David Landau, Oslo Logician, Asks Condi Rice to “Rape” Israel

In today’s Jewish Week, the editor Gary Rosenblatt has a shocking piece on the editor of Ha-Aretz, David Landau’s conversation with Condi Rice last September, in the build-up to Annapolis. Both the message and the language shed a harsh light on the condition of the “anti-occupation” Israeli mindset. The landscape is not pretty.

Haaretz Editor Urged Rice To ‘Rape’ Israel

David Landau: Crude language over the top, or well placed?
by Gary Rosenblatt

Israelis are known for being direct and blunt. But comments made by David Landau, editor of the Israeli daily, Haaretz, to Condoleezza Rice about Israel needing to be “raped” by the U.S. to achieve a Mideast settlement caused quite a stir among the 20 or so attendees at a confidential briefing with the secretary of state on a recent visit to Israel.

The incident, which took place Sept. 10 at the private residence of America’s ambassador to Israel, Richard Jones, has not been fully reported until now. What is contested is not the raw language Landau used but the context of his impassioned comments.

Following Rice’s briefing to the gathered military, academic and media elites at the dinner, the guests offered their views and comments about the Mideast impasse. Landau, who was seated next to Rice, was said to have referred to Israel as a “failed state” politically, one in need of a U.S.-imposed settlement. He was said to have implored Rice to intervene, asserting that the Israeli government wanted “to be raped” and that it would be like a “wet dream” for him to see this happen.

This represents an extreme expression of Oslo Logic: If only Israel would make the right concessions — painful but necessary — it could end the “occupation.” Since the inordinate influence of “right-wing” irredentists who don’t want to give up any territory prevents Israel from making the necessary concessions, it needs to be forced to do so. Then we’ll have… peace?

I’m not even sure that Landau is so naive. I have friends who think that the “occupation” — which I am whitewashing by arguing that the Israelis didn’t shoot Muhammad al Durah — is such a blot on the soul of Israel that it should be ended immediately — including the division of Jerusalem. When I point out that this is likely to lead to even more violent aggression and more devastating forms of warfare, the answer is consistently: “I don’t care. Israel, if it is to be a moral state, cannot endure the corruption of its youth who must do terrible things as a result of occupying, oppressing, and humiliating another people.”

So Landau may be shrewd enough to know that these concessions will not lead to peace, indeed might well lead to war. But on the other hand, he’s almost surely not telling that to Rice, who might think twice about forcing Israel to make concessions that will make the situation worse. Of course, who (not steeped in the intricate pathways of Jewish self-criticism) could begin to understand the toxic moral perfectionism that drives highly intelligent Israelis to take such suicidal stances? She, enamored of her Palestinian “Martin Luther King Jr.,” Abu Mazen, surely thinks this is an exaggerated but well-intentioned effort to achieve peace.

And yet, consider the catastrophic potential of this “self-abnegating” advice. First, the concessions that Landau wants to make are much more likely to whet the Palestinian/Arab/Muslim appetite for destroying Israel than “changing the tide” and heading us all towards a “negotiated solution.” And this is true even if Israel came to that decision all by herself. But if Israel’s foes think that they have now turned the only serious ally Israel has, the USA, against her, then the smell of weakness and failure in their nostrils will arouse even greater hopes of ultimate victory.

The odds that this will lead to war — just as the NIE report increases the likelihood of war — are enormous. And the odds that that war will force the USA into either much more costly engagements in the Middle East, or, even worse, huge losses in this area, make his advice almost as bad for the USA as it is catastrophic for Israel. The collateral damage of his single-minded opposition to the “morally corrupting” occupation is enormous. Right now the Israelis who oppose the occupation worry about the humiliation of thousands and the killing of dozens of Palestinians. When they trigger the wars their postures will invite — quod absit! — they will have an opportunity to weep over the death of millions of Israelis and Palestinians.

When contacted this week, Landau said the description was “inaccurate” and “a perversion of what I said.” He said his views had been delivered with “much more sophistication.”

But he added: “I did say that in general, Israel wants to be raped — I did use that word — by the U.S., and I myself have long felt Israel needed more vigorous U.S. intervention in the affairs of the Middle East.”

Not clear how much more sophisticated his own “general” summary is from the one reported. Indeed his subsequent remarks contradict his opening denial.

Landau, often outspoken in his views, is a bit of an anomaly in Israeli society in that he is a native Brit editing Israel’s oldest newspaper and an observant Jew (and former yeshiva student) with decidedly left-wing views.

This is an interesting detail, and not that anomalous. Some of the most ferocious “left-wing” critics of Israeli policy in Israel and abroad, are observant and learned Jews who are driven to their positions by moral imperatives. The fact that they do not engage in much realism, and show almost no interest in “the other side” (other than to view it, as so many reporters for Ha-Aretz do) as the innocent victim of Israeli misdeeds, has much to do with the “four-dimensional Israeli/two dimensional Palestinian/Arab/Muslim” problem I have discussed before.

The fact that Landau can refer to Israel as a “failed state” because it won’t adopt his policies of massive concessions to an Arab political culture that cannot even — does not apparently even want to — build a Palestinian state no matter how dysfunctional, illustrates the degree of self-referential isolationism that informs this aggressively self-abnegating “left-wing” position. Indeed, if we were to rate the states in the Middle East by how they treat their own people — I believe the standard by which the states Landau wants Israel to be a part of are judged — then we’d find 22 failed Arab/Muslim states well below his own.

He told The Jewish Week that the context of his remarks was that each of the dinner attendees spoke of Israel’s challenges, and when it was his turn he pointed out that since 1967, Israel has failed to resolve its territorial conflicts with the Palestinians.

And in the mind of Landau and others who share his masochistic omnipotence complex, if there’s been a failure, it’s obviously Israel’s. Of course it’s our fault; of course if we had behaved differently (MY way), things would have been better. Of course the Arabs are not nice to us and want to get rid of us… it’s because we haven’t been nicer to them.

“I told [Rice] that it had always been my wet dream to address the secretary of state” on these vital matters, he said.

This, coming from an orthodox Jew to a female Secretary of State, is stunning. It suggests a level of verbal incontinence that makes one wonder about Landau’s mental balance. Even if we ignore the inappropriateness of the imagery, the sentiment behind it — he’s long dreamed of having the opportunity to tell the USA to force Israel into concessions — suggests that Landau, like so many people on the “left” actually have contempt for the democratic process, and since they trust their own political judgment so much more than that of leaders produced by their democratic process, they feel completely justified in using any device to “force” their own polities to “be free.”

Her response, he said, was “fantastic” in that she was “completely unfazed” by his remarks, and remained “urbane and diplomatic.” Attendees said she told the assembled that the U.S. had no intention of imposing a settlement on the Israelis and Palestinians.

She was probably so embarrassed that she didn’t know what to do.

Isi Leibler, a weekly columnist for The Jerusalem Post who has written critically of Landau, said that “by any benchmark, Landau’s behavior as an Israeli citizen would be deemed unacceptable.” He said it was “unconscionable” for someone in Landau’s position to urge a U.S. Secretary of State “to ‘rape’ his own government.”

Note that Landau’s position is as editor of the “NYT of Israel,” the most widely read Israeli newspaper outside of Israel. As one of my students noted when I presented the Al Durah case and she read the coverage Ha-Aretz gave to it, “I thought Ha-Aretz was an Israeli paper. Why does it sound like a Palestinian one?” Landau was not editor at the time, but he has hardly made things better. On the contrary, he made some remarks in Moscow that reveal an astonishing degree of open advocacy involved in what he, as editor, allows his newspaper to publish.

I agree here with Liebler (whose comments on the affair can be read here). Landau, based on his own peculiarly hyper-self-critical logic, has called on the USA to take Israel’s foreign policy into recievership. He didn’t do this because in his mind the USA is the wisest of nations — unless he’s a Jewish “racist” and holds a radicaly different standard for the non-Jews, he must think the occupation of Iraq is a catastrophic venture — but because it’s the strongest, and can “do the job.” In other words, he goes by the logic that destroyed democratic Greece: “those who can do what they will, those who cannot suffer what they must.”

In a sense, he represents a contorted, modern, activist version of prophetic logic. Back in the old days, the prophets saw the behavior of empires who smashed Israel as delivering the punishment of the Lord. They showed minimal interest in the moral behavior of the nations, whose imperialist ambitions they took for granted and only fore-saw a change among the nations in messianic times: “And they shall beat their swords into plowshares…”. In the unredeemed present, however, the prophets focused only on the role the Israelites who, by their immorality, had brought this plague upon themselves. That position lies at the heart of masochistic omnipotence syndrome: “we are the omnipotent God’s chosen people. If terrible things happen to us from merciless gentile armies driven by the basest of imperialist drives for dominion, then it’s our fault for having offended our God and provoked him to remove his protection.” As Max Weber points out, this remarkable and unique form of self-criticism contributed crucially to the eventual emergence of Western civilization.

But in the modern world, where even many people who believe in God don’t expect his direct intervention in history — especially after the Holocaust — the situation is radically different. Among other things, in principle, the other nations have renounced their imperialist drives, and we expect from all “players” in the world of democracies and civil societies, a certain measure of moral behavior in political culture that Israelite and Jewish thought had long demanded (and whose failure to maintain, led to the loss of God’s favor). It’s not accidental that the UN’s “peace square” has the messianic passage from Isaiah as it’s motto. In our day and age, imperialism is officially “not good.”

So today, with God non-interventionist, and people more morally responsible, there is considerably less need for the kind of hyper-self-criticism that marked the invective of the prophets. Now, the discourse of criticism and self-criticism should be a matter of negotiation between mature political cultures in conflict that resolves problems. Jewish self-criticism in principle in a civic world should not need to overcompensate by turning up its own perfectionism in response to a pervasive failure to self-criticize on the other side of the conflict. And yet, here we have newspaper editor David Landau, having wet dreams about telling the greatest power on earth to rape his own people because they are not living up to his prophetic standards. Not only is he playing the role of the God who he apparently does not expect to intervene, but with a particularly crude and heavy hand.

Ehud Yaari, a leading broadcast and print journalist in Israel who reported the incident on the air but did not mention Landau by name, called it “embarrassing.”

But Landau said he had no regrets and that, on the contrary, he was pleased, adding that he was later congratulated by several professors in the room who felt “I articulated what many Israelis feel.”

I wonder who these “professors” are. Can one find them chronicled here?

34 Responses to David Landau, Oslo Logician, Asks Condi Rice to “Rape” Israel

  1. […] David Landau, Oslo Logician, Asks Condi Rice to “Rape” Israel — they will have an opportunity to weep over the death of millions of Israelis and Palestinians. […]

  2. Eliyahu says:

    The so-called “left” of today has two main branches, neither one cares any longer about the “working class” or the “poor” except to sometimes pay them lip-service. The older branch derives in its attitude toward Jews from the fake-rational Judeophobia of Kant, Hegel, and Voltaire [itself of medieval and late ancient (early Christian, such as Marcion) antecedents]. The other is more manipulated by Western governments and –imbued with the irrational or non-rational or anti-rational notions of Sorel, Foucault, and others, manipulated by techniques perfected by Communists, Nazis, American advertising and public relations experts, British psywar experts, explained theoretically to a great extent by Gramsci [his analysis of opinion-formation was perceptive actually]– practically resembles fascism with a different label. Be that as it may, those who consider themselves loyal to the abstract notion or movement called “the left” or who want to be loyal to it, must share its notions, however false. This explains much of the Israeli “left” and its intellectual corruption. Some people are incapable of perceiving that they are being manipulated psychologically. Of course, huge sums and efforts are put into shaping public opinion, creating fake movements in favor –ostensibly– of various and sundry lofty goals. There is a whole industry of fake NGOs. That is, usually well-funded groups that pretend to be “non-governmental” while being financed by —governments [Yes we get money from our government but we are “non-governmental,” I was told by a foreigner who came to Jerusalem to defend the “freedom” of the Orient House, former PLO HQ in Jerusalem owned by the family of Haj Amin el-Husseini, Hitler’s chief Arab collaborator].

    Anyhow, these creatures like Landau [his brother Pinhas is said to have different views] are blind and insensitive to Jewish suffering, humiliation, etc. How about the age-old humiliation of Jews in Arab and Muslim states, according to the dhimma? Landau’s is a really sick point of view, which, by the way, I recall hearing from Communists back in the 50s in somewhat different form. So Commies too were expressing this attitude and promoting it. But when the exponents of this view are “religious” like Landau or B Michael, then we have an even more complex problem. RL, I think that you have done very well and gone very far in explaining it, but I’m not totally satisfied. There still seems to be something missing from the explanation.

    In any event, we have to bear in mind that the public space worldwide nowadays is saturated with psywar efforts, themes, procedures, arguments, etc. Consider ahmadinejad’s latest message to the pope about the sad state of world morality, the lack of world moral leadership, etc.
    Ahmadinejad ha inviato un messaggio di auguri a Benedetto XVI, “in occasione dell’anniversario della nascita di Gesù Cristo che è messaggero di amore, amicizia, giustizia e spiritualità”. Il mondo, dice il presidente iraniano, “ha un disperato bisogno delle linee guida dei profeti di Dio, più che in qualsiasi altro momento nella storia”. The world, he says, is in desperate need of the guidelines of the prophets of God, more than in any other moment in history.

    I agree with some it. Which does not make him less dangerous [Russia is now going to supply Iran with S-300 ground to air missiles]. We have to bear in mind that the most sophisticated propaganda blends truth with falsehood, like much of what chomsky says.

    It is curious that “leftists” like Landau and his professor admirers are so willing to encourage intervention by the United States, a power that in former days they would have scorned as “imperialist.” Today’s “leftism” is indeed a weird and complex creature, and not only in Israel.

  3. Richard Landes says:

    thanks for the rich comment. can you give some refs for gramsci’s handling of opinion manipulation?

    as to why these guys don’t notice jewish humiliation and degradation — i think they’re proud of the fact that they’re not “honor-shame” and therefore don’t “need” such infantile “honors” as being treated with dignity.

    if i’m right, one of the mystic’s mottoes is: “Shame and fame are all the same.” so when you’re self-less, ego-less, you’ve transcended. it’s their quiet way of asserting their higher maturity.

    of course it underlines their secret contempt for people who, they seem to think, so need “dignity” that they are “justified” in blowing up israeli children because they’ve been humiliated.

  4. Eliyahu says:

    As I understand it, Gramsci’s key innovation or perception –or one of them– was the notion of hegemony. That is, if all the institutions of society promote and/or agree on a certain idea –and the population lives in a certain isolation from outside ideas, then that idea is hegemonic and it is unlikely that anyone in that society will think differently. So the key to controlling the ideas/notions in a particular society is to dominate all institutions that impart notions/ideas/”facts”/”truths”. These institutions can comprise schools, universities, mass media, churches/mosques, children’s entertainment, political parties, and so on. We often see in many places that “left”, “center”, and “right,” the Establishment and the “anti-Establishment,” can actually agree on some idea or principle or notion or “fact,” etc. In Egypt, for example, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Government and all major parties agree on the importance of Islam, as do most educational institutions [al-Azhar, etc.], etc. In fact, Egyptian law discriminates against non-Muslim natives of Egypt, such as the Copts. The outside “democratic” world doesn’t seem to care.

  5. Jonathan Levy says:

    It’s worth noting that the Hebrew verb for ‘To Rape’ (“Le-enos”) also means ‘To Coerce’.

    Perhaps something was lost (or added) in translation.

    Not that this necessarily invalidates this analysis, but the original meaning might not have been so sensational.

  6. Richard Landes says:

    of course, Landau is English of origin, and spoke to Rice in English, so I don’t think the Hebrew is relevant.

  7. Solomonia says:

    Haaretz Editor Tells Condi Rice to ‘Rape’ Israel

    "No matter how hard I try, I can’t convince my countrymen to see things the way I do, so they must be forced." David Landau puts the anti-democratic left on full display. Richard Landes discusses: David Landau, Oslo Logician, Asks…

  8. fp says:

    i’m sorry, rl, but as far as I am concerned these people are utterly DUMB!!!! one cannot have ability to reason and be entirely blind to the utter barbarism of the other side. dumbness turns them blind.

    they are so desperate to be singularly moral that they resemble the many jews who during nazism blamed the victims for bringing such a treatment on themselves.

    they may not be aware of it, but there is more than this at play: it’s also an attempt to separate themselves from the other jews to save their own asses (a la judt). Looky here, I’m a good jew, don’t kill me.


  9. Haaretz Editor: Israel Should Be ‘Raped’

    Little Green Footballs

    We have our official Weird, Offensive Utterance of the Week, from the editor-in-chief of Israel’s Haaretz, David Landau, who told Condoleezza Rice that Israel needs to be “raped into resolving the problems.”


  10. Adina Kutnicki says:

    There is little doubt that the pathology which drives vermin such as Landau has little precedent in history.
    I have never heard of a major journalist in another country EVER imploring another power to ‘rape’ their country.
    Surely Landau realizes that scores of Jews would have to die in order to implement his ‘wet dream’. And herein lies the crux – Landau is now guilty of the highest form of incitement to murder. His statements dare not be construed as an attempt to ‘resolve’ the PA/Israel war. His sentiments not only smack of murderous intent, but of high treason.
    A normal leadership would haul him before the legal system and charge him with incitement to murder. I would not hold my breath that they will do so, simply because they are mainly in lockstep with his vile views.
    The self described ‘elite’ in Israel are beyond the pale. A complete overhaul of its leadership is a matter of Jewish life and death.Truly.

  11. Joe in Australia says:

    I’m Jewish myself and his coarse language makes me feel ashamed and embarrassed. I don’t know any Orthodox Jew who would use such extraordinary sexual metaphors – even to another male, even in private. Under the circumstances I agree that it reflects on his mental balance.

  12. Sophia says:

    As a woman and a Jew, I find this comment utterly shocking and despicable.

    Politically it’s irresponsible in the extreme.

    I do NOT find it shocking that Landau is a native Brit. I think the British view of Israel is deeply vile, they actually did everything they could to ensure that Israel was never born, and having been born, wouldn’t survive.

    British treatment of Jews historically has been appalling and antisemitism was and is quite fashionable. One only needs to check the Guardian occasionally especially the cartoons – often they rival der Sturmer.

    As far as the Left in general is concerned, I think we’ve lost our focus and indeed our purpose. No more does the left fight for unions, for the poor, for women – no. The so-called left in the “resistance” business, whatever the heck that means, even if it means supporting far right wing organizations and mimicking far right wing rhetoric and adopting their racist attitudes.

    Education of course plays no role: a quick visit to the left wing blogosphere will make a principled antiracist weep. History and reality – both meaningless, cast overboard into the postmodern sea. Bigotry, as long as it’s against Jews, is quite acceptable – one needn’t even couch it in the guise of mere anti-Zionism.

    There’s a screed today on “My Left Wing” by a nut proclaiming “Goodbye Cruel Jews,” which would shock me except that I’ve been seeing things getting worse and worse for years now. People like her declare themselves progressive, which is horrifying.

    A woman who believed in democracy was murdered today in Pakistan. In her honor we should all rethink our values, and what it means to be a progressive, where we want to go politically – here or in Israel or anywhere else on planet Earth, be we right wing or left, rich or poor, American or Arab, Muslim, Hindu, Christian or Animist or aetheist or Jew.

    Being raped, though, isn’t something that should happen, or be wished upon, any person, soul or nation and the person who said this should be censured and ashamed.

  13. stefanie says:

    Does he not know or does he not believe that Israel has a Husband who will not let this pass?

  14. Lorenz Gude says:

    If an elderly gent schooled in the application of Freudian theory to literature may be permitted to inquire into the possible meaning of Mr. Landau’s curious sexual imagery he would argue that the juxtaposition of ‘wet dream’ and ‘rape’ is worthy of special note. At the surface Landau seems to be sexually excited by merely being allowed to address the dusky dominatrix from Alabama. But his offering up his own country to violation suggests a deeper longing. The secret desire for an Arab lover perhaps? Do not be shocked, Leslie Fiedler was finding homoerotic relationships in the sacred precincts of American literature in his “Come Back to the Raft Ag’in, Huck Honey!” way back in 1948. We have now progressed to postmodernism and absolute moral and cultural relativism with the consequence that all politics and morality and even eroticism itself have been compressed into autoeroticism. Perhaps this spectacularly fruitless dissipation of energy is the missing element fp seeks.

  15. Sophia says:

    I wonder if people realize how close “post-modernism” really is to Dada?

    At least the absurdists linked their art to the utter destructiveness of WWI.

    What’s our excuse? A simple inability to cope? Walmart? What?

    Here’s what I think: I think this is a Bad Sign. It means people have surrendered, no longer have the will to try and save culture, history or the planet itself. There’s a huge die-off underway and some of my students react by throwing garbage into the lake. It’s easier than trying to work the problem and find a path forward. Maybe it’s form of suicide bombing: self-destruction by trash?

    Trying to teach them a classical art form is difficult because they want to proceed directly to the post-modern part without learning the classical or the modern first. Trying to teach about another culture is almost impossible because they’ve decided to heck with those other people, they are American and therefore have the right to take this or that from the culture of “the other” and do whatever they like with it without even attempting to learn the intricacies of another artistic language, let alone to try and empathize with the people who created it.

    I never thought I’d say this but I’m actually beginning to (gasp) understand Edward Said. And I’m really beginning to be disgusted with this “post-modern” stuff; it’s also very confusing to find oneself identifying, not with the Romantics or the Impressionists, but with the French Academy.


  16. fp says:


    you mean you only now realized this obvious a thing?
    don’t blame just the public, it’s the western educational system that has collapsed, killing knowledge and reason as basis for its civilization. it’s what happened in history to all civilizations.

    for coverage of post-modernist absurdities see:


    and particularly today posting:

    A vile ingenuity

    I wonder if Landau has ever stopped to think about who really deserves to be raped.


  17. Kurtlane says:

    I wonder if David Landau himself would like to be raped? (any Freudians there to analyze it?) I propose we begin with him.

  18. Hillel Stavis says:

    Lorenz’s Freudian observations are fascinating. I agree on the frisson of not only addressing Ms. Rice with (more than) sexual innuendos, but in reinforcing them in public later. If we contrast Richard’s “honor-shame” paradigm of Arab culture with European Jewry’s “guilt-accommodation” model, Landau’s overture becomes clear. As to whether he recommends rape for his fellow leftists or he reserves that humiliation only for his political opponents, we aren’t told, but I suspect he desires humiliation and pain for all Jews (especially himself), religious or otherwise. Only through such public humiliation can Jewish guilt be expiated.

    As for his “wet dream”, I think that this represents a kind of sexual bragging to the “dusky dominatrix”. Don’t we almost always associate “wet dreams” with adolescents? Perhaps Mr. Landau is a case of arrested sexual development. You see, Jewish men can perform after all, Ms. Rice, he seems to be declaring.

    On the political plane, Landau’s comments bring to mind Shimon Peres’ famous reply to the question of Oslo being brought about by a coterie of TA intellectuals, not arrived at through any semblance of a democratic process: “You don’t let the passengers on the bus tell the driver where to go.”

    In any event, Landau should be consigned to the nearest mental health facility.

  19. fp says:

    Peres comes from a generation without a real clue about the democratic process. Their roots were in communism/socialism, not the most democratic of the lot.

    When Golda’s government was losing support after the 1973 war and there were street demonstrations against it, she is is said to have knocked her fist on the table and shouted: “This is a democracy: the people on the street will not tell the government what to do!” She was unaware of the inconsistency. Ben Gurion had a similar outlook, part. in his old age.

    The problem with that group is that they built and developed Israel, but did not know when to go. They overstayed and did quite a lot of damage, Peres in particular.

    As to Landau, I reiterate: you overanalyze his sexual language. He is simply dumb in the sense that he is blind to the enemy. Typical jewish guilt coupled with attempt to appear a “good” jew.

  20. fp says:

    peres belongs to a generation of founders who, being of the left, did not have a solid grasp of the concept of democracy. his mentor, ben-gurion was pretty authoritarian, part. in his old age. and golda meyer, at her low popularity after the 1973 war knocked her fist on the table and declared about street demonstrators: “this is a democracy, dammit. the people on the street will not tell the government what to do!”

    As to Landau, you’re over-analyzing and intellectualizing what is essentially stupidity and desperattion to separate himself from the “bad jews”.

  21. Lorenz Gude says:

    There is certainly a danger of over analyzing Landau’s sexual remarks but I doubt that he is dumb in the sense of lacking intelligence. Something sexual appears to be disrupting normal, appropriate language – and, granted, we have only two instances yet they are breathtaking in their inappropriateness – particularly from a public person. It was precisely to produce such inappropriate responses that early psychology used word association tests. The idea is that the patient would reveal their true concerns where denying any such concern if questioned directly. I hope it was obvious that my previous comment was intentionally over the top – at least in part because it really is highly speculative what these remarks might mean psychologically. Still I thought Hillel’s remarks perfectly logical extensions of what I was implying. So fp, dumb in the sense of malfunctioning mentally? Sure. And I think one thing that causes otherwise intelligent people to malfunction in this way is ideological desperation. I first saw it among right wing Americans of the fifties and sixties who got so worked up they convinced themselves that Ike was a communist. When the world refuses to conform to a person’s beliefs they can change or deny. If they keep denying they will eventually sabotage their intelligence and even mental stability.

  22. Kurtlane says:

    Alas, authoritarian and totalitarian behavior does not disappear no matter how many generations people live in a democracy. Americans themselves are far from perfect in this respect. In fact, I find most Americans very timid and conformist.

    Here is a perfect example of pure totalitarianism:
    (The program is now closed. But how was it possible that such a program could emerge in the first place?

    And here is another:
    Just fill out a form, and – presto – cause lots of trouble for anyone you don’t like. It’s the same old practice: informing anonymously on a fellow student.

    Very good comments on David Landau, but something is still missing. Particularly his comment “No matter how hard I try, I can’t convince my countrymen to see things the way I do, so they must be forced.” It seems to me that Kipling’s poem fits people like him:

    THREE things make earth unquiet
    And four she cannot brook
    The godly Agur counted them
    And put them in a book—
    Those Four Tremendous Curses
    With which mankind is cursed
    But a Servant when He Reigneth
    Old Agur entered first.

    An Handmaid that is Mistress
    We need not call upon,
    A Fool when he is full of Meat
    Will fall asleep anon.
    An Odious Woman Married
    May bear a babe and mend,
    But a Servant when He Reigneth
    Is Confusion to the end.

    His feet are swift to tumult,
    His hands are slow to toil,
    His ears are deaf to reason,
    His lips are loud in broil.
    He knows no use for power
    Except to show his might.
    He gives no heed to judgment
    Unless it prove him right.

    Because he served a master
    Before his Kingship came,
    And hid in all disaster
    Behind his master’s name,
    So, when his Folly opens
    The unnecessary hells,
    A Servant when He Reigneth
    Throws the blame on some one else.

    His vows are lightly spoken,
    His faith is hard to bind,
    His trust is easy broken,
    He fears his fellow-kind.
    The nearest mob will move him
    To break the pledge he gave—
    Oh a Servant when He Reigneth
    Is more than ever slave!

    Slavery of heart and brain – that’s the problem. Americans, Israelis, Russians, anyone: very few people anywhere are not slaves.

  23. fp says:



    absolutely. agreed. that’s exactly what I meant by dumbness — in fact I explicitly said that he Landau is desperate, ideologically so.

    that’s why I did not think the use of a sexual word should be given too much attention. he was looking for something “strong” to express his desperation.


    as i often say, leftists are simply atrocious at losing. the loss killed them and they cannot cope with it. hence the desperation

  24. […] bookmarks tagged shrewd David Landau, Oslo Logician, Asks Condi Rice to … saved by 1 others     UsingTheInterweb bookmarked on 12/30/07 | […]

  25. […] Stables’ response to David Landua’s remarks to Condoleezza Rice that the US should “rape” Israel, offers perhaps the most […]

  26. Antidhimmi says:

    Not to disagree with Hillel and Lorenz, however the way that Landau expressed himself was so inappropriate and over the top that it may reflect something about him that we ought to reflect on. Would he, for example, have used the same words to express his sentiments if the Secretary were a white male. I tend to doubt it. The simplest explanation is that the ‘dusky dominatrix’ notion reads as a racist and sexist mind-set that allows Landau to place himself not only above the Israeli political system but also above a Black female American Secretary of State. The use of sexual metaphors in a semi formal setting with a high official with whom one is not on intimate terms is totally inappropriate and demonstrates a complete lack of respect – even for an arrogant British leftist. There may be less here than meets the eye.

  27. fp says:

    the left has become so desperate and frustrated that trying to interpret them rationally would lead you to the nut house.

  28. ROCHELLE OWENS says:


    Poet and Playwright


  29. […] this cognitive warfare — the power of suggestion? Or is it just anti-Zionists fantazing their wet dream? « So what if, by 2020, Rotterdam is a majority Muslim? We already have an answer. […]

  30. […] David Landau, whose astonishingly self-destructiive advice to Condaleeza Rice, I’ve discussed before, finds Goldstone unpalatable. And yet, he remains firmly inside his moral narcissism, obsessing […]

  31. […] talking about David Landau, famous for his “Oh Condi, it’s been my wet dream to tell you to rape Israel into making concessions to […]

  32. […] David Landau, whose astonishingly self-destructiive advice to Condaleeza Rice, I’ve discussed before, finds Goldstone unpalatable. And yet, he remains firmly inside his moral narcissism, obsessing […]

  33. […] interviewers don’t seem to have asked him about it, the Agean Stables website provides a reminder of Landau’s immortal and disgraceful “rape” line from a while back.  […]

  34. […] known as Melbourne), where leftist Israeli journalist – who is, of course, on record as saying Israel wants to be raped – seems to have been packin’ ‘em in …  Reports J-Wire:Read on for […]

Leave a Reply

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