Thomas Friedman Calls For Israel To Get Lara Loganed
Phyllis Chesler blogs on Thomas Friedman's call, in The New York Times, to bring Tahrir Square to Jerusalem -- vis a vis the Israel-"Palestine" impasse:
Tahrir Square? Did the man sleep through journalist Lara Logan's mass gang rape there? Does he view such a mob as "peaceful" or "non-violent?" Does he not understand that the young Egyptian Wael Gonim has, perhaps unintentionally, paved the way for the far more organized Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists to assume power? Does Friedman actually believe that the Islamist factions at war with each other and with their overlords, chieftains, and dictators, are all engaged in "non-violent" social change?Friedman does not focus on Syria's Bashar al-Assad, Yemen's Ali Abdullah Saleh, Libya's Moammar Qaddafi or Bahrain's King Hamad Bin Isa Al Khalifa --all of whom have been shooting down their own people in cold blood in the streets. He does not call for people of good will to "nonviolently" go and face these evil men down. No. Instead, listen to Friedman's clarion call. He suggests that we should:
Announce that every Friday from today forward will be 'Peace Day,' and have thousands of West Bank Palestinians march nonviolently to Jerusalem, carrying two things -- an olive branch in one hand and a sign in Hebrew and Arabic in the other. The sign should say: 'Two states for two peoples. We, the Palestinian people, offer the Jewish people a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders -- with mutually agreed adjustments -- including Jerusalem, where the Arabs will control their neighborhoods and the Jews theirs."
Yeah, except that's not what the Palestinians want. They want the Jews dead and all the land for themselves. There's that quip, "If the Arabs lay down their arms there will be peace. If the Israelis do, they'll all be dead."
Chesler asks the right questions -- among them:
Alright, the man's a regular Gandhi, hand him his dhoti (loincloth). However, why doesn't Friedman also call for an international delegation to march to Sderot to serve as human shields against Hamas rockets?
How cute that he thinks the Palestinians want peace. But for the Israelis being there to hate and murder (per the Quran's calls to kill the Jews), these Muslims would likely be like the tribal, warring Muslims in its neighbor-states, murdering each other for belonging to the "wrong" branch of Islam. The choicest example is the Iraqi woman who blew herself up -- taking out a bunch of other Iraqi women and children who were waiting in a U.N. food line. Please tell me how that was about the jooooos.
Friedman is far more credible on the subject than Chesler. He knows the Middle East and its dangers much better than she. He won a Pulitzer Prize for his reporting from Lebanon during the civil war there. He's spent a lot of time in that part of the world. He's also Jewish-American.
Iconoclast at May 26, 2011 9:55 AM
oh puihlease, Have you watched Friedman's documentaries on said subject. His is so anti-israel it shows, as he does not try to hide it. These kind of statements just bring him the attention he lusts for
ronc at May 26, 2011 10:46 AM
Ridiculous. It's her main focus, and she was married to a Middle Eastern man and lived there, and learned her lesson. And she debunks his thinking rather succinctly here. But, you, "Iconoclast," apparently aren't interested in the quality of the thoughts, just impressed by a person's position.
Amy Alkon at May 26, 2011 10:49 AM
Thomas L. Friedman Wants Us "to be China for a day," to "authorize the right solutions"
biff at May 26, 2011 11:57 AM
Lenin coined the term "useful idiots" to describe people like Uncle Tom. It appears to pay well, judging by his house. He earns it, but he has to live with himself. That is not a tradeoff I'd be willing to make.
MarkD at May 26, 2011 12:08 PM
"But, you, "Iconoclast," apparently aren't interested in the quality of the thoughts, just impressed by a person's position."
I'm not advocating for or against either Chesler or Friedman in this debate. But Friedman (and others) have made the point that increasingly, Israel will be occupying territory in which its citizens outnumber Palestinian Arabs. That's a big dilemma for Israel. So far, Israel isn't dealing with the problem at hand.
As an American, I feel like both Israel and Arab countries have used the U.S. for their own interests. The U.S. keeps funneling beaucoup aid money to Israel year after year, while Israelis keep building or enlarging settlements in the West Bank. And the U.S. has been friendly with corrupt governments like Mubarak's Egypt. These measures outrage tens of millions of Arabs.
Here within the U.S., the situation has worsened regarding Israel policy because the Republicans appear intent to outdo Democrats in catering to the Israel lobby.
Iconoclast at May 26, 2011 1:13 PM
@Iconoclast -
Pulitzer prizes don't impress me. Walter Duranty ring a bell?
If you'd paid attention to history, you'd realize that appeasing the arabs has the same effect as antagonizing them - they increase their demands and their whining.
It's a lose-lose situation.
Until the Arabs accept the fact that they lost, and they aren't going to take over the world, nothing will change.
brian at May 26, 2011 5:23 PM
"And the U.S. has been friendly with corrupt governments like Mubarak's Egypt. These measures outrage tens of millions of Arabs."
Ah yes, because the Arab existence was so much better when Egypt was hip-to-hip with the Soviet Union. And I can recall when Mubarek was said to be the "real representative" vs. Anwar Sadat, you know, the guy that signed the Camp David accords and made the only progress the Arab world accomplished since WWII. Our foreign aid to Mubarek's Egypt was protection money, nothing more. And even then, more often than not, we didn't get our money's worth.
As for what outrages Arabs... I challenge you to name something, anything, that doesn't outrage Arabs. When the sun comes up in the morning, it outrages Arabs. When it rains, that outrages Arabs. When it doesn't rain, that outrages Arabs. They are outrage machines. Rage is how they respond to every one of life's circumstances, everywhere, all the time.
Cousin Dave at May 26, 2011 6:04 PM
I believe that it was Netanyahu who said that "if arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel."
AllenS at May 26, 2011 6:27 PM
The U.S. keeps funneling beaucoup aid money to Israel year after year, while Israelis keep building or enlarging settlements in the West Bank. And the U.S. has been friendly with corrupt governments like Mubarak's Egypt. These measures outrage tens of millions of Arabs.
There is a reason why we funded the corrupt Egyptian government -- the Camp David Peace Accord:
Note who brokered that deal: President James Earl "Jimmy" Carter, Jr. (Democrat)
Jim P. at May 26, 2011 7:47 PM
Re: "But Friedman (and others) have made the point that increasingly, Israel will be occupying territory in which its citizens outnumber Palestinian Arabs."
My goof - I should've said that Israel will be occupying territory in which its citizens are outnumbered by Palestinian Arabs.
Iconoclast at May 27, 2011 6:29 PM
Leave a comment