Define ‘loose cannon’ (Peretz attacks ‘old’ Jews who go to ‘gentile soirees’)

by on March 3, 2010 11

Here’s why you should read the Financial Times. Its Israel coverage gets Marty Peretz really worked up in ethnocentric fits. I know, that’s not hard to do. Still. By the way, Peretz is calling Henry Siegman "old." Siegman was born in 1930. Peretz was born in 1938.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in Israel Lobby, Israel/Palestine, US Politics

{ 11 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. sky7i says:
    March 3, 2010 at 12:07 pm

    Marty Peretz, are you a self-hating geriatric?

  2. Les says:
    March 3, 2010 at 12:07 pm

    Monday’s Financial Times had an article by Benny Morris who could not quite get himself to make clear that it was the Israel Lobby that was the driving force for US sanctions against Iran. Today’s issue, Monday March 3, has a piece by British historian Andrew Roberts pooh poohing critics of Israel’s assassination in Dubai, this from a man who pleaded ignorance at the time that there was a boycott underway against apartheid South Africa.

  3. Avi says:
    March 3, 2010 at 1:09 pm

    Since Buck is the paper’s Israel correspondent, all you have to do is pick up the daily or log on to its web site, and you’re almost sure to find the same story he wrote yesterday or last week and will surely write tomorrow.

    Hey Marty, if you’re reading this, I’ve got news for you; the reason THE SAME STORY keeps getting itself written is because REALITY hasn’t changed over the course of the last few decades. It only keeps getting worse. But, you already knew that, you “dreary old Jewish [propagandist]“.

  4. Leper Colonialist says:
    March 3, 2010 at 1:31 pm

    Poor Marty! I can almost feel pity for him, picturing MP working himself into fits of rage as he composed that hysterical little missive.

    Does MP realizethat the US gov’t likewise does not recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, despite the best efforts of AIPAC and the US Congress to bring about, by legistaltion, just such a result?

  5. Howard says:
    March 3, 2010 at 2:06 pm

    Marty Peretz writes: “Hardly a day goes by that the Financial Times doesn’t do a hit job on Israel. The otherwise sober pink sheet has such an obsession with the Jewish state that I’ve come to wonder what its views were on the rescue of Jewish children into England during the Nazi onslaught on them and on their parents.”

    I don’t know what the FT’s views on the rescue of Jewish children into England were. But I do know what the views of one prominent Zionist, David Ben-Gurion were in this regard. A month after the Nazi pogrom against Germany’s Jews, known as Kristallnacht, Ben-Gurion, he stated:
    “If I knew it was possible to save all [Jewish] children of Germany by their transfer to England and only half of them by transferring them to Eretz-Yisrael, I would choose the latter – because we are faced not only with the accounting of these [Jewish] children but also with the historical accounting of the Jewish People.”

  6. Pamela Olson says:
    March 3, 2010 at 3:43 pm

    Anti-Semite! House Jew! Anti-Semite! House Jew! Old anti-Semitic house Jew! Old anti-house Semitic Jew! Jew house anti-old Semite! Goldstone anti-Jew old house! Biased! Biased! Leaflets warned them! Human shields! Gaaaauuugghhhh!

    One of these days, the Zio-bots’ heads are just going to collectively explode.

  7. jimby says:
    March 3, 2010 at 4:43 pm

    this in today’s FT.
    “Israel is no more rogue than America”
    link to ft.com
    By Andrew Roberts….

    If by rogue nation he means criminal nation then that seems about fine. Certainly it is nothing to brag about. “they do it so it must be OK if we do”
    I find that sort of logic to be idiotic at best.

    • marc b. says:
      March 3, 2010 at 5:05 pm

      From Roberts in the FT:

      Is state-sanctioned assassination justifiable, or does it somehow de-legitimise the state that undertakes it? Two articles in this newspaper last week, by Henry Siegman and David Gardner, have been violently critical of Israel in the wake of the assassination of the Hamas arms smuggler Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai on 19 January.

      How can an article be ‘violently critical’? I would expect this sort of analysis from a teenager swimming in hormones and narcissism. But from a fully formed adult? Every slight, every critique is an existential threat, and the logic of every disagreement is camoflaged anti-Semitism of the Himmler variety.

      Harold Bloom brilliantly dismissed Freud as a scientist or psychologist, instead describing him as sort of the house philosopher for the Jewish mind. And as I understand Freud’s stages of psycho-sexual development, the likes of Peretz and Roberts appear frozen in the so-called anal phase, exhibiting the anality and inability to think objectively typical of control freaks.

    • Les says:
      March 3, 2010 at 6:43 pm

      Here’s my letter to the FT:

      Historian Andrew Roberts’ defense of Israel’s assassination of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai defines critics of the assassination to be moralistic prigs, a charge easily made, as well, against opponents of white phosphorus Judaism. We await with baited breath to hear from the learned historian why Germany’s attack on the armed Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto is bad asymmetrical warfare and Israel’s Cast Lead attack on Gaza is good asymmetrical warfare.

  8. cvillej says:
    March 4, 2010 at 4:38 am

    Which brings me to another FT habit that I’ve written about before. The paper simply refuses to name Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

    Hint to the delusional: When the rest of the world isn’t going along with your perception, maybe your perception is wrong.

Leave a Reply