Bart, the anti-Semite - again

 Dear Bart

 Love your site and work. Usually.

 I have seen you refute charges in the past of anti-Semitism, and have been a bit concerned about it.
 Today, 11/24/02, I think you really put your foot in it.

 I love a debate - this should be good.

 You actually have posted, and given explicit appreciation of, a reader's letter supporting the loony
 right-wing accusation that Vince Foster was murdered.

 It was the first discussion I've seen of Vince Foster's death that wasn't hysterical.
 I'm sorry you found no value in it.

 Evidently, what motivated you to do an about-face in direct opposition to your own political philosophy,
 was the truly demented and intellectually absurd proposition that it was Jonathan Pollard and THE JEWS
 who had something to do with this.

 Are you saying you have proof the Massad could not have done this?
 I don't think you can back that up, and besides, Schuman was asking questions, not accusing anyone.
 Why do you think it's wrong to consider all motives and suspects when there's been a murder/suicide?

 You seem to be saying Pollard was an innocent man who was framed.
 If you're not saying that, why do you give the spies an automatic pass?

 Based upon nothing but self-contradictory speculation, (Starr did not FULLY investigate the Foster death?;
 Foster and Hillary accused of "purloining" NSA secrets, but that's NOT true, yet Foster was killed by the Jews
 because it WAS true?, and killed to prevent the exposure of Jewish intelligence gathering ALREADY in
 NSA reports?), the letter seems a spectacular exercise on the lengths some will go to provide the worst
 kind of anti-Israeli (anti-Semitic?) slander.

 I fail to see your logic.
 If a black man had a possible reason to want Foster dead, would I then be a racist to ask the question?
 There are unanswered questions regarding Foster's death, and you think we should look everywhere
 except Israel for possible suspects?

 If Ariel Sharon was driving a car that ran over my dog, would I be anti-Semetic to say he did it?

 Is your anti-Israeli meter so sensitive that questions can't even be asked?
 Besides, if I had a problem with Israel - I'd say so.
 Why do you think I'd need to tip-toe around giving my opinion on something?
 Have you known me to be shy in the past?

 Considering the multiple allegations against you in the past,

 ...well, as the GOP has proven for the last ten years, any idiot can make an allegatiuon.

 I have a history of being anti-Israel?
 I'll bet you can't back that up.

 Why don't you go thru the back issues and send me examples of my bigotry?
 And if you're talking about my screaming eagles story, could you do some research and tell me
 how many dozens of Jews have been murdered since I suggested they move out of the war zone?

 ...and your history of rather tenuous defense, a circumspective editor wouldn't go anywhere near this
 kind of repulsive tripe.

 The man asked some questions.
 Jesus, you're sounding like Ari Fliescher, telling me I need to "watch what I say."

 Unfortunately, your enthusiastic publication of this letter indicates that you will happily embrace the
 lowest standards of journalistic ethics to promote an anti-Semitic theory.

 Shame on you.
 Roger Lambert

 Roger, I think you're nuts.
 My "enthusiastic promotion" of an "anti-Semetic theory" was an exercise in free speech.
 To say "they can't be guilty because they're Jews" is crazy talk.

  back to

Privacy Policy
. .