academic milieu). I say "might" as I can be as sensitive in that area as anyone. In any case, I don't see it as all on one side, that's for sure.

- ironyroad

March 20, 2011 at 10:41pm

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

Roid is back, for one last nasty word, the sick Rottweiler.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 10:42pm

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

Yup, this is fun. I have a dumb, fat fuck like you on the hook and I can just keep jerking the line. It's easy and it's free.

- roidubouloi

March 20, 2011 at 11:11pm

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

Roid is back, for one last nasty word, the psycho Rottweiler.

- nr106646

March 20, 2011 at 11:29pm

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

Seems you stayed up late to have the last word, eh NR106646? Such a child.

- roidubouloi

March 21, 2011 at 6:55am

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

Gotta love morons like nr who are desperate to have the last word and so try to bait others into refraining from saying anything further. Noga likes this game too.

- roidubouloi

March 21, 2011 at 6:55am

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

Sorry, posted only the punchline, not the joke. Here it is. 03/20/2011 - 10:10pm EDT | nr106646 I bet he will stay up all night to make sure he gets in the last word, the pathological loser.

- roidubouloi

March 21, 2011 at 6:57am

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

"saying in effect that you write the way you write and you weren't damn well planning to take my unwanted advice anytime soon?" What I said was that I'd rather stick to my own style and thank you for the advice. I happen to like my style, by which I mean that I try to translate into words what I really feel and think at the moment I'm writing. It's a rather straightforward style in most cases (when serious issues are discussed) because I wouldn't want to run the risk of being misunderstood. The only problem is that often you (and others) can't really accept this very simple principle of mine. You think I have ulterior motives and hidden intentions, or whatever. So with these suspicions, whether conscious or not I cannot tell, you tend to DISunderstand my comments and apply to them meanings that are not there. Maybe you are just incapable of not searching for subtexts; it can't be that simple, there must be more to it than meets the eye. And all that aside from the fact that you can be as mulish as I am if not more so whenever when I openly criticize something you wrote. By "mulish" I mean, quick to throw accusations that should not be lightly made between friends (such as that I misrepresented your comments), even when they disagree. Having said that, I will not deny that I tend to over analyze everything and this can be rather tedious and unfruitful. Just last week at the last minutes in class I asked why they think Orwell's protagonists always have some visible flaw, like a birthmark on the fact, or a dwarfish stature, or ugly varicose veins or an ulcer. By that point everyone was so fed up with my minute questions that they just yelled at me: Not everything has to have a meaning! I left it that that, of course since the class had come to an end but you can be sure that I will bring it up again at some point until they get it right ...

- noga1

March 21, 2011 at 7:17am

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

10:29pm is not late for most people, roi.

- noga1

March 21, 2011 at 7:21am

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

You miss the point, noga. Quelle surprise.

- roidubouloi

March 21, 2011 at 9:23am

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

At least I have a point, missed or not. What have you got?

- noga1

March 21, 2011 at 12:33pm

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

I agree that I might look for some subtext or whatever when all I'm doing is missing the plain meaning in front of me. I'll certainly stipulate to that. But sometimes context/framing can be genuinely confusing. Thinking of someone saying apologetically "Sorry! -- the Disunderstanding was entirely on my side!" suddenly makes me start laughing. Maybe it's a needed neologism. As to mulishness. Well, ok. But the mule in me comes out e.g. if I find myself quoted to make me say something I obviously didn't mean. Friendship should survive a touch of honest conflict now and then. That said, I don't claim that it must be intentional and in most cases I can determine that it wasn't.

- ironyroad

March 21, 2011 at 1:35pm

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

"Friendship should survive a touch of honest conflict now and then" "There are fair-weather friends and foul-weather friends, but the strangest friends of all are those who display their commitment to you only when they publicly criticise you."

- noga1

March 21, 2011 at 5:24pm

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

Give over, Noga. It's never been "only," on either side.

- ironyroad

March 21, 2011 at 6:07pm

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

I'm not arguing with you, ironyroad. Just ruminating.

- noga1

March 21, 2011 at 6:46pm

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

Aha! -- I might be visiting Rumania over the summer. Oh, "ruminating." Sorry.

- ironyroad

March 21, 2011 at 7:02pm

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

Noga, believe it or not, I loved your line about the Arab League being like a bad slot machine. Wrote that over on the Libya is just about Libya thread.

- MOLLYSIMON

March 21, 2011 at 8:53pm

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

"03/21/2011 - 6:57am EDT | roidubouloi Sorry, posted only the punchline, not the joke. Here it is. 03/20/2011 - 10:10pm EDT | nr106646 I bet he will stay up all night to make sure he gets in the last word, the pathological loser." The asshole not only stayed up half the night when he got to sleep in the wee hours of the morning he got up around 6 am to post his "triumphant nonsense."

- nr106646

March 21, 2011 at 11:26pm

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

http://engageonline.wordpress.com/2011/03/20/violence-against-israel-advocate-during-iaw/ "Violence against Israel advocate during IAW March 20, 2011 — Mira Vogel Israel Apartheid Week is an unconvincing masquerade of an annual Palestine solidarity event which aims to indoctrinate students against Israel. It is known for violence and threats against Jews and Israelis on campuses, and a growing number of voices are calling it part of the problem. The Jewish Chronicle reports that a member of Stand With Us was physically attacked as he challenged the delegitimation of Israel at a public event. No less worrying was the reported victim-blaming reaction of SOAS’ student union president and security guards: “There was a struggle and the university security guards came out. A number of other people then began to say we shouldn’t be there. The president of the union came out and said we had made our point. A policeman strongly advised us to leave.” Ro’i Goldman, who plans to study in the UK next year, said he was very shocked by the experience. But Tony Coren said he was not shocked, but was angry that the university authorities had indicated that by their very presence, the Stand With Us protesters had possibly provoked the attack. Dean Gold, the alleged victim, was taken to University College Hospital.” You see Hanzala a lot at these events – I’m picturing him watching Dean Gold get bitten, wishing Palestinians had better advocates. In Canada, where the atmosphere around IAW has been fraught, University of Winnipeg President Lloyd Axworthy has responded with a programme of events and activities to give the Israel-Palestine conflict “a full and fair hearing as opposed to a one-sided hearing”: “We felt the most effective way to respond to Israel Apartheid Week was to organize a series of opportunities in March for Arab-Jewish dialogue [that is] respectful, more open and fair” and promotes a greater understanding of the issues involved.” That’s what university campuses are for."

- Newly84

March 21, 2011 at 11:59pm

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

“Celebrate Palestine” http://hurryupharry.org/2011/03/21/celebrate-palestine/ "And what better way can there be to celebrate Palestine, than by biting a Jew on the face?"

- Newly84

March 22, 2011 at 12:02am

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

Thanks for the links. I am not surprised that leftist Universities should endorse violence against Jews.

- nr106646

March 22, 2011 at 12:23am

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

Tell the truth, nr, are you one of those right-wing nuts as more and more it appears you are? Or are you just a garden variety moron? Or are you both at once? Yes, that must be it.

- roidubouloi

March 22, 2011 at 12:42am

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

Roid is one of those left wing nuts who keep dehumanizing Israeli and Jews who support their right to live. He seems very nonplused by the vicious attacks on Jewish protesters just as he was nonplused by the murders of Jewish babies in Israel. I take it for granted that he is a psychotic moron, his posts show that to anyone with any sense. No need to repeat that every time.

- nr106646

March 22, 2011 at 5:19pm

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

So, Newly84, what's Hasbra?

- MOLLYSIMON

March 22, 2011 at 7:39pm

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

http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2011/03/breaking-explosion-at-jerusalem-central.html "Breaking: Explosion at Jerusalem Central Bus Station; " 31 wounded, one dead. Someone notice a pattern emerging?

- noga1

March 23, 2011 at 12:39pm

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

http://daledamos.blogspot.com/2011/03/jerusalem-bus-bombing-and-last-11-days.html " * March 12: An Israeli couple and their three children are stabbed to death in their sleep in Itamar. A Palestinian terror group claimed responsibility for the attack. * March 15: A ship delivering arms for Palestinian terrorists to fire into Israel is intercepted in the Mediterranean. * March 19: Palestinian terrorists fire 50 mortars and rockets into southern Israel in just 24 hours. * March 23: Terrorists blow-up a bus in Jerusalem." "March 7: J'lem sanitation worker loses arm to garbage-bag pipe bomb Police say small pipe bomb placed in garbage bag in Gilo neighborhood; cops believe incident is capital's first terrorist attack in a year."

- noga1

March 23, 2011 at 12:46pm

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

From post: 03/23/2011 - 12:46pm EDT | noga1How does one distinguish between a spate and a pattern? How do we know whether the timing of these events were coordinated? Or merely coincidental? * March 15: A ship delivering arms for Palestinian terrorists to fire into Israel is intercepted in the Mediterranean. * March 19: Palestinian terrorists fire 50 mortars and rockets into southern Israel in just 24 hours. These does not fit into the pattern that may be assumed by Noga. Though it may indicate the Palestinians are gearing up. You know, because they're mad. And maybe this is part of what's pissing them off: "In response to the attack, Israel defiantly announced new plans to build up to 500 new homes in settlements located in major blocs next to Israel. Israel expects to keep these blocs, home to the vast majority of Israel’s 300,000 West Bank settlers, under any future peace deal." Maybe arresting every male in the vicinity of Itamar is pissing them off: "During the five-day curfew in the village of Awarta, south of Nablus, the Israeli military raided homes and detained around 300 people, the youngest 14 years old." Maybe they got mad because an innocent Palestinian man in the West Bank was recently shot dead in his bed (strafed would be more like it), no questions asked, no identification made, during an assasination raid (way to go most moral military in the world! Way to go democracy) because he was mistaken for someone else." The Itamar murders were despicable. There is no excuse. But will anyone in Israel take any responsibility for Palestinian hostility? Is Israel blameless? Completely innocent, without blood on her own hands?

- MOLLYSIMON

March 23, 2011 at 9:07pm

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

“After the outbreak of WWII, Poland was partitioned again, by Hitler and Stalin. The paranoid Stalin, saw in Poles his potential enemies, and actively persecuted them. Hundreds of Thousand of Poles were sent to Siberia. During this period, many Jews, that for long times were denied employment opportunities, welcomed the change in government and became functionaries of the new regime. After the Hitler's attack on Russia, and the onset of the Holocaust, the Poles created a myth, that is still alive today, that the Jews are responsible for Stalin's persecution of the Poles. It was a convenient myth, it enabled the majority of the Poles to stand by and watch the destruction of the Jewish community, waiting to inherit the Jewish properties.”

- NR1043890

March 23, 2011 at 10:32pm

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

“The Itamar murders were despicable. There is no excuse. But will anyone in Israel take any responsibility for Palestinian hostility? Is Israel blameless? Completely innocent, without blood on her own hands?”

- NR1043890

March 23, 2011 at 10:33pm

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

“The Itamar murders were despicable. There is no excuse. But will anyone in Israel take any responsibility for Palestinian hostility? Is Israel blameless? Completely innocent, without blood on her own hands?” The Holocaust was despicable. Auschwitz was a horror. There is no excuse. But will Jews take any responsibility for the European hostility? Are the Jews blameless? Completely innocent, without blood on their own hands?

- NR1043890

March 23, 2011 at 11:04pm

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

NR: You are out of your fucking gord and I won't argue with you. Especially because your arguments are so weak. It's a waste of my time. Go away.

- MOLLYSIMON

March 24, 2011 at 12:49am

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

MOLLYSIMON IS STUPID, STUPID,STUPID. MOLLY SUMON IS SUTPID. MOLLY SIMON HAS ISRAELI BLOOD ON HER HANDS. MOLLYSIMON IS STUPID, STUPID,STUPID. MOLLY SUMON IS SUTPID. MOLLY SIMON HAS ISRAELI BLOOD ON HER HANDS. MOLLYSIMON IS STUPID, STUPID,STUPID. MOLLY SUMON IS SUTPID. MOLLY SIMON HAS ISRAELI BLOOD ON HER HANDS. MOLLYSIMON IS STUPID, STUPID,STUPID. MOLLY SUMON IS SUTPID. MOLLY SIMON HAS ISRAELI BLOOD ON HER HANDS. MOLLYSIMON IS STUPID, STUPID,STUPID. MOLLY SUMON IS SUTPID. MOLLY SIMON HAS ISRAELI BLOOD ON HER HANDS. MOLLYSIMON IS STUPID, STUPID,STUPID. MOLLY SUMON IS SUTPID. MOLLY SIMON HAS ISRAELI BLOOD ON HER HANDS.

- NR1043890

March 24, 2011 at 11:06am

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

The ravings of a lunatic.

- MOLLYSIMON

March 24, 2011 at 11:24am

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

Molly Simon and NR1043890 are both crazy.

- nr106646

March 24, 2011 at 4:22pm

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

'Dear Reuters, You Must Be Kidding' By Jeffrey Goldberg Mar 23 2011, 8:41 PM ET "This is from a Reuters story on the Jerusalem bombing earlier today: Police said it was a "terrorist attack" -- Israel's term for a Palestinian strike. It was the first time Jerusalem had been hit by such a bomb since 2004. Those Israelis and their crazy terms! I mean, referring to a fatal bombing of civilians as a "terrorist attack"? Who are they kidding? Everyone knows that a fatal bombing of Israeli civilians should be referred to as a "teachable moment." Or as a "venting of certain frustrations." Or as "an understandable reaction to Jewish perfidy." Or perhaps as "a very special episode of 'Cheers.'" Anything but "a terrorist attack." I suppose Reuters will mark the 10th anniversary of 9/11 by referring to the attacks as "an exercise in urban renewal." The mind reels."

- nr106646

March 24, 2011 at 4:23pm

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

David Remnick twists history: of course in 1967 there were many Israelis who did not look forward to a long occupation of the West Bank. They wanted peace with Jordan (and Syria and Egypt). Remember the "three no's" from Khartoum. A treaty would have returned land to Jordan, an already existing nation.

- JerryL

March 24, 2011 at 4:53pm

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

The NRs are obviously an army of clones.

- MOLLYSIMON

March 24, 2011 at 7:48pm

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

"The NRs are obviously an army of clones." If so, unlike the MollySimons they are all cloned from different DNA.

- nr106646

March 24, 2011 at 11:24pm

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

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close