Thursday, March 28, 2024
Miles from the Mainstream
D. R. ZUKERMAN, proprietor

Reflections on New York Times Columns by Nicholas Kristof and Maureen Dowd.

August 19, 2015 --

Nicholas Kristof, August 13, noted that "...Obama (petulantly) suggested that some opponents [of the nuclear arms deal with Iran] were 'alarmist,' 'ignorant,' 'not being straight,' and "making common cause' with Iranians who chant 'Death to America.' Kristof first asserted: "Critics [of the president] are (ludicrously) accusing President Obama of appealing to anti-Semitic tropes."

Well, LPR sees a whiff of anti-Semitism in this comment from Maureen Dowd, in her July 18 Times column: "Republicans were never going for the Iran deal. Their apocalyptic statements were written well in advance and they just had to hit 'Send' followed by a fundraising appeal to Jewish donors." "Jewish donors?" Are Jews the only Americans opposed to the deal? Are there no Jews backing the president. Why didn't Ms. Dowd simply accuse Republicans of using their opposition to the president to make a fundraising appeal to donors, generally -=- without reference to religion?

By the way, the lead New York Times editorial, August 6, "A Compelling Defense of the Iran Deal," airbrushed the president's reference comparing Republicans to Iranians chanting "Death to America." The editorial merely commented that President Obama "likened Republicans to Iranian hard-liners, saying both are more comfortable with the status quo." Here are the President words: "Just because Iranian hardliners chant 'Death to America' does not mean that that is what all Iranians believe. In fact, it's those hardliners who are most comfortable with the status quo. It's those hardliners chanting 'Death to America' who have been most opposed to the deal. They're making common cause with the Republican Caucus."

This Times editorial offered an explanation, of sorts, why the administration accepted this "deal."

The administration backed down in the face of threats from Iran's rulers. The editorial, summarized post-American University remarks by the president: "Though Iran may not attack the United States directly, it could threaten American troops in Iraq with Shiite militias there, threaten Israel with rocket attacks by Hezbollah or send a suicide bomber in a small craft against American navel ships in the Strait of Hormuz," the president said talking with "a small group of journalists" after his American University speech.

(LPR's comment: if Hezbollah fired rockets at Israel, the administration would warn Israel not to respond disproportionately and, above all, not to harm civilians who might be used as "shields" by Hezbollah.)

Addressing the Turkish parliament, April 6, 2009, President Obama declared: "The United States is not, and never will be, at war with Islam." Apparently, Iran takes a rather different view vis-a-vis the United States.