Jerusalem prize recipient criticises his critics

It's a good letter, although I also heard a quote in which he said:

"I am neither pro-Hamas or pro-Settler movement."

Drawing moral equivalence between the two is reprehensible.

Even if that quote was confirmed, he would have put both in the same sentence but that does not imply that they are similar.
I don't like oisters and I don't like antisemitism, but one is not related to the other, although I don't see in what exceptional circumstance I would mention the two in the same sentence!

Or maybe he's suggesting that people who are opposed to the settler movement support Hamas? Whatever, I'm not going to lose sleep over it!

Good for him, anyway.

"Drawing moral equivalence between the two is reprehensible"

That struck me too at the time, Matt.

Jose, don't talk such nonsense. Would you be saying the same thing if he said: "I don't like Nazis, but I don't like settlers either?".

Would you be saying the same thing if he said: "I don't like Nazis, but I don't like settlers either?".

I never speak about a quote without knowing the context. That's a difference between us.

Jose - Here is where I found the quote:

http://www.thejc.com/blogpost/having-it-both-ways

And you're right, there isn't much context. It still struck me as worrying.

I never speak about a quote without knowing the context. That's a difference between us.

But it's a minor one. Far more unites you.

I never speak about a quote without knowing the context. That's a difference between us.

But it's a minor one.

Intellectually speaking, no.

The typical example of a quote taken out of context (by antisemites) is that quote of Ben Gurion:

If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England, and only half by transferring them to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, for before us lies not only the numbers of these children but the historical reckoning of the people of Israel.

Quoted by Martin Gilbert in the New York Times in 1987.
Now imagine if that would have been written post WW II, as the antisemites pretend (it was written before 1938, of course).

So even if the text is clearly understandable, the dating of it makes a big difference. Let's not even mention the cases where quotes are distorted, meaning inverted or even totally fabricated.

Another example is exposed in a JC article:
http://www.thejc.com/gaza/44365/death-threats-over-israelis-gaza-film

Just translate "clear" or "clean" into "cleanse" and you've got a perfect case of blood libel going!

"I never speak about a quote without knowing the context. That's a difference between us"

What a self-important little prick you are.

What a self-important little prick you are.

Well, compared to you, I surely am, but in easy victories, there's no glory.

Now, now, boys...all 4 of you are pretty.

Now, now, boys...all 4 of you are pretty.

Can't really say the same thing about you, Myopic! Antisemitism always look ugly to me!