Peacock Rhinos: On the nature of Ionesco’s Rhinoceros in the early 21st century

In a recent comment on a Goldstone post, Eliyahu made the following comparison:

Eugene Ionesco’s play, The Rhinoceros, has a lot of insights relevant to the “peace camp” and to people starring in the field of “international human rights advocacy” and “peace” advocacy. I think the term rhinoceros or qarnaf [קרנף] in Hebrew fits richard richard goldstone rather well. He’s a rhino in Ionesco’s sense. He is morally insensitive. He is an opportunist. He is devoid of scruples in his field of endeavor. He serves as his master’s voice. He has masters as he indicated by saying that he really didn’t want to take on the assignment. But he is part of a movement and/or a gang and cannot refuse, no more than a mafioso can refuse an assignment. He is expected to comply. His field of endeavor, his assigned task, is to pose as a highly moral man while acting immorally. He puts on the pose of a man of conscience, of a serious man. But he is shallow. He has a weak conscience.

Ionesco’s play referred to what happened in Vichy France as normal, relatively decent people became corrupted by favors, by receiving positions giving them power over other people, by the opportunity to bully others, etc. These people became like the thick-skinned, supposedly insensitive rhino in Ionesco’s metaphor. Unfortunately, the rhino metaphor can describe what is happening throughout the world, including the civilized world.

I ran this by my friend and associate (who considers himself extreme left), and his response was interesting. Many of Ionesco’s rhinos knew they were unprincipled. They openly sided with power and, as Eliyahu points out, were devoid of scruples. Goldstone, he argued, is full of fine thoughts, a beautiful soul who thinks much of himself. He struts on the stage as a moral voice. He’s a peacock.

But, I objected, beneath this veneer lies the heart (and hide) of a rhino. He is thick skinned in the sense that nothing can penetrate to even give him pause. (it is interesting that self-criticism is just not part of his repertoire. He’s admitted no mistakes, even as he expect – no, demands – that Israel bear its breast in public.)

He has his ideas, some public – the importance of the ICC and the human rights movement – and some private – Israel should be held to a higher standard – and it really doesn’t matter to him whether they contradict each other, whether the way he proceeds will work, or destroy his work. As long as that chorus keeps singing his praises, he’s not going to give an inch. The peacock feathers are the cloak of high moral-mindedness that Goldstone and so many others – including journalists – adopt, even as they pursue a rhino’s goals.

The reports coming from the “human rights community” in which at both HRW and AI, dissent is systematically throttled, suggests that this is a breeding ground of peacock rhinos.

UPDATE: William Briggs summarizes Thomas Sowell’s latest book, Intellectuals and Society, which describes the Peacock-rhino (or, as E.G. would have it, the Rhino-cock), with a quote from T.S. Eliot:

Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don’t mean to do harm — but the harm does not interest them. Or they do not see it; or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves.

Read the rest: it will sound painfully familiar.

69 Responses to Peacock Rhinos: On the nature of Ionesco’s Rhinoceros in the early 21st century

  1. JD says:

    You’re both right.

    He was and still is a rhino. But he poses as a peacock once exposed. His demise was the internet.

    I am sure he had no idea what was coming. I do not think he knew how bad and crankish the report would be. It is not his writing, but he is responsible for it since he took on the “Good Jew” role.

    He has moved from lawyer-like twists to out and out moralization and blaming the Israelis. “If only Israel responded” is not Israel’s life boat, but his own.

  2. obsy says:

    Someone on a extreme left site wrote that Goldstone is just a politician. For me, this is the best metaphor.

    I doubt that the extreme left likes people who behave or even talk like him. They are not pro-Goldstone but Anti-Israel. Sounds familiar.

    Does Goldstone understand that the loudest applause which he gets is not meant for him?
    If not, he is a peacock.

  3. E.G. says:

    Weekly update from Latma, Rhinocock included.

    http://www.youtube.com/user/LatmaTV#p/u/2/ePjkUG7wr8Y

    —-
    On a side note, at the beginning of the J’lem part, there’s a non-translated wordplay/double entendre: Ir HaBira is both “Capital city” and “Beer City”.

  4. Lorenz Gude says:

    This category of survival behavior feels so familiar – I think it is common in the academic world for people to rise by having the ‘right’ attitudes to get grants and promotion. People who will sell their soul for peacock feathers. Michael Creighton in “State of Fear” made the point that a lot of the best dissent comes from professors emeriti because they can offend who they like. So perhaps there is an entire class of institutionalized people who act this way? Academics, NGOers activists of all sorts. It isn’t that corporate types or politicians, for example, don’t compete in all sorts of unsavory ways, but it is particularly galling when people who are ostensibly pursuing high minded goals act no better than Vichy collaborators.

  5. Joanne says:

    I guess Ionesco’s rhinos could stand for political opportunists of any age, who out of fear—or out of lust for approval, wealth, and honors—will eventually sell out and join the herd.

    But I think there is something more to it than that. While there is a subdermal layer of cynicism at work, there is another process going on as well. The rhino-to-be becomes infatuated with the dominant group and, by extension, with its ideology. Flirting at first, he or she is increasingly seduced by the dominant group’s appeal. On top of that, the prestige of intellectuals, professors, journalists, and other stars who support the group adds to the group’s apparent moral power. Not to mention the growing support among the rhino’s own peers.

    Thus, might (in terms of popularity) becomes right. The rhino-to-be begins to believe in the rightness of the dominant group’s ideas. And the rhino sincerely believes that he/she sincerely believes.

  6. SE says:

    Interesting that here you accuse Goldstone of the same thing you accuse demopaths/Palestinians: that he is exploiting a core principle of a civil society — self-criticism — to demonize Israel while entirely avoiding this principle when it applies to himself.
    Not sure what to make of this.

  7. Cynic says:

    I think that Goldstone is exploiting a core principal of the judiciary, and that is that only the judge is right.
    The manner in which they appear and how they are addressed has caused them to obsess with their own self-importance.

  8. Cynic says:

    How strange is coincidence, when after my comment above I read this quote of T.S. Elliot

    Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don’t mean to do harm — but the harm does not interest them. Or they do not see it; or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves.

    from a review of Thomas Sowell’s new book “Intellectuals and Society”.

  9. Eliyahu says:

    If we really want to study the corruption of the intellectuals in the 21st century we might also go back to Julien Benda’s book, The Treason of the Intellectuals [La Trahison des clercs][not sure of the English title]. This book was first published in 1927 and made an impression, hence it was revised and republished in later years. I don’t think that I would agree with everything in the book, but some parts were and are valid. I would have to go back and read it again and thoroughly. So this is a problem that existed before but now seems worse than before.

  10. E.G. says:

    Two accounts (both in French) on a round table held last week at one of Paris’ elite Academic institutions, Ecole Normale Supérieure. The subject was Zionism.

    http://www.primo-info.eu/selection.php?numdoc=Ed-920812908

    http://www.upjf.org/actualitees-upjf/article-18277-110-1-scenes-guerre-ideologique-normale-sup-r-drai.html

  11. E.G. says:

    The honour/shame dimension, I’ve already argued, has not disappeared from Western culture. It evolved and got more sophisticated.

    Powerfulness is not only physical but also intellectual. And it’s still necessary for achieving, maintaining, and enhancing an “honourable” position – a position that means having the legitimate capacity to influence if not coerce a more or less large group of people.
    Also, an honourable position often (but not always) brings about pride (see: peacock).

    In school and academia, in media and many strata of “intelligentsia”, there’s been a trend imposing conformity and herding (see: rhinoceritis). All the more so in Intl. institutions, where rhinos are majoritarian.

    There is a profusion of Academics and “celebrities” (e;g. Bono) who reproduce Ionesco’s logician: the savant who keeps making fallacious inferences, drawing absurd conclusions. That’s another aspect of rhinoceritis: the betrayal of principles – morality, justice, ethics… Yet not only are they not discredited, they’re often promoted and their opinion, whether well informed or not, based on relevant or irrelevant competence, is revered. They’re granted peacock feathered tails.

    Totalitarianism (rhinoceros governing rules) encourages conformity and compensates agents enforcing it. It fights, and quite ferociously, free, independent thinking. Because its change agenda is not compatible with independence.

  12. Michelle Schatzman says:

    I agree with you, E.G. ; recent french example : Chomsky is visiting France from May 28th to 31st,

    http://www.chomsky.fr/

    I really recommend a careful reading of the names of the people organizing this web site. They include a man described as professor in the Collège de France, Jean-Jacuqes Rosat (but he is, in fact, a maître de conférences, which is way less prestigious), and the unavoidable Jean Bricmont (who likes more the ayatollahs than the Iranian homosexuals or women) and Gilbert Achcar, a fanaticall propalestinian Lebanese trotskyite.

    Moreover, Chomsky’s trip to France gets to have an announcement in the CNRS house journal, on page 42 of the May issue :

    http://www2.cnrs.fr/presse/journal/

    (download the pdf from this web page).

    I astounded that the french rhinos (and I thought that Jacques Bouveresse was a decent man) organize a full day scientific meeting in the Collège de France, under the title

    “Rationalité, vérité et démocratie : Bertrand Russell, George Orwell, Noam Chomsky”

    on May 28th.

    [Question : who is the wrong man in the above list of three ?}

    A number of linguistics labs and cognitive science labs from CNRS invited also Chomsky to talk on the 29th, and the Collège de France offers him a big lecture in the big lecture hall on the 31st.

    So, Rhinochomsky gets a pestigious invitation by Rhinobouveresse, and a long list of other rhinococks.

    I am in awe…

  13. Michelle Schatzman says:

    I listened to dear Mr Achcar – who is franco-lebanese, born in Dakar, and teaches in the UK –

    http://www.soas.ac.uk/staff/staff30529.php

    explaining the origin of antisemitism in arab countries :

    http://www.telerama.fr/idees/gilbert-achcar-le-pretendu-negationnisme-palestinien-est-une-provocation-envers-israel,50512.php

    (interview from December 19, 2009).

    It is nice to listen to when you clean up the dishwasher (which I did). His arguments boil down to a few principles :

    - the racism of the dominated against the dominant is easier to forgive than the racism of the dominant against the dominated and the correct administration of justice has to include the circumstances of whoever is being passed judgment upon.

    - if the proportion of the israeli Arabs who deny the destruction of the Jews by the nazis has passed from 28% to 40 %, with higher proportion in the more educated classes, it means that they are just reacting to oppression. If relations improved between Israel and the Arab countries, negationnism would immediately lose ground immediately.

    - The grand Mufti of Jerusalem did collaborate with the nazis, but he had little influence over the arab world by the end of the war. He called the Arabs to rebel and fight against the anti-nazi front, but he did not succeed.

    - Yes, about 6500 soldiers from Arab contries fought alongside the nazis, but many more fought against the nazis, alongside the allied forces.

    If you want to listen to the piece, it is about 30 minutes long. Did I say in french? Yes, en français.

    What is interesting is that there is such a short chain from a Gilbert Achcar, who writes fanatically propalestinian opinion, for instance in

    http://www.irishleftreview.org/2009/01/17/interview-gilbert-achcar/

    to Jacques Bouveresse

    http://www.college-de-france.fr/default/EN/all/phi_lan_en/index.htm

    where the link is through Chomsky…

  14. Michelle Schatzman says:

    E.G.,

    I read the article about Chomsky that you mentioned and found it devoid of interest. On one hand, I tend to agree that it is silly to forbid Chomsky from entering Israel, because it gives him lots of publicity, and the dear old professor cannot live without it. On the other hand, forbidding him from entering has little to do with fascism, or stalinism, as Chomsky himself claims.

    Yhe only good attitude re. Chomsky is to compare him to the spanish clown who was barred from entering Israel a few weeks ago. This is why I am appalled by the kind of reception he will get in France in ten days. The guy has lost all intellectual integrity probably 40 years ago, and people are still considering him as a biggie? Because he invented universal generative grammars, a concept which is still discussed, and the Chomsky hierarchy of languages (definitely used in computer science), his word is Gospel, or Torah or Koran, or Marx-Engels-Lenin-Stalin-Mao-Enver Hodja (sorry, instead of Lenin et al., I should have written Chomsky-Chomsky-Chomsky, probably) ?

    I can’t stomach Chomsky, and I really do not understand respectable philosophers who let themselves be fooled by this guy.

  15. Eliyahu says:

    Chomsky is said to have plagiarized much of his linguistic theories –for which he is famous– from Prof Zellig Harris of the Univ of Pennsylvania. If so, then his reputation as a linguist is undeserved and he committed the academic crime of plagiarizing from Harris without recognition the origin of his theory.

    You cite Achcar saying - the racism of the dominated against the dominant is easier to forgive than the racism of the dominant against the dominated and the correct administration of justice has to include the circumstances of whoever is being passed judgment upon.

    Here the importance of historical truth comes in. This is because precisely in the Arab/Muslim ruled-lands in general and the Land of Israel in particular, Jews were oppressed by Arabs/Muslims [and in the Byzantine period by Christians, although Byzantine oppression of Jews was less severe than Arab/Muslim oppression of dhimmis, including Jews]. In other words, if we would accept his principle of justice, then we would have to condone Jewish racism against Arabs. Because the Jews were the people oppressed, in fact, oppressed by both Western Christians and Middle Eastern Arabs/Muslims. Now, Ashcar is sinister precisely because he is such a slick liar. So how come Jews are told that, despite all of their past suffering, they have to let the Arabs do just about whatever they want??

    Here is an excellent critique of Achcar’s lies and distortions. Also see my comments below the article:
    http://cifwatch.com/2010/05/17/arabs-and-the-holocaust-the-truth/#more-7488

    Chomsky is , I believe, a conscious crook, a conscious agent of propaganda and psychological warfare.

  16. Michelle Schatzman says:

    Eliyahu,

    I have no complete and reliable proof that Chomsky plagiarized Harris’ work, so I will not endorse this accusation , though I know about it. This being cleared away, Chomsky is definitely not a nice guy, and I recommend

    http://www.jbooks.com/interviews/index/IP_Dershowitz.htm

    where Alan Dershowitz explains how the threesome made out of Chomsky, Finkelstein and Cockburn have been organizing for more than 20 years plagiarism accusation against anyone who did not toe their line.

    Achcar is obviously a very unreliable source, as far as truth is concerned. But he is a wonderful source, if one wants to guess what will the next generation of anti-Israel lies be.

    When reading Achcar rants, I have been struck by the undeniable fact that his lies propagate in MSNM. Therefore, I offer an experiment in social science :

    (1) determine a new lie written by Achcar, which has not appeared in the MSNM.

    (2) determine how long it will take for this lie to appear in MSNM.

    Of course, there will be another social project, which is to determine how this specific lie made its way to the MSMN.

    I root for the Achcar statement, which says that Israeli Arabs deny the destruction of European Jews, because they are exasperated by the permanent Israeli propaganda, which justifies the Israeli exactions by the catastrophe of the destruction.

    This satement was put into print, when Achcar published in french on Oct. 15th, 2009, and in english on April 1st, 2010.

    So, let us bet : how long will it take for this interesting statement to become accepted in MSNM?

  17. Joanne says:

    Cynic,

    That’s a great quote from Elliot. Thanks.

  18. Eliyahu says:

    Michelle, I heard the claim about chomsky plagiarizing from Zellig Harris years ago from a scholar of the older generation whom I respected very much. He was very positive and emphatic about this claim. I heard it from others too. Now, I don’t have any personal proof that this is correct. However, it seems quite possible that chomsky knew Harris through his father who was a linguist too. They all lived in Philadelphia where the Univ of Penn is located. One way to check this is to read Harris’ published works and see whether chomsky’s writings match them without acknowledgment.

    Chomsky has also given out differing accounts of his early political identifications. He told one story to the New Yorker for a profile by, I think, Ved Mehta. He gave another, somewhat contradictory account to Israel Horizons, a monthly which was published by HaShomer HaTzair in the USA. Both accounts appeared around 1968-1969. As you know, he defended Faurisson’s freedom of speech to lie about the Holocaust.

  19. Eliyahu says:

    Now, the role and function that Achcar plays in 2010 in the erstwhile “bourgeois press” shows that the prejudices and fanaticisms of Trotskyite sects and groupuscules have become mainstream. They could be described by a Marxist-Leninist of the old school as ideological weapons in the hands of the “bourgeoisie” or the “imperialists.”

    You mentioned the Pabloite Trots a week or two ago. Specifically Pablo’s argument about imperialism has been very useful over the years. To the great powers also called “imperialists.” So the anti-imperialists have become the tools of imperialists. Nothing new under the sun. אין חדש תחת השמש

    What I say is that anti-Zionism is the anti-imperialism of fools. Achcar says something like “Holocaust denial is the anti-Zionism of fools.” I don’t think that Achcar is a fool. He is doing quite well from a bourgeois viewpoint. Achcar’s anti-Zionism is simply sinister, a remake of the traditional Western Judeophbobia as was common 100 years ago.

  20. Michelle Schatzman says:

    Eliyahu,

    Chomsky definitely knew Harris: he took clases with him at U Penn. Your favorite wikipedia article says so, and it is not a mystery. Considering the large number of people who hate Chomsky, and who would have been delighted to substantiate the accusation of plagiarism, since it is not proved, I guess that it simply does not stick.

    Achcar: I agree with the last paragraph of your #21. But I would go beyond it. If holocaust denial is the anti-zionism of the fools, how come that the more educated part of the arab Israelis condones this opinion more than the less educated? Does it mean that foolishness is inversely proportional to education in the arab sector, or does it mean that holocaust denial is a trendy, elegant thing to do, showing solidarity with the arab nation, islam/Islam or whatever fantasies the deniers hold in their poor minds?

    I was surprised that Achcar did not say or write explicitly that denial of the holocaust by a significant proportion of Arabs is the fault of Israel and the Jews. I am pretty much convinced that he writes in order for his readers to jump precisely to this conclusion.

  21. Cynic says:

    Michelle,

    I was surprised that Achcar did not say or write explicitly that denial of the holocaust by a significant proportion of Arabs is the fault of Israel and the Jews.

    Well, many antisemites have said that the holocaust came about because of the faults of the Jews.
    That the Jews were responsible for it.
    In the case of denial of the holocaust, of course it is because of the Jews. Who would they have to antagonise if the Jews weren’t around?
    The Jews unfortunately have never come back with the apposite retort; but then of course it all depends on the ability of the intelligence Achcars and ilk to understand it.
    Just like children and name calling; don’t the Jews have enough psychiatrists to know to be able to handle it?

    Unfortunately the majority of the Jews know nothing about Islam and even less about about the Mandate period to be able to comprehend the context and ably respond to the insults.

  22. E.G. says:

    Eliyahu and Michelle,

    I don’t have the guts to stomach your links now, but thanks.

    I vaguely recall Chomsky’s Generative Grammar theory. But I do recall my just-a-bit learned adherence to it. It made a lot of sense for me. Whether it’s his own or not is, in my view, a minor issue. I wouldn’t be surprised or shocked to see conclusive proof either way.

    Please excuse me going o/t but I just read this (no, Charlie ain’t in there)
    On the values guiding the French practice of journalism: Interviews with thirteen war correspondents
    http://jou.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/11/3/293?etoc

    They’re no rhinos, or they wouldn’t need those famous vests ;-) but peacocks – O Yes!

  23. Eliyahu says:

    Here is part of a comment by me on the CiFWatch sie:

    Achcar demonstrates that clever Arab and/or pro-Arab psychological warfare experts have realized that, rather than make themselves ridiculous by denying the Holocaust, they can get farther by pretending to be victims of the victims. That is, they and their partisans argue that the Jewish survivors learned cruelty and brutality from the Germans and came to the Middle East to persecute Arabs as they had been persecuted, etc. That is actually a very convenient argument for the old Euro Judeophobes. It says that the Jews are really as bad or worse than we Euro Judeophobes are. Indeed, it insinuates that the Jews deserved the Holocaust. On the other hand, nobody takes the logic of the argument to the next step. That is, if the German Nazi persecution made the Jews just as bad or worse than the German Nazis, then why aren’t the Arabs –particularly Palestinian Arabs– made as bad or worse than the “Zionist racist Nazi infidel dogs” by the persecution and oppression that they are supposedly undergoing and have undergone??

    The Arab propagandists, as skilled opportunists in their craft, can take more than one position on the Holocaust, depending on their audience. To one crowd, they pretend that it never happened, that the Holocaust was a Jewish lie to pressure the West into giving them southern Bilad ash-Sham [Bilad ash-Sham = Syria or Greater Syria]. They also can stir up their home front by bringing in Roger Garaudy to speak to them in denial of the Holocaust. Indeed, that has happened.

    On the other hand, they come to Western liberals and Western church groups and whine that the Jews/Zionists are worse than the Nazis because they learned from the Nazi Germans, etc. etc.

    And they can also praise the Holocaust among themselves, even though they also deny it.

  24. Eliyahu says:

    I should add that one major argument made by Arab and pro-Arab spokesmen for many years has been the, “We had nothing to do with that Holocaust, it was strictly a European affair.” Azmi Bishara, the Arab ex-Commie made that claim specifically in an article in Zmanim [circa 1995-96], a somewhat popularized Hebrew-language history magazine. I think that at the time it was edited by Idit Zertal, another academic screwball and moonbat. Bishara denies any Arab collaboration in the Shoah about 5 or 6 times in the articles. Methinks he doth protest too much. That’s tantamount to an admission.

    Bishara has since fled to Syria because he was caught helping Hizbullah target its rockets during the 2006 Lebanon war.

  25. E.G. says:

    This one made me grin in pity.

    Grand Gideon foaming at the mouth.
    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/democracy-according-to-reichman-1.291143

  26. Michelle Schatzman says:

    Bought a book by Chomsky, with a preface by Jacques Bouversse, professor in the Collège de France, no less. And looked at it : mostly articles condemning postmodernism, extreme relativism, and bad teaching.

    I read half of the intro by Bouveresse. Semes that he wants to enroll Chomsky into his fight against pomo.

    Fighting pomo is Ok, but using the Chomsgun is dangersous : it blows in the face of anyone who tries to use it.

    I thought I would write to Bouveresse, because I was a student in the Ecole Normale Supérieure de Jeunes Filles at the same time as his kid sister, whom I knew well.

    I won’t. If Bouveresse thinks that the stupid and disgusting positions of Chomsky relatively to Faurisson or the Khmers Rouges are old and can be forgotten due to a statute of limitation, then he probably will not understand my letter. I’m afraid that Chomsky can be persona grata again in the halls of french academia, because of his propalestinian positions. Maybe, I just don’t want to check.

    Or maybe, I could check by just asking Bouveresse whether Chomsky has been forgiven, and for which reasons. That might be more interesting than rebuking Bouveresse. In the past, I was a leftist, so maybe, he will be candid? Thinking of it, maybe, it is a good idea. I’ll sleep over it.

    always write, make contact, ask questions. the worst that can happen is that you’re disappointed. the best, that you’re pleasantly surprised. times are changing. people need to speak out. nudge them gently but firmly to show intellectual courage. -rl

  27. Cynic says:

    E.G.,

    Did you by any chance see this blog post
    The most Ashkenazi elite is Israel’s radical left

    Reading Alexander Jacobson’s riposte to Gideon Levy’s accusation that Israel has failed to integrate Mizrahi Jews into its elites, one can’t help a frisson of satisfaction: the most Ashkenazi elite of all, Jacobson claims, is the radical left, of which the vuzvuz (yekke, noch!) Gideon Levy is a prime example.

    It wouldn’t be funny if I had no sense of humour!

  28. E.G. says:

    Cynic,

    I only read Jacobson’s op-ed. And I don’t see where or why any sense of humour is needed to find the “paradox” funny. Indeed, Yekkes are said to have none, but I can personally testify to the contrary: some do have some, or even quite some.
    Grand Gideon’s lack of it is not what I find his worst defect. But, come to think of it, maybe that’s the cause of his great defect?

    A propos, have you seen this already? The A.R. sequence is… the Gideonisation of minds*.
    http://www.youtube.com/user/LatmaTV#p/u/0/mHJNzp-mNM8

    ____
    * My take on the French term “lepenisation des esprits”, referring to Le Pen’s presumed influence on good, Honest-to-God Socialist party, French souls.

  29. E.G. says:

    Ah, it’s Feed the Filters moment.

  30. incognito says:

    Grand Gideon foaming at the mouth.
    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/democracy-according-to-reichman-1.291143

    Alas, be that as it may, he is right about Herzlia. See my comment in another thread here.

    I wouldn’t mind Israel without the left, Chomsky included; but I sure am wary about the Israeli rich who live in a world of their own and who will be the first to run away when the going gets tough.

  31. E.G. says:

    incognito,

    Ah, the Tel-Aviv U. rhinococks strike again. In collaboration with one of their peers.
    Don’t confuse us with facts

    Cynic will surely note the irony in the title. That’s exactly the battle cry of that very intelligentsia.
    (and I proudly (?) report that my talkback on the Hebrew version was not censored)

    O/T, for nostalgia’ sake.
    http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/israeli-chef-rolls-into-the-record-books-with-largest-fellafel-ball-1.291520

  32. Cynic says:

    E.G.,

    From your link to projected transfacts
    However, a new study about psychological obstacles to solving the conflict shows that the average Israeli doesn’t want to know the facts.
    A study by Dr. G. Levy?

    A pragmatic Palestinian leadership runs up against Israeli public opinion,

    I almost choked on my wine reading that. Pragmatic leadership my eye.
    Just watching Palestinian media perform is fact enough to establish belief.

  33. incognito says:

    “Ah, the Tel-Aviv U. rhinococks strike again. In collaboration with one of their peers.”

    TAU is the left, not the rich. I was referring to IDC which is the rich, not the left.

    The left has not been known to appreciate facts, just the contrary. That’s the fate of utopians (particularly when they have tenure).

    The rich in Israel are the same as everywhere else. And now they rule Israel too, just like everywhere in the west. And the west has collapsed, now what xan be inferred from this for Israel?

  34. incognito says:

    I almost choked on my wine reading that. Pragmatic leadership my eye. Just watching Palestinian media perform is fact enough to establish belief.

    See my comments in another thread as to the inability of the peace processors to accept the reality of the conflict because they have no solution for that and are scared shitless. The same is true for the Israeli left.

    They all have a utopia of peace. The reality of arabs simply not wanting any jews there (or anywhere else) pulls the rug from under their feet.

    Schadenfreude or not, I would really like it to be possible for Israel to follow their guidelines and have the consequences fall ONLY ON THEM. That would have the only chance to force them to see reality, and even them I am not sure they will accept it.

  35. incognito says:

    Another take on Beinart. Don’t confuse us with facts, indeed.

    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/05/21/curing_the_israel_estrangement_syndrome?page=full

    There is nothing new in Beinart: the standard looking for the keys not where you lost them, but where there is light. There’s nothing they can do about the arabs so they blame Israel.

  36. incognito says:

    One fact that defies Beinart, although I am not sure that it’s representative:

    http://www.jta.org/news/article/2010/05/21/2739262/students-across-us-invite-oren-to-speak

    Note carefully that jewish students have come closest to traumas on US campuses which would explain their reaction. This would confirm my comments about a trauma being necessary to overcome indifference to Israel.

  37. incognito says:

    One of the best writers on the ME is Lee Smith (I’ll be reading his STRONG HORSE). Here’s a piece on the
    delusion of the liberal west based on projection:

    Outside Looking In
    By Lee Smith
    http://www.newsweek.com/id/238313

    It explains the self-blinding of the liberals to reality.

  38. Cynic says:

    incognito,

    the inability of the peace processors to accept the reality of the conflict because they have no solution for that

    They have a solution but the don’t want to accept it.

  39. Cynic says:

    incognito,

    Re your #39 it seems that the inventors of the term “sucker bait” fall for it every time.
    Whatever Rima Fakih’s modus vivendi she is free, like the CIA, to present herself as befits her role.

    From the Curing the Israel Estrangement Syndrome:

    He concludes his essay by quoting approvingly the words of former Knesset Speaker Avrum Burg — a man who has compared Israel to pre-Nazi Germany, suggested revoking the law of return (which allows diaspora Jews to become Israeli citizens), and called upon all Israelis to obtain foreign passports. If this is what Beinart means by “talking frankly” about Israel, one wishes he were as vigilant about those seeking to destroy it.

    For an American Jew most likely aware of the “dual loyalty” slur he is incredibly stupid or just a cur.

    By the way from looking at the comments I feel a more asinine bunch would be hard to find.

  40. Eliyahu says:

    Cynic, you really ought to go into the moral corruption of Burg junior. I’ve done it a few times I think here on the Stables. It would be hard to beat young Avremeleh for hypocrisy, corruption, etc. Note that certain Western Israelophobes like to cite burg, aloni, g levi, uri avneri [a successful pornographer], etc., even ehud olmert as moral paragons who can be useful in chastizing Israel. They know little about the real Israel or about the records of burg, olmert, avneri, and other comrades, who often suck off the teat of Western “NGOs”. But none of that matters when you want to smear Israel for the good of the cause.

  41. incognito says:

    They have a solution but the don’t want to accept it.

    The have “outlawed” that solution, so from their perspective it does not exist. To accept it would be to rob them of their notion of moral superiority. Of course, their morals are fucked up, but they dk it.

    Whatever Rima Fakih’s modus vivendi she is free, like the CIA, to present herself as befits her role.

    Ah, but that is the point of the soft jihad: to live in the west free and undermine it from within. Rima is probably not a jihadi, but I am making a broader point. And some mentioned her support for Hezballah, or roots in the Hezballah area. Would not be surprised, but somehow I doubt that hotpants and bikinis square with jihad. OTOH, support for jihad may be her way to save herself from beheading :).

    For an American Jew most likely aware of the “dual loyalty” slur he is incredibly stupid or just a cur.

    You mean cur = ass? Could not agree more.

    By the way from looking at the comments I feel a more asinine bunch would be hard to find.

    It’s THAT that is scary and prompts me conclude that the US is finished. It is one think to have ignorant idiotic pundits like Beinart, but the reality is that such are coming out of the woodwork because they now have an increasing population to buy this crap.

  42. incognito says:

    eliyahu,

    Regarding our exchange in the other thread, it is not by chance that the Beinarts and J-Streets pop up during Obama’s reign. This is what underlies my claim that the jews are easiest to deal with, including Israel.

    It may not seem that way to many, but Bibi has caved in to everything Obama wants.

  43. incognito says:

    See what I mean by “coming out of the woodwork” during Obama’s reign?

    Reviving Jewish Race Science at Columbia U Conference
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/05/reviving_jewish_race_science_a.html

  44. Eliyahu says:

    that is why obama was chosen to lead the Judeophobic campaign.

  45. incognito says:

    that is why obama was chosen to lead the Judeophobic campaign.

    Obama was chosen for all sorts of reasons, some real and some illusional. My guess would be that more of the latter than the former, because there are many more ignorants and stupids than manipulators in the electorate. Your argument holds more for those who funded and indoctrinated him.

  46. Cynic says:

    incognito,

    Rima is probably not a jihadi, …

    She is from a Christian community but so many people tried to get Hezbollah on board; if only they could get some bloodshed along, what a story for the media! that would be.

  47. E.G. says:

    Reichman’s (of “Univ. of the rich” infamy) response to the Great Knight of Democracy:
    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/zionist-and-democratic-1.291844

  48. Cynic says:

    Your argument holds more for those who funded and indoctrinated him.

    Well Soros is fully supportive.

  49. Cynic says:

    from the link in #45

    He told his audience that Kuwait formerly had a black prime minister, which was not widely reported in the media, but if Israel had one, “that definitely would make world news.” He neglected to mention that Kuwait’s Prime Minister is not elected, so the fact that a Kuwaiti Prime Minister was black tells us little about Kuwaiti society. Israel, on the other hand, is a multi-ethnic democracy with Arabs and Jews of every color serving in the Knesset, the Israeli parliament.

    What should be reported on is Arab behaviour towards Israeli border guards who are of Ethiopian extraction, vilifying them and cursing their skin colour. When it is a whitish Israeli they shut up.

  50. Cynic says:

    E.G.,

    From the link

    IDC is the only institution is Israel that is teaching refugees from Darfur, and also the only one that maintains academic cooperation projects with Al-Quds University and with the Royal Institute for Inter-Faith Studies in Amman. Recently we waged a successful struggle to secure entry visas for two female students from Jordan who are now enrolled with us.

    For the Great Knight of Democracy vuzvuz/yekke hypocrite the only thing that counts is being able to use the “Palestinians” as a club to beat his country.
    Can it possibly be that this type of behaviour has something in common with wife beating; the husband dissatisfied with life takes it out on his wife?

    Amazing how none of the Israeli Arab, Ethiopian, Sudanese, Indian and other Asian colours in life count but only the particular Arab colour confined to the Arab Leagues ghettos that make or break apartheid in Israel.

  51. E.G. says:

    Cynic,

    Let’s not be unfair. Recall your #29 ref.: Grand Lamentator did complain about Weiss intra-Israeli over-representativeness.

    My interpretation of the recent screaming fiesta (not only by our pet Yekke) about anything not in line with their radical agenda, is that these folks feel threatened. They’re isolated and rarefying, and fear that their attempt at the “Gideonization of minds” is doomed to fail.

    In fact, it has failed in Israel (see: the recurring complaint about deaf ears). That’s why they’re addressing the World, attempting to draw their peer-minded and/or circumstantial allies into the battle on Jewdemocratic Israel.

  52. Eliyahu says:

    Miss Rima is a Muslim according to Debbie Shlussel. Debbie lives in the Detroit area where Rima comes from so I will take her word for it. Her site has had quite a few posts on Rime.

    http://www.debbieschlussel.com/22109/top-muslim-hezbo-extremists-praise-miss-hezbollah-usa-muslim-leader-who-urged-mass-murder-of-jews-is-rima-fakih-fan/#more-22109

  53. incognito says:

    That’s why they’re addressing the World, attempting to draw their peer-minded and/or circumstantial allies into the battle on Jewdemocratic Israel.

    Having lost an audience in Israel, who else can they find a lefty/anti-Israel one? In the arab-israeli community at
    best, and they’re probably conscious that’s not gonna
    help them convince the locals.

    Miss Rima is a Muslim according to Debbie Shlussel.

    DS is probably right, but there have been Christian more muslim than the muslims in history (Michel Aflaq, the priest carrying arms for Arafat, anyone?). At least now I understand the Hezballah Christian allies now that the west/US has dumped Lebanon in the Iranian/Syrian lap.

  54. E.G. says:

    #56

    I saw it first. :-/

  55. incognito says:

    Beinart factually challenged — how lies become truth:

    http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/2010/05/inventing-netanyahus-past.html

  56. Eliyahu says:

    Incog re #56

    You’re right about how the US –and the West generally– has handed Lebanon to the Assad gang on a silver platter –specifically obama et Cie. But this is an old American policy. The USA, like the UK, has long favored pan-Arabism going back –in the USA– to the Eisenhoover administration and its evil geniuses, the Dulles brothers. Of course, zbig bzzzski makes the Dulles brothers look like small town ministers. But the policy goes back that far. Kissinger was pleased that Syria was playing a “constructive role” in Lebanon, this after Syria had helped start the civil war there.
    But Obama’s diplomacy is a pure zbiggian horror show. Obama et Cie wanted to restore and reinforce Syrian hegemony in Lebanon, which hegemony had been lost by the “cunning of history.”

    When the Assads murdered Hariri Senior [Rafiq, a son of a bitch in his own right], Chirac of France et d’Arabie [title of a book about Chirac] raised a fuss. This was because Hariri was Jacques’ good friend and benefactor [lending him use of a large Paris apartment, etc]. If Rafiq had not been Chirac’s friend, Chirac would not have raised a fuss over the murder and it is unlikely that the March 14th movement could have moved the Syrians out of Lebanon, since Chirac’s fuss also brought the USA and UK temporarily into the camp against Syrian occupation of Lebanon. Now Chirac is out and Obama and zbig wanted to put Lebanon back where it belonged, in Assad’s paws. So pan-Arabism triumphs again thanx to the “leftist” Obama, with the British no doubt cheering quietly from the sidelines.

  57. Cynic says:

    Eliyahu,

    I have read that Miss Rima claims to celebrate both Christian and Muslim holidays and traditions, went to a Catholic school etc., so as I wrote in my first comment about her in #41
    Whatever Rima Fakih’s modus vivendi she is free, like the CIA, to present herself as befits her role.

    In a manner just as those AsaJew types apply their chameleonistic politics du jour so with the multiculti world’s celebrities; anyway taquiya is rife in the Arab world and is part and parcel of breathing and with everyone piling on to make their political points I thought I’d add my cynicism. :-)

  58. E.G. says:

    Excuse me for going “sideways topic”.

    I just saw 2 lengthy (but fascinating) testimonies on the USC Shoah Foundation Youtube chain, both by Yekkes who were adolescents in the early 1930′s, self-described as escapees (rather than survivors) since they made it to America before 1939.

    In the mid-late 1990′s, they both stressed the (usually unknown to Americans) early signs of what was coming as they had experienced them, in a society where anti-Semitism prior to Hitler’s “appearance” was not present. Both lived in mixed milieux.
    They talked about restriction of freedom of speech, prejudice towards the other- “different”, indoctrination and repression…
    And both thought that it can happen again. Anywhere, including America.

    Do you think there’s more to such apprehension than the effects of the traumas?

  59. incognito says:

    Eliyahu,

    You’re right about how the US –and the West generally– has handed Lebanon to the Assad gang on a silver platter –specifically obama et Cie.

    Sure, but I was referring specifically at the latest dump, after the Lebanese managed to kick the Syrians out.

    Chirac of France et d’Arabie [title of a book about Chirac] raised a fuss. This was because Hariri was Jacques’ good friend and benefactor [lending him use of a large Paris apartment, etc].

    I doubt it it was friendship. If you read THE STRONG HORSE, Smith argues that Chirac used the opportunity to mend relations with the US in its desperation to become relevant. France had been nothing to that point and nobody paid attention to them.

    Now Chirac is out and Obama and zbig wanted to put Lebanon back where it belonged, in Assad’s paws.

    Yes, but given Assad’s contempt for Obama it does not look like the latter helped himself much by this.

  60. incognito says:

    Cynic,

    I have read that Miss Rima claims to celebrate both Christian and Muslim holidays and traditions

    As I said, that’s the safe thing to do as a christian, particularly if you want to wear hotpants and bikinis.
    Although I don’t think it’s that safe as she thinks.

  61. incognito says:

    E.G.,

    They talked about restriction of freedom of speech, prejudice towards the other- “different”, indoctrination and repression… And both thought that it can happen again. Anywhere, including America. Do you think there’s more to such apprehension than the effects of the traumas?

    I have not experienced any (physical) trauma and yet I can tell that we’re in the 30′s again. Never again is an illusion of which I never suffered.

  62. E.G. says:

    incognito,

    In my mind, what these escapees (neither of whom suffered a physical trauma; but physical loss) were saying, connected to what our pet al-Ard Yekke, and his fellow Reds are yelling: ze F peril is back! And it’s Jewish-Christian and RW fanatic!

    But it also connected to what a few honest-to-Marx people now start discovering, and quite naively stutter timidly, discretely…

  63. incognito says:

    E.G.,

    Well, how about this?

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/05/026384.php

    Seems to me the dangers are from the left, not Christians-Jews, and who is the left aligned with these days? (see Eliyahu’s comments on Obama’s intentions regarding America).

  64. E.G. says:

    incognito,

    I’m afraid that, unwillingly and certainly unintentionally, Nazi-regime survivors and escapees contributed to focussing attention on the “National” part of the National-Socialist agenda.
    It seems that the double pain inflicted to those who suffered the Red terror after (having survived) the Brown one has not been fully understood yet.

    And the German Jews (as well as French Jews) – who have quite large survivor/escapee proportions – also have some specificities vis-a-vis Ost-Juden, who were much less lucky (especially on survival ratios).
    For example, both German and French Jews had (have) strong national identities, and far less attachment to either religion or Zionism. Even as long settled immigrants, including in Israel, the cultural ties to their countries/culture of origin are relatively stronger than those of Jews of other places.

    I’m the last to reproach such attitudes, but I suspect that these survivor/escapee views were/are the most frequent ones heard in “the West” and that they do not reflect the whole spectrum of the totalitarian phenomenon. Arendt’s voice, for example, is representative of a part, but not of the whole. Yet hers has been considered a “Master’s voice”.

  65. E.G. says:

    Greedy Filters!

  66. [...] behind the moral preening, lies intimidation. These self-destructivists heap the criticism on powers that do not strike back [...]

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>