Posted by: sean | September 18, 2009

Reactions to the Goldstone report

hitlerThe UN fact finding mission on last winter’s war in Gaza is out, and you can read the report here. I haven’t had time to read the report yet, but I have read some of the commentary, most likely by people who also haven’t read the report. One thing that struck me was a striking similarity in language coming from opposite sides of the spectrum.

Here are two quotes, one from Max Boot at Commentary and the other from As’ad Abukhalil, a.k.a. the Angry Arab. Try to guess who is who:

it’s a good thing that the United Nations wasn’t around during World War II. I can just imagine its producing a supposedly evenhanded report that condemned the Nazis for “grave” abuses such as incinerating Jews, while also condemning the Allies for their equally “grave” abuses such as fire-bombing German and Japanese cities. The recommendation, no doubt, would have been that both sides be tried for war crimes, with Adolf Hitler in the dock alongside Franklin Roosevelt.

and:

Of course, all [UN] reports … now have to condemn the victims. It is called a balance. If Judge Goldstone were to write a report about Nazi war crimes, he would have considered the Warsaw ghetto uprising a war crime too.

I’m sure neither realizes the irony of their similar rhetoric. Of course, neither of these brilliant minds seems too upset about being an example of Godwin’s Law, either. In any case, the answers are here and here.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. I guessed it correctly!

    I have noticed in the past how similar the attitude of the far-right and far-left often are to the UN.

  2. well put, man.

  3. Shalom, habibi! Where have you been? Nizar’s in neutral territory now, so maybe we can all meet up together and and a peace summit somewhere in Europe!

  4. What an asinine post. So one of them knows what analogy means and the other is too thick to understand that balance of power is not a function of ethnicity. And the blogger I presume doesn’t know what jus ad bellum and jus in bello mean, otherwise he won’t have a problem distinguishing Abu Khalil’s legitimate criticism (this time, that is, since he can often be reactionary) from Boot’s petulant propaganda.

  5. Glad to see you’re still as obtuse as ever, ya habibi. Feel free to troll over here as much as you want!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: