The inescapable logic of things like Jewish conspiracies

Two nuggets of fact lie on the shore after the last news-cycle. One helps explain my mystification at theimmediate hard right hysteria. The verbal formula that essentially repeats the standard position of every recent US administration on the two-state solution did not strike me as anything new;

There’s a debate about that. I’m not sure. If there is anything new, it probably has to do with nuances, not about the idea that the 1948 armistice lines here-and-there nudged a tiny bit westward is going to be the new border.

in fact, it struck me as a minimalist response to Israel’s continued aggressive settlement of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

That’s a lie. There is no “continued aggressive settlement.” There is continued construction in areas it already has. In fact, in Jerusalem, construction has been slowed to less than a trickle and it’s driving residents up the wall. Going by Orwell’s standards, Andrew is being a pure propagandist.

And yet instantly Drudge, Fox, Romney et al. blasted the “stunning” news that Israel had somehow been thrown under the bus.

My God. Drudge, Fox instantly blasting Obama with a spin on something in the news cycle! … It makes you wonder whether the world has turned totally upside-down in just one evening.

None of this makes sense until you realize that Netanyahu had been given a heads-up by the administration.

Really, there is no other explanation that would make sense to him?

So it’s pretty obvious that it was the Israelis who immediately got their US media mouthpieces to spin

— Does his psychiatrist read his blog? If so, he should kindly inform Andrew that “pretty obvious” can indicate a narrow view that takes very little information to sustain some strange hopeful thinking.

the speech as some sort of attack. So those of you who think Jeffrey Goldberg and Walter Russell Mead and Victor Davis Hanson are a foreign government’s favored outlets should think again.

“Those of you” in this case are antisemites of the flaming variety that make Andrew feel better about his own opinions.


In the same post as the above delusional musings, Andrew gives us this gift:

And then, of course, one wonders if what Obama really wants is exactly for the European allies to vote for Palestinian statehood, because he, given the exigencies of American politics and fundraising, and his own attachment to Israel, cannot. And this speech was designed in part to give him cover.

In other words, Obama might not have betrayed Andrew’s vision, and Andrew does not have to feel ashamed and self-questioning. In this case, Andrew would have that, in regard to a potential UN vote on Palestinian statehood, the speech both (a) shows that Obama’s emotional attachment to Israel prevents him from voting “for”, AND (b) shows that he really wants his Europeans to VOTE “for.”

Ladies and gentleman, this is a mind capable of crafting both the most bizarre simplicities and complexities in the service of his angry, ashamed and vengeful politics.


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: