I’m quoting Alan Dershowitz from WBUR’s Radio Boston, today (9/18) at about the 6:20 mark. “(Hamas) use what I call the dead baby strategy.”
Dershowitz was expounding on his current series in the Globe. My question is, do the editors at the Globe really think that he needs a multiple part series to get his point across?
I mean, after that quote above, what else is there to say?
Please share widely!
the Globe turning over its op-ed page to anyone for a 5-part series before? And if not … so, really, Alan Dershowitz was the first person in history whose stuff to say was so important that he needed 5 Globe op-eds to say it?
Methinks not.
They’ve been turning over the front page to Henry Kissinger and representatives of Pinheads for a New American Clusterf*ck for years, now. It’s not like they’re endangering their credibility or anything.
I may be mistaken here — and if I am, please correct me. But I suspect the Globe is giving space to this discussion of the ends of violence and ways it might be ended because, not long ago, the Globe was unable to talk very much about other troubles.
It is widely believed that, for a generation if not longer, Boston was an indispensable source of funding and arms for Sinn Fein and for the Irish Republican Army. This underground support was widespread and, to some extent, institutional, but it was not something of which people spoke too much. Doing so would raise not only the spectre of the Troubles but also stir up the anti-Catholic, nativist prejudices that simmered beneath Boston’s hard-won surface civility. And of course, beneath that surface lurked depths of racial animosity that the 1974 bussing crisis made only too clear.
Look at the mayors of Boston: Curley (3), Mansfield, Tobin, Kerrigan, Curley(4), Hynes, Collins, White, Flynn: for sixty years, from Hoover to the 90’s, the mayor of Boston was a son of Ireland and a man whose law diploma said BU or BC or Suffolk, not Harvard.
Lots of people took lots of time in those days, shaking their heads and trying to work out how to help the people back there, especially if you wanted to help but did not condone the way things were going (which was seemingly always to the dogs). It might have been better had this been discussed more openly and more broadly; in any case, I think the Globe is anxious not to repeat the silence of the past.
Again: I have no inside source at the Globe, and my reading of Boston history is superficial at best.
The right will never forgive him for defending OJ, and the left will never forgive him for defending Bush on torture and his knee jerk Likud approach to Mideast political issues.
Then again, until recently the Globe was owned by an even more distinguished paper of record that thinks a debate between Gail “Seamus!Seamus!Seamus!” Collins and David “Pot is not the way to Hegelian enlightenment” Brooks is interesting, or that consider Tom Friedman, Nick Kristof and Frank Bruni to be it’s ‘liberal columnists’.
Another AD low point.