Home / Culture and Society / Obama on a Foreign Policy Roll

Obama on a Foreign Policy Roll

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

The health care reform bill has passed, but domestic issues continue to loom large in the discourse in the U.S. As Sarah Palin rallies Tea Partiers on Boston Common, a new Supreme Court nomination fight looms. Unemployment remains very high, Main Street still hates Wall Street, and everybody hates Congress.

But meanwhile, with relatively little fanfare, President Obama has been racking up foreign policy successes on an almost daily basis. A new nuclear treaty with Russia is hammered out; warming of relations with China lead to talk of cooperation on Iran and hints of currency flexibility; an unprecedented nuclear nonproliferation summit results in a significant agreement by world leaders on protecting nuclear stockpiles.

Obama has not made similar progress in the Middle East. He hasn't been able to convince the Israeli people of a thorough commitment to peace and prosperity for the Jewish state, as his predecessor was. It's worth noting in this context that Obama is president of a country a sizable portion of whose citizens seem willing to entertain the possibility that he is "the Antichrist." It certainly shouldn't shock anyone that a man who spent some formative years in a Muslim country and bears the middle name "Hussein" should have his work cut out for him in the Holy Land. The President and his advisors need to work harder to gain the trust of the Israelis, through both word and deed.

Nevertheless, Obama's recent string of foreign policy successes bodes well for the world in the next few years. The drawdown of forces in Iraq is running more or less on schedule. Afghanistan remains a bed of quicksand beyond the capacity of anyone to escape (or pave over) in the short term, but the President, his Secretary of Defense, and the indefatigable US armed forces keep trying.  And Obama has come through well over a year in office without having starting any new wars.

If nothing else, Obama's practice of realpolitik is a breath of fresh air after the previous administration's unfunded wars and pie-in-the-sky talk of exporting democracy…and after months of near-gridlock on health care making us all sick.

Powered by

About Jon Sobel

Jon Sobel is a Publisher and Executive Editor of Blogcritics as well as lead editor of the Culture & Society section. As a writer he contributes most often to Culture, where he reviews NYC theater; he also covers interesting music releases. Through Oren Hope Marketing and Copywriting at http://www.orenhope.com/ you can hire him to write or edit whatever marketing or journalistic materials your heart desires. Jon also writes the blog Park Odyssey at http://parkodyssey.blogspot.com/ where he visits every park in New York City. And by night he's a part-time working musician: lead singer, songwriter, and bass player for Whisperado, a member of other bands as well, and a sideman.
  • Great article, Jon. It’s without question that Obama is walking the walk when it comes to nukes. If we protest about places like Iran acquiring them, we must set the tone by getting rid of (at least some of) them ourselves.

  • Jon,

    I really suggest you stick to Culture and theatre reviews. The things you miss in this article are so voluminous as to require a whole book to correct. The article itself sounds as if you have been drinking the Obama Koolaid, and have visions of Obama wearing a top hat, twirling a cane, and singing The Candy Man. It was a work, like Obama’s foreign policy, of Pure Imagination.

    But I’ll give you one thing. Your article is short sweet and concise – even if it is all wrong.

  • This song, as sung by Gene Wilder, is remarkably prescient of the Obama propaganda you swallow with the joy of a child gobbling up a Willie Wonka candy bar.

  • Ruvy, as usual, you are so cynical you don’t see even the glimmers of hope and positivity that exist in the world. I am not swallowing propaganda. I am merely observing what is actually happening in diplomatic circles. You mention propaganda – I wonder how many readers actually know the definition of propaganda? It comes from “propagate” – to spread a message. Another word for spreading a message is one Christians would recognize: Gospel.

  • Jon,

    You mistake “glimmers of hope and positivity” for a successful record. There is a huge difference between the two. I’ve also written about glimmers of hope and positivity – but I am careful not to call it more than that.

    The big problem with your article can be summed up in four letters – I-R-A-N. That can be read in two ways: “I RAN from the issues I had to cover here so fast that the scenery blurred around me” – a good characterization of this article; or “IRAN – Farsi for ‘Aryan’, the name the Empire of Persia adopted in its admiration of Adolf Hitler.”

    Either way, IRAN is the 8,000 pound gorilla in the room. And your beknighted leader has seen fit to offer the leaders of Iran bananas, which have been promptly slapped away with Persian contempt.

    That is not “Obama on a Foreign Policy Roll” – unless he rolling you all down to a nuclear hell. I hope you know a nice Jewish air conditioner salesman when you get there, Jon.

  • Mark

    Geeze, that’s one big gorilla!

  • So because Iran continues to be a problem, nothing that happens with the hundreds of other countries in the world means anything? That’s the benighted attitude, not mine.

  • My apologies, Jon. The song listed above was not sung by Gene Wilder, and I’ve been having trouble finding the singer. The most accurate guess I can up with is Anthony Newley, listed on a CD of the original soundtrack of the movie (or was it the musical?).

    As for my criticisms of your article, however, I stand by my assertions. Iran is not the only problem – but it is a major problem that your president dances around the way Chamberlain danced around Hitler. As you may recall, Hitler proved Chamberlain quite the liar and quite the coward, and given the chance the mullahs in Teheran will do the same to the fool in the Oval Office.

    The Persian bomb may be an existential threat to us in Israel, so naturally we would be very concerned. But it is a threat to you as well, as well as the Europeans who will be within range of the Shahab 3 missiles now in Iran’s possession. As I said in my first comment, the things you have missed in your article are so voluminous as to require an entire book to answer. I don’t have that kind of time.

  • I can, however, recommend to you to my second comment at Dock Ellis’s article, Afghanistan Lost. You and other Americans really do need to view the world through lenses other than the cracked rose-colored ones of the Obama propaganda/gospel machine.

  • With Obama, you will never make conservatives happy, much the same as Bush never did anything right in liberals’ eyes.

    We are all becoming perpetual whiners.

  • zingzing

    jesus christ, ruvy. he mentions iran once, and you dismiss every other word as “all wrong?” explain that. how can you possibly think that you’ve fairly assessed this article?

    let me guess. you just hate obama. nothing new. nothing unexpected. just pure, ridiculous, blinding hate, as usual.

  • A foreign policy roll in which he is embarrassing himself and the nation and which has caused French President Sarkozy to call him a “lunatic” – way to roll!


  • zingzing

    apparently, dave, the “lunatic” comment came from a discussion on how to deal with “islamic extremism,” which the french have dealt with by banning burqas. draw your own conclusions.

    and how exactly has he embarrassed himself and the nation? want to elaborate?

  • Dave repeats the fake tabloid assertion about Sarkozy* and offers no further evidence of the alleged embarrassment Obama is causing us. Hey, I’m not embarrassed. Are you embarrassed?

    This knee-jerk compulsion to say sweeping derogatory things about all of the president’s policies serves no purpose. Just propagandistic vitriol that says a lot about the person posting.

    *The unverified source: one article by one wack job on one European web site [based on ‘secret’ documents ‘leaked by the Kremlin’], amplified through people like Nalle who just can’t resist passing it along. Trying to ascertain whether something is actually true is just so…old school, eh?

  • zingzing

    “Trying to ascertain whether something is actually true is just so… ANTI-AMERICAN.”

    there, i fixed it, you commie.

  • “and how exactly has he embarrassed himself and the nation? want to elaborate?”

    Hey, Sistah Sarah thinks so, so it must be true!

  • Lumpy

    I saw the sarkozy quote in that fake tabloid called the Washington Post.

  • The piece was published in something called The EU Times [“the eeww times?”] and every mention of it in a Google search goes back to that “article.” [I use the term loosely.] I just searched the Post site, no such animal. [If Lumpy can provide a link, we’d all love to see it.]

    It’s basically a pseudonymous blog post, author name “Europe.”

    Here’s the beginning of this masterpiece of journalism:

    ”A new report circulating in the Kremlin today authored by France’s Directorate-General for External Security (DGSE) and recently “obtained” by the FSB shockingly quotes French President Nicolas Sarkozy as stating that President Barack Obama is “a dangerous[ly] aliéné”…

    And here’s a later sentence that tells me just what kind of “journalist” we’re dealing with.

    Most unfortunately for those Americans living under the Obama regime is that their attempts to stop the radical socialism he has pushed upon them from destroying their once great Nation has failed…

    And here are the last two sentences:

    “To everyone else in America we can only advise you to begin stocking up for the End of the World….you won’t be alone.

    Donate and help us spread the truth further.”

    Then a convenient “Donate” button. They take MasterCard and Visa. Lumpy, Dave, care to send them something?

  • zingzing

    where did they quote it from?

  • First: One must totally ignore Ruvy. He left earth decades ago and hasn’t touched terra firma in years.

    Second: One must realize that Nalle is easily embarrassed. His puffy little cheeks turn red at almost anything. And, one should realize that Nalle and most of the righty tighties still look at things through Cold War era glasses. They believe adamantly that the ONLY way to deal with the world at large is to assume our superiority, be condescending, and of course, be a bully. It is in their view our god given right to stick our unabashed red, white and blue thumbs in everyone’s eye.

    It is reported by most who have witnessed Obama’s recent international successes as having opened up many new channels of communication which had been summarily cut off by Bush/Cheney – that the international diplomatic community looks again at the US as a vigorous and positive player in world politics.

    But, of course, the right isn’t happy unless this country is prowling about the world like opportunisitic junk yard dogs itching for a fight.


  • And another thing: Why would ANY wing nut worth his or her salt give a whit about what some Frenchy had to say about anything?


  • Thank you, Baronius. It’s nice to see some common sense in the BC commentosphere.

  • Wilder may have sung “The Candy Man” in some film or other, but the song became a moderate hit as sung by Sammy Davis, Jr.


  • “Why would ANY wing nut worth his or her salt give a whit about what some Frenchy had to say about anything?”

    When it’s convenient to advance his or her bogus argument.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Jon #22 –

    I assume you meant “Baritone” instead of “Baronius” since the normally almost-rabid-right-wing Baronius hasn’t commented on this topic yet.

    Don’t worry, though – I’ve mixed the two of them up before, too.

  • I’m told that changing my moniker here would cause a lot of problems. I have often considered a change – to say “Stud Muffin,” or “Handsome Dude,” or something else appropriate to my particular reality, but I hate to make waves. 😀


  • I made a similar “mistake” on another thread -by design, however.

  • Baronius

    It’s easy – I’m taller and darker-haired, and Baritone’s the one with the colossal package.

  • Baronius

    What; he gets a lot of mail-order stuff.

  • . . . the collossal package?

    I be darned.

  • Baritonius? Baronitone?

  • Baritonius? Baronitone?

    Sounds like a chronic degenerative condition of the larynx, and the drug used to treat it.

  • Glenn Contrarian


  • John Wilson

    Meanwhile, Sarah Palin continues to flourish her utter ignorance by claiming that Reagan would never, no never, even think about reducing nukes!


  • I sincerely hope that Sarah heads up the Republican ticket in 2012 with Michele Bachmann as her running mate. A dream ticket come true.

    Dumb and Dumber.

    Bar and Grill

  • Baronius


  • Glenn Contrarian

    Baronnie and the Baracktones?

  • Glenn Contrarian

    For everything,
    Spin, spin, spin
    There is a reason
    Spin, spin, spin
    And an excuse
    For every corruption
    In Washington.

  • Baronius

    John – source for #34?

  • zingzing

    baronius, i dunno if this is exactly what john was talking about, but recently, while she and hannity were talking about obama’s nuclear arms reduction policies, she said, “[…] we miss Ronald Reagan who used to say when he would look at our enemies and say, no, you lose, we win.” of course, this ignoring that reagan pushed for similar deals and policies, because he didn’t like nukes any more than most people do. excepting palin, of course.

    she continued, saying that our armed forces “want to know that all options are on the table. They want to know that the resources, that the strategies are there for them to keep us safe, to be victorious.” not that by reducing nuclear arms, or by announcing that we’d only use them in certain situations, we’re really taking the option off the table. we’ve got plenty of nukes and we’d use them if we had to, but for once, we’re acknowledging that we’re not a trigger-happy nation.

    you can find all this on fox news or a simple google search.

  • zingzing

    oh, here’s a good sarah quote as well: “No administration in America’s history would, I think, ever have considered such a step that we just found out President Obama is supporting today. It’s unbelievable.”

    of course, if one knew one’s history, one would know that yes, there has been another administration that “would” and did. reagan. but palin’s a silly, ignorant person who holds sway over silly, ignorant people.

  • Baronius

    Zing, I saw that online. It doesn’t match what John was saying. Personally, I don’t put much stock in Palin, but if John is wrong, he’s wrong.

    I don’t remember Reagan ever taking a nuclear strike off the table, even a first strike. And he steadily moved toward missile defense, walking out of a treaty negotiation rather than giving it up. President Obama has moved in the opposite direction. Reagan also upgraded our arsenal (with the Midgetman and the MX, if I recall correctly) and launching platforms.

  • Obama hasn’t taken nuclear strike off the table

  • zingzing

    come on, baronius… obama is not taking nuclear strikes off the table by any stretch of the imagination. you’d have to be a pretty trusting and naive person if you think what he said stretches that far. as far as arms reduction, what do you consider what reagan did for the latter portion of his terms? he spent the soviets into the ground, then he backed off. this is just what reagan did, and its language isn’t even that different. it’s just the same thing. palin is seemingly unaware of that.

    reagan was gung-ho and brought our world to a dangerous brink, but luckily, it worked. after we got up to the brink, arms reduction was the way to go. stopping all the threats was the way to go. with bush, the world got up to a dangerous brink again. it’s time to start backing up a bit, or else we’ll go over.

    for you, and palin (although that’s not so surprising), to miss these obvious connections is… well, it’s just politics. palin’s ignorant. are you?

  • Reagan stated as a goal the end of nuclear proliferation and ultimately the eradication of all nukes. It may be the only thing the man ever said that I agreed with. Anyone claiming that not to be a desirable goal, must believe nukes are a good thing.

    What is so laughable is that even if all the nukes that are supposed to be destroyed, just here in the good ole US of A, are gone, we’ll still have something like 1600 of the damn things. What do you suppose someone could do with 1600 nukes? A handful strategically detonated could bring virtually any country in the world to its knees.

    Hell, we still have enough chemical and/or biological weaponry in storage to kill everyone on the planet about 3 or 4 times over. Talk about overkill.

    Bar Mitzvah

  • Jeff Forsythe

    It’s truly amazing
    Bush canceled the space shuttle program but
    Obama gets blamed for the jobs lost

    The bank crisis/meltdown happened in 2007 under Bush, but Obama gets blamed for it.

    the fat-cat Bush tax cuts were intentionally designed to expire after he left office so that Obama would get blamed for it.

    How short is America’s memory?

  • It’s important to totally ignore Baritone. Not because his opinions are idiotic – one wishes one could say that; not because he doesn’t know how to express himself – one wishes one could say that. But it seems his reading comprehension is slipping with the years. Or maybe it’s his trick knee.

    To wit: Wilder may have sung “The Candy Man” in some film or other, but the song became a moderate hit as sung by Sammy Davis, Jr.

    I made the point of noting that Wilder did not sing this song in “Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory”. But Baritone’s tin ear is getting to him. Or maybe it’s that tin eye. He chose to ignore what I wrote – and state what anyone older than 45 knows.

    Baritone can choose to ignore what I have to say. But the facts of the matter are that I know a hell of a lot more about American foreign policy than he ever will – because I have to live under its baleful influence – a fact that a fool from flyoverland will never acknowledge.

    But now that I think of it, the rest of you fools in the States can’t acknowledge that fact either.

  • As it stands, Mr. Sobel was on a Ignorance Roll when he wrote this article, and the rest of you are on an Idiocy Roll in commenting on it.

    Mazel Tov!

  • zingzing

    “the rest of you fools in the States can’t acknowledge that fact [that ruvy has lived under the influence of american foreign policy] either.”

    i admit it, you have. there, theory destroyed. of course, we live under it here as well, as it has obvious repercussions, so… we live with israel’s foreign policy decisions here as well. so, if you’re right, you know nothing about israel’s foreign policy compared to the rest of the world. go ask a palestinian about it.

    that said, your rhetorical style of positing yourself as the wise man amongst fools is getting a bit old. you might want to consider stopping calling everyone else around here idiots, ruvy. it doesn’t ingratiate you. in fact, it makes you look like an arrogant prick, which i know you’re not…

  • zing, I’ve been right and you’ve been – well, you’ve been just a troll. But it’s nice to know that you can acknowledge that I live under the baleful influence of American foreign policy. Why, bless you!

    In case anyone wants to open his trap on the subject, for all that baleful influence of American foreign policy, I’m far better off here dealing with that than having to suffer under the shit that constitutes American domestic policy.

  • zingzing

    if i’m a troll, you’re the bridge i sit under. i’m a troll for you, ruvy. thank you for giving me shelter. garble garble.

  • Baronius

    Ruvy, you sometimes remind me of Fred Phelps, a guy who’s so convinced that G-d hates everyone, and that G-d is hated by everyone, that he tries to make himself holy by hating and being hated.

  • Nice comeback, zing, shows true self-confidence and maturity:

    Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.

  • What Ruvy fails to realize is that by setting himself apart from the rest, his voice is about to become extinct – a lone voice in the wilderness.

  • Baronius

    Roger, you miss my point: he wants to be a lone voice. If everyone else is going to be judged harshly by G-d, only the reviled prophet is just. There’s a little bit of Jonah in Ruvy.

    Jonah was a prophet who was sent to Ninevah to warn them of G-d’s approaching wrath. Ninevah listened, repented, and gave up their evil practices. And that bummed out Jonah, because somewhere along the way he became more consumed with wrath than with serving G-d.

    I don’t know if America is going to listen to the warnings of fiscal ruin that are coming from many sources. I get the feeling that if we do, Ruvy will come up with another impending disaster, or maybe go back to prophecies about the bird flu.

  • Baronius, I have a feeling there was originally more to the story of Jonah.

    I’ve always felt that that book seems – well – unfinished. It ends so abruptly.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Baronius –

    I don’t know if America is going to listen to the warnings of fiscal ruin that are coming from many sources.

    In the best of times, and in the worst of times, there are those who cry out about the certainty of impending doom (fiscal and otherwise).

    After a financial crash, all of a sudden the public spotlight is pointed where it wasn’t before, and people become more aware of the problem.

    So it was after the Depression (which is how we got the financial regulations that protected our economy until the conservatives (including Clinton) repealed them, thereby removing the protection we had from the causes of the Great Recession).

    And so it was after the S&L crisis back in ’87-89 (where we got more regulations that should prevent similar crises (the Great Recession was NOT from a similar cause)).

    And so it will be with the current financial regulation overhaul that’s gathering steam in Congress right now…and which the Republicans oppose at their peril, since even many (perhaps most) in the Tea Parties want this regulatory overhaul.

    In other words, it’s time to be bullish once more. If you’ve a mind to invest, the time was about this time last year…but right now is the best time to invest that you’re going to see for years to come (especially in real estate).

  • I totally agree, Baronius. Ruvy craves for immortality. Nothing would make him happier than being the last prophet.

  • There’s a little bit of Jonah in Ruvy.

    ‘Fraid not, Baronius. My real warnings are not for financial disaster. Those were all obvious to anybody with a brain. But too many fools in America refused to see the possibility. A lot of you have finally woken up. There remain those few (like Glenn) who grasp on to any positive news as proof positive that your economy is not collapsing and assume that your economy will recover soon. But, that is not my worry.

    And I am not a prophet. I have made too many mistakes in my forecasts to make such an arrogant claim. But fools who comment here refuse to see that. Their blindness and arrogance ain’t my problem.

    My real warnings have been for my fellow Jews in America who refuse to see that the régime there will turn on them as the American economy progresses in its collapse. And so will many Americans. For the most part, they [American Jews] do not want to see this at all. That hurts because I have family that I will probably lose as a result. Being right predicting death in my family is no pleasure at all.

    But, where G-d shuts one door, He opens another – that is my consolation.

    By the way, Baronius, it is spelled Niniveh, not Ninevah.

  • Since you have decided to “move on” to talk about what for me is just bullshit, I’ll stick with this topic. I can’t blame the Obamashit for doing what I expected him to do – be a Jew-hater in chief. But I can blame the fuckin’ wimps in Jerusalem for not standing up to the shit in Washington. From Redeeming the Jewish Wimp

    Alas, Israel is a wimp -and not only with Turkey. Israel would never dare to “upset” Egypt by complaining about the fact that Mubarak’s state-controlled media are full of anti-Semitism, blood libels and Holocaust denial. When Egyptian Culture Minister Farouk Hosni said he would burn any Israeli book he found in his country, Israel didn’t have anything to say. And when the Egyptian Government backed Hosni’s candidacy for the job of UNESCO Secretary General, Israel didn’t vote against because Mubarak asked us not to. By contrast, Jewish intellectuals around the world (such as Eli Wiesel and Bernard Henri-Lévy) were vocal against Hosni’s candidacy. Diaspora Jews have more guts and self-confidence than the Jewish state.

    The question is why. I remember having a conversation with my students about this. Their answer was that Israel can’t afford to be assertive. When I asked them why, their answer was that Israel owes its existence to the goodwill of the nations and that we can therefore not upset those who tolerate us. I believe this is the root of the problem, and that the problem is serious indeed.

    Our founding fathers certainly didn’t suffer from this inferiority complex. Think about Abba Eban and Menachem Begin. They had different political opinions about nearly everything. But they were educated, outspoken, and proud Jews. They knew that Israel doesn’t owe its existence to the goodwill of nations but to our exceptional history and courage. They were unapologetic and articulate advocates of Israel who had no problem putting people in their place.

    The government in Jerusalem has to be brought down. Only the anger of its own people at its own evil will bring it down. They are a poison to the Jewish people for even bowing just a bit to the trash in the White House. They need to be replaced with people who will put the shit in the White House in his well deserved place – and who will tell him in clear English what an ass-hole he is – and to get his arrogant face out of our business.

    Until that wonderful day, that job falls to me. Your country is on a foreign policy roll to hell – and you can all burn there if YOU haven’t the brains to tell your president what a piece of shit he is.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Ruvy –

    They knew that Israel doesn’t owe its existence to the goodwill of nations but to our exceptional history and courage.

    No. Secularly speaking, Israel owes her existence to the British who, in their gratitude to Chaim Weizmann for essentially saving the Royal Navy in WWI, agreed to grant the land now (and long ago) known as Israel to the Jewish people as a homeland and safe haven.

    Israel owes her continued existence mainly to the courage and fortitude of her people…but the goodwill (and financial support) of the West have still been crucial to her success as a nation. The support of the West has been every bit as important (and every bit as politically poison in the eyes of many) as were the Murmansk convoys to the success of the Soviet Union’s war with Nazi Germany…which – just as the Israel of today – owed her survival in WWII mainly to the courage and fortitude of her people.

    Note that I’m not comparing the countries (of course not!), but I am certainly comparing the situations.

  • Glenn,

    Secularly or religiously speaking, we Jews do not owe you in the west jack shit. We have paid a huge price in lives and dignity over 17 centuries for the tepid support the British gave to a Jewish national home in the Land of Israel for 35 years before abandoning it altogether to kiss Arab ass. Do you seriously think that $100 billion in your money in so-called “aid” to the State of Israel pays for the shit you put us Jews through over 17 centuries? Try doing the math….

    Secularly – and religiously – it is you gentiles who owe us. First of all, we gave you a moral code that you still can’t follow, much less understand; we gave you the concept of a “day of rest” – that you still don’t comprehend; we have given you medical advances that have saved millions of your lives (penicillin, insulin, HAND WASHING!); we have given you advances in chemistry, mathematics and physics that have changed your world.

    And finally, without us Jews, you wouldn’t even have Christianity – not that Christianity has civilized you any. You are still the same stinking savages you were 3,300 years ago when G-d gave the Torah to Moses. The main differences are that you live longer and screw each other over more efficiently today, and can kill a lot more efficiently. The continuing genocide that you call “abortion” stinks to G-d’s heavens and yes, you will pay for that too – in spades.

    Your “civilization” is as fake as a $3 bill and it is coming to an end rapidly – because you in the west haven’t the guts to face down and exterminate the Wahhabi cockroaches you yourselves put in power, not to mention the Shi’a crazy men you yourselves put in power.

    You richly deserve the end you are getting.

  • zingzing


  • comment 63


  • zingzing

    comment 64


  • Glenn Contrarian

    Whoo-hoo! Boy, did I get Ruvy’s attention!

    Only one comment, friend: One of the excuses that the Catholics used for their unholy persecution of the Jews over the centuries was that “the Jews caused the death of Jesus and they’ll always be held responsible for it.” In uber-Catholic Mel Gibson’s movie “The Last Passion of the Christ”, there’s a guy in the background who’s shouting (in Aramaic) how the Jews would be forever damned for what they had done to Jesus. Sorta puts his drunken anti-Semitic rant in front of the cops in context, y’know?

    In other words, the Catholics (and their offspring, the protestants) have been holding the descendants responsible for the supposed sin of their fathers. This is in direct violation of one of the Mosaic laws:

    Deut. 24:16 Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin.

    Now I see nothing in Christian Scripture that nullifies that particular portion of the Mosaic Law (though much of the rest was nullified by Jesus’ fulfillment of the Law)…

    …but I have to ask: Do you, as a Jew, abide by that particular commandment of the Mosaic Law – and also by its obvious inference that sons in no wise should be punished for their fathers’ crimes?

    If so, then, I refer you back to comment #62, wherein IMO you are judging me and mine for the atrocities my ancestors committed.

    And I realize that I know little of Jewish law and tradition, so I won’t be offended if you do help me with my ignorance in your reply.

  • Look harder at your arguments, Glenn. I didn’t judge you. I didn’t accuse you. I stated brutal truths that are insulting – but I accused you of nothing.

    I totaled up a bill of damages, Glenn. I totaled up who owed whom what. And as I told you, you gentiles owe us. That is not Biblical criminal law. It’s tort law – specifically, damages. The relationship between the non-Jewish society that abused Jews for 17 centuries, and the society of Jews who had to take your shit for 17 centuries.

    Your people massacred my people, raped our women, stole our children and defamed us day in and day out for 17 centuries – and we repaid you with penicillin, insulin, handwashing, advances in physics, mathematics and biology.

    You have NO claim on any Jew on this planet. Neither does any “Christian”, fallen away Christian or Muslim. What little your people have done to help us resurrect the nation your ancestors drove us out of has been giving grudgingly, if at all. So, not only do we not owe you, we don’t owe you any politeness, we don’t have to be nice to you, nor are we obliged to respect your amour propre. You do not rate any of these things.

    That is why I said you are little better than the uncivilized savages you were 3,300 years ago when G-d gave Moses the Torah.

    How many articles do I see from non-Jews here condemning the American government for its unfairness to Jews? For imprisoning Jonathan Pollard for life while letting Christians convicted of espionage against the United States of America go free after seven or eight years? How many articles do I see from non-Jews condemning the Army Air Force for refusing to bomb the tracks to concentration camps – even after D-Day? How many articles do I see here from non-Jews condemning the refusal of the United States to pressure the Brits to erect a Jewish National Home in Mandate Palestine? How many articles do I see here condemning the United States for pressuring Israel not to attack the Arab states gathered around her like wolves with wet jaws in 1967? Or in 1973?

    I don’t see a single one, Glenn.

    If I forget (and I won’t) the 1,700 years of anger we’ve built up against you for the damages you caused us, if I flush it all down the drain, there is still the 70 years of utter hypocrisy of your government, its lying to us and to you, and your failure or refusal to condemn your government in no uncertain terms when the facts were made crystal clear to you.

    You may not like that, but that is the way it is. And at some point, you are going to get that bill of damages thrown at you from Jews a lot more powerful and important than me. It has already started with Ed Koch, a man famous for his attitude that he gives YOU ulcers, not the other way round. OUR Foreign Minister, Avigdor Lieberman, has already said the British are dogs. It won’t be long before he gets around to calling you dogs, too.

    But I’m just telling you that because you pissed me off. What follows is not the result of anger.


  • zingzing


  • Glenn Contrarian

    (after chuckling at Zing’s comment) Ruvy –

    Look again at my post. I didn’t say you accused me. I said you JUDGED me. To wit:

    That is why I said you are little better than the uncivilized savages you were 3,300 years ago when G-d gave Moses the Torah.



    You judged me and mine. Now, would you please answer the question I asked you? Is it or is it not against Jewish law to hold the sons accountable for the sins of the fathers?

    And this question is asked not in anger…but in curiosity.