Our communique yesterday addressed the LA Times granting op-ed space to a far-out radical – Michael Neumann – who would (in his own words) ‘use anything, including lies, injustice and obfuscation’ to promote his anti-Israel agenda. The Times felt this person was qualified to pontificate on the resurgent wave of anti-Semitism.
The LA Times published a number of letters today that took issue with Neumann, but none of these letters addressed the heart of the matter – that Neumann has written this, which should disqualify him from any respectable public platform:
My sole concern is indeed to help the Palestinians, and I try to play for keeps. I am not interested in the truth, or justice, or understanding, or anything else, except so far as it serves that purpose…I would use anything, including lies, injustice and obfuscation, to do so. If an effective strategy means that some truths about the Jews don’t come to light, I don’t care. If an effective strategy means encouraging reasonable anti-Semitism or reasonable hostility to Jews, I don’t care. If it means encouraging vicious racist anti-Semitism, or the destruction of the State of Israel, I still don’t care.
We’re still waiting for the Times to both publish a letter that raises the issue of Neumann’s prior writings (we know they got them…) and justify their granting this nihilist prominent space on this weighty matter. In the meantime, this guy hits the nail on the head:
Neumann concludes his convoluted screed by stating that anti-Semitism is not a priority, but only after he asserts that “a substantial majority of adult Jews” have “some responsibility” for Israeli “war crimes and human rights violations.” Obviously, anti-Semitism is not a priority for someone who believes that most adult Jews are war criminals. The relevant question is whether anti-Semitism is a priority for people who are actually in touch with reality. – David Podvin, West Hills
Comments to: firstname.lastname@example.org