Monday, October 18, 2010
These Won't Help
Nor Will This
What do Alan Dershowitz and Marty Peretz have in common these days? Choose from the following list:
(a) They're both part of the Harvard community
(b) They're both "public intellectuals" (whatever that means)
(c) They're both outspoken
(d) They're both Islamophobes and bigots
(e) They're both obviously Jewish
(f) They're both proudly Liberal
According to the MSM and the university establishment, a through e are correct, but f is now seriously in question by the intellectual powers that be. In almost parallel instances, Peretz and Dershowitz have been cast in the roles of the "Jew among the intellectuals." The common thread that unites the two right now is their staunch defense of the Jewish State, Israel. And for that reason, alone, they have been sent out into the wilderness burdened with their people's guilt.
For decades both have been stalwart standard bearers of Liberalism and the Democratic Party. Peretz, as owner and editor of the venerable magazine, The New Republic and Dershowitz as Harvard's Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, "attorney for the damned" (and occasionally, the well-heeled), have supported Democrat candidates since time immemorial. Both supported and campaigned vigorously for Barack Hussein Obama for President. Their big "L" liberal credentials are long established.
Dershowitz, whose books and speeches in defense of Israel are legion, spends a good part of every presentation on the Middle East conflict establishing his Liberal bona fides ranging from the Civil Rights struggle to women's rights, not to mention the rights of Palestinians to their own state. Peretz has lent his name and money to the campaigns of Al Gore and John Kerry. If this is the case, then what was their unpardonable offense that led to their rapid and precipitous fall from grace?
Both men have fallen prey to the current hysteria and witch hunting of those who would root out any dissenters from the prevailing tyranny of "Islamophobia." and moral relativity. "Jews" (used advisedly) like Glenn Greenwald of Salon and MJ Rosenberg of Media Matters have placed themselves in the vanguard of the Jewish Left which will brook no defense of Israel or dissent from their alliance with Islam.
Peretz has since apologized for his comments of last month:
"But, frankly, Muslim life is cheap, most notably to Muslims,'' He went on to say:". . . I wonder whether I need honor these people and pretend that they are worthy of the privileges of the First Amendment which I have in my gut the sense that they will abuse.''
Sadly, an investigative door was opened by his comments, but quickly shut. Considering the pervasive death cult practiced by many radical Muslims, both of their own lives and the lives of innocents - both Muslim and non-Muslim - the "cheapness" of life among them might have been worth exploring. If it were not for 9/11 and the 16,000 additional terrorist attacks that have occurred since that date, none of us would be having a discussion on the nature of the politico-theology called Islam. And considering recent polls in the Muslim world that show an overwhelming number of adherents favoring strict Shariah Law, his other point about the First Amendment seems particularly valid for discussion. As to whether Muslims should be granted the benefits of our Constitution, he has made this apology:
"I wrote that, but I do not believe that. I do not think that any group or class of persons in the United States should be denied the protections of the First Amendment, not now, not ever. When I insist upon a sober recognition of the threats to our security, domestic threats included, I do not mean to suggest that the Constitution and its order of rights should in any way be abrogated. I would abhor such a prospect. I do not wish upon Muslim Americans the sorts of calumnies that were endured by Italian Americans in connection with Sacco and Vanzetti and Jewish Americans in connection with communism. My recent comments on the twisted Koran-hating reverend in Gainesville will give evidence of that. So I apologize for my sentence, not least because it misrepresents me."
All to no avail. Peretz and Dershowitz now occupy the Ninth Circle of the Left. No matter what apologies are forthcoming, they bear the stain of incorrect politics. And that was evident at a recent book event at Boston's venerable Old South Church at which Dershowitz discussed his novel, The Trials of Zion" along with Palestinian Arab-American, Susan Abulhawa and her novel, "Mornings in Jenin" (whose original title was "The Scar of David" - no kidding). Ms. Abulhawa's presentation quickly descended into a screed against Israel and Jews complete with David Ben Gurion's genocidal comments which have long been exposed as forgeries. No amount of left-wing merit badges could spare Dersh the ire of the crowd. Even when he cited the incontrovertible evidence that the Palestinians' national hero for decades, Haj Amin al Husseini, was an active participant in the Holocaust, urging Hitler and Himmler to murder the Jews even faster than they were doing - the graying, pony-tailed, faux-Jewish crowd were screaming for Dershowitz's blood. In true Stalinist fashion, they tried to silence him, but he gave as good as he got.
But like Van Helsing's garlic or wolfsbane, the magic amulet of correct, left wing beliefs will prove ineffective in warding off antisemitism. It's time Alan Dershowitz realized that he has been expelled from academia's garden of eden. He's fighting the good fight, however as is Marty Peretz.
Correct on all points but one. And it's a doozy. Glenn Greenwald in his own words is NOT a liberal and he earnestly corrects all who call him that. Greenwald tries to be coy on the point by saying he is neither left nor right but libertarian but several nasty facts get in the way:
He used to work for and ghostwrite for Pat Buchanan.
He happily associates with Larouche fringe loons.
He ended his own promising law career when he successfully defended Matt Hale, that famous neoNazi, to be admitted to the Illinois Bar.
He has said on his own blog that he would have given unqualified support to the Nazi party to march in Skokie, Illinois (that famous event which ended up as a non event).
In his blog he's an open Jew baiter and proud antizionist slightly more on the fringe than Hamas, (by his own admission.)
Has stated repeatedly that Jews control the US government foreign policy.
He stated repeatedly that Jews control the media.
Is a close ally of Alex Jones.
He lends his name to Holocaust denial organizations.
And last but not least, retains hands on control over EVERY single comment posting to his columns on Salon and never (and I mean NEVER) deletes Nazi hate speech. He deletes only opinions he personally disagrees with.
He is not a liberal. In fact he's so extreme right wing that it wraps around to the Chomsky left. And as far as being a "Jew", apart from his name, he's never actually made the claim himself.
As a liberal, I truly lament that we have an ugly side just like our adversaries, and this diary shows it quite well. Deshowitz's comment at the end was on the mark.
Trudy, I am not here to defend Greenwald and agree his views on Israel are way extreme. As I result, I essentially stopped reading what he says, and give him less credence on those issues where he and I may agree. But you leveled a lot of accusations, which in fairness remain nothing more without something supporting. In my opinion, your point could have been better made without what, to me, is a litany of demonization.
Why should Greenwald get better treatment than he gives anyone he disagrees with. 30 minutes of Google and a week spent reading his columns will tell you all you need to know. Search his columns at Salon.com. We would think they're written BY him.
By the By in case you haven't noticed yet, Greenwald has yet to publish an original idea or thought. A cursory review of his work will demonstrate that the man's total output is essentially personal attacks on other bloggers, more famous than he is, who had the audacity to actually disagree with anything Greenwald said. If he were not allowed to write about David Brooks, Marty Peretz or the Washington Post his output would drop by 90%.
Sorry but I stand by what I said. If the pilotfish in his wake can't tolerate that, too bad. I'd also add he has quite a reputation for constructing sockpuppets who gush over his online columns.
I would finally add that to name Greenwald as a Jew is vague, at best. He himself does not claim to be Jewish or not. He leaves that up to his followers to comment that the he is based on his name alone. I will tell you that I personally know an Elliott Goldberg who is a 3rd or 4th generation Southern Baptist. Greenwald may be a person who once had Jewish ancestors. So his implied claims "ASAJew" don't hold much water.