Trying hard to keep up with the enormous quantity of stuff that floods into my inbox(es) and twitter feed and blog feeds...

Here's some of it: Kellie: Libya - the regime under siege; Rebecca: Notes on Alice Walker and the Gaza Flotilla; Andrew Coates: How secularists got lost; Piaf’s Paramour, and Much More: Singer Georges Moustaki Elevated Modesty to an Art Form; The Persistence of Bourgeois Radicalism by Colin Liddell; Yale’s Antisemitism Problem by Clemens Heni; Rachel Shteir on David Mamet’s The Secret Knowledge; Bill Weinberg: ANSWER bars Libyans from Libya event; NJR: Egyptian Bedouin demand equal citizenship rights; Poumista: Orwellianism in the consumer age.


"... I took part in was an aborted attempt in May, 1989, to visit a Palestinian family in Qalqiliya, on the West Bank - one of the sons of the family had been arrested and was accused of being a terrorist, and in response the IDF was going to seal off one of the rooms of the house ... Our goal was to express support for the family."

Sealing a room in a house of a terrorist's family seems a rather non-violent kind of punishment for giving support to such a person. By what rule of universal justice has this family won the author's sympathy over the Israeli family whose son or daughter would be targeted by the terrorist?

Her story reminded me of this more recent solidarity visit by extremist leftists to the village of Awarta:
bensix said…
From your "I'm not a racist, but..." post, Bob...

...policing the line of acceptability is not an easy task. I've spent a large amount of this internet space on this blog fighting on that front, but I don't think the front is always easy to draw so clearly.

Me, I think exposing oneself to a broad range of ideas is a splendid way of testing one's assumptions and beliefs. As that post suggests that you're more cautious about venturing near "extreme" positions, and as I'm'a'gonna guess you're not a reader of TakiMag and may, if you read further, feel slightly awkward about linking to it*, could I be cheeky enough make these proposals...

(1) That a link needn't imply a wholehearted endorsement.

(2) That a tainted source needn't be entirely rotten.

(3) That the question of the legitimacy of links needn't be worth losing sleep/friends/marbles over because, ultimately, unless you're Instapundit/Andrew Sullivan/whoever runs Boing Boing it only effects pedantic commenters such as myself.

[*] Not that I want to play the petticoat-clutching maid. I just assume that if you think is beyond the pale you won't be a massive fan of Paul Gottfried, Pat Buchanan and the gang.
bob said…
Yes absolutely to all of Ben's 3 points. I don't endorse the content or broader website of any of these links. In fact, I had not delved very deeply into Taki's before posting this, and only now see a list of names that includes Buchanan, who despise, and Gottfried. I may consider removing that link pending further investigation.

On Gottfried:
Will said…
"Trying hard to keep up with the enormous quantity of stuff that floods into my inbox(es) and twitter feed and blog feeds..."

Why? Are you a mOrAN?

Popular Posts