12 thoughts on “Rob Malley: Victim of a Jewish Smear – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. I’ll remember this the next time someone attacks Dennis Ross as a right wing neocon, or a Zionist traitor, or…heaven forbid….”Pro Israel”

    I’ll also remember this the next time a blogger thinks his great contribution to the world of free speech and discourse was that he could call his flip-side “Kahanist Swine.”

    To call Robert Malley “anti-Israel” is crude and simplistic. But we have now gotten to the point where COUNTERSPEECH is considered censorship or a “smear.” The fact is that Robert Malley is someone who is outspoken on the conflict and also involved tangentially in Obama’s campaign. So naturally people are going to criticize his views. That’s what politics is supposed to be.

    And Richard, have you proven that AIPAC’s “list” was used for the Obama attack e-mails, or are you once again on one of your tirades filled with unsubstantiated assertions?

  2. The fact that Dennis Ross stood up for Rob Malley has nothing to do with whether his views of the I-P conflict are correct. He did the right thing standing up for Malley. He’s still an enlightened AIPAC shill–though much smoother & more articulate than someone like Shmuel Rosner.

    Only a demagogic propagandist like you would call me the flip side of Rachel Neuwirth. You may recall that the judge sided with me, not her. I trust him as a better arbiter than you.

    we have now gotten to the point where COUNTERSPEECH is considered censorship or a “smear.”

    How nice to hear you dignify the dreck in American Thinker as “counterspeech.” This is a coordinated campaign of vilification that will only intensify. Let’s not difnify it by calling it anything other than a dirty lowdown smear.

    They attacked his father for Pete’s sake. Is that what politics is “supposed to be?” Clearly in yr warped world view it’s what politics is supposed to be.

    have you proven that AIPAC’s “list” was used for the Obama attack e-mails

    Where did you think I got the quotation from? That I made it up? Now do some work for a change & Google the quotation & you’ll find the source. And while you’re at it read what I write. I didn’t claim AIPAC was the source. That’s my interpretation of what the source said. And a pretty good inference I’d wager.

  3. You’re a supporter of that nutcase antisemite Norman Finklestein? I’m not surprised.

    Oh, yes…just noticed you’re hawking his books on your site. You must be immensely proud.

  4. that nutcase antisemite

    Which only betrays your close-mindedness, intolerance, spitefulness & all around lack of menschlichkeit. You must think “hate your fellow-Jews” was one of the 613 commandments.

    You must be immensely proud.

    You sure win the snark award today. I think all the books in my store are worth reading as do the hundreds of thousands of other readers including many Jews who’ve purchased them. What would be in your store? Baruch Goldstein’s memoir? When Dersh writes that first opera of his why don’t you hawk tickets for it via your own online store? Maybe you could sell Daniel Pipes’ latest diatribe & David Horowitz’s latest attack on academia.

  5. Me thinks you doth protest too much. Steve really hit a nerve didn’t he. You carry adds for Norm Finkelsteins books. However way you cut it that’s an endorsement. Are you a Norm Finkelstein fan, if your not the adds shouldn’t be on your site. If you are the next question is why? Serious question

  6. Very mature response, Richard. I criticize a man who supports Hizbullah, who would like to see them defeat Israel and you throw Baruch Goldstein at me? You should be ashamed of yourself but I know you’re incapable of it.

    Here are some of the words you’ve used recently with other people who disagree with you:

    demagogic propagandist
    yr warped world view
    the world’s greatest class-A asshole
    That’s dumber than dumb.

    Sounds a lot to me like “close-mindedness, intolerance, spitefulness & all around lack of menschlichkeit”.

  7. Richard,
    I am still puzzled why you use the term “pro-Israel” as an epithet, meaning something like “fascist”, when you define yourself as a “Zionist”.

  8. @ Bill Pearlman:

    Steve really hit a nerve didn’t he.

    No, I enjoy pointing out the inanities posted by people like you & him.

    Are you a Norm Finkelstein fan, if your not the adds shouldn’t be on your site.

    I do so enjoy people like Bill Pearlman telling me what I should & shouldn’t do on my blog. It’s terribly persuasive Bill & I always take yr advice so seriously. I would advertise your book, Bill, if you could ever get one published that I found interesting. Chances of that happening are next to none. But it’s true. And if I did advertise yr book you can be damn sure it doesn’t mean I’m a fan of yrs. Same holds true of Finkelstein. I find what he writes to be 1,000% more compelling than anything you or Steve can come up with. Hence, I promote it in my store.

    And if any of my readers want to support this blog I’d urge them to check the store out & thank Steve & Bill for helping me promote it. Because you can be damn sure that anything these two find objectionable almost all the rest of my readers would quite enjoy reading.

    @ Steve:

    I criticize a man who supports Hizbullah, who would like to see them defeat Israel

    You called him a ‘nutcase’ & ‘anti-Semite’ which is a little diff. than merely “criticizing” him. And you don’t quite have the full picture concerning his views. Finkelstein believed, as I do, that Israel waged an unjustified war of aggression against the Lebanese people that was all out of proportion to the actual event which triggered the war. He believed that Hezbollah was fully justified in defending Lebanon against Israeli attack.

    I don’t support Hezbollah’s kidnapping Israeli soldiers. But Israel’s invasion and mauling of an entire nation was wholly unjustified. Finkelstein believed Israel deserved to lose the war. I don’t believe that but I certainly don’t believe they deserved to win it either. There would’ve been far more effective means of avenging the kidnapping than the choices made.

    As for the epithets I used which you object to: they were used in debate with commenters here who I find intellectually dishonest, politically repugnant. Since you haven’t read my blog very long you will not know their history here, what they written, & how they have slandered me and my views. All you have to do is search through this blog for their names & you will find their other comments.

    I don’t pull punches here. If someone wants to debate civilly & w/o ad hominem attacks on me then they will be responded to civilly in return. But those who use insults, snark & the like, thereby falling below those standards will be responded to in kind. If you don’t like that then there are a few million other blogs out there you may turn to which may interest you more.

    @ Bar Kochba

    I am still puzzled why you use the term “pro-Israel” as an epithet

    The term I actually used was “pro-Israel extremist” which is entirely diff. than “pro-Israel.” You apparently didn’t bother to read my response to you the last time you raised this red herring argument. I am pro-Israel. The American Thinker “journalist” is a “pro-Israel extremist.” I think the diff. should be self-evident.

  9. Richard,

    I still don’t understand “pro-Israel extremist”. If you define yourself as “pro-Israel”, what you said makes no sense. That is like saying “he is like me, but too much”. I would understand “chauvinist”, “fascist”, “racist”, “jingoist”, or whatever.

  10. Bar Kochba: I’m open to suggestions. But the terms you used ignore the fact that the motivation of Ed Lasky & Rachel Neuwirth is to advocate on Israel’s behalf. They aren’t just chauvinists, fascists, etc. So what short phrase would you call someone who is an extremist advocate for Israel?

    Bill: I don’t always agree with Finkelstein and as Jerry Haber wrote to me recently he’d prob. not be the most convivial companion. But what I find compelling about him is that he is an uncompromising, laser-focussed political moralist. His arguments are fierce, unyielding & rigorous. He gives no quarter nor asks for any. Some of our Biblical prophets were fierce in the same way. Perhaps not the nicest person around, but I cut a lot of slack for a child of survivors. I’m sure the demons can be intense.

  11. What do you expect the US rightwingnuts to do? When guys like David Horowitz, M. Thomas Eisenstadt and Daniel Pipes couldn’t get Giuliani elected, they’ve since gone looking for more blood in the water. Anything to get their names and think tanks in the media for the general election cycle, they’ll do: completely self serving, irrespective of what they “say” about Israel.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *