Did anyone ever ask the Jews behind barbed-wire whether they should humanize the Nazis? The stupid question ignores reality and Stewart’s nose should’ve been rubbed in it. “Mr. Stewart, if you were aware of history, and if you could put yourself in the shoes of other people, you’d be asking the exact opposite: why Jewish agitation is incapable of humanizing their Arab neighbors. I suppose you think throwing 700,000 Arabs off the land is humane?” denying them the right to return and compensation? bottling them up like “drugged roaches” is treating them humanely? killing them with white phosphorous? with naval-gun fire directed at squalid camps of refugees? with F16′s against police armed with hand-guns? by starving 1.5 million people of food and every other basic commodity needed to survive? and finally accusing the dead and starving of “not treating Jews as humans? What planet you living on Stewart?”

He walks and chews humanizing gum at the same time; it’s a tension, but a GOOD. He doesn’t criticize, he PROPOSES that we are all wrong.

I spent more time twisting the arm of green leaning publications to support Nader in 2000.

Balzer only deflected the question, obviously aware that she has been a condemnor politically, moreso than a proposer.

Both sides is important. Mutual humanization does not come from likud overtly or actually. It usually doesn’t come from the far left, which defines its role as “dissent, objection” more than proposal or positive advocacy or better yet, actual help.

I haven’t read her book. If it is of witness (rather than agitation), then it is likely to be important and helpful to all.

I just find it odd that I am accused of hypocrisy for focusing on the issues that I believe illustrate what I understand to be important concerns, but Walzer is praised for the same.