Easterbrook redux

Easterbrook redux
: A super Charles Krauthammer column today on l’affaire Easterbrook. He says, as many of us have — and as Easterbrook has, too — that he expressed himself stupidly and that was wrong. But…

What is going on here? Jews are being attacked in Germany. Synagogues are being torched in France. Around the world, Jews — such as Daniel Pearl — are hunted and killed as Jews. The prime minister of Malaysia tells an Islamic summit that “1.3 billion Muslims cannot be defeated by a few million Jews. . . . We are up against a people who think . . . they have now gained control of the most powerful countries. . . . We cannot fight them through brawn alone” — and gets a standing ovation from the heads of state of 57 countries. And amid all this, the Anti-Defamation League feels the need to wax indignant over a few lines on a Web log? …

Nonetheless, the idea of destroying someone’s reputation and career over a single slip of this type is not just ridiculous, but vindictive.

And hugely beside the point. The world is experiencing the worst resurgence of anti-Semitism in 50 years. Its main objective is the demonization and delegitimization of Israel, to the point that the idea of eradicating, indeed obliterating, the world’s only Jewish state becomes respectable, indeed laudable. The psychological grounds for the final solution are being prepared.

That’s anti-Semitism.

Easterbrook has apologized. Leave him alone.

: UPDATE: See Steven I Weiss’ cover story in Jewsweek: “Gregg Easterbrook’s not an anti-Semite…

…and the media just can’t figure out why. The anatomy of a blog controversy.”

  • What would Krauthammer say if the remarks were attributed to Michael Moore?

  • Diana

    I hope this is the beginning of a massive tide-turning. If so, l’affaire Easterbrook will have had a good effect. I guess it is always good to bring out the truth. In this case, the truth was not that Easterbrook was an anti-Semite, but that some of us are so disoriented by REAL anti-Semitism, that our judgement is clouded.
    Krauthammer mentioned Pat Buchanan’s blaming Gulf War I on the Jews, um, Israel. How funny, as I remember Thomas Friedman’s analysis of the war, on August 5th, 1990. I nexised it:
    For Israel, the invasion is a mixed blessing. Militarily speaking, Israeli officials are wishing Iraq and its Arab neighbors a long and healthy war. The longer the better. The more energy they expend on each other the less they will have left for Israel. Politically speaking, the Iraqi invasion is also good news for the right-wing Government of Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, since it underscores his argument that the real source of instability in the region is not the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but rather the threat posed by aggressive, belligerent Arab states.
    I remember the invasion distinctly, and remember reading those words, because I read them on a particularly nice birthday (don’t ask which one) vacation. And I remember thinking that every word Friedman wrote was true. Full disclosure: I was delighted at the invasion. As America’s ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie put it, “We take no position on Arab-Arab disputes.”
    I also remember reading Ezer Weizman being quoted about the invasion: “It’s too bad about Kuwait, but it’s a fact.” In other words: hasta la vista, baby. But I haven’t been able to nexis it or find a URL. You’ll have to trust my memory.
    If Buchanan had thought a little more clearly, he might have seen that Friedman was telling the truth, and blamed the invasion on, who else, the evil Jews, who just love to see the Arabs killing each other. All of which goes to show that anti-Semites can’t get their stories straight.
    And they never apologize.

  • hey

    it’s a minor scalp, but at least its a start… and we got the pentagon’s chaplain advisor (who just happened to be a radical terrorist supporter)
    scalp them all, from easterbrook on up… so he’s a friend or a colleague, he helped contribute to the atmosphere that allows widespread attacks and libels against jews, he deserves everything he got
    it’s time, and I’m a big fan of John Brown and the uncomprising school of dealing with evil. Just as slavery was an unalloyed evil, so is terrorism (in all its guises) and anti-semitism. Let’s hope we can soon hang Patty B and Al Sharpton up along Easterbrook on our trophy wall, quickly followed by Chirac, Arafat, et al…
    no quarter, no quarter, and no sympathy

  • Lisa, if Michael Moore had said it I simply be in a state of awe and probably blog “maybe he ain’t all bad” with a link to it.

  • Anonymous

    Great article in Jewsweek about l’affaire.
    Stephen Weiss rules!
    Jeff, I think Stephen may be the next person to see a media career start in blogging.

  • Diana

    Link didn’t work.
    It’s on the front page of today’s Jewsweek.com

  • That’s very cute, Diana, except that Friedman was talking about Israeli reaction to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait while Krauthammer is referring to Buchanan’s comment on the US counterstrike against Iraq. I would bet that Buchanan was of a simliar mind to April Glaspie regarding the Iraqi invasion.

  • Diana

    You’re a bit confused.
    Buchanan plainly stated that Israel was so alarmed by Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait that it manipulated the US into a retributive war–on Israel’s behalf.
    Quite apart from Buchananesque fantasies about congress being Israeli-occupied territory, his charges were illogical. The fact is that the Israelis weren’t terribly upset about the invasion at all.
    What is your point?

  • I think one thing we’ve all learned over the past couple days is that Diana loves, and has always loved Tom Friedman, not that there’s anything wrong with that ;)

  • Diana,
    I was indeed confused and misread the last paragraph of your post. Mea culpa.