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 Does Obama Really Think He Can Micromanage American Jews?

THE SPINE APRIL 22, 2010

Does Obama Really Think He Can Micromanage American Jews?

BY MARTIN PERETZ

There are signs that he thinks he can. Barak Ravid reports in yesterday’s Ha’aretz that a high-level but unnamed U.S. official has complained about American Jews speaking up about how they feel and what they think about U.S. policy towards Jerusalem. I don’t particularly agree with what I’ve discerned as Ravid’s political views. But he is certainly a reliable journalist. He did not make this up.

It’s one thing, however unbecoming, for the Obami to lecture Israel about its capital. Still, truth be told, the U.S. not only is apoplectic about the 180-odd thousands of Jews who live (and have lived) in areas of the city beyond the temporary armistice lines of 1949, it has never recognized anything specifically Israeli in even western Jerusalem. If an American baby is born, for example, in Kiryat Yovel, an old Jewish neighborhood in the “new city” (or the “western sector,” as it used to be called), of Jerusalem, his or her place of birth will be registered by the American consulate not as “Jerusalem, Israel” but just as plain “Jerusalem.” How is that for the U.S. sticking its head in the sand? And, even though the Congress has legislated transferring the ambassadorial mission from shabby Hayarkon Street in Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, several presidents have simply refused.

Look up “U.S. Consulate, Jerusalem.” It is eerie how unresponsive and indifferent to historical realities the site is. It’s almost as if Israel does not exist there at all.

In any case, the churlish American factotum cited above was upset that prominent American Jews had made their views known about Obama’s obvious hostility to Jewish Jerusalem in general. In fact, the president has never, NEVER acknowledged the special role of Jerusalem in Jewish history, in Jewish religion, in the Jewish present. Believe me: this is not an oversight. I wrote about this twice during Passover.

Apparently, the aforementioned person was especially distraught that both Ronald Lauder, president of the World Jewish Congress, and Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel had each taken out newspaper advertisements about the city that is holiest to Jews, holiest to Jews above all, whatever Obama seems to believe. This spiritual reality does not give Jews license to disrespect their Arab neighbors. But it should impel the president at least to recognize the tri-millennial Jewish bond to the City of David and Israel’s function as its guardian.

Both of the public letters are eloquent, especially Wiesel’s, with its quiet resonance of his communion with the horrors and ecstasies of the Jewish past. The disdain of the president’s errand boy for the Nobelist’s message is actually repulsive. But not more repulsive than Obama’s cavalier excision, crass excision, of Jerusalem from his almost proprietary Passover story.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 141 comments

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

141 comments

This post makes the case for Jerusalem issue quite effectively. However, peretz is the last person on earth to accuse someone else of trying to "micromanage" American Jewish opinion. That has apparently been one peretz' primary goals over the past 35 years, so much so that he even perceives himself as having the juice to throw "errant Jews" - defined as those American Jews who disagree with his political positions - out of the tent. Micromanage indeed...

- MrCookie1

April 22, 2010 at 1:05pm

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

It is the right of Americans to criticize their government and say whatever the hell the damn please. If the administration wants publicly to disagree with the critics, that's fine too. If the administration is complaining about the fact of being criticized, that is sort of laughable, and if that complaint is being made of "the Jews," it is dangerous and should be resisted, as it should if the complaint were being made of "the Catholics," "the blacks," etc. However, that some unnamed "high official" says we don't exactly know what, as it is not quoted just described by a journalist with his own point of view, it is as yet a rather meaningless event. We don't know how high, we don't know what was said, we don't know if this in any sense represents Obama or is an excursion by someone working his own agenda. Too soon to get in a snit.

- roidubouloi

April 22, 2010 at 1:13pm

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

Roid: "Too soon to get in a snit." Nah - if an "Obami" pea were under a thousand down-filled conditionals and hypotheticals, Princess Peretz would still complain of a bad night's sleep.

- icarusr

April 22, 2010 at 1:25pm

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

American Jews, especially Democrats, need to be MORE vocal about Obama's tilt against Israel and his ineffectual handling of the Iranian nuclear threat. Iran already has a base in Venezuela. See Obama handshake with Hugo Chavez at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/17/obama-and-hugo-chavez-sha_n_188515.html . Also see Robert Morgenthau's recent articles about fructifying links between Iran and Venezuela at http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/contd/2009/09/09/the-link-between-iran-and-venezuela-a-crisis-in-the-making/ . x

- amidut

April 22, 2010 at 1:45pm

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

Corrected: American Jews, especially Democrats, need to be MORE vocal about Obama's tilt against Israel and his ineffectual handling of the Iranian nuclear threat. Iran already has a base in Venezuela. See Obama handshake with Hugo Chavez at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/17/obama-and-hugo-chavez-sha_n_188... . Also see Robert Morgenthau's recent articles about fructifying links between Iran and Venezuela at http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/contd/2009/09/09/the-link-between-iran-and-venezuela-a-crisis-in-the-making/ . End.

- amidut

April 22, 2010 at 1:48pm

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

But I AGREE with Obama's policy tilt, although I do not perceive it as "against Israel," only against the Likud designs for Israel. "Ineffectual handling of the Iranian nuclear threat" -- based on what? It isn't ended? Obama hasn't yet cleaned up eight years of carnage caused by the right-wing and the Peretzes of the world? * * * American Jews, especially Democrats, need to be MORE vocal in support of President Obama so that he can fend off the attacks of the ravening right-wing.

- roidubouloi

April 22, 2010 at 2:07pm

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

It's not about Jerusalem this week, Marty. Also in the April 21 edition of Haaretz, Natasha Mozgavaya covered the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia hearing, and I am sure Obama has now heard what Eliot Engel said "...Because sometimes I wonder if this administration defines Israel as friend. ..." to U.S. Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman. Today, Engel teamed up with Mark Kirk, now favored to win Obama's Illinois Senate seat, introducing a bipartisan resolution that "calls for strict enforcement of sanctions and other diplomatic repercussions due to allegations that Damascus provided Lebanese Islamist group Hezbollah with long-range Scud missiles from Iran." http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2010/04/22/US-lawmakers-put-pressure-on-Syria/UPI-30301271950534/ for anyone interested: The context from Haaretz on the hearing with Feltman: "...Feltman's defense of instating an ambassador raised criticism from other participants in the hearing of Congress subcommittee on the Middle East. Congressman Eliot Engel asked why the U.S. would need an ambassador when Feltman had managed to have a direct phone conversation with Syrian foreign minister just hours before the hearing. "If you had a phone call with foreign minister, why do we need an ambassador to communicate with them?" "We have other channels to Syrians," replied Feltman. "But these issues are so important to us that we can't rely only on the third party and whatever their ambassador in Washington is telling them." "They need to hear directly from us what the consequences of their actions are. Syria is not Iran. We do not accept that their alliance is a permanent fixture in the Middle East. There is obviously different calculus at play. "We want to see a comprehensive peace in the region and it will have to include Syria. But Syrians actions fall short of its words. The Syrian government associates itself with one of the most dangerous and destabilizing players in region, Hezballah. It facilitates many of Iran's aggressive policies. The question is how we deal with it. The engagement with Syria doesn't come at the expense of our friends in region." Engel responded: "You said it doesn't come at the expense of our friends in region, Iraq and Lebanon. Does it include Israel? Because sometimes I wonder if this administration defines Israel as friend." "Yes, absolutely and unequivocally," said Feltman. Engel, who announced his intention on Wednesday to introduce a resolution calling for additional pressure on Damascus responded: "Do we actually have a policy towards Syria?" ..."

- K2K

April 22, 2010 at 2:18pm

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

K2K, a candid answer from Jeffrey Feltman to Elliot Engel's question about why we need a reopened embassy in Syria is that, without such an embassy, our intelligence activities in Syria are much less robust than they could be, and Syria is an important place for the US to have very, very robust intelligence activities. Of course, this being a Congressional hearing, candid answers like that are never uttered. I can understand that a retired accountant in West Nyack who is a member of the local AJC may not be aware of such a reason for reopening the embassy in Damascus. On the other hand, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee for the Middle East should understand that perfectly well.

- wildboy

April 22, 2010 at 2:29pm

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

I would say that there is no question that the Obama administration defines Israel as a friend. If it did not, one would have to ask why they requested a record breaking subsidy ($3 billion) for Israeli military "aid". However what is also true is that they do not view the US's relationship with Israel as a 4 year old views its mother, i.e. that anyone who says or does anything not nice to mummy is immediately wrong.

- Nari224

April 22, 2010 at 2:39pm

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

"In fact, the president has never, NEVER acknowledged the special role of Jerusalem in Jewish history, in Jewish religion, in the Jewish present." Just out of curiousity, has ANY American President (other than Bill Clinton) ever acknowledged "the special role of Jerusalem in Jewish history, in Jewish religion, in the Jewish present"? I could find no record of the stoutly pro-Israel George W Bush ever having done so, even in his famous Mark Thiessen-penned "false comfort of appeasement" speech at the Knesset in 2008, at the Annapolis Conference or any other time. Similarly with his other predessors going back to 1948. Bill Clinton did so on a number of occasions around the time of the Camp David summit and shortly before leaving office in January 2001 to the Israel Policy Forum, but that arose in the context of his active attempts to implement a final settlement between Israelis and Palestinians that would have included a detailed solution to Jerusalem's current status. I would safely assume that, if Obama was presented with a similar opportunity, he would emphasize Jerusalem's importance to Jews as well in seeking a mutually acceptable peace agreement. I would be happy to be corrected on this point, but this seems like another of Marty's "I've fallen out of love with Obama" missives in which he holds him to a higher standard of Philo-Semitism than any other President.

- wildboy

April 22, 2010 at 2:43pm

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

Peretz is right; Obama is tryng to censor American Jews. His Islamophilia means he will actively try to return the Jews of the Mideast and of the rest of the world, to dhimmi status. Worse, his inability to handle Iran, combined with his desire to impose a Palestinian state within two years, both represent an existential threat to Israel. It is high time the international Jewish community recognises the new Chamberlain for what he is.

- TNR.Reader

April 22, 2010 at 4:37pm

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

"In fact, the president has never, NEVER acknowledged the special role of Jerusalem in Jewish history, in Jewish religion, in the Jewish present." http://images.nymag.com/daily/intel/24_obamawestwall_lg.jpg

- noga1

April 22, 2010 at 4:47pm

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

Well it's pretty silly to think anybody can micromanage Jewish opinion in the first place. But, it's seriously disturbing that a government would try. This comment, unattributed as it is, taken in context with the "dual loyalty" attack on Dennis Ross and other assorted discourse about American soldiers, "blood and treasure," etc, makes me seriously nervous. I say this as a person who voted for Obama, etc. etc. and etc. The fact remains that the antisemitic discourse which had remained essentially on the far left/far right blogosphere level is now becoming disturbingly part of the real world and worse, appearing to emanate from the Administration, even if only in the words of "unnamed members" thereof. Am I being paranoid? This isn't about "criticizing Israel" after all. It's about American Jews and our rights to have opinions. NB this is the really scary aspect of the M/B thesis about "the lobby." Sooner or later we (and other supporters of Israel) were bound to be accused of "treason." Throw in comments like the "blood and treasure" business and the putative endangerment of American soldiers, the spin on Petraeus, and this becomes scary (and also has a disturbingly familiar ring to it.)

- Sophia

April 22, 2010 at 5:00pm

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

Sophia, you are one of many who now doubt their vote for Obama, for exactly the reasons you state.

- TNR.Reader

April 22, 2010 at 5:13pm

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

"why we need a reopened embassy in Syria is that, without such an embassy, our intelligence activities in Syria are much less robust than they could be" Wildboy, you are confusing two different things -- having a functioning embassy (with its very critical intelligence gathering function) and appointing an ambassador. To the best of my knowledge, the US embassy in Damascus has been open all along (http://damascus.usembassy.gov/) but with a Charge D'Affairs as the senior diplomat rather than an ambassador. Thus appointing the ambassador is more an issue of symbolic importance & hence Engel's & Kirk's comments are very much in place in view of the Syrian SCUD shipment to Hezbollah. For an interesting peek on the intelligence gathering function of an embassy, in this case the US Embassy in Tel Aviv see here. As I once said, the fancy antennas etc. on the roof of the US Embassy in T.A. aren't there for picking up Monday night football. Hershel Ginsburg Efrata / Jerusalem

- ginzy

April 22, 2010 at 6:13pm

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

"high-level but unnamed U.S. official has complained about American Jews speaking up about how they feel and what they think about U.S. policy towards Jerusalem. " The Obamanaughts have always been very very thin-skinned (even thinner than RMN's) about any sort of criticism, going back to the campaign. By way of example, the NY Post reporter assigned to the Obama campaign was banned from the campaign jet after the paper endorsed McCain. So their reaction to the Jewish community's speaking up against Obama's antipathy toward Israel is very much in character. Now that Rahm Emmanuel has indicated that he wants to be Mayor of Chicago after Daley III, it will be interesting to see if he tries to make nice to the Chicago Jewish community (admittedly, not as big or influential as the NYC one) & blame David (The Axe) Axelrod for the Administrations inept management of the US-Israel relationship. Hershel Ginsburg Efrata / Jerusalem

- ginzy

April 22, 2010 at 6:25pm

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

Rahm seemed droopy and phlegamtic last I saw him on CNN with Wolf Blitzer. He tried to reassure Wolf that he was a happy camper at the WH but his demeanor was that of despondent youth. I thought to myself we would hear about his resignation within a few months. And a few days later Axelrod (whom I secretly call Obama's nanny) was trying valiantly to ward off rumours that he and Rahm were out of sorts. Just Washington gossip, he said, which no one should take seriously. It's pretty ironic, isn't it, how Obama who was supposed to be the uniter can sow such discord among Jews, and between long time friends. But of course none of it is Obama's fault. It's not him; it's them. I have been perusing editorials from the European, South American and Arab press. They seem to adulate Obama more than anyone here. And for every misstep, mistake or failure he makes they are ready with the excuse: it's not him, it's them. The latest was an editorial in Spanish from Argentina, trying to explain why Obama's new nuclear policies were not more ambitious 9or "revolutionary") as he has promised in Prague in April 2009. It was the Pentagon's fault, apparently, as well as Robert Gates's: "Obama se vio obligado a hallar fórmulas de compromiso con el secretario de Defensa de EEUU, Robert Gates, que también desempeñó este cargo en el gabinete anterior, es decir, bajo la presidencia de George W. Bush. Robert Gates (y el Pentágono, respectivamente) acordaron no desarrollar nuevos tipos de cabezas nucleares y cesar los ensayos sólo después de comprometer a Obama a aumentar el presupuesto para el mantenimiento y la modernización de los actuales arsenales nucleares de EEUU. Obama no descartó la posibilidad de usar armas nucleares contra Estados que no las poseen. Sería ingenuo esperar que el inquilino de la Casa Blanca renuncie voluntariamente a su derecho de emplearlas cuando estime necesario. El Pentágono nunca lo aceptaría." http://www.argenpress.info/2010/04/estados-unidos-evolucion-de-la-politica.html

- noga1

April 22, 2010 at 6:59pm

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

thanks ginzy, for your comment to wildboy. The fuss over the ambassador is a tactic. Engel was forcing Feltman to state for the record that Israel is still a friend of the U.S. And the issue is now Syria and the alleged SCUDS to Hezbollah if Obama really believes in the U.N. The Obami NEVER had any organization in New York outside of the two majority black CDs, and they still do not get the politics. For Engel to team up with Kirk is HUGE, a real slap at Obama. Now that I know how good TNR.com is at Google sensitivity, I shall stop. noga: Der Spiegel, and the press in Asia is much cooler these days. the key exchange is repeated here: "...Engel responded: "You said it doesn't come at the expense of our friends in region, Iraq and Lebanon. Does it include Israel? Because sometimes I wonder if this administration defines Israel as friend." "Yes, absolutely and unequivocally," said Feltman. ..."

- K2K

April 22, 2010 at 8:17pm

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

"It's pretty ironic, isn't it, how Obama who was supposed to be the uniter can sow such discord among Jews, and between long time friends." - noga. There's no evidence of that, is there? Just as there's no evidence of the nonsense Peretz just posted. Chances are that the raging Peretz, consumed by hate, is beginning to see and hear things that are not there. If, say, the Israeli Prime Minister was the subject of such unfounded allegations as you and Peretz made on this thread, you, Peretz, and all the rest here lapping it up would go crazy in making ridicules of the writer. And rightly so. The fact that many Obama critics would make things up about him, says more about them than it says about the President.

- scrubby

April 22, 2010 at 10:35pm

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

Scrubby something tells me that even if Marty and Noga were right you still would't admit it.

- jdyer

April 22, 2010 at 11:05pm

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

And how about this Scrubby, is "Senator Schumer also seeing things?" "Middle East.Schumer: Obama's 'counter-productive' Israel policy 'has to stop' New York Senator Chuck Schumer harshly criticized the Obama Administration's attempts to exert pressure on Israel today, making him the highest-ranking Democrat to object to Obama's policies in such blunt terms. Schumer, along with a majority of members of the House and Senate, signed on to letters politely suggesting the U.S. keep its disagreements with Israel private, a tacit objection to the administration's very public rebuke of the Jewish State over construction in Jerusalem last month. But Schumer dramatically sharpened his tone on the politically conservative Jewish Nachum Segal Show today, calling the White House stance to date "counter-productive" and describing his own threat to "blast" the Administration had the State Department not backed down from its "terrible" tough talk toward Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu...." http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0410/Schumer_Obamas_Counterproductive_Israel_policy_has_to_stop.html

- jdyer

April 22, 2010 at 11:06pm

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

With your current crusade, Fox News is a better fit for you, Peretz. There, you and their professional liars can, without any journalistic ethics, work together using innuendos, rumors, and unproven allegations as facts. As someone here reminded me, you are allowed to do such because you are only a blogger, not a journalist. Isn't that right, jackson?

- scrubby

April 22, 2010 at 11:16pm

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

scrubby "With your current crusade, Fox News is a better fit for you, Peretz. There, you and their professional liars can, without any journalistic ethics, work together using innuendos, rumors, and unproven allegations as facts." Scrubby, is this your answer to Senator Schubert's comment? As I told you before, you are not the brightest bulb on this website.

- jdyer

April 22, 2010 at 11:30pm

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

thanks for the link jackson. I wonder what the media echo will be. tough reading the comments attached to politico's transcript of Schumer. is there a brainwashing camp in Berkeley? The Obami just do not get it. They can not even handle diplomatic relations with the New York congressional delegation.

- K2K

April 22, 2010 at 11:31pm

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

jackson, in my opinion, noga has been right many times. She is, also in my opinion, a very good commenter here on these boards. But something about the President throws her off and I don't know what it is. She's always wrong about him, in my opinion. Also, jackson, unlike you, she does not rage. She can insult with the best of them, but in a calm effective way. Again, unlike you the raging jackass. Finally, I never claimed I was bright.

- scrubby

April 22, 2010 at 11:36pm

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

and for our weekend reading, published on Tuesday: "Security for Peace: Setting the Conditions for a Palestinian State" insights from Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, Rwanda, and Afghanistan... you can download the pdf at: http://www.cnas.org/node/4362

- K2K

April 22, 2010 at 11:48pm

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

"Scrubby, is this your answer to Senator Schubert's comment?" As usual, you are fighting a strawman, jackson dyer. And it's Senator Schumer, not "Schubert", O' bright one.

- scrubby

April 22, 2010 at 11:54pm

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

"The Obamanaughts have always been very very thin-skinned (even thinner than RMN's) about any sort of criticism, going back to the campaign." ginzy, do you mean as thin-skinned as some people here become when their know-it-all, lord Peretz, is criticized? Or when Israel is criticized? Just asking.

- scrubby

April 23, 2010 at 12:24am

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

scrubby: the Obamoids were extraordinarily thin-skinned during the campaign to any criticism from the media. inside the campaign, the nastiness was directed to women (possible Hillary-trolls), anyone over 50, anyone who did not buy into the anti-war left "blame the Israel/AIPAC/Zionist conspiracy for Iraq", anyone who thought people should be respectful to each other, and anyone who did not drink the kool-aid. I kept reams of documentation of the hypocrisy inside that campaign. If you do not like Peretz or Israel, you are lost in cyberspace.

- K2K

April 23, 2010 at 12:33am

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

"And it's Senator Schumer, not "Schubert"...." You got me there. Shouldn't be listening to CD's while typing.

- jdyer

April 23, 2010 at 12:40am

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

"And it's Senator Schumer, not "Schubert"...." Really? I always thought Schumer sort of unfinished. And he's certainly not my lieder!

- TNR.Reader

April 23, 2010 at 1:18am

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

Oy.

- Sophia

April 23, 2010 at 2:57am

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

..... Obamanoids. The anti-war left, blame-the Israel/AIPAC/Zionist-conspiracy-for-Iraq. Those who don't believe people should be respectful to each other..... k2k, when you describe the President's supporters as such, what would you expect in return? Love and respect? (BTW, 53% of Americans voted for him. Yeah, Obamanoids indeed.) You also wrote "If you do not like Peretz or Israel, you are lost in cyberspace." Really? You mean as in this: if you don't like Obama and America because you criticize them, you must be lost in cyberspace. Seriously, though there are some Jews who don't like Israel, I am certainly not one of them. However, the Likudniks, whom you seem to channel in your posts and whom you often conflate with Israel as a whole, are detested by millions of Jews worldwide. Count me as one of those detesters. As to Peretz, what's there to like?

- scrubby

April 23, 2010 at 6:29am

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

"With your current crusade, Fox News is a better fit for you, Peretz" Not quite analogous but still am reminded of a Jewish woman once telling me how, 40 years ago, she and her family moved into a neigbourhood in Montreal populated mostly by "Quebecois de souche" (What Moredechai Richler would call "pure woolies"). Her puzzled neighbour could not get it and kept asking her why doesn't she go live somewhere more centrally located, like on St. Urbaine (where most Montreal Jews lived before they got rich and moved westwards...:)) I swear, some people are nearly impossible to satisfy: Jews, go to Palestine! (1935) Jews, out of Palestine! (2010) scrubby would like his world to make better sense and Marty @ the Fox would be just the thing to set things right in their proper and easily tabulated place, eh, scrubby?

- noga1

April 23, 2010 at 7:41am

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

scrubby “Seriously, though there are some Jews who don't like Israel, I am certainly not one of them.” Yes, and there are some Jews who don’t like Jews, and you would be one of them if you were Jewish. I see no evidence in your posts that you know very much about Jews. Besides, if there are some Jews who don’t like Israel and they voted for Obama, how does that prove that what you said earlier that “Chances are that the raging Peretz, consumed by hate, is beginning to see and hear things that are not there.” Seems like Scrub is the one consumed by hate: His hatred of Israel, hatred of Peretz, hatred of Jews who don’t support Obama, lots of hate there, Scrubby. Scrubby’s posts here are one long exercise in rage. “However, the Likudniks, whom you seem to channel in your posts and whom you often conflate with Israel as a whole, are detested by millions of Jews worldwide. Count me as one of those detesters.” More hateful nonsense from antisemitic Scrubby! (Likudnik is often used as a term of insult for Jews who like and support Israel.) Where is your evidence that “millions” of Jews detest Israel? You seem to be doing what you accuse Marty of doing, projecting your own feelings on the Jewish community. Moreover, it is you who is conflating the Likud with “whole of Israel.” Previously you said that you detested Israel: “Seriously, though there are some Jews who don't like Israel, I am certainly not one of them.” (Do you have any evidence to support this malicious fabrication of yours?) In any case, you are dead wrong more than half of the Jews in the world now live in Israel and within a generation or two, given the demographic realities of Diaspora Jewry the percentage of Jews living in Israel will only increase. Your hate filled post, Scrubby, as I said above, is one long exercise in rage it is also full of lies and half truths. Finally, Democratic Senator Schumer’s views about Obama Israel policy are similar to those of Marty. That fact alone should tell any sensible poster that Marty is not “seeing things.” Your man Obama has a problem with the Jewish community and it will only get larger unless he changes his Israel policy.

- jdyer

April 23, 2010 at 9:47am

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

"With your current crusade, Fox News is a better fit for you, Peretz" Scrubby Scrubby is no different from those extremist Conservatives who wish to see all liberal Republicans leave the party. He is someone who is uncomfortable around dissent within his political party. This makes him an authoritarian. Hence he rages at Marty for not supporting 100 percent his “leader.” I am surprised he reads TNR a magazine that has always thrived on offering dissenting opinions. The Nation or the National Review would be more to his taste. These are publications that follow a single party line and are especially suited for the authoritarian personality.

- jdyer

April 23, 2010 at 9:57am

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

A long-delayed response to Ginzy for his good point about the US Embassy in Damascus -- I stand corrected regarding the status of the Embassy (the website link is actually pretty hilarious, what with its advertising of hip-hop concerts). But I have to mildly disagree that the absence of an Ambassador means everything is just hunky-dory with the Embassy and that the presence or absence of the Ambassador has significant political meaning. Even though the Charge d'Affairs is running a functioning Embassy with a staff that includes intelligence professionals, I would assume that an Embassy that includes an Ambassador and the additional staff necessary to support him or her (like the fully-staffed US Embassies in every other Arab country) would include even more intelligence professionals and more intelligence gathering. In a place like Syria, there can never be too much intelligence gathering from an American perspective (just like Israel can never have too much intelligence gathering in Egypt or Jordan). So the absence of an Ambassador is a handicap, even if it is not as bad as having no Embassy whatsoever, like in Iran or Afghanistan before 2001. As for Mark Kirk and Elliot Engel working together on legislation to prevent the reopening of a Damascus Embassy, this is the same kind of thing that routinely goes on with regard to the location of the US Embassy in Israel -- in other words, a safe bipartisan way for House members (especially ones who represent heavily Jewish districts, like Engel, and those like Kirk who are running for higher office in states with a large Jewish share of the vote) to show they support Israel and a quiet effort by the Administration and the Senate to undermine the practical effect of the House's vote. K2K, I guarantee you that this game will play out this way in the end and no one will ever change their minds about anything or anyone.

- wildboy

April 23, 2010 at 10:45am

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

wildboy: ANY reliable liberal Democrat who teams up with Mark Kirk is a de facto endorsement of Kirk for Obama's Senate seat. When it is a reliable Dem from New York, it is also a sign of of marking Obama as 'Carter's second term'. (and they are not trying to "prevent the reopening of a Damascus Embassy" as you had just acknowledged) I am far more interested in what this means in the byzantine arena known as New York politics, an arena in which the Obami have no power base.

- K2K

April 23, 2010 at 11:30am

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

Sophia, how does one tell a dyslexic rabbi? Well, he bops down the street saying, "Yo!" Noga, JDyer, good posts.

- TNR.Reader

April 23, 2010 at 11:44am

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

TNR.R: you don't want to read how NATO will protect Israel's security? published on Tuesday: "Security for Peace: Setting the Conditions for a Palestinian State" you can download the pdf at: http://www.cnas.org/node/4362

- K2K

April 23, 2010 at 11:52am

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

JDyer: "I am surprised he reads TNR a magazine that has always thrived on offering dissenting opinions. The Nation or the National Review would be more to his taste. These are publications that follow a single party line and are especially suited for the authoritarian personality." True. But, one can simply peruse all three publications and try to form a synthesis of their (mostly disjoint) material.

- TNR.Reader

April 23, 2010 at 11:56am

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

"...I see no evidence in your posts that you know very much about Jews." JD: Knowledge about Jews can be misleading in many ways and some examples I encountered would make your jaw drop with surprise at the level of ignorance. A few years ago one of our local "alternative" news weekly (there are two the "Mirror" and the "Hour") ran an article about the Chassidic community in Outrement. The author of the piece proclaimed himself a Jew, therefore passing for some sort of an authority on Jews. One of the subjects that occupied him was why Chassidic families did not seem to have pets. According to Jewish law, he solemnly affirmed, Jews can eat cats and dogs but are forbidden to keep them as pets. I repeat, this was not a satire aimed at spoofing some of the ignorance and cluelessness that abound about Jews, even at this day and age. It was a straightforward piece of reporting.

- noga1

April 23, 2010 at 1:12pm

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

noga1 “"...I see no evidence in your posts that you know very much about Jews." JD: Knowledge about Jews can be misleading in many ways and some examples I encountered would make your jaw drop with surprise at the level of ignorance.” Your example, Noga, is pretty funny. Yes, many, many, “Jews” are ignorant even of the basic facts of Jewish practice, belief, and above all history. (Beyond the Shoah, there is a blank. Even their knowledge of Israel is restricted to bumper sticker phrases and the ubiquitous anti-Zionist rants they are exposed to on a daily basis.) Still, my point about Scrubby wasn’t merely his ignorance; I was commenting on the fact that I know of no time when he posted anything from a Jewish point of view. Being Jewish isn’t a passive state of being; it’s an active engagement with one’s community, culture and history.

- jdyer

April 23, 2010 at 1:30pm

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

copied from my emailbox: "RALLY IN SOLIDARITY WITH ISRAEL’S RIGHT TO BUILD AND LIVE IN ITS OWN COUNTRY. STAND FOR A UNITED JEWISH JERUSALEM AND PROTEST THE ADMINISTRATION’S DISGRACEFUL SCAPEGOATING OF ISRAEL. Sunday, April 25, 2010 • 1 PM LOCATION: Israeli Consulate, 2nd Ave between 42nd and 43rd St, NYC The rally is being sponsored by the Jewish Action Alliance, an organization well known for activism and speaking out on issues of Jewish security...and many other Jewish, Christian and Hindu groups. " yes, Hindu groups. India is now Israel's real friend.

- K2K

April 23, 2010 at 3:09pm

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

Noga, that is a hilarious reference to the Montreal article about Hasidim. It's too bad there is no link to it. Ironically enough, the ignorant author was technically correct in stating that Jewish law permits Jews to eat cats and dogs -- in fact, Jews are obligated by Halacha to eat cats, dogs and any other treyf food in those (very, very) limited circumstances where that is the only food available to prevent the Jews in question from starving to death. On the other hand, the author was dead wrong about prohibitions on Jews keeping cats and dogs as pets -- there is nothing forbidden about this, except that many Haredim refrain from doing so because of the many Halachic restrictions that are applicable to keeping such animals as pets (including the issues of exercising dogs on Shabbat and obtaining pet food that is kosher for Pesach). Shabbat Shalom.

- wildboy

April 23, 2010 at 3:11pm

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

"...to prevent the Jews in question from starving to death" There is a very good illustration of this principle in the movie "Defiance".

- noga1

April 23, 2010 at 3:50pm

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

Noga, you seem to have a film example for every assertion. Did the Bielsky brothers eat cats and dogs in the film? I don't remember the incident in book.

- jdyer

April 23, 2010 at 4:40pm

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

In fact the author who wrote the article seems to have intended to make fun of the irrationality of Jewish law while wildboy's explanation offered an angle I had not considered, and in fact re-affirms the very rationality of Jewish law. ""Pikuach nefesh", a principle in Jewish law that the preservation of human life overrides virtually any other religious consideration. When the life of a specific person is in danger, almost any negative commandment of the Torah becomes inapplicable." (wiki)

- noga1

April 23, 2010 at 4:42pm

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

Not cats and dogs. Horse. Tuvia kills his horse when the people are nearly starving in the winter.

- noga1

April 23, 2010 at 4:44pm

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

noga1 "Not cats and dogs. Horse. Tuvia kills his horse when the people are nearly starving in the winter." Ah yes, horse meat. I have had a steak or two in my day also, Noga. Wasn't starving just experimenting with different animal flesh. I liked alligator meat better. Probably not kosher, though.

- jdyer

April 23, 2010 at 4:56pm

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

noga: "Defiance" was such a great film, yet it did not get any recognition beyond the reviews for cinematography, and did poorly in global release (Gaza backlash? or real Jews fighting back and surviving?) , which surprised me because Ed Zwick, and Daniel Craig, films usually do very well globally, though no one can beat Eastwood, or animated anything. boxofficemojo.com tracks results by country, and it seems Defiance never got released in Israel. My favorite quote: Konstanty Kozlowski: Why is it so f*****g hard being friends with a Jew? Tuvia Bielski: Try being one.

- K2K

April 23, 2010 at 5:39pm

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

Noga: "Jews can eat cats and dogs but are forbidden to keep them as pets." The author is a cat-astrophe. He is a prime example of the Talmudic adage - those who do not know and do not know that they do now know, are dangerous. Now, I think gazelle is techncally kosher (ruminant, cloven hoof) - but it would have first to be captured and slaughtered in a minimum of pain; therefore, no random arrows; therefore, what did the ancient Israelites do with the results of the hunt??

- TNR.Reader

April 23, 2010 at 6:09pm

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

"...those who do not know and do not know that they do now know, are dangerous." Socrates would agree.

- noga1

April 23, 2010 at 7:27pm

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

".. yet it did not get any recognition beyond the reviews " There was a problem with "Defiance" which the director was fully aware of and talked about in a conversation with Charlie Rose. There was no "action" in the movie, and it is difficult to represent mere survival over a period of years in an exciting way for movie audiences to want to see. You can watch it here. Our very own Leon Wieseltier is there, too: http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/9924

- noga1

April 23, 2010 at 7:34pm

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

I loved Defiance but there wasn't enough violence to make it an action movie and there wasn't enough nuance, etc. for an art-house style movie. Which means it was a perfect movie for me. But Jews killing Nazis? What more could you want in a movie?

- MOLLYSIMON

April 23, 2010 at 10:07pm

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

thank you noga. I enjoy Zwick's films for their good storytelling, and do not see the contradiction of "no action". I compared "Defiance" overseas sales to Eastwood's "Gran Torino", an American classic with a multi-layered story, and a bit surprised it did so very well in so many countries. I confess, knowing full well the abuse I invite, that I can not watch online video due to being in a village where the civil war over cell phone service still simmers, as does the lower level conflict between the 'Readers With NO TV and Proud of it' and those of us who can both read, and watch TV, though limited to satellite. I just read Margaret Drabble at tabletmag.com "Art Thou Contented, Jew? The British novelist on England, the Jews, and anti-Semitism today". Thoughtful, if a bit naive, and thought the more literary here would find it interesting. TNR.R would have an aneurysm reading it. :) My first foray to tabletmag.com to read an analysis on Syria, saw the Drabble piece, and, when I used to read fiction, enjoyed hers. I also enjoyed reading the attached comments; an interesting community there.

- K2K

April 23, 2010 at 10:31pm

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

I left a comment on the Drabble article, providing some evidence that her assessment of Jeremy Bowen as "..reassuringly reliable, rising calmly above the waves of partisan extremism." when it comes to the way he reports on Israel is not as reassuringly reliable as she would have us believe. The comment has not appeared yet.

- noga1

April 23, 2010 at 11:53pm

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

"scrubby would like his world to make better sense and Marty @ the Fox would be just the thing to set things right in their proper and easily tabulated place, eh, scrubby?" Whatever you say, noga. You know these things much better than I will ever know.

- scrubby

April 24, 2010 at 12:53am

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

"Where is your evidence that “millions” of Jews detest Israel?"..... "Previously you said that you detested Israel".... I never said any such thing, Mr jackass dyer. Go read my posts again, O very bright One. Or should I say blind One? "More hateful nonsense from antisemitic Scrubby! (Likudnik is often used as a term of insult for Jews who like and support Israel.)"...." I see no evidence in your posts that you know very much about Jews." ".....I know of no time when [scrubby] posted anything from a Jewish point of view." Uh huh. What can I say, jackass. You are the ultimate arbiter on good and bad Jews, and now you've finally exposed me as a self-hating Jew. I'm so ashamed for describing Israeli wingnuts as Likudniks, and for not displaying enough tribal markers that could have given me Jewish authenticity. My bad. Please, help me learn: what is a Jewish point of view? And how exactly is that different from a Gentile point of view? Must a Jew or Gentile only subscribe to the views of their own group? If anyone else had written such crap like "Jewish point of view", wouldn't you be bellowing charges of antisemitism? You and your jackass-ed double standard. Here you are, all bent out of shape, attacking me for criticizing your lord, Peretz. Why is it okay for you to defend Peretz, but not okay if I defend the President?

- scrubby

April 24, 2010 at 2:55am

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

noga: they did not yet approve my comment on Iran. perhaps a 9-5 moderator? Their terms of use are very strict, so I will not use any quotes. It happened I saw Jeremy Bowen's coverage on Ramat Shlomo (I rarely watch the BBC anymore), and I remember thinking it exceeded my very low expectations of BBC coverage on anything to do with Israel. Of late, am having similar issue with National Public Radio's coverage. New York's WNET and WLIW replaced the BBC news, probably due to complaints from their audiences, for awhile with a global news show anchored by Charles Osgood, Alas, that show was cancelled for financial reasons. At least tabletmag keeps flamethrowing comments under control!

- K2K

April 24, 2010 at 8:23am

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

what a coincidence noga, from today's NYT" "Adding More Jewish Voices to the Discussion" about an alternative to The New York Review of Books "...He might have added that The New Republic is so identified with Zionism, and The New York Review [of Books] with skepticism about Israel, that many minds may have closed to those publications. The Jewish Review of Books’ editorial board is free of notable anti-Zionists, but it includes liberals as well as far-right types..." And, the new JRoB will take online comments.

- K2K

April 24, 2010 at 9:11am

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

BTW, k2k, I also disagree with Drabble's lachrymose interpretation of Shylock.

- noga1

April 24, 2010 at 11:55am

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

“never said any such thing, Mr jackass dyer. Go read my posts again, O very bright One. Or should I say blind One?” Scrubber Here is what you said: “Seriously, though there are some Jews who don't like Israel, I am certainly not one of them. However, the Likudniks, whom you seem to channel in your posts and whom you often conflate with Israel as a whole, are detested by millions of Jews worldwide. Count me as one of those detesters.” 04/23/2010 - 6:29am EDT | scrubby You don’t like Israel and it is obvious that it is you who “conflates” the Likud with not just Israel but with any supporter of Israel. I ask you again scrubber, where is the evidence that millions of Jews detest Israel or the Likud? “Uh huh. What can I say, jackass. You are the ultimate arbiter on good and bad Jews, and now you've finally exposed me as a self-hating Jew.” More Scrubbish rubbish I didn’t say I think you are a “self hating” Jew. I said there is no evidence that you are not a Jew. However, you do write like a Jew-hater which is not the same as being a “self-hating Jew.” “Please, help me learn: what is a Jewish point of view? And how exactly is that different from a Gentile point of view? Scrubbish ignorance The fact that you need to ask means that you are not Jewish. “You and your jackass-ed double standard.” The double standard is yours and Obama’s; it’s not mine nor that of Marty’s or that of other supporters of Israel. Now scrubbish-rubbish switches to talking about “double standards” because it’s obvious that he couldn’t answer the question posed to him about Senator Schumer. Is the Senator also “hallucinating about Obama’s policies towards Israel?” Is Elie Wiesel? You are a dishonest as well as stupid scrubber and Obama flunky.

- jdyer

April 24, 2010 at 12:00pm

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

"the Likudniks, whom you seem to channel in your posts and whom you often conflate with Israel as a whole, are detested by millions of Jews worldwide. " There are a few unknowns in this statements. If scrubby would be so kind as to reveal them to me I'd be ever so grateful. What's his definition of a "likudnik"? What is this "Israel" that is being conflated with "the Likkudniks"? Since Netanyahu is head of the Likkud, does it mean that millions of Jews detest Netanyahu? Most importantly, I'd like to know what exactly and really bugs scrubby about the whole issue of Israel.

- noga1

April 24, 2010 at 1:03pm

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

"Most importantly, I'd like to know what exactly and really bugs scrubby about the whole issue of Israel." Noga, Scrubber said that he detests the Jewish State. The reasons as far as I am concerned are not relevant. Had he said he detested, say, Black African States, no one would be asking him for his reasons.

- jdyer

April 24, 2010 at 2:12pm

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

I also read, Noga, “Margaret Drabble’s “Art Thou Contented, Jew?” I read through the comments but didn’t see your name there. Did you post under another ID?

- jdyer

April 24, 2010 at 2:14pm

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

“And, the new JRoB will take online comments.” I went to their website but didn’t see any poster comment section. Do you need to be a subscriber to post? I may subscribe to it myself soon. I also noted how uneasy the New York Times was when writing about the Jewish Review: "Adding More Jewish Voices to the Discussion" by MARK OPPENHEIMER http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/24/us/24beliefs.html?scp=1&sq=%22Adding%20More%20Jewish%20Voices%20to%20the%20Discussion%22&st=cse His tone changed though when he wrote about the other review “Books and Culture” with a “Christian point of view.” Was that because the reporter was Jewish? Btw: I looked up Books and Culture and their reviews also seem to me to be first rate and the fact that it has a point of view is to its credit.

- jdyer

April 24, 2010 at 2:22pm

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

noga, perhaps you know how Shakespeare invented Shylock in the absence of Jews from England between 1290 and 1655? my brief visits to TNR since 2008 indicate Likud=hawkish rightwing. which appears to be incompatible with being a peace-loving Democrat in the U.S. So, the illogic flows that anyone supporting Israel when the Prime Minister is Likud must therefore be right-wing, and thus a demon to be crushed. The new fact that Likud is the center in Israel is lost on so many, including the Obami. labels, schmabels, who wants a bagel... :)

- K2K

April 24, 2010 at 2:24pm

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

jackson, the comments are in the upper right hand corner. JRoB is brand-new, and I think you have to be a subscriber to register to comment. As to Oppenheimer, he just struck me as being uncomfortable about anything boldly defined as Jewish. the curse of assimiliation in America. I did subscribe, then got distracted by "why do Jewish writers not write epic fantasy" (my only area of literary expertise is epic fantasy), and then realized I must get offline before the rains come tomorrow, to finish my yard's winter clean-up while the sun shines.

- K2K

April 24, 2010 at 2:31pm

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

"noga, perhaps you know how Shakespeare invented Shylock in the absence of Jews from England between 1290 and 1655?" An excellent question that has occurred to me and had prompted me to research for a possible dissertation. My method was to do a sort of reverse-engineering. MoV introduces Shylock as a Jew. What I did was look at his words and the information Shakes gives us about him (I mean, all of them, not just his famous "Hath not a Jew..") and then asked, if I did not know he was a Jew, who would he most likely be.

- noga1

April 24, 2010 at 4:00pm

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

I have absolutely no use for the Likud, and it wouldn't change my opinion one iota if they were supported by 90% of Israel. Similarly, I detest the Republican party and would detest it no less (more methinks) if it were the majority party. Peretz's jackal pack considers that anyone who detests the Likud therefore hates Israel, and I suppose they would similarly claim that anyone who detests the Republicans therefore hates the United States (although hypocrisy is their preferred style so who knows). This is typically fascist "loyalty-oath" taking that equates loyalty to right-wing ideology with love of country. In my opinion, anyone who really loves their country ought to detest its right-wing, by whatever name and however many support it. The jingoism alone is enough to make any decent person choke. Had the Germans shown a little more love of Germany and little less love of those who claimed to be the über-lovers of Germany, a great deal of tragedy might have been avoided. Does the popularity of right-wing ideology vindicate it? I don't think so. In any case, these professions of superior patriotism by the right are as nauseating as ever. But then, what would one expect from the jackal pack?

- roidubouloi

April 24, 2010 at 4:37pm

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

noga1 “‘Noga, perhaps you know how Shakespeare invented Shylock in the absence of Jews from England between 1290 and 1655?’ An excellent question that has occurred to me and had prompted me to research for a possible dissertation. My method was to do a sort of reverse-engineering. MoV introduces Shylock as a Jew. What I did was look at his words and the information Shakes gives us about him (I mean, all of them, not just his famous "Hath not a Jew..") and then asked, if I did not know he was a Jew, who would he most likely be.” There have been a number of answers to this question by Shakespeare scholars, none of them convincing. The truth we know little about Shakespeare’s private life and less about motivated him to write most of his plays. At the time The MofV appeared there had been a high level treason trial in which the Queens physician Dr. Lopez known to have been of Iberian converso extraction was the defendant. (He was the Zionist agent of his day) Lopez was accused of having plotted to poison the Queen; these charges, which never proven, sent him to the gallows. It is said by some scholars that Shakespeare wrote the play in order to show the “humanity” of Jews at time when they were widely believed to be inhuman devils-literally so. (This is the view of Shakespeare as a member of the Jewish lobby.) It’s more likely that Shakespeare and his company were trying to compete with Marlowe who had just written “The Jew of Malta” (also to take advantage of the bad press Jews were getting at the time. Jews were news back then too.) Marlowe’s play was very successful and it’s a miracle that more companies didn’t put on plays about evil Jews. (Jews was always cast as villains in the so called miracle plays in Europe). There are others who say, not very convincingly, that there was a small colony of Jews in London living as Marranos and that Shakespeare knew some of them. As far as I can tell most of the scholars who hold this view are Jews. They offer no significant concrete proof for the existence of such a colony and less proof that Shakespeare would have known any of them. In the absence of evidence people can make up whatever story or stories they like. My own views is that the Lopez trial and Marlowe’s play did influence Shakespeare. I also think that an even stronger influence on him were the Puritans in his day who tried to close down the theaters. The one character Shylock resembles the most in his plays is Malvolio of “Twelfth Night.” Both of them are puritans who hate merriment and music and there many other points of similarity. The interesting thing about Shylock is that Shakespeare doesn’t give him a special Jewish accent. He could have done it had he wanted to. (Neither did Dickens with Fagin (who was probably originally conceived as an Irishman---some say a “homosexual” but that is mere pc guess work.) Finally I prefer the character barabas to Shylock even though he more inhuman he also more heroic (as most of Marlowe’s heroes were— they are full of Byronic energy). Shylock after the trial becomes another passive comic evil doer who once he is brought to heel becomes very compliant.

- jdyer

April 24, 2010 at 4:48pm

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

“Peretz's jackal pack considers that anyone who detests the Likud therefore hates Israel,” KING BULL is back. Give it a break. I am not a supporter of the Likud and their political program. The poster who said he hated the Likud also said that he hated Israel. You are just throwing peanut off the gallery without knowing what is going on. “Had the Germans shown a little more love of Germany and little less love of those who claimed to be the über-lovers of Germany, a great deal of tragedy might have been avoided. Does the popularity of right-wing ideology vindicate it? I don't think so.” The comparison with the German Nazis is pretty obscene.

- jdyer

April 24, 2010 at 4:54pm

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

"In any case, these professions of superior patriotism by the right are as nauseating as ever. But then, what would one expect from the jackal pack?" The only "professions of superior patriotism" I encountered on these pages usually come from posters who suggested that disagreement with Obama's policies vis a vis the Middle East is tantamount to treason. The very same posters who darkly hint at double loyalties when others express their grave concern for Israel's future. Those who accept that Israel's friendship costs America in blood and money and anyone who does not automatically endorse this view is a potential if not an actual traitor. Not surprisingly, I also had an encounter with roi's mini-me on another thread where I openly criticized the Canadian health system. This criticism was interpreted in the most assured and vocal expostulation as lack of enough patriotic feeling for Canada. Needless to remind, mini-me self-identifies as a Leftist. I mean, speaking of hypocrisy and all that... Hannah Arendt: "What makes it so plausible to assume that hypocrisy is the vice of vices is that integrity can indeed exist under the cover of all other vices except this one. Only crime and the criminal, it is true, confront us with the perplexity of radical evil; but only the hypocrite is really rotten to the core."

- noga1

April 24, 2010 at 5:03pm

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

For a quick and authoritative view of the life of Shakespeare I recommend: "Will in the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare" by Stephen Greenblatt http://www.amazon.com/Will-World-How-Shakespeare-Became/dp/0393050572/ref=sip_rech_dp_4#noop Frank Kermode’s study is also an excellent source: “The Age of Shakespeare” by Frank Kermode http://www.amazon.com/Age-Shakespeare-Modern-Library-Chronicles/dp/0812974336/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1272143219&sr=1-2#noop

- jdyer

April 24, 2010 at 5:08pm

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

JD: Let me just say that everything you have written is pretty common knowledge. I went into the subject from a very different angle. My research work is actually mostly done which is why I do not wish to discuss it any further. One thing which is suspected is that the dark lady of the sonnets was a converso Jewess, Amelia Bassano and that she had arrived from Venice and described the city to Will, her lover. All very well except that Shakespeare's play shows no familiarity with Venice and Amelia was only 7 year old when she arrived in England.

- noga1

April 24, 2010 at 5:12pm

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

"The only "professions of superior patriotism" I encountered on these pages usually come from posters who suggested that disagreement with Obama's policies vis a vis the Middle East is tantamount to treason." Exactly. In any case, KINK BULL is just sounding off. He is a lonely fellow who has nothing to do except play with himself and pick fights on line. And he is not even witty about it. His chief vice aside from hypocrisy is that he is boring. One can forgive almost anything except a boring hypocrite.

- jdyer

April 24, 2010 at 5:13pm

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

“One thing which is suspected is that the dark lady of the sonnets was a converso Jewess, Amelia Bassano and that she had arrived from Venice and described the city to Will, her lover. All very well except that Shakespeare's play shows no familiarity with Venice and Amelia was only 7 year old when she arrived in England.” Yes, but most people aren’t Shakespeare scholars. Anyway, there is very little that is new in Shakespeare studies. BTW: do you accept the view that “the Dark Lady” was a converso Jew? I don’t.

- jdyer

April 24, 2010 at 5:20pm

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

"The comparison with the German Nazis is pretty obscene." roi invokes the nazis whenever he wishes to discredit anyone. He called me a nazi and renamed me Goebbels. He called Hannah Arendt a Nazi or a Hitlerite. It seems this is the only one historical analogy that comes to his mind when he discusses Israel or Jewish history, so we can expect him to keep returning to it, in various forms and contexts. Roi has one idea in his head which generates a lot of noise. As the Aramaic saying goes: "Istera balegina- kish kish karia" One coin in a tin cup makes a lot of noise. (Or in the English version: the empty barrel makes the most noise ...)

- noga1

April 24, 2010 at 5:22pm

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

"“the Dark Lady” was a converso Jew? I don’t." Her being one or not is irrelevant for my thesis.

- noga1

April 24, 2010 at 5:23pm

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

Is there a jackass around here? I believe there is. A consummate jackass, indeed a perfect asshole. Viz: Scrubby says: "Seriously, though there are some Jews who don't like Israel, I am certainly not one of them. However, the Likudniks, whom you seem to channel in your posts and whom you often conflate with Israel as a whole, are detested by millions of Jews worldwide. Count me as one of those detesters." To which the jackass replies: "Seems like Scrub is the one consumed by hate: His hatred of Israel, hatred of Peretz, hatred of Jews who don’t support Obama, lots of hate there, Scrubby." So, first the perfect asshole puts words in someone else's mouth, then he attacks him for harboring the sentiments that he, the asshole, has placed there. Entering stage right, the peanut intellect chimes in to insist that none of the jackals would ever confuse dislike for the Likud with dislike for Israel, followed by pious lessons on hypocrisy from the queen of hypocrites. Then, of course, they all go back to their self-satisfied licking and grooming each other, imagining in their pea brains that they have scored some great victory for Israel. So typical. All hate, all lies, all the time. Peretz's jackal pack at work. And this is supposed to create esteem here for Israel? Anyone who did not already have reason to hold Israel in high regard would recoil in disgust. No one needs friends like these. No one should be burdened with friends like these. Utterly repellent, disgracing anything of which they express their approval.

- roidubouloi

April 24, 2010 at 6:01pm

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

"The comparison with the German Nazis is pretty obscene." But, of course, the comparison was not with the Nazis at all. The comparison was with the German people who were swayed by the Nazi professions of superior love of country. Goebbels would be proud of even this little evasion. Just to his taste.

- roidubouloi

April 24, 2010 at 6:06pm

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

Boy KING Bull writes like he has been kicked him in the balls. They guy needs a distemper shot, though I doubt it’ll do him any good. BULL JIVER’s vile and repetitive posts speak for themselves. Hope he keeps his hate filled posts coming because they more he writes the chances of his getting a stroke keep increase. And we do want him to get a stroke, don’t we? It’s the only way to calm him down. No sense in wasting time replying to this Obamadnik ass-licker.

- jdyer

April 24, 2010 at 6:11pm

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

"Goebbels would be proud of even this little evasion. Just to his taste." To your tase too Obamadnick.

- jdyer

April 24, 2010 at 6:12pm

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

I like that "ass-licker" image, jackass. Such an apt description of you jackals with your noses way up each others asses, licking, licking, licking for all you are worth. A regular daisy-chain of ass lickers. One thing is for sure. No one can kick you in the balls. Those are long gone. All that's left arelittle pockets of slime where the balls used to be, slime that you insist on spraying everywhere you go. If there is a foul smell hanging over a thread, it is certain that the jackass has been there. Have a good evening.

- roidubouloi

April 24, 2010 at 6:30pm

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

Jeremeny Ben-Ami of J Street takes Alan Dershowitz, and by implication Martin Peretz and his moronic acolytes, out behind the woodshed for a well-deserved flaying:

Really? Code? Who's got the codebook, Alan? My words stand for themselves. If you disagree with President Obama and with J Street that it's an American strategic interest to end the conflict, just say so. But just because you know that argument won't fly doesn't give you license to put words in my mouth. Frankly, the kind of diatribe that you engage in, replete with falsehoods, name calling and guilt by association represents all that is wrong with the way the "case for Israel" has been made for far too long. It's precisely this kind of slanderous campaign that you regularly run against anyone who disagrees with you. And it's precisely such tactics that lead to un-Jewish outcomes such as Judge Richard Goldstone being barred from attending his own grandson's bar mitzvah. Your tactics are what makes being "pro-Israel" so unattractive that college students who do love and support Israel are afraid to be labeled "pro-Israel." They are not running away from Israel. They are running away from you. Alan Dershowitz, you are wrong on the merits of America's strategic interest in making peace in the Middle East. You will lose in the court of public opinion and in the national policy debate. But more important you are wrong to press the "case for Israel" in this way. Engaging in these sorts of attacks will not only set back the cause of peace and security for Israel, it will ultimately undermine the strength of the U.S.-Israel friendship.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeremy-benami/alan-dershowitz-is-wrong_b_548647.html

- ndmackenzie

April 24, 2010 at 6:47pm

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

Statement #1: "“Had the Germans shown a little more love of Germany and little less love of those who claimed to be the über-lovers of Germany, a great deal of tragedy might have been avoided" Statement #2: "But, of course, the comparison was not with the Nazis at all. The comparison was with the German people who were swayed by the Nazi professions of superior love of country." In what way are these two statements different? Is this meant to insert an essential and historically-verifiable difference between the German people during the Nazi regime and Nazi Germany? If the German people elected Hitler, does that mean that they are to be excused from their responsibility for their choice because they were duped by Hitler? Did Hitler really dupe anyone who did not want to be duped? And in what way is the Israeli people comparable to the German people who had been "duped" into believing in Hitler? roi falls into the molasses and tries to extricate himself with his usual obfuscations and irrational reversal of argument or whatever it is that passes for argument with him.

- noga1

April 24, 2010 at 6:52pm

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

Ben Ami's diatribe explains why J-street is so popular with the likes of Norman Finkelstein.

- noga1

April 24, 2010 at 6:55pm

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

Anne and Dan, right on cue: "If you disagree with President Obama and with J Street that it's an American strategic interest to end the conflict, just say so." Now where does the "professions of superior patriotism" come from?

- noga1

April 24, 2010 at 7:03pm

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

Noga, no need to answer the deranged asslicking Obamadnick, KING BULL. I haven't read his latest dearnged post. Let him howl at the moon all by himself He can also talk to that other obsessed poster mackenzie.

- jdyer

April 24, 2010 at 7:11pm

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

Obama, Mitchell, and J Street got Abbas to say today: "...Since you, Mr. President and you, the members of the American administration, believe in this, it is your duty to call for the steps in order to reach the solution and impose the solution — impose it," Abbas said in a speech to leaders of his Fatah movement." "But don't tell me it's a vital national strategic American interest ... and then not do anything," he added. ..." [Karin Laub, AssociatedPress] thanks Jackson, and noga, for insight into Shakespeare's Shylock. Here is an interesting twist on the increasingly frequent observations on Obama's foreign policy ('ignore allies/bow to enemies' in various mutations), codified into "the Obama Syndrome" by friends of the Archbishop of Canterbury, undoubtedly Conservatives. :) From Jane Kramer's "A Canterbury Tale: The battle within the Church of England to allow women to be bishops" in April 26 The New Yorker: "...[Archbishop Rowan Williams] He thought that with time, patience, and enough discussion within the Church you could temper the opposition to female bishops—despite the fact that three synods since 1994 have tried to address the issue, and the opposition remains intractable. His friends call this “Rowan’s Obama syndrome”: the persistence of a commendable but not very realistic belief in the power of reason to turn your enemies into allies. ..." which led me to a short excursion into the etymology of Obama + Syndrome, the most relevant hit Walter Russell Mead on "The Carter Syndrome" in January Foreign Policy: "...Barack Obama might yet revolutionize America's foreign policy. But if he can't reconcile his inner Thomas Jefferson with his inner Woodrow Wilson, the 44th president could end up like No. 39. ..." My brief search got complicated by the need o distinguish between the Syndrome suffered by Obama supporters, and Obama opposition, from the Syndrome in this example that Obama suffers from himself. As to the commenters here who consider disagreement with Obama on anything to be heresy, it is odd they do not realize that they are attacking registered Democrats like me. What a strange way to RETAIN voter support! The left in America is a small place indeed. Godwin's Law combined with too many Nature episodes is pure nasty.

- K2K

April 24, 2010 at 7:13pm

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

noga1 writes: -- Is this meant to insert an essential and historically-verifiable difference between the German people during the Nazi regime and Nazi Germany? If the German people elected Hitler, does that mean that they are to be excused from their responsibility for their choice because they were duped by Hitler? Did Hitler really dupe anyone who did not want to be duped? -- And in what way is the Israeli people comparable to the German people who had been "duped" into believing in Hitler? Actually, the Israeli people - even cognizant of the dangers of miltant (religious) nationalism - have shown how easy it is to be swayed by that vile ideology. They serve to remind us just how easily nationalism can become miltant and descend into Nazism. We can see that ease in the casual racism, the casual lies and the casual bigotry of noga1 and her peers on this forum. They are the useful idiots of the ZioNazism that the settlement project has made the dominant political idology of the State of Israel.

- ndmackenzie

April 24, 2010 at 7:22pm

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

I'm so glad the mackenzies are here, to prove they understand roi's analogies so well... THEY do not pretend to misunderstand roi's comparison of Israelis with Nazis.

- noga1

April 24, 2010 at 7:30pm

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

Godwin's Law "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches."

- K2K

April 24, 2010 at 7:35pm

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

There is this difference between KING BULL and mackenzie: the latter is a real nazi like antisemitie, while KING Bull is clinically insane. His life is one ongoing temper tantrum. No wonder he is a unthinking Obamadnick. You don't reason with either insane people or nazi-Mackenzie. You ignore them.

- jdyer

April 24, 2010 at 7:46pm

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

-- As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches. It is difficult to discuss Nazism, in any form, without referring to Nazism. If you don't want people to associate the Israeli settlement of the Occupied Palestinian Territories with Nazism then you should fight the settlement that represents the Nazism. The problem is not the word but the deed.

- ndmackenzie

April 24, 2010 at 7:47pm

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

today is the Armenian commemoration of Aghet, which was a genocide. Good thing the Sunday talk shows are all about financial reform, so we can save this for another thread: "...Since you, Mr. President and you, the members of the American administration, believe in this, it is your duty to call for the steps in order to reach the solution and impose the solution — impose it," Abbas said in a speech to leaders of his Fatah movement." "But don't tell me it's a vital national strategic American interest ... and then not do anything," he added. ..." [Karin Laub, AssociatedPress]

- K2K

April 24, 2010 at 8:06pm

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

I think it is clear by now that "the tablet" is not going to publish my comment. Since yesterday they added only one comment and that was in line with the article's principles. I sent them a query as to what happened to my twice-posted comment but no answer so far. The same behaviour as the Juan Cole website. Tight moderation and no disagreement allowed. A truly "liberal" ethos, what do you know.

- noga1

April 24, 2010 at 9:06pm

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

"And it's precisely such tactics that lead to un-Jewish outcomes such as Judge Richard Goldstone being barred from attending his own grandson's bar mitzvah." For the record: "It was further confirmed that Judge Goldstone would attend his grandson's barmitzvah and that there would be no protests associated with the barmitzvah."

- noga1

April 24, 2010 at 9:13pm

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

Hey there, jackass. Went out for a lovely dinner and come back to find you insisting that everyone ignore me be indulging your obsession with attempting to insult me. Your Tourette's just won't give you a rest, will it? You can't insult me, jackass. Because you are a jackass and no one who walks around with his hand in his pants all the time as you do looking for where your balls used to be can successfully insult anyone. You can disgust them, to be sure, and you do, but insult? Too dimwitted. You are just an embarrassment to yourself and anyone you associate with. You are such a sick, twisted, nasty little piece of crap that lighting you up -- as I can do any time and every time I push the button! -- is the least I can do for the decent few who still have something to say and haven't been silenced by you and the rest of the jackals.

- roidubouloi

April 25, 2010 at 12:00am

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

Then we have the poor, uncomprehending soul, both thick and dead, who could read this: "Had the Germans shown a little more love of Germany and little less love of those who claimed to be the über-lovers of Germany, a great deal of tragedy might have been avoided" and respond with this: "Is this meant to insert an essential and historically-verifiable difference between the German people during the Nazi regime and Nazi Germany? If the German people elected Hitler, does that mean that they are to be excused from their responsibility for their choice because they were duped by Hitler? Did Hitler really dupe anyone who did not want to be duped?" No, for those of us who are capable of more than the most banal and trivial interpretations of absolutely everything, the first statement is meant to indicate that it is not criticism of clan and country that leads to bestial outcomes, but succumbing to the intimidation of those who insist in ever more hysterical tones that criticism of clan and country is disloyal, unpatriotic, or evinces hatred of self and of one's own. This shows us the difference between dumb literalism and an actual understanding of the import of words.

- roidubouloi

April 25, 2010 at 12:12am

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

Noga (rightly questioning an earlier poser): "Since Netanyahu is head of the Likkud, does it mean that millions of Jews detest Netanyahu?" Even were that true, so what? Until they are citizens who live in Israel, pay taxes in Israel, and do military service in Israel, I fail to see why any foreigners (Jewish or not) should have much of a say in whom Israeli democracy picks as PM. When the USA tries to determine whom another country chooses as leader, it's accused of neo-imperialism. So why aren't Israelis entitled to the same dignity, of freedom from foreign neo-imperialism (Jewish or otherwise)?

- TNR.Reader

April 25, 2010 at 12:22am

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

And for those who are dumb literalists, allow me to remind you of just who it is on these threads who constantly insists that criticism of the government of Israel and its practices is disloyal, unpatriotic, and anti-Semitic. It is the jackal pack. This is indeed what makes them the jackal pack. It is the fascist and crypto-fascist right and the Leninist/Stalinist/Maoist left, the totalitarians, who equate the mere fact of criticism with disloyalty. Which are you?

- roidubouloi

April 25, 2010 at 12:24am

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

The latest fascist fashion: Democratically elected leaders should not be criticized. Or should only be criticized by their own electorate. Or only by people who pay taxes. Of only by people who have served in the military. Any excuse for fascist intimidation will do.

- roidubouloi

April 25, 2010 at 12:28am

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

Ignore king bulljive, the Obamadnik.

- jdyer

April 25, 2010 at 12:32am

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

It appears that Judge Goldstone has to undergo forced re-education in order to attend his grandson's Bar Mitzvah. Only a fool would think that redounds to the credit of the South African Jewish community. Here is a more complete version of the statement quoted by noga1:

I am happy to inform you that after being approached this morning by the Jewish communal organizations, the following statement was issued by the Director of the South African Board of Deputies, Wendy Kahn: "The SA Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD) is pleased to announce that, following consultation between all the parties involved, an agreement has been reached confirming Judge Richard Goldstone attending his grandson's forthcoming bar mitzvah ceremony. It was agreed that a meeting hosted by the SA Zionist Federation would take place between Judge Goldstone and leadership of the SA Zionist Federation and other Jewish Communal representatives to discuss the Jewish community's response to the report of the Commission chaired by Judge Goldstone last year and for Judge Goldstone to give his perspectives on the issue. It was further confirmed that Judge Goldstone would attend his grandson's bar mitzvah and that there would be no protests associated with the bar mitzvah. The SAJBD respectfully requests, in light of the agreement reached, that all parties immediately desist all public activities on this matter so that the young man's bar mitzvah celebration can be returned to the privacy and dignity that it deserves. Judge Goldstone said that "I am delighted that I will attend the bar mitzvah of my grandson."
http://tinyurl.com/35vt6uo We must never cower in the face of thugs.

- ndmackenzie

April 25, 2010 at 3:29am

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

"This shows us the difference between dumb literalism and an actual understanding of the import of words." "Now, take a good look at me! I'm one that has spoken to a King, I am: mayhap you'll never see such another... ".. There's glory for you!' `I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said. Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. `Of course you don't -- till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"' `But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected. `When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.' `The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.' `The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master -- that's all." ___________________ Or, as the Canadian poet Anne Carson explains: ""What really connects words and things? ... All human words are known to the gods but have for them entirely other meanings alongside our meanings. They flip the switch at will. " ________________ It is interesting to note that in both cases, lying is associated with pathological self-importance and narcissism.

- noga1

April 25, 2010 at 8:27am

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

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-dershowitz/an-invitation-to-j-street_b_550718.html "I'm delighted with Jeremy Ben-Ami's answer to my direct question. Ben-Ami, speaking for J Street, now says that American wars and casualties "do not find their roots in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and it would be absurd to adhere to such a simplistic causal analysis." This answer is important for several reasons. First, it puts J Street directly in conflict with many on the hard left, including some of J Street' own supporters, who have publicly stated that American casualties are directly caused by Israel's alleged refusal to make peace. Second, it puts J Street directly in conflict with views attributed (falsely one hopes) to Vice President Joe Biden and General David Petraeus. Biden was quoted as telling Prime Minister Netanyahu, "what you're doing here undermines the security of our troops." And General Petraeus has been quoted as saying that Israeli intransigents "could cost American lives."

- noga1

April 25, 2010 at 9:20am

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

"And for those who are dumb literalists, allow me to remind you of just who it is on these threads who constantly insists that criticism of the government of Israel and its practices is disloyal, unpatriotic, and anti-Semitic." roi is seeing things, or rather, projecting from the arsenal he carries around to discredit anyone who disagrees with his sentiments about Netanyahu or Obama. I defy him to provide a quote from any of the posters here that would validate this assertion. I mean, if the practice is done consistently and insistently as he suggests, then there should be no problem providing such a quote, right? Lest he should follow his wont and provide some quote which he then, humpty-dumpty style, will attempt to rework in order to fit his own ends, I insist that he should provide a quote that will include all the elements he itemized in his accusation: criticism of the government of Israel disloyal unpatriotic anti-Semitic. Should he fail to do so, then it is safe to regard him as a braggart, a buffoon and a liar, with all the esteem that such characters deserve.

- noga1

April 25, 2010 at 9:39am

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

A second chance for those who have eyes but refuse to see: Scrubby says: "Seriously, though there are some Jews who don't like Israel, I am certainly not one of them. However, the Likudniks, whom you seem to channel in your posts and whom you often conflate with Israel as a whole, are detested by millions of Jews worldwide. Count me as one of those detesters." To which the jackass replies: "Seems like Scrub is the one consumed by hate: His hatred of Israel, hatred of Peretz, hatred of Jews who don’t support Obama, lots of hate there, Scrubby."

- roidubouloi

April 25, 2010 at 10:01am

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

"A second chance for those who have eyes but refuse to see:" I specifically qualified my request by insisting that your example be a clear, transparent and self-evident illustration of your accusation that: "constantly insists that criticism of the government of Israel and its practices is disloyal, unpatriotic, and anti-Semitic." No re-meaning or de-meaning, of words is allowed. I want to see "disloyal, unpatriotic, and anti-Semitic." clearly being claimed in response to "criticism of the government of Israel and its practices". To help you with your assignment, here are a few guiding questions: 1. Point out scrubby's "criticism of the government of Israel and its practices" 2. Define: disloyal, unpatriotic, anti-Semitic. 3. Illustrate how these definitions are born out in the quote you provided. Should you fail to do so, then it is safe to regard you as a braggart, a buffoon and a liar, with all the esteem that such characters deserve.

- noga1

April 25, 2010 at 10:14am

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

But as to this matter of TNR.reader's accusation that I am an anti-Semite, here is the exchange: 03/26/2010 - 11:17am EDT | TNR.Reader This discussion belongs in Hebrew in Israel. It does not belong in English abroad. One suspects Halevy moves the discussion here because he has failed to convince the Israeli polity and wishes, like J-Street, to circumvent that failure by using foreigners to over-ride Israeli democracy. 03/26/2010 - 11:53am EDT | roidubouloi You are so right, TNR.reader. No one outside of Israel is capable of thinking about these things or taking note of the realities unless instructed by an Israeli such as Halevy. And if Israelis will therefore confine their discussions to Hebrew, so that no one else in the world notices what is occurring in the Middle East, why, it will be as if the rest of the world doesn't exist. But, I have a much simpler method for you: Just close your eyes and put your hands over your ears. Poof!, the world will be gone and there will no longer be any need to worry that outside forces may put an end to Israel's colonial adventures. By the way, got any opinion about the propriety of AIPAC meddling in American domestic affairs by lobbying our legislature on behalf of a foreign state? Would that constitute trying to over-ride our democracy? 03/26/2010 - 12:02pm EDT | TNR.Reader RoiDesTravelosDuBoisDeBoulogne, you're an anti-Semite & TNR should eject you.

- roidubouloi

April 25, 2010 at 10:41am

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

The jackal pack at work and play.

- roidubouloi

April 25, 2010 at 10:42am

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

" AIPAC meddling in American domestic affairs by lobbying our legislature on behalf of a foreign state ... trying to over-ride our democracy" "Our" democracy? Who is "our"? Roid's? Obama's? Americans who hate Israel, thus excluding from "our" the majority of Americans (including AIPAC) who support Israel? Oh, I see, according to Roid, those Americans who support Israel are not real Americans and are not part of "our" America. JD, Noga, note that the Roid's political career makes him so loyal to Obama, that he will even whip out this old, anti-Semitic canard of dual loyalty. And his overwheening pride prevents him from admtting he stepped over the line, into classic anti-Semitism.

- TNR.Reader

April 25, 2010 at 11:08am

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

"TNR.reader's accusation that I am an anti-Semite," Your comment about "the propriety of AIPAC meddling in American domestic affairs by lobbying our legislature on behalf of a foreign state" counts as an antisemitic argument, at least according to the Definition of Antisemitism, Source: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. http://www.zionismontheweb.org/antisemitism/EU-definition-of-antisemitism.htm ___________ A sensitive soul, aren't you? I could equally to respond to your accusation by reminding you of just who it is on these threads who constantly insists that criticism of the Obama's administration and its practices is disloyal, unamerican, and Nazi. And as example I will remind you of your many references to my person as a Goebbels, an antisemite and a Nazi.

- noga1

April 25, 2010 at 11:08am

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

TNR.Reader, you are wasting your time answering the deranged KING BULLJIVE. He is clinically insane and lonely and his posts are meant to anger you. Don't tak the bait. Just ignore him.

- jdyer

April 25, 2010 at 11:20am

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

This belongs here too: "White House says Schumer attacks unfounded" April 25, 2010 "(JTA) -- The White House responded to Senator Chuck Schumer's criticism of the Obama administration for its attitude toward Israel. In a radio interview Thursday on The Nachum Segal Show, which originates in New Jersey, Schumer (D –N.Y.) called the administration's policy toward Israel and the Palestinians in an attempt to restart negotiations "counter-productive." "(W)hen you give the Palestinians hope that the United States will do its negotiating for them, they are not going to sit down and talk," Schumer continued. Schumer said Jewish members of Congress "will be meeting with the President next week or the week after, and we are saying that this has to stop." "Right now there is a battle going on inside the administration, one side agrees with us, one side doesn’t, and we’re pushing hard to make sure the right side wins and if not we’ll have to take it to the next step," Schumer said. In a press briefing Friday, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs took issue with Schumer's criticisms. "We have an unwavering commitment to the security of Israel and the Israeli people," Gibbs said. "We have said that from the beginning of this administration." "I don't think that it's a stretch to say we don't agree with what Sen. Schumer said in those remarks," Gibbs added. Schumer is up for re-election in the fall. He has been one of President Obama's closest allies among Jewish Democrats." http://www.jta.org/news/article/2010/04/25/2394491/white-house-says-schumer-attacks-unfounded

- jdyer

April 25, 2010 at 11:22am

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

Noga, leave it alone. You won't convince KING BULL of anything since he is not here to argue, he is here to bully and to rage. The man is insane, really clinically insane. As to double loyalty, all supporters of the Arab, Muslim, and universal leftists causes have double and triple loyalties . It's to their cause. At least my double loyalty is to my country and to an ally. It's not to the enemy. In any case, anyone can sue me for my "double loyalty" if they have a mind to do so. I'll sue them right back. The idea of a mackenzie and his ilk attacking other of double loyalty is laughable. There isn't a Palestinian supporter who doesn't have a double and triple loyalty.

- jdyer

April 25, 2010 at 11:28am

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

JD: 1. "TNR.Reader, you are wasting your time ... Don't tak the bait" You're absolutely right. The language is also over-the-top. But you're privileged: He called me a "piece of shit" but only called you a "piece of crap." He must like you. ;-} It's scary to think (according to Roid) he may hold a public position of power. 2. Schumer's "if not we’ll have to take it to the next step" Nice to see the Jewish comunity finally showing some backbone.

- TNR.Reader

April 25, 2010 at 11:32am

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

TNR.Reader "JD, You're absolutely right. The language is also over-the-top. But you're privileged: He called me a "piece of shit" but only called you a "piece of crap." He must like you. ;-} It's scary to think (according to Roid) he may hold a public position of power." He has no power, people with power don't waste their time posting deranged insults on blogs. He is a lonely sad sack with nothing better to do than rile people up. This is the only he figures he could get anyone to exchange words with.

- jdyer

April 25, 2010 at 11:50am

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

noga: tabletmag has now approved my comment on Iran war scenarios. Perhaps each author moderates the comments, but I do not think yours would be banned, based on some of the comments in the Drabble thread. as to Chuck Schumer? He reflects his constituents, but has no opponent (yet) as the NY GOP keeps thinking Gillenbrand is vulnerable, not Schumer, who is flush with cash, almost $22mil. A fluke that both NY senators are up for re-election in the same year. Schumer is under heat for being too close to Wall Street. If Schumer does have a backbone, it is on Israel. A plus for him is that his office excels at constituent services, unlike Hillary. Schumer's dilemma, neatly summarized by Juli Weiner: http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2010/04/today-is-just-not-chuck-schumers-day.html Actually, Schumer's dilemma is how to keep the money flowing to other Senate Democrats if Wall Street money keeps drying up for the Dems. And whether he has a shot at Majority Leader if Harry Reid loses. The fracturing of the Democratic Party in New York is rather complicated this year in the absence of a clear leader. Lucky for the Dems there is less leadership or cohesion in the NY GOP.

- K2K

April 25, 2010 at 12:14pm

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

"“Most importantly, I'd like to know what exactly and really bugs scrubby about the whole issue of Israel.” ( noga) Very clever, madam noga, but Israel doesn’t bug me. What bugs me is the tendency of some people, including you, to equate any strong disagreement with them over Israel as either anti-Semitism or hatred for Israel.

- scrubby

April 25, 2010 at 5:04pm

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

"“The new fact that Likud is the center in Israel is lost on so many, including the Obami.” (k2k) No, k2k, the Likud is not the center in Israel, thank God. They can barely hold a governing coalition together, a situation they would not find themselves in, I think, if they are truly the Israeli center. Judging by your sentiments on Israel, though, I could see why you’d wish it so." Hopefully, by the time this tango being danced by Obama and the Likudniks is over, they (the Likudniks) would barely be a member of any governing coalition in the Knesset much less be the government. But, we'll see.

- scrubby

April 25, 2010 at 5:15pm

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

"...to equate any strong disagreement with them over Israel as either anti-Semitism or hatred for Israel." Clever sleight of hand. Now you use "anti-Semitism or hatred for Israel." interchangeably. I don't see them as equivalent or alternative. Antisemitism is not necessarily hatred of Israel, and vice versa. But if you use them in this way that means that "hatred of Israel" as an illegitimate reason for criticism of sporadic Israel policies should not be used by way of discrediting an argument. It's a version of the Livingstone formula and as such, a logical fallacy. I can reassure you that I will continue to analyze and identify any argument according to a set of rules and if I deem your argument to be a mask for antisemitism, I will say so and if I think it is Hatred of Israel, I will say so. I do not go about throwing accusations of antisemitism gratuitously. But I will pronounce my judgment when the label is merited. People who pretend to be so wounded by the accusation of antisemitism should check out their own words and opinions to see why such an impression is conveyed.

- noga1

April 25, 2010 at 5:27pm

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

Thank you, thank you, roi, for defending the point I made about the Likud…..a point which I thought was clear enough for anyone not looking for Jew-hatred behind every thought on Israel. You just have this knack for expressing many of my sentiments on Israel in ways that my limitations on English writing ability doesn't allow me to. You are a Godsend. I mean, what, with the double or triple teaming one encounters on the Spine from you know who -- the jack(al) pack, often led by the emotional-control-challenged, raging jackass himself, jack the bully. The jackal pack is very apt. Thanks too for coining that. This pack, some of them perpetually raging and others calm, cool, full of hypocrisy, always think their love for Israel surpasses anyone’s. To them anyone that strongly opposes their Likudnik fantasies must be driven by malice toward Jews. I don’t know who or what the hell they think they are, but I have some family and extended family members living in Israel, of which, decades ago, one died and another was very badly injured in the defense of the Jewish state. I don’t need any lectures from any of them on what’s at stake in the struggle for Israel’s survival. To be honest, their attitude toward a differing opinion on Israel reminds me of the bastard who shot Rabin

- scrubby

April 25, 2010 at 5:37pm

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

Saying "either A or B" doesn't necessarily mean that A and B are interchangeable, noga. But when it comes to English grammar, I'll defer to you.

- scrubby

April 25, 2010 at 5:45pm

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

scrubby: "No, k2k, the Likud is not the center in Israel, thank God. They can barely hold a governing coalition together, a situation they would not find themselves in, I think, if they are truly the Israeli center." If you update yourself on the changed demographics, and electoral outcome last year, you would realize that Likud is now slightly to the left of the coalition partners (Yisrael Beitenu and Shas) that ANY Prime Minister now needs to form a governing coalition. Kadima refused their demands, and Barak led the weakened Labor party into Likud's coalition, and that is why Tzipi Livni is not the PM. do not bother to respond. I ignore the roid crew.

- K2K

April 25, 2010 at 6:08pm

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

"you would realize that Likud is now slightly to the left of the coalition partners (Yisrael Beitenu and Shas)" Only slightly to the left indeed. Maybe like being slightly to the left of Le Pen's Front National. Nothing to brag about and frightening for anyone other than another jingoist, messianic nutcase. * * * Oxymoron of the week: "I can reassure you that I will continue to analyze and identify any argument according to a set of rules and if I deem your argument to be a mask for antisemitism, I will say so and if I think it is Hatred of Israel, I will say so. I do not go about throwing accusations of antisemitism gratuitously. But I will pronounce my judgment when the label is merited." "I will pronounce my judgment . . . " Ho, ho, ho. Grandiosity? Megalomania? Or merely unsocialized and completely lacking the ability to understand how one's words sound to others. There's a name for that last syndrome. Let me think . . . This poster cannot analyze anything whatsoever that is not fiction and makes nothing but accusations, every one of them gratuituous. Goebbels little virgin. * * * Just whistle, and the jackal pack gathers around and commences its snarling. What truly is beyond my imagination is that they imagine themselves to be defenders of Israel. They disgrace Israel with their so-called defense. I'd rather have declared enemies than self-appointed friends like these. Anyone who did not hold a well-formed opinion already, pro or con, would look at this pack of animals and conclude that Israel must indeed be guilty of all sorts of crimes.

- roidubouloi

April 25, 2010 at 6:28pm

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

They are the bastards who shot Rabin, scrubby. The maniac emerged from a particular political sub-culture. You are looking at it here.

- roidubouloi

April 25, 2010 at 6:31pm

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

scrubby "Thank you, thank you, roi, for defending the point I made about the Likud….."" Scrubbudab thanking King Bull is like the latter talking to himself. Two crazy Obamadnik peas in one pod.

- jdyer

April 25, 2010 at 6:50pm

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

The Margaret Drabble article Art Thou Contented, Jew in Tablet magazine mentioned upthread is indeed an excellent article on the relationship between Jews and non-Jews in Britain. It is a far more accurate portrayal of that relationship than would ever appear in this magazine - which suffers for it. Unsurprisingly, it is nothing like the fantasy vision of that relationship presented by Martin Peretz and extended by the febrile imagination of the jackasses. Frank Foer would be a much better and more honest Editor were he to publish something like this article by Margaret Drabble instead of yet another piece of apologia for the Gaza pogroms by someone like Howard Jacobson. http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/31246/art-thou-contented-jew/

- ndmackenzie

April 25, 2010 at 7:11pm

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

"do not bother to respond. I ignore the roid crew." No, k2k, you don't ignore the "roid crew." If you did, you wouldn't have responded. Besides, isn't such attitude the same kind you professed turns you off the President's supporters.

- scrubby

April 25, 2010 at 7:14pm

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

roid baiting K2K: "Only slightly to the left indeed. Maybe like being slightly to the left of Le Pen's Front National. Nothing to brag about and frightening for anyone other than another jingoist, messianic nutcase." hmm, I am a third generation registered Democrat. Is roid is a right-wing mole? or the worst recruiter for Obama's Democratic Party? Considering the Google-search friendliness of TNR.com, I think the Democratic Party is poorly served by a partisan making 'Roid Rage available for GOP attack ads. the real moles burrowed along my north foundation are much easier to whack.

- K2K

April 25, 2010 at 7:22pm

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

Here you will find the real story about the treatment of Jews in merry old bigoted England: "Trials of the Diaspora: A History of Anti-Semitism in England" by Anthony Julius "Review "Anthony Julius has produced a brilliant and readable account of a shameful stain on the national reputation. The best dissection I've seen of Britain's oldest and least acknowledged racial prejudice." --Nick Cohen "Part history of an irrational hatred, part forensic analysis of a sophistical lie, part literary criticism - for, as Anthony Julius shows, anti-Semitism is a species of fantastical literature, all figure of speech, misquotation and fancy - this exhilarating work nails a defamation which, to humanity's discredit, persists to this hour. Indispensable." --Howard Jacobson "This is an essential history and so it's fortunate it has been written by a man with the extraordinary fluency, staggering erudition, scholarly integrity, intellectual acumen, and moral discernment of Anthony Julius." --Philip Roth "Writing against a backdrop of rising violence and abuse directed at English Jews and the State of Israel, Anthony Julius insightfully and passionately traces antisemitism's abject history in England from the medieval period until today. This eminently readable book is thoroughly researched and nuanced, and its take on contemporary antisemitism is a true tour de force." --Jehuda Reinharz, Richard Koret Professor of Modern Jewish History and President, Brandeis University "Once he gets to the modern era Julius writes with unrivalled authority and these chapters will be required reading for anyone interested in the subtle and often cruel ways in which anti-Jewish views have been expressed by the English in the last century, as well as the disturbing ways in which anti-Zionism has of late shaded into a new and permissible form of anti-Semitism." --James Shapiro, Financial Times "Trials of the Diaspora is an extraordinary testament to the brilliance of its author." --Keith Kahn-Harris,Forward" http://www.amazon.com/Trials-Diaspora-History-Anti-Semitism-England/dp/0199297053/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1272239358&sr=8-1 Drabble is just a dear old smarmy old lady who means well, but doesn’t know much about Jewish life in England outside of her own circle of assimilated “Jews.”

- jdyer

April 25, 2010 at 7:54pm

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

The Wikipedia page for Anthony Julius states: -- Julius is known for his opposition to new antisemitism, the alleged expression of antisemitic prejudice couched in terms of criticism of Israel, and gives frequent talks on the subject all over the world to raise awareness. In other words Anthony Julius subscribes to the ideology of Zionist Anti-Semitism which seeks to appease and the Israeli oppression of the Palestinian people because Israel is a "Jewish" state. In seeking to absolve Israel from responsibility for its war crimes because Israel is a "Jewish" state, Zionist Anti-Semites seek to share the blame for these war crimes among all Jews. This is despicable and is no different from traditional anti-Semitism blaming all Jews for the crimes of some. The vacuous charge of "new anti-Semitism" is put forwrd by those who provide the intellectual backing to the physical Zio-Nazism of the Israeli settler movement. Anthony Julis does not need to write a book about anti-Semitism, in its Zionist form it pervades the "new anti-Semitism" he supposedly advocates. Margaret Drabble, of course, does not share his biases and his bigotry so gets attacked by the jackass. It is always the same. As in 1930s Germany so today.

- ndmackenzie

April 25, 2010 at 8:28pm

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

Ha, ha, ha, nazi mackenzie quoted wikipedia the anonymous factoid page with antisemitic posts to prove that there is no antisemitims in his home country. Now that's a good joke from mackasshole.

- jdyer

April 25, 2010 at 8:56pm

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

Oh yea, the nzai like anitsemite macknezie also known as mackasshole didn't post a link wiki blog article here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Julius#cite_ref-0 most people who support Julius are prominent scholars like Simon Schama people who oppose him are bigots like mackasshole. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/dec/22/bergerboycott

- jdyer

April 25, 2010 at 9:09pm

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

In the Guardian article linked to by jdyer, Anthony Julius and Simon Schama show almost immediatelyjust how disingenuous their argument is: -- Advocates of the boycott of Israel repeatedly invoke the boycott of South Africa. The parallel they draw between Israel and apartheid South Africa is false. -- The Palestinian, Druze and other minorities in Israel are guaranteed equal rights under the basic laws. All citizens of Israel vote in elections. There are no legal restrictions on movement, employment or sexual or marital relations. The universities are integrated. Opponents of Zionism have free speech and assembly and may form political organizations. By radical contrast, South African apartheid denied non-whites the right to vote, decreed where they could live and work, made sex and marriage across the racial divide illegal, forbad opponents of the regime to express their views, banned the liberation movements and maintained segregated universities. -- In any event, the relations between Israel and the Palestinians of Gaza and the West Bank are not governed by Israeli law, but by international law. "Apartheid," as a set of discriminatory laws governing the nationals of one state, is simply not the appropriate model here. While Israel undoubtedly has some racial tropes embedded in its laws - in much the same way as the American South did with blacks or the British with regard to catholics in Northern Ireland - they are not the reason people seek a boycott of Israel. It is well known that the driving force behind a boycott is the massive and wanton violation of international law that is the Israeli colonization of the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Julius and Schama completely ignore this canonical violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention Article 49(6) even as they admit that the Occupied Palestinian Territories are subject to international law. Indeed, this violation is probably the most egregious violation of human irghts by any Western nation since the Nazi occupation of Europe. The separate and unequal measures which Israel has taken to enable and facilitate its colonization of the Occupied Palestinian Teritories amounts to an apartheid system. Their failure to consider this in their article shows that Julius and Schama are at best ignorant and at worst malicious liars. The occupation denial of the settlers and those who seek to support the Israeli oppression of the Palestinian people by minimizing its severity comes from the same moral depravity as the holocaust denier. Their lies may differ but their goal is the same - the support of militant (religious) nationalism. In writing this article replete with feigned ignorance and malicious lies Julius and Schama confirm that they are Zionist Anti-Semites seeking to absolve Israel from its responsibility for hideous war crimes because it is a Jewish state. In doing so they seek to share the blame for Israeli atrocities among all Jews. Theirs is a foul and depraved anti-Semitism that remains the most pernicious and prevalent form of anti-Semitism in the Western World of today. In choosing to minimize the significance of the horrors consequent to the Israeli oppression of the Palestinian people Julius and Schama showed their work to be haunted by the shadow of the ZioNazism that is the central ideology of the settler movement. It is thanks to morally depraved individuals like them that this vile ideology is becoming the core ideology of the State of Israel.

- ndmackenzie

April 25, 2010 at 11:42pm

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

"hideous war crimes" "the horrors consequent to the Israeli oppression of the Palestinian people" These statements are completely absurd. The only horrors visited upon the Palestinians are at the hands of other Palestinians. Any point that could possibly be made about Israeli violations of international law is completely vitiated by statements so extreme as to be completely ridiculous. The settlements are a burden, but houses are neither hideous war crimes nor "horrors." The period between Oslo and the Second Intifada made clear that, in the absence of terrorist violence, conditions in the West Bank could improve almost to the point of normalcy. The heaviest burdens of occupation are the direct result of the PA's violation of its pledge at Oslo to desist from violence and pursue its goals by peaceful means. That does not justify the settlements, but the magnitude of that problem needs to be regarded with some perspective that is at least vaguely rational. The Palestinians have only to desist from violence, firmly and finally, to free themselves.

- roidubouloi

April 25, 2010 at 11:54pm

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

The antisemite mackenzie writes: "In the Guardian article linked to by jdyer, Anthony Julius and Simon Schama show almost immediatelyjust how disingenuous their argument is" Except that he didn't show anything of the kind. As usual all he does he throw around the tired all 4th Geneva argument as if it were a warrant for his Jew hatred. You can always rely on mackenzie to come up with an extreme antisemitic post. Any one who agree with him on any issue soon finds that out. If you lie down with dogs….. And mackenzie is rabid antisemitic nazi dog. Best keep him muzzled and on a leash.

- jdyer

April 26, 2010 at 1:08pm

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

To the muckenzie Crow: Andrew Barton Paterson - Why the Jackass Laughs The Boastful Crow and the Laughing Jack
Were telling tales of the outer back:
"I've just been travelling far and wide,
At the back of Bourke and the Queensland side;
There isn't a bird in the bush can go
As far as me," said the old black crow.
"There isn't a bird in the bush can fly
A course as straight or a course as high.
Higher than human eyesight goes.
There's sometimes clouds -- but there's always crows,
Drifting along for a scent of blood
Or a smell of smoke or a sign of flood.
For never a bird or a beast has been
With a sight as strong or a scent as keen.
At fires and floods I'm the first about,
For then the lizards and mice run out:
And I make my swoop -- and that's all they know --
I'm a whale on mice," said the Boastful Crow.
The Bee-birds over the homestead flew
And told each other the long day through
"The cold has come, we must take the track."
"Now, I'll make you a bet," said the Laughing Jack,
"Of a hundred mice, that you dare not go
With the little Bee-birds, by Boastful Crow."
Said the Boastful Crow, "I could take my ease
And fly with little green birds like these.
If they went flat out and they did their best
I could have a smoke and could take a rest."
And he asked of the Bee-birds circling round:
"Now, where do you spike-tails think you're bound?"
"We leave tonight, and out present plan
is to go straight on till we reach Japan.
"Every year, on the self-same day,
We call our children and start away,
Twittering, travelling day and night,
Over the ocean we take our flight;
And we rest a day on some lonely isles
Or we beg a ride for a hundred miles
On a steamer's deck,* and away we go:
We hope you'll come with us, Mister Crow."
But the old black crow was extremely sad.
Said he: "I reckon you're raving mad
To talk of travelling night and day,
And how in the world do you find your way?"
And the Bee-birds answered him, "If you please,
That's one of our own great mysteries".
Now these things chanced in the long ago
And explain the fact, which no doubt you know,
That every jackass high and low
Will always laugh when he sees a crow.

- jdyer

April 26, 2010 at 6:17pm

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

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close