Crooks and Liars Lies About Max Blumenthal

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.


25235053_BG5

The appropriately named left-wing Crooks and Liars site has pathetically tried to defend bigot Max Blumenthal over his involvement in influencing Kansas City shooter Frazier Glenn Miller.

And it did that, appropriately enough, by lying about Max Blumenthal.

Writing at Crooks and Liars, David Neiwert attempts to falsely claim that Blumenthal only opposes “the right”, not Israel.

Neiwert calls Blumenthal a “liberal”. That’s an understatement. Blumenthal is much further left-wing than that.  He refers to, “Blumenthal’s against-the-grain reporting on the right wing in Israel”. Blumenthal doesn’t limit his attack to the Israel right.

“Blumenthal…does not “despise” Israel,” he claims. “Blumenthal has written a number of articles that criticize Israeli policies.”

Neiwert may choose not to believe criticism of Blumenthal from the right, but he’s been amply criticized by the left.

Eric Alterman of The Nation called Goliath, “The I Hate Israel Handbook” and a potential selection of the Hamas Book of the Month Club.

“Never before has anyone defended the analogizing of the behavior of Israeli Jews to that of the war criminals who led Nazi Germany. Such arguments are, unfortunately, consistent with both the quality of Blumenthal’s judgments and the honesty of his journalism,” Alterman wrote.

Here’s The Forward on Max Blumenthal.

“He’s written a collection of 73 short vignettes, weaving together reportage, history and interviews to show the suffering and unbroken spirit of the Palestinians and the callous cruelty of the Israelis. Lest anyone miss the point, many of his chapters have titles like “The Concentration Camp,” “The Night of Broken Glass,” “This Belongs to the White Man” and “How to Kill Goyim and Influence People.”

Almost halfway through their 83-minute encounter (minute 34:00 on YouTube), Lustick emotionally asks Blumenthal whether he believes, like Abraham at Sodom, that there are enough “good people” in Israel to justify its continued existence — or whether he’s calling for a mass “exodus,” the title of his last chapter, and “the end of Jewish collective life in the land of Israel.”

Blumenthal gives a convoluted answer that comes down to this: “There should be a choice placed to the settler-colonial population” (meaning the entire Jewish population of Israel): “Become indigenized,” that is, “you have to be part of the Arab world.” Or else…? “The maintenance and engineering of a non-indigenous demographic majority is non-negotiable.”

Lustick appears stunned. And not only Lustick. Philip Weiss, founder and co-editor of Mondoweiss, who was in the audience, wrote afterwards, in a rare rebuke of his own writer, that he saw “some intolerance in that answer.”

We live in a “multicultural world,” Weiss wrote. There should be room for Israelis. “The issue in the end involves the choice between an Algerian and a South African outcome.” Mass expulsion versus coexistence. “I’m for the South African outcome.”

Blumenthal isn’t. It’s a chilling moment, even for the anti-Zionists among us.”

Pretending that Blumenthal is a critic of the Israeli right, as opposed to an opponent of Israel, is simply a lie. Even veteran critics of Israel have blasted him. Israeli figures on the left showed him the door.

Neiwert attacks me using material from Mondoweiss. As I discussed in this week’s article, Mondoweiss is an openly bigoted site.

Blumenthal had also posted at Mondoweiss which is closest to the intersection between Neo-Nazis and the Anti-Israel left.

One of its writers had said, “I do not consider myself an anti-Semite, but I can understand why some are.” Another had written that, “Israel is no normal state, but one governed by the forging of Zionist system-logic into a Satanic ideology.”

Alan Sabrosky, wrote at Mondoweiss that “an awful lot of American Jews” are “agents of a foreign government” and called for “excising” the cancer. Elsewhere he wrote that, “I don’t care if we’re called anti-Semites or not,” claimed that most American Jews are “traitors” and accused Israel of being behind the September 11 attacks.

Mondoweiss’ Jeffrey Blankfort went so far in his hatred for Israel as to assert that, “When it comes to talking about Israel-Palestine — David Duke and Pat Buchanan are more informative than Noam Chomsky or people on the left.”

He also endorsed Holocaust denial.

Blankfort’s statements show how thin the line between the Neo-Nazi and the Anti-Israel activist has become.

And Crooks and Liars and David Neiwert insist on lying about it.

  • Judahlevi

    Max Blumenthal is just another bigot, and anyone who defends him is defending bigotry in general. Hating Israelis/Jews as a group is no different than hating women or hating dark-skinned individuals as groups. Who defends such people?

    Putting people in groups denies the individuality of each of us. This is one of the main problems with multiculturalism – it continues to think of people as groups and assigns values based on which arbitrary group you are put into. In other words, its thought process is the same as Blumenthal or any other bigot.

    Individualism is the only cure for racism, sexism, or any other group hatred. It is the ideal human relational philosophy.

  • Abberline

    Chuck Schumer is a liberal, Max Blumenthal is a neo-Stalinist.

    • A Z

      Wasn’t there an article about people who liked the British petition to restrict press freedoms.

      One of the upshots was that some Americans also liked the ideal one of them being Chuck Schumer.

      You might want to re-consider your support or defense of Chuck Schumer.

      • Abberline

        I neither support nor am defending Chuck Schumer.

        • A Z

          What does it mean to be a liberal in your opinion?

          I can’t see myself being in the military to defend the world that Senator Chuck Schumer wants to make.

  • Abberline

    What is the deal with The Forward? It seems stuck in a time warp of the 1930′s and 40′s when Stalin (or Trotsky) was their unofficial God.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      That is its heritage.

      • Abberline

        Mr. Greenfield: I recall when Ronald Reagan died they wrote a nasty editorial trashing him. It was disgusting. I am glad I quit the Workmen’s Circle a long time ago.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          The left is the left.

          • Sheep O’Doom

            and the right is full of American value God hating hating terrorists.

  • SCREW SOCIALISM

    maxie blumenthal should join the neteuri karta cult.

  • Mike

    Both Weiss and Blumenthal start from the premise that they personally don’t see a need for a Jewish state because the Jews have made it, and therefore a Jewish state is unnecessary.

    It’s an extremely selfish, blinkered, analysis They grew up in successful Jewish families after WWII, a golden age for US Jews. Blumenthal is a son of the privileged elite. That is an extremely small sample from Jewish history, both chronologically and geographically.

    Blumenthal’s encounter with David Grossman is very revealing.
    Many critics of Israel interpret Grossman’s silent non response to Blumenthal’s statement that Jews are insiders, and thus a state is pointless, to an inability to parry that argument.
    I think it was rather a stunned revulsion to the small minded selfish ignorance and arrogance of Blumenthal’s comment.
    Israeli Ashkenazi Jews are the children and grandchildren of European Jews, not American elites. Many of them also felt they had made it, were insiders, before their world was destroyed.

    Even Norman Finkelstein has said that he understands the sentiment among many Jews of the need for a safe haven. His family history has granted him a little more perspective and humility than Blumenthal is capable of.