Norman Finkelstein's behavior doesn't present a big mystery. Of course, there are many who erroneously claim that he belongs to that funny and ill-defined sect called "self-hating Jews". I've always protested that definition, seriously wrong in most cases as it's wrong in Finkelstein's case - after all, is there something he hasn't done yet for self-aggrandizing and for self-love?
If Finkelstein suffers from surplus hate, it is directed at Israel. Visiting Lebanon as a celebrity guest of Hezballoons - it is quite an act of hate, you would agree. Although - even in this act our Finkelstein was quite focused on his own PR.
But now, I suggest, we may have found the problem of the character, whom I called some time ago "a pathetic individual that carries out some deep psychological trauma, expunged by academic community and living of the Holocaust memories in his own perverted way". We don't have to look further for the root cause of the trauma.
The discovery is related to the story about the decoy Jews in Amsterdam. It appears (thanks to Yitzchak Goodman aka Judeopundit) that Finkelstein stumbled upon an AP article on the subject. His response? Reposting the whole article without any comments, save the following headline:
Dutch police to undergo mandatory circumcision and will expose their traumatized “members” in publicHere is a snapshot of the relevant page from his site:
So, without further ado: this pointless (and not even approximately funny) headline is, in fact, a cry (or a wail if you will) of a tortured soul. This headline puts a finger on the sensitive or, rather, painful point. (Can a headline put a finger on something? Whatever, you know what I mean.)
Notice the "traumatized" in conjunction with "circumcision". A botched circumcision could get a man to a poor state of mind, for sure. One could understand that hate - of own's father who has chosen the mohel with a shaking hand, of his own people who persist in their habit of circumcising their young. Of the whole megillah, in short.
Yeah. It was a big mistake. Or should we call it a small mistake in this case? Whatever, and here is the result:
Ehehe... A big schmuck with a small pipik, and this is the whole story? How sad indeed.