Friday, January 04, 2013

 I don't get it ...

Look at this post by Prof. AbuKhalil. Read the title he gives to this entry and then click on the link to read the whole article, authored by Bilal Y. Saab and Andrew J. Tabler.

Here is a synopsis of the main idea in the article: 

 After almost two years of bloodletting in Syria, there is little chance that negotiations of the kind UN peace envoy Lakhdar Brahimi has been urging would end the conflict. More likely, they would prolong it. And worse, they would perpetuate Bashar al-Assad’s favorite strategy of fanning fears of rebel sectarianism and extremism to dissuade the world from intervening against him.
 Here is the title the prof. gave this analysis: "Zionist hoodlums don't want peace in Syria, damn it"

 I ask you: Where is the "Zionist" angle in this article? Why is Bilal Y. Saab defined by AbuKhalil as a "Zionist hoodlum"? Where is the rejection of "peace" in the article? And why is the Prof. who teaches American students in a Californian university using "Zionist" as a demonizing adjective?

I keep looking at what this so-called academic writes on a daily basis, while he is assigned with the teaching young impressionable minds the foundational principles of good thinking, critical analysis and ethics, and I just don't get it. I really don't.
_______________

Later: Another baffling entry from the professor, blaming a report in the New York Times of  distorting a story:

"A spokeswoman for the Israeli military, who spoke on the condition of anonymity under army rules, said the purpose of Tuesday’s raid on the village, Tamoun, was to arrest a resident, Murad Bani Odeh, who she said was suspected of being a terrorist."  In the early version of this lousy article, Mr. Odeh was referred to as "suspected terrorist".
 
Isn't a person who is  "suspected of being a terrorist  a "suspected terrorist"? In the first instant, the "suspected" is used as a verb and in the second instant it is used as an adjective. One of Chomsky's discoveries in his thesis on universal grammar was the fact that a phrase like "A beautiful girl" means "A girl who is beautiful" and is a fundamental structure  common to all languages. AbuKhalil can hardly claim that he made this allegation out of ignorance of the English language.
 
What exactly is the point to this fulmination, then? Is the prof running out of material? If you read the several entries he devotes to his hobby of demonizing Israelis for the same day as this example appears you will notice how he is reduced to scrapping the bottom of the barrel. 

Like I always say, anger makes you stupid and no better model to exemplify this principle that Prof. AbuKhalil.

3 Comments:

At 8:23 PM GMT-5, Anonymous Anonymous said...

maybe AbuK subscribes to DEBKA. They just posted a plan where the IDF and USA special forces are fighting together to protect the Golan Heights.

Also, as I recall, The Protocols define Zionists as anyone who also works for the Jews. The British Empire was cited. Been 7 years since I read that strange fable.

K2K

 
At 7:01 PM GMT-5, Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.algemeiner.com/2013/01/04/the-difference-between-northern-cyprus-and-judea-samaria/

an actual counter for the next time roid repeats his tiresome Geneva Convention argument.

K2K

 
At 9:00 PM GMT-5, Anonymous Anonymous said...

tnr logged me out for the last time since I did not renew.
so, please say goodbye for me if you encounter malahat in another thread.

I had just posted this on the Lew thread:
http://nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/is-jack-lew-a-friend-to-wall-street-20130110

btw, PJM has a 13 minute interview with Ayalon, in which he uses a terrific phrase, while talking about Jewish refugees from Arab lands, whose communities had been there for 2,500 years, well before "the Islamic Occupation of the Middle East".

K2K

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home