The Warped Mirror is the blog of Petra Marquardt-Bigman, one of the good people, and a blog I regularly read, when I've the time to leaf through my personal blog-roll. The following entry is on the Free Gaza Movement, led by one Greta Berlin, who is also a co-founder of the group.
And, you might well ask, so what? We know all about groups like this, well-intentioned (at least in their own eyes), but nearly always not only misinformed but also anti-Zionist. The former is unforgivable, the latter regrettable. And we all know lots of groups like that: here in the UK, Jews for Justice for Palestinians; Independent Jewish Voices; Palestine Solidarity Committee, and on and on and...
This one, however, is just a tad different, according to Petra M-B: it's also anti-semitic (or at least Greta Berlin is, and the difference may be moot). Petra traces a number of links within the Movement's website that lead directly to antisemitic articles, images and even videos. Further links can be found on her tweet account. Although, since this has broken, there have been strenuous efforts by the FGM to disappear these embarrassments, digging into the depths of the net soon brings them back (that is, it gets difficult to deny - like the famous photo of the air-brushed Trotsky: copies of the original remain in existence.
Just one quote from her article, to whet your appetite: 'Here is some of Free Gaza’s recommended reading: From the “Occupied Palestine” blog that is supposedly devoted to “Blogging 4 Human Rights & Liberation of Palestine!” The post recommended by Free Gaza is entitled “A ‘Leaflet’ to the World about it’s own ‘forgotten’ Extermination Camp called Gaza.”' Read it for yourself here.
Petra also notes that Walter Russell Mead, an American academic who blogs at Via Meadia, which is part of an online US paper called The American Interest (which I don't read: enough already), has an article on this matter, very much to the point, as you'll see from the heading: Archbishop Tutu Please Apologize to the Jews. If only. I'm not all that fond of Mead myself, a bit too Republican for my taste, but each to his own, and he is pro-Israeli.
By Brian Goldfarb.
1 hour ago
14 comments:
Mead is not a Republican. He's a liberal academic (history, Bard College) with conservative views who voted for Obozo in '04, suckered in by the claim that Barry would be a moderate. He now says he will vote for Romney, as anyone will have to if they want an alternative with a chance of being elected.
As Dick already said, WRM is NOT a republican; unlike Dick, I'm not sure that I would describe his views as conservative; indeed, for all I know, his sympathies tend to be center left. In any case, being myself a lapsed leftist, I think the man is a genius when it comes to getting the big picture.
Oh: And BIG thank you...
I have no idea what Mead's political affiliation is. Like Petra, I respect him for his independent thinking (not political designation). However, a person who would even consider voting for Romney cannot be considered a liberal. I don't say that snidely. To hold true liberal views would simply preclude the possibility - as I'll claim the same is true in reverse for conservatives and Obama. It might be that Mead is considering casting his vote purely on the basis of foreign policy, but that would be contingent on knowing what Romney's views on foreign policy actually are.
Oh, - and forgive my rudeness for neglecting to say so before - I'll second the praise of Petra. Maybe I can lead the lapsed back to the faith. ;-)
Mead's probably just tired of high unemployment, gasoline prices and coming electric rates now that Barry has made economics look like rocket science. Romney did a foreign policy speech yesterday in Virginia. Robust, muscular American exceptionalism, basically. Oh, and absolute support for Israel in deed as well as word. I'm voting for Romney and I have more than a few liberal views. As does Romney, for that matter. See Obamacare, the screwed-up version of Romneycare.
Thanking us? What for?
Best.
Hm... That gulf most American commenters see between the Republicans and the Democrats: it looks a bit exaggerated to most non-Americans, you know.
Oh, and by the way: I have a lot of trouble struggling with the modern definition of a liberal, being very far from the dictionary one.
It's convenient to posit, say, support of gay marriage as liberal and being opposed to abortion as conservative. When, in fact, some liberals are anti-abortion and some conservatives couldn't care less if gays marry.
It's a gulf the Democrats encourage so they can "fight" it, because otherwise they have only more government dependency to offer, the kind that has sooo helped Greece and Spain. In fact, both sides have too many crooks and liars.
So true.
Well, and you already know that I have trouble with the definition of the word "liberal" that is widely used today - frequently in a negative way. Someone must wrestle that term back to its roots.
No, guys. It's a gulf, with real water in it you can swim in, with a shore on this side and a shore on that side. You say it's not an ocean. Okay, it's not an ocean. It's not a stream either.
Well, I wouldn't argue, after all there is this Israeli song that says "the things you can see from here you can't see from there" or something to that effect. Still, gulf... oh well.
Post a Comment