Trending Topics:

Bill Kristol says jump, Romney and Gingrich say How high?

Israel/Palestine
on 27 Comments
gutman
Howard Gutman

I thought it was a grandiose joke when Bill Kristol said on Saturday that the ambassador to Belgium must be recalled because he dared suggest that Israeli intransigence was fueling Muslim anti-Semitism. Well who’s laughing now? The two Republican frontrunners, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, have now called for the firing of Howard Gutman.

What do they want that Bill Kristol commands? The support of the Israel lobby– the backing of a large segment of the establishment.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center condemned Gutman. Also the Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors. That group has hosted Islamophobes Pam Geller and Robert Spencer, and they get quoted in the Post!

Here, by the way, from the Washington Post, is a precise report of Gutman’s comments. Notice that he finds moral parity between settlement building and suicide bombers….

According to his prepared remarks, Gutman, who is Jewish, described two forms of anti-Semitism — one that he described as “classic bigotry” against Jews and a second type of “growing anti-Semitism” that is the result of the inability to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“Throughout the Muslim communities that I visit, and indeed throughout Europe, there is significant anger and resentment and, yes, perhaps sometimes hatred and indeed sometimes an all-too-growing intimidation and violence directed at Jews generally as a result of the continuing tensions between Israel and the Palestinian territories and other Arab neighbors in the Middle East,” Gutman said, according to his prepared remarks.

He added, “It is the area where every new settlement announced in Israel, every rocket shot over a border or suicide bomber on a bus, and every retaliatory military strike exacerbates the problem and provides a setback here in Europe for those fighting hatred and bigotry here in Europe.”

P.S. I don’t think he’s going to lose his job. But I’m not the smart money, am I?

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

27 Responses

  1. Potsherd2
    Potsherd2
    December 5, 2011, 10:11 am

    Never underestimate the spinelessness of the slime mold in the White House.

  2. Avi_G.
    Avi_G.
    December 5, 2011, 10:13 am

    P.S. I don’t think he’s going to lose his job. But I’m not the smart money, am I?

    No, you’re not.

    You’re just a decent guy trying to make the world a better place.

    So I must sarcastically ask, “What is wrong with you? And, “How dare you, sir?”

  3. Krauss
    Krauss
    December 5, 2011, 10:17 am

    Back in the day, these people used to go after semi anti-Semites. These times it is mostly left wing Jews(Kushner, Finkelstein, Judt etc). Even people like the craven Goldstone(pre-begging).
    Masada.

  4. Bill in Maryland
    Bill in Maryland
    December 5, 2011, 10:18 am

    Ambassador Gutman seems like a gentleman with insight. Hope Hillary and Obama have his back.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      December 5, 2011, 4:56 pm

      They won’t have his back. Hillary & Obama are gearing up for the prez contest; they will try to outdue the GOP & this calls for rubber-stamping Israel right or wrong. Hillary’s spiel about civil rights in Israel pertain only to Jews.

  5. pabelmont
    pabelmont
    December 5, 2011, 10:30 am

    Good that those comments got some play. Even if he is fired.

    Funny to think that saying that Arabs’ anger at Israel is a (“a”, not “the only”) reason for Arab anger at the West, at USA, should anger Zionists. (Maybe what angers Zios is to SAY so, to discuss it, to get Americans thinking about it.) Zionist anger at Gutman’s statement — if assumed to relate to the truth of his statement rather than to his making the statement — almost seems to constitute a guarantee that NO ARAB is angry at the West because of ANY action by Israel. Wow! Not only — in this view — can Israel do no wrong, but Israel cannot even be (improperly, of course!) blamed by its victims and their friends for what it does.

    Maybe some Arabs also hate our freedoms, who knows? For example, some definitely hate the caricature of the Prophet published under the banner of “freedom of press”. And the (mostly European) laws punishing anti-Semitism (perhaps as redefined to embrace anti-Zionism) may rub painfully against the perceived non-punishment of anti-Islamic expression.

  6. Sin Nombre
    Sin Nombre
    December 5, 2011, 10:57 am

    Phil Weiss said:

    “P.S. I don’t think he’s going to lose his job.”

    It will be interesting nonetheless. I’ve been thinking that maybe, just maybe, Panetta’s words about “getting back to the table” and then Hilary’s about Israel’s new legislation and treatment of women might just be Obama saying “okay, we can punch back a bit too,” and allowing it. Almost certainly I would think these remarks were vetted by the WH before being given.

    I doubt that Gutman’s remarks were, but I suspect it would be relatively easy for Obama to just let them slide given that everyone understands they aren’t the kind of thing that’s vetted. (Not to mention their reasonableness.)

    In any event like I say, regardless of this Gutman thing it’ll be interesting to see if Obama is indeed punching back a bit. “After all,” I think he could reasonably say, “who is the jewish community going to really run to? Mormon Romney or Southern Boy Newt? Naaaahhh. Not gonna happen…”

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      December 5, 2011, 5:01 pm

      Obama will do nothing to harm his next 4 years. Both parties will fight over who is more pro-Israel. Case closed.

  7. marc b.
    marc b.
    December 5, 2011, 11:03 am

    i’m perplexed by the ‘new anti-semtism’ meme, although i applaud gutman’s candor. the ‘old’ anti-semitism was based on falsehoods attributed generally to ‘the jews’, in some cases traits assigned to ‘the jews’ on the basis of an individual’s actions, and, more often than not, fantastic allegations fabricated from whole clothe. how can gutman and others liberally smear criticism of the actions of a state as ‘the new anti-semitism’? it might be unfair to ‘target jews generally’ (although one can even question this argument when the state of israel is the most vocal advocate of the conflation of ‘jews’ and israel), if that is what is done, but there is no equivalence between, say, the blood libel, a pure fiction, and criticism of israelis’ use of chemical weapons on civilian populations, or continued construction of illegal settlements and removal of arabs, bedouins, from their residences. the association of anti-semitism with criticism of a state is a bit too reflexive.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      December 5, 2011, 5:07 pm

      Anti-semitism has never been cut from fabricated whole cloth since the days the Jews became the middleman in Western socio-economic society.

    • Bumblebye
      Bumblebye
      December 5, 2011, 5:41 pm

      marc b
      I’d suggest the “equivalence” arises when anger and antipathy over the deeds of Israel is expressed against Jews anywhere who may, if asked, be just as appalled. If they are blamed because Israel conflates itself with all Jews anywhere, it would still be anti-semtism to blame any and all Jews, yes? That’s where our media and politicians fall down too, by accepting and regurgitating Israel’s constant conflations and contributing to the problem – much, I’m sure, to Israel’s satisfaction. (It’s a dangerous world out there, come to your perfect homeland, Israel!)

      • marc b.
        marc b.
        December 6, 2011, 8:40 am

        I’d suggest the “equivalence” arises when anger and antipathy over the deeds of Israel is expressed against Jews anywhere who may, if asked, be just as appalled.

        i agree that it is unfair to blame all jews for the crimes of israel, but a more accurate analogy, rather than the ‘old anti-semitism’ (hatred based on myth), would be broad anti-american sentiment on account of US ME policies when, in fact, a large percentage of americans disagree with such policies. and, again, a state actor, israel, is the most vocal advocate of the link betweens ‘jews’ and israel. were it not promoting that link (and benefiting from the backlash, i.e. immigration to israel in response ‘the rise of the ‘new anti-semitism) i believe that people would be less inclined to make such generalizations.

  8. annie
    annie
    December 5, 2011, 11:17 am

    What do they want that Bill Kristol commands?

    let’s also ask “What else do they want that Bill Kristol commands?”

    i’d like to see a graphic of kristol as the puppeteer with the candidates at the end of his strings.

    http://visibility911.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/puppeteer.jpg

  9. GalenSword
    GalenSword
    December 5, 2011, 11:21 am

    Can you imagine that Bill Kristol was actually teaching a class to Harvard undergrads a few years ago?

    Charles Sennott and I audited one day. Sennott tried to contain himself, but he had to disagree in front of the whole class with the nonsense Kristol was spewing.

    • Antidote
      Antidote
      December 7, 2011, 12:06 pm

      “Can you imagine that Bill Kristol was actually teaching a class to Harvard undergrads a few years ago?”

      Can you imagine Dershowitz still teaches there? And that Goldhagen did?

  10. seanmcbride
    seanmcbride
    December 5, 2011, 12:33 pm

    This is what I don’t understand: how did someone like William Kristol, who is fanatically obsessed with the Israeli interest and nothing but the Israeli interest, acquire dictatorial control over the entire Republican Party? How did we get to this point? The situation is truly bizarre and certainly unsustainable over the long run.

    See also this recent attack on Leon Panetta by Elliott Abrams from his perch at the CFR: “Panetta’s Dangerous Mistake”:

    http://blogs.cfr.org/abrams/2011/12/03/panettas-dangerous-mistake/

    Nowhere in the article does Abrams address the substance of Panetta’s analysis or display the slightest concern about the American interest. Why does the CFR treat someone as intellectually shallow as Elliott Abrams as a serious person?

    The only reasonable explanation for this state of affairs: the influence of a corrupt combination of big money, tribalism and nepotism. In open and fair debate among American foreign policy experts, neocons like Kristol and Abrams are quickly brought to their knees. They are terrified of fair and open debate with knowledgeable experts and analysts.

    Do leading Republicans ever feel a sense of self-loathing when they grovel so shamelessly before this bullying and brainless political machine?

  11. pabelmont
    pabelmont
    December 5, 2011, 12:39 pm

    If Newt and others call for Gutman’s firing, do they state a BASIS for the demand (or is it merely a form of words intended to win brownie points from AIPAC)?

    If I had a shot at them, I’d ask whether they thought Gutman was WRONG TO SAY WHAT HE SAID, or whether WHAT HE SAID was WRONG.

  12. upsidedownism
    upsidedownism
    December 5, 2011, 12:59 pm

    gutman’s analysis isn’t too bad, except for calling hatred of Israel’s policies a form of anti-semitism. Its not in any way antisemitic to criticize and oppose the colonization of the west bank and east jerusalem or to criticize and oppose “every new settlement announced in Israel”. Its in fact a moral obligation to do so.

  13. December 5, 2011, 5:04 pm

    Bill Kristol screams: “Fire”!!
    Romney and Gingrich shout: “Yes, sir ,we are ready”.
    As always.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      December 5, 2011, 5:11 pm

      All candidates for POTUS will bend to AIPAC’s will–except Ron Paul. The Goys don’t see the significance of this; they are too buried in lesser issues.

  14. DICKERSON3870
    DICKERSON3870
    December 5, 2011, 5:07 pm

    RE: “The two Republican frontrunners, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, have now called for the firing of Howard Gutman… The Simon Wiesenthal Center condemned Gutman. Also the Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors…” ~ Weiss

    FOR THE HUNDREDTH TIME – Sinning against Zionism: Traitor to Country, by William A. Cook , Dissident Voice, 4/21/11

    “Hell is where many false commitments must be unlearned.” — Ricardo J. Quinones, ‘Dante Alighieri’

    (excerpt) Richard Goldstone’s journey from Justice to Sinner represents the spiritual act of dying in the Zionist world. By recanting his own report he has attempted to break the bonds that cast him into the sufferings in Caina, Antenora, and Judecca where, in ‘Dante’s Inferno’, those treacherous to their own, are removed from the light and warmth of their kin, their country, and their masters and suffer eternal damnation in the remorseless dead center of the ice in the most bottomless circle of Hell.
    Fortunately, Goldstone like Dante can learn that he has, in his journey, aligned himself with many false gods and many false attachments ignoring on the way the elementary truths that bind humankind ineluctably in one race in a bond of human grace.
    The Zionist world needs no Hell since it heeds no conscience. It exists on one foundation, a solid block of ice that freezes the soul of all who bear allegiance to its creed of absolute obedience, an ancient form of tribal slavery bound by fear that shackles the soul, by isolation that instills despair, by humiliation that corrodes self, and by victimhood that bonds the tribe in self-perpetuating agony. It is in this sense Medieval, a remnant of the inquisitorial mind that harbored no dissent, gave no credence to personal freedom, and obligated all to one monolithic understanding of commitment to the powers that control…

    ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://dissidentvoice.org/2011/04/sinning-against-zionism-traitor-to-country/

  15. Sin Nombre
    Sin Nombre
    December 5, 2011, 6:20 pm

    I see it just now being reported in Haaretz that Gutman will not be dismissed, with the Admin saying he was expressing is own views. Gutman seems to have had to abase himself first however, saying he was misunderstood and holding up his own jewishness to defend himself.

    Kind of made me a bit resentful of Gutman seeing him playing his jewish card: Smells more than a bit like he’s saying that while *he* could say what he did, boy if you’re one of the goyim …

  16. patm
    patm
    December 5, 2011, 6:27 pm

    ….a second type of “growing anti-Semitism” that is the result of the inability to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    This is the plain unvarnished truth. I doubt he would be fired for such a remark as this.

Leave a Reply