Re: on Israel lobby in the US and foreign policy

[sartesian <sartesian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

You know we are missing a big point here, and the point is not about
academic freedom and freedom of speech.  It's about money and class.
Kissinger is most definitely a war criminal.  He does what he does for
money.  Ann Coulter is a hack.  She does what she does for the money.

This isn't about the free expression of ideas.  It is about the real
content of the actions of these people and how those interests both
represent and are protected by the existing commercial arrangement,
(euphemism for ruling class).

Should Kissinger be allowed to speak?  Even putting the question that
way obscures the real content of the origins of the conflict. His right
to free speech is not at all  at stake.  He represents a class, and the
class' needs and tactics to destroy those threatening its power.

He should be confronted; his presence attacked at any and all
opportunities based on those class actions.

As should Rice, Cheney, Miller, Abrams, Bolton, Negroponte, Powell,
Bremer,  etc.

Coulter is not a war criminal (not yet, at least). She is a paid
advertising agent for a culture of war criminals.  So let's call it by
its right name and force the discussion into the world of the concrete.





----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Perelman" <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <PEN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 11:08 PM
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] on Israel lobby in the US and foreign policy


> Like Bill Lear says, David compares 2 different animals.  I regard
Henry Kissinger
> as a war criminal, yet nobody will loose their job for inviting him to
their campus
> or for saying that they agree with him.
>
> David says that liberals are not being treated like conservatives.
Conservatives do
> like to play victim & then claim their every one else pretends to be
the victim.
> They also speak of a liberal press.
>
> David defends Ann Coulter.  She has a right to speak, but what would
happen to me if
> I went on tv & called Bush a fag -- as she did with Edwards?
>
> I would think that libertarians would defend the right of all ideas to
be defended.
> The people who are against Israeli policy are not attacking people as
Jews -- as
> Murray's hypothetical speech would attack Blacks.  They are saying
that the Israeli
> policy is wrong or in the case of M&W only that support for Israel is
not in the US
> interest.  Would anyone suffer consequences for saying that a detente
with the USSR
> is not in the US interest?
>
>
> --
> Michael Perelman
> Economics Department
> California State University
> Chico, CA 95929
>
> Tel. 530-898-5321
> E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
> michaelperelman.wordpress.com
>