Many in the media will leap to condemn Pat Robertson’s remarkably obtuse public statement calling for the assassination of Hugo Chavez, and in the process of doing so will almost certainly attempt to paint the “religious right” en masse as a group of bloodthirsty whackos in the mold of Robertson. But while you’re reading that inevitable litany of attacks and condemnations, be careful to keep in mind just who Hugo Chavez is and what he stands for—as well as how much of a threat his regime actually is becoming to the US and its allies. From Thor Halvorssen’s “Hurricane Hugo,” WS, August 8:
[…] In January, the State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor released a “Report on Global Anti-Semitism.” The report documents how openly anti-Semitic the Venezuelan government now is. Besides the raid on the Jewish school, it noted that “President Chávez cautioned citizens against following the lead of Jewish citizens in the effort to overturn his referendum victory. Anti-Semitic leaflets also were available to the public in an Interior and Justice Ministry office waiting room.”
Chávez first ran for president on a reform platform, winning in a landslide. What few understood then was that Chávez planned to revolutionize the country following a plan masterminded by his longtime friend Norberto Ceresole, an Argentinian writer infamous for his books denying the Holocaust and his conspiracy theories about Jewish plans to control the planet.
The title of Ceresole’s 1999 book on Chávez and Venezuela, Caudillo, Ejército, Pueblo (“Leader, Army, People”), eerily recalls the German national socialist maxim, “One People, One Country, One Leader.” (The first chapter is titled “The Jewish Question and the state of Israel.”) After denying the Holocaust, he explains that the greatest threat to Chavismo comes from the Jews of Venezuela. A self-described Communist and fascist, Ceresole became an expert in national socialism after designing Juan Domingo Perón’s electoral platform in Argentina. In Ceresole’s hands, representative democracy mutates into “participatory” systems led by cult-like figures; tellingly, Chávez praises the “participatory democracy” of Libya, Syria, Iran, and Cuba. Ceresole’s structure channels the people’s will through the charismatic strongman; the military functions as the central political body. Ceresole’s roadmap for Venezuela suffered some setbacks, including a 2002 coup that displaced Chávez for 48 hours and a national strike that almost toppled the government. But Venezuela’s dramatic political metamorphosis was nonetheless complete by the time Ceresole died in 2003.
Chavismo’s purpose, however, is not just to create a stable autocracy. At its core is a far-reaching foreign policy that aims to establish a loosely aligned federation of revolutionary republics as a resistance bloc in the Americas. The Chavista worldview sees the globe as a place where the United States, Europe, and Israel must be opposed by militarized one-man regimes.
In an interview with Voice of America in 1999, the late Constantine Menges of the Hudson Institute predicted that “Chávez will stir up revolution and violence throughout Latin America. The longer he is in power, the more he can use the oil wells of Venezuela to do so.” When Menges spoke, the price of oil had briefly dipped below $10 per barrel. Since then, oil prices have quintupled, making the Chávez government the richest in Venezuelan history and vastly multiplying the damage it can do.
[…] In addition to his ideological alliances, petro-politics, and support for guerrilla terror throughout Latin America, Chávez has begun expanding Venezuela’s military capability. In the past year he has more than tripled the Venezuelan military budget, purchasing 20 high-performance MiG fighter jets and 100,000 AK-47 machine gun rifles from the Russian government as well as an unprecedented number of helicopter gunships, surface-to-air missiles, and Onyx missiles (which can sink aircraft carriers). This spring, Chávez defended Iran’s nuclear development program after warmly receiving their president in Venezuela and signing new “technological” treaties. In March he announced the creation of a two-million man reserve army to defend the revolution “against the American invasion.”
THE VENEZUELAN OPPOSITION is a loose-knit, underfunded network of individuals and small organizations powerless to offer much more than moral opposition to Chavismo. The military hierarchy is incapable, after six years of demoralization, rampant corruption, and regular purges, of restoring any semblance of constitutional order. Any effective response to Chavismo will have to be, in part, international.
Most important for now is persistent public exposure of Chávez’s increasing militarism, assaults on democracy, human rights abuses, and free speech violations, as well as his involvement with terrorist groups in South America and terror sponsors in the Middle East. Such exposure will ideally arouse international public opinion against Chávez and nurture new leadership inside Venezuela that will provide democratic alternatives to Chavismo.
Though Robertson clearly overstated the case—at least insofar as he spoke publicly, which will allow Chavez to play up his already legendary paranoia and anti-Americanism by tying Robertson’s statement to the official government line—it is nevertheless imperative that we don’t lose sight of who the real villian is here. Unfortunately, I suspect our own press will do just that, aiding Chavez by playing up the connection between the social conservative base—understood to be Bush’s staunchest supporters (though that itself is debatable)—and Roberstson’s brand of religiosity. Which, while predictable, would be a shame, nevertheless.
After all, it’s quite possible Robertson read the WS piece and was simply heeding Halverssen’s advice (however rhetorically boneheaded his execution) that “persistent public exposure of Chávez’s increasing militarism, assaults on democracy, human rights abuses, and free speech violations, as well as his involvement with terrorist groups in South America and terror sponsors in the Middle East” is an important component in combatting his influence in South America and the Middle East.
****
more here. See also, Mark Daniels (h/t Glenn)
I hate that he goes and says things like this…..just makes me shake my head. I attend grad school at Regent University (the school he founded). I met him Saturday on a cruise for the new students in the Robertson School of Government. He is such a nice, surprisingly funny, man, and I hate that people (not speaking to you) make him out to be a monster.
You have to admit, TVW, he gives the forces of monsteration plenty of material to work with. In this case, for instance, nice men don’t generally call for the assassination of inconvenient people (nor do men of god, generally).
yeah true. like i said, i’m not really from the “pat robertson” school of politics. what i was trying to say in a back asswards way was that he’s such a nice man, i wish he wouldn’t say retarded things.
monsteration? Is that like menstruation?
Did I just say that out loud?
Anyways, Chavez has (unfortunately) played wisely here. He’s jumped on the Anti-America band wagon right on time; also predicting the conflict he knows will already happen (because he’s doing everything he can to make it so). Even more regrettable is Robertson’s fumbling of the issue here, which, I mean it wasn’t a surprise that he would come out the door with both guns blazing. But if Chavez really is big on human rights violations, and we all stay mindful of the kinds of people that push a discriminatory, publicly anti-semetic scapegoat campaign; then the problem should be easy to solve.
At least, I guess we hope so.
You are so sensitive about this “Jew” stuff!
Just because a government distributes anti-Semitic leaflets, suddenly you’re all like, “look, they’re anti-Semitic!” Why can’t people distribute anti-Semitic literature without you throwing down the convenient “anti-Semitic” card?
When Media Matters speaks, people listen.
By “people” I mean “fearless, unbiased seekers of the truth in Manhattan and Washington, DC whose definition of investigative reporting is to quickly and accurately summarize the press releases of non-partisan organizations such as the National Abortion Rights Action League, People for the American Way, the Union of Concerned Scientists, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Sierra Club and MoveOn.org by including as much original text as their intellectual honesty will allow into breathless stories about the impending doom of family, country and the Earth due to the Bush Administration’s (pick one of the following) tax-cuts-for-the-wealthiest-1-percent-of-Americans / reckless-environmental-policies / suppression-of-civil-liberties / policies-that-lead-to-the-shame-that-is-known-as-ABU GHRAIB! / failure-to-plan-the-war / failure-to-up-armor-Humvees / plans-to-exploit-the-pristine-unspoiled-ANWAR-caribou-and-mosquito-refuge.”
Those people.
Speaking of Media Matters, what ever happened to roly poly Ollie? I miss watching everyone verbally pummel him like a donut-and-cheese-curd-stuffed pinata.
Robertson’s main mistake is that he put to voice a thought that should be reserved for the inner monologue. Or dialogue, depending on how many voices are in one’s inner.
Yes, it is correct to remember just who and what Chavez is, but Robertson just did more to remove attention (such as it was) from Chavez and put it onto himself and by MSM implication all those who support this administration.
This man has been an embarrasment for quite some time now. Let’s recap, back when he thought about running for office, his claims to have been a decorated combat vetran were lies. He referred to Scotland a “dark brooding land, overrun with homosexuals.” There are many more, but I don’t have the time to look them up on my lunch break.
And now, here is this alleged man of god calling for the killing of a foreign leader. The mind reels. How to characterize such a statement. Stupid, ignorant, unchristian all fall short. Thankfully, this man has no political authority as a basis for his fatwas. For that is what he reminds me of more than anything else. Some malevolent and ignorant Talibanish mullah issuing decrees of death. Robertson does more to discredit the causes he claims to support, including Christianity, than a dozen Michael Moores ever could.
Pat never opens his mouth except when he needs to change feet.
While it’s fairly obvious that the good preacher is playing to his monied constituants I have no problem with “a secret force” taking out any/all persons who call for my(Americans) death. This “taking out” includes Chavez, Osama, deranged mullahs, Code Pink dykes and their crazed collaborators in congress and our educational system.
Thankfully, this man has no political authority as a basis for his fatwas.
Which begs the question of “then why does the MSM trumpet his every foolish utterance as though he were some sort of oracle?”
To ask the question is to answer it.
Or if that’s not enough, do this thought experiment: try to remember the last time one of Calypso Louie Farrakhan or Al Sharpton’s verbal faux pas led “The Today Show” with Perky Katie Courie.
Any excuse to tar and feather conservatives. Any excuse.
Interestingly, Roberts (who is an idiot for all kinds of reasons that I trust I don’t need to list) said something very similar back in 1999:
Robertson, that is.
Ummm, yeah.
And it’s “Couric”, not “Courie” in my post above as well.
Which, you know, would be embarrasing if anyone actually took the time to read my brain droppings.
Which they don’t.
Aww, buck up, Freddie! (Can I call you Freddie?) I enjoyed that particular brain dropping quite a bit. To be honest, not having followed the Chavez situation, my first reaction to this story was exactly what the MSM was looking for (except for associating his comment with all conservatives), focusing on Robertson as a raving idiot. Thanks to Jeff for the education on a subject I’ve been ignoring, choosing to save my brain capacity for Iraq and the WOT. By the looks of it, Chavez is definitely not someone to ignore.
Anyway, Fred, you’re right on about the MSM’s selectivity when it comes to spotlighting extreme political blather. And CINDY! has had all kinds of air time, but somehow they forget to include her more extreme rhetoric (well-known here, of course).
Oh, and call The Perky Witch anything you want.
If there is a God, do you think he is wishing he had made the universe a little bigger so he could get further away from all the nut bags down here?
I’m personally all for bumping off punks like Chavez and Castro. Pat Robertson ain’t exactly my drinking buddy, but he’s been right a time or two.
For those who may not have heard or read what Pat Robertson said, but only heard paraphrases, here is a transcript (abridged):
Well, Jeff, I’ve tried to trackback to this post several times now, but it won’t take (through Wizbang).
Anyhow, this is an excellent analysis of what’s happened and what’s next.
Thanks.
This quote is complete propoganda. Don’t believe everything you read, especially if it’s coming from the “loose-knit, underfunded network of individuals” that comprises the anti-Chavez ruling elite. Please. These are the wealthy and connected who have historically controlled the oil resources and controlled the media and were shamelessly complicit with the US sponsored coup (that failed). Take a look at this film, which is available on chomskytorrents.org. Chavez is the most charismatic politician in the western hemisphere, and while nobody’s perfect, his heart is definitely in the right place.
Uh, no. His heart is NOT in the right place. And this “quote” is taken from a long, linked article in which are quoted a number of sources, among them the State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. Not mentioned here are the million plus people who’ve fled Venezuala.
Anybody who praises Carlos the Jackal and cozies up to mideast terrorists is a thug. And recommending anything from a website with “Chomsky” in the URL ain’t gonna win you many fans here, Mert.
Hmmmmm.
1. “ social conservative baseâ€â€understood to be Bush’s staunchest supporters (though that itself is debatable)”
I’m hurt. You forgot us **fiscal conservatives**.
2. “ Take a look at this film, which is available on chomskytorrents.org”
This is a parody right? You’re pretending to actually believe this stuff. Right?
God bless you, Insomni.
Fuck Jeff … more daily references to anti-semites world over. A few days ago I pointed out that you tend to make this charge quite liberally and a lot and you told me something like “fuck off if you don’t like it, and that until Gandhi turned up you hardly mentioned it. yet daily you come up with more fuzzy evidence of a world-wide conspiracy to persecute Jews. OK I use hyperbole here, but it’s not inaccurate. I graciously took your answer on good faith but you have turned out to be one of those stooges who delight in anti-semitism. What a head case …. Google your blog and you find out that you have 44 correctly spelt references to anti-semitism. You are to racial/religious persecution what a masochist is to pain. I suspect you switch as well. Fine, it is your gig. Like you said, if I don’t like it I can fuck off. So ciao. I don’t want to leave on a completely sour note – I have enjoyed some of your writing and gags. Your audience is generally dim though.
Turing word: growth, like I shall not grow here
Sure some of them are your commenters but, hey, you set the tone big boy. <a href=”Results 1 – 10 of about 44 from proteinwisdom.com for “Anti-semitic”. (0.04 seconds)” target=”_blank”>Anyway – here is the google result: Results – about 44 from proteinwisdom.com for “Anti-semitic”.</a> (0.04 seconds)
And here is something that might help you. CYA – it’s been a peach.
TW: bad … as in BAD Jeffery BAD
Bad linking Wads. Try again
Um, Wadard? However sensitive Jeff may be about anti-semitism, the fact remains that Chavez’s government is as openly anti-semetic as anyone these days. Google “danilo anderson jewish school” and find out what the Chavistas were up to, for starters.
If you want to take Jeff to task for hypersensitivity, you may want to wait for a less blatant example of unreconstructed Jew-baiting.
*shakes head sadly* Wadard is accusing this audience of being dim and yet he has repeatedly shown himself to be completely deaf to sarcasm and intentional irony.
Oh, and are there any other groups you think are defended too much? Blacks? American Indians? Muslims? Women? Gays, maybe?
TW: material, as in who writes yours?
Your search – “danilo anderson jewish school†– did not match any documents.
so remove the “” and;
http://www.venezuelatoday.org/04-12-01_in.htm
Story about a fucked up country, a bombing assasination, a Jewish school gets seached, nothing found to suggest wrong doing … yea, I would be pissed off too. It feels like scapegoating in some duplicious by bigboy power-plays, and if I were Jewish that would really piss me off because, while it is not fun the first time you have the knowledge that history old and recent is replete with horrible examples of the scapegoating and much worse of Jews.
But to excuse Pat Robertson’s call for assasination of Chavez, albeit a qualified excuse isn’t constructive, really, for anyone.
Maybe I didn’t delve into the story deep enough. This is what I got:
November 30th., 2004
The Spiral of Violence
Summary:
In the last two weeks, a spiral of violence swept the country.
District Attorney Anderson, a government emblematic character, was murdered.
Several of those whom the government considers as suspects have been murdered.
Police and military people have been conducting raids which produce doubts and fears in different sectors.
A Jewish school and club are raided searching for weapons.
The search is fruitless and the indignant reaction is swift.
Chavista Brigades echoed: “Danilo, comrade, your death shall be avenged.â€Â
The Republic’s Attorney General vows to achieve “justice claimed by the street,†as he feels uncomfortable with the “straight jacket†imposed by the law.
When Ms. Castillo asked for his son, the reply was: “We killed the dog your son was!â€Â
Chávez travels.
In Spain he got Zapatero’s support and he instigated controversy between the PP and PSOE.
He received a “Human Rights Award†from Gaddafi.
An Energy Cooperation Accord with Russia and the announcement of the purchase of 40 combat helicopters and 100,000 machine-guns.
Besides the picturesque aspects, <objectives of Chávez’s oil diplomacy: to keep oil prices high.</strong>
But – I think, the story of Jewish peoples long history is also a story of survival, which from a goy p.o.v. is very inspiring and admirable. Mebbe I am being pollyanna-oish ‘bout me hebbe’s.
Is there no longer a barrier between reality and satire? Mert has given us a new essay format: the realitire.
Carry on.
look, Jews (wishyest washyest of races, pretty much most of those that went massive are rather mongrelized at the edges and as venturesome and unrestrainedly proud of ‘guaranteeing’* demographic prowess jews are they got that more than most) don’t ‘plan’ stuff as much as they are pretty damn unreflexive and spontaneous, not to say impulse or even reactionary type folk (they have a nose for . ..eh . .springboards that help set themselves apart the furthest, roam widest etcetera. But nothing is the best thing around without carrying it’s shadowside, remaining all the more shadowy cause deserts creep without casting them in your face enough to be alarmed; I think zionism’s ideas of regreening the deserts are great and it’s time we help them match their ecological footprint* to their impact and not get side tracked into .. .well .. we all know the horror stories .. .
down with semitilitary patrism and slily secretive pahchutz; stop the motor of antropocentric desertification; permacultivate! pleach! down with holy books, up with live leaves!
My grandmother was one of the most beautiful half assimilated dutch jewesses you’ll ever see; I love them and have thus a right to criticize.
Woo boy, the Weekly Standard column is a real howler.
The “real villain†here has “assaulted democracy†by winning three fair elections by far wider margins than our President. Obviously, Venezuelan voters are dupes of a communist Svengali. Talk about paranoid. Maybe they were voting for the first President to care about the majority of Venezuelans who live on $200/month.
Perhaps Chavez’s paranoia was fueled by the American-backed coup against him. It isn’t as if we haven’t murdered popular elected leaders in South America in the past.
“THE VENEZUELAN OPPOSITION is a loose-knit, underfunded network of individuals and small organizations powerless to offer much more than moral opposition to Chavismo.†The WS article really lost all credibility with that one. The opposition owns the televisions, the newspapers, it ran the oil refineries, and controls the vast majority of the country’s wealth.
I am not surprised that the Weekly Standard despises Hugo Chavez, but at least they could make real arguments, rather than indulging in laughably hyperbolic screeds.
Stick to the rules; Americans don’t understand sarcasm and irony.
No man, that’s not my gig. I look forward to a time when all Jews don’t feel that they have to be strong all the time.
I say all Jews because the ones that I interact with daily in my living and working don’t feel that way, in their day-to-day. So, this, what I am witnessing in this blog is new, but I am aware of reports of rises in a-S globally lately. And I think that is fucked. But it is related to the latest intafada, occupation, and the take-with-one-hand-give-with-the-other-then-take-with-the-other-shennanigans going on at the moment, and then the coalescing with the scWOT or G-SAVE or WOTEVA. But that still doesn’t take away from the fuckness of this rise in a-S. I live in a safe, relatively baggage-fee country where people are just getting on with the job of living. I suppose PW has given me a context for the MSM reporting of the rises.
Thanks for opening my eyes to Chavez, though.
TW: mass. Critical.
Just so we’re clear on this, waddy – you agree that there is a trend toward rising global sentiments of anti-Semitism. But Jeff is being too sensitive about it?
In other news, this:
HAS to win the all-time, least-coherent parenthetical statement award. Jeebus it looks like your dictionary suffered a bout of projectile diarrhea, whoever you are.
spam word: able. As in, wadard is not able to support any of his arguments with facts. Or logic. Or any of those other inconveniences.
From an earlier thread that no one is gonna bother to scroll down the home page to read anymore, our Wadard uncorked this gem:
My orig. pt. is that the world is a safer place if Iran has nukes.
Participants in this discussion should decide for themselves if it makes any sense at all to engage a person of this mentality in any meaningful way.
The same could probably be said for Mr. Golden. Chavez as the latest martyr of the Church of Great Satan Victimology. Rock on, dude.
Which thread was that, Fred? I missed that beauty. His last rambling response to me made no sense and conflicted with his previous statements. Yeah, not worth our time, but sometimes it’s fun to see what sort of nonsense trolls will spew when poked.
Click here for the wit and wisdom of Wadard!
This is getting downright circular. Wadard’s comeback to having his ignorance of sarcasm and irony clearly displayed is quoting what looks like a blog post (unlinked) about Americans not understanding sarcasm and irony. The irony is snowballing!
Looking forward to his next goodbye…
Fred: Thanks for directing everyone to Wad’s…unique.. statement about Iran. I’m still a wee bit astounded by that one as well. Initially, I just assumed he was doing the standard troll drill, perhaps with the added hope of drawing traffic to his site – but God help him, I think he actually believes statements such as that above.
And even more amazing, he seems to think he’s scoring points in this “debate” of his.
Wadullard —
First of all, I didn’t bring up anti-semitism here; Thor Halverssen did, in an article about Chavez’ Venezuala. I linked it (along with the NR piece), because it was the most recent thing I’d read on Chavez—not to mention (he wrote, mentioning) that since Robertson had just called for Chavez’ assassination, I thought it was appropriate to offer up at this moment. It wasn’t some backhanded, sneaky way to introduce anti-semitism into the mix when it doesn’t apply to the conversation; you have a problem with the material, take it up with Halverssen (or better, Chavez).
I have a search function ON MY SITE, so no need for you to Google “anti-semitism.” Since late 2001, there appear to be 54 mentions, a good deal of them by commenters, and many in posts not ostensibly about anti-semitism. Many of them, I found upon review, came in direct response to some public figure uttering some kind of anti-semitic or anti-Israel sentiment—which is how blogs work, of course: reacting to the latest news.
Do a search here on the site, read the actual posts I’ve put up since Dec 2001, then come back and tell me if I’m obsessed with anti-semitism. Because even if every one of those mentions were by me (they aren’t) or were posts specifically about anti-semitism (they weren’t, and in fact, some of them were humorous), we’d be talking about 54 out of over 5400 posts, or about 1%.
As I said before, you don’t like the content here, you’re free to go elsewhere. But because you happened to stumble in at a time when Mother Sheehan was breaking out the anti-Israel shit, which in turn has brought a few real anti-semites to this site, you seem to have a distorted view of how things go here.
Perhaps Waddo, as a proud Australian, might be interested in a little compare-and-contrast:
as in, what is his position on aboriginal rights and land tenure, and how would that reflect on his argument regarding Israel?
Of course, this is a fellow who – I kid you not – thinks it effective argumentation to accuse someone of *shudder* bed-wetting.
And will Eurogliders ever re-form and tour the States again?
Incidentally, the author of this piece, Thor Halverssen, is a civil liberties advocate, President of the Human Rights Foundation, and has done a lot of work with FIRE.
He is hardly some hard right ideologue.
xxx
At a time when there seems to be an unholy convergence of leftist, neo-nazi, paleocon, and Islamic anti-semitism all focused on Israel (as in the demonization, isolation and destruction thereof) it would seem prudent and healthy to be a bit obsessive of pointing out that there are a whole slew of people who want to kill Jews!
Click “new and impr. version of 8.13 post” above to see the true face of insanity. Piet, see a doctor NOW!
I’m telling you, it’s like a combination of e. e. cummings, commenters “gandhi” or Wadard, and copious amounts of meth.
See ‘secrets of the soil’ someHOW! back to you buddy; talk about confessions in the form of vacuous accusations; I just got done polishing that piece some more (my first 200 pages took 7 years!!!!): http://powdertowell.blogspot.com/2005/08/monies-mystics-and-marksmen.html
jeff, could you make a post about waddard and then we can all place bets on how many comments he can make in a row? i’d love to see the tangents on that one.
If you post it, he will come….
Like, uh, you know, Field of Dreams?
Just with more anti-Semitism and an Aussie accent.
Piet: A second reading was more enlightening, but could you clarify one passage for me? I’m not sure I grasp the full meaning:
Thanks.
find ‘8. 4. 1949’ in (the last sixth of) http://liecause.tripod.com/Beckerath-Meulen-corr3.htm – quoting from John Zube’s note to the letter by Beckerath written on said date: “— I do believe that one should clearly distinguish between those index standards which are intended only for optional, competing and privately or cooperatively issued currencies, which are refusable and discountable and those index standards meant for an exclusive and forced currency, i.e., one with compulsory acceptance and a compulsory value. The former are a problem at most only for those who voluntarily use them. The latter are a problem for all who are forced to use them. As a mathematician and statistician, who had himself calculated index numbers for the “Festmark Bank” and possibly others, B. objected only to the tyrannical aspects of many of the index currency advocates. E.g., Gesell wanted to “stabilise” the general price level by adding to or reducing the volume of the circulation of an exclusive and forced currency, and others, having only legal tender currencies in mind, do not want to abolish their monopoly or their coercion, but merely to “improve” or to mitigate (as in Israel) their effects by “stabilising” this monetary despotism via one index or the other.”
I am just thinking of ways to take the positive properties of the late gold standard applicable to an even and especially this day and age sorely missed ecological orientation regarding e- and direction of values standards.
Well, it’s hard to argue with that.
Can I declare this thread dead?
No. There’s more, I’m afraid…
so much depends
upon
the use of an
ellipsis
glazed with
distortion
his arguments fall
flat
Ezra Pound is rolling in his urn right now.
Sorry, William Carlos Williams.
Heck, Ezra Pound is probably rolling in sympathy.
OK. I may have had a distorted view. I am in over my head when it comes to that stuff anyway.
As for Mother Sheehan though, I understand she said something about her son dying for Israeli territorial or regional ambitions. There is a land grab on that wouldn’t be if the US hadn’t invaded and occupied. The Bush Admin is firmly behind Israel. There is a nexus between these facts in the minds of many including Sheehan. How is it being anti-Israel to state this belief? It may be wrong or not. But it is not malicious, or racist. She’s saying, ‘I think my kid died for a foreign policy that is benefitting Israel the most’. And she is coming from grief.
When you’ve given birth, breastfed and brung up a kid to have it KIA for what you rightly or wrongly see as benefitting another country than your own, you might understand her POV.
Anyway, that is not the thrust of your point, I am just responding to that meme getting about the ether. Your ‘her anti-Israel shit’ just reminded me of it.
Wadard: When a rising German politician of Austrian descent wrote about Jewish participation in forcing the German government into an armistice which ended disasterously for the German government and its people, was there a nexus between these facts in the minds of many? How was he being anti-Semitic or anti-Jew? He may have been wrong or no, but he was not malicious, or racist, right? He was just saying that “I think my country was betrayed for a foreign policy that benefitted the Jews most.” Who could disagree with that? who could possibly ascribe antisemitism to him?
I get your point. I really get your point.