Comments on: Freeman Loses By Winning http://washingtonindependent.com/32988/freeman-loses-by-winning National News in Context Sun, 04 Mar 2012 13:30:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: math_peremath http://washingtonindependent.com/32988/freeman-loses-by-winning/comment-page-1#comment-36719 math_peremath Tue, 10 Mar 2009 19:54:31 +0000 http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=32988#comment-36719 I am all for contrarianism and free discussion. My problem with Freeman is that the guy knows how to disappear facts. My only source is his Gulf cooperation council speech. He analyzes the Middle East crisis but never acknowledges what everybody knows: since 2000, Israel proposed peace that was rejected; then they vacated two places unilaterally; in return, they got three wars started against them. I mean, I don't want him to acknowledge the whole package, or to share my interpretation. But how is it possible to just disappear all those facts at once? And then there is his mad talk about how the Arabs may opt for Israel's destruction. Let me give you a comparison. Assume an American public figure talks to a mixed Israeli-American audience and says: "Arab behavior may make Israel believe that the Arab states are too theomaniac, too fixed on hate, rage and revenge, and the only way is to destroy them, like the Baghdad Califate of old". This would be outrageous, no? But this is an almost exact paraphrase of what Freeman said. I am all for contrarianism and free discussion. My problem with Freeman is that the guy knows how to disappear facts. My only source is his Gulf cooperation council speech. He analyzes the Middle East crisis but never acknowledges what everybody knows: since 2000, Israel proposed peace that was rejected; then they vacated two places unilaterally; in return, they got three wars started against them. I mean, I don't want him to acknowledge the whole package, or to share my interpretation. But how is it possible to just disappear all those facts at once? And then there is his mad talk about how the Arabs may opt for Israel's destruction. Let me give you a comparison. Assume an American public figure talks to a mixed Israeli-American audience and says: “Arab behavior may make Israel believe that the Arab states are too theomaniac, too fixed on hate, rage and revenge, and the only way is to destroy them, like the Baghdad Califate of old”. This would be outrageous, no? But this is an almost exact paraphrase of what Freeman said.

]]> By: Casual Observer http://washingtonindependent.com/32988/freeman-loses-by-winning/comment-page-1#comment-36720 Casual Observer Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:27:50 +0000 http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=32988#comment-36720 I suggest that the Freeman discussion here and at interlinked websites is getting too complicated. A Freeman win here might actually be a win. In that more balanced thinking on the ME is being made available to the President--regardless of what detractors may say. <br><br>Why not take this small victory (if that is what it turns out to be with confirmation) for what it is? I suggest that the Freeman discussion here and at interlinked websites is getting too complicated. A Freeman win here might actually be a win. In that more balanced thinking on the ME is being made available to the President–regardless of what detractors may say.

Why not take this small victory (if that is what it turns out to be with confirmation) for what it is?

]]> By: math_peremath http://washingtonindependent.com/32988/freeman-loses-by-winning/comment-page-1#comment-21766 math_peremath Tue, 10 Mar 2009 12:54:31 +0000 http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=32988#comment-21766 I am all for contrarianism and free discussion. My problem with Freeman is that the guy knows how to disappear facts. My only source is his Gulf cooperation council speech. He analyzes the Middle East crisis but never acknowledges what everybody knows: since 2000, Israel proposed peace that was rejected; then they vacated two places unilaterally; in return, they got three wars started against them. I mean, I don't want him to acknowledge the whole package, or to share my interpretation. But how is it possible to just disappear all those facts at once? And then there is his mad talk about how the Arabs may opt for Israel's destruction. Let me give you a comparison. Assume an American public figure talks to a mixed Israeli-American audience and says: "Arab behavior may make Israel believe that the Arab states are too theomaniac, too fixed on hate, rage and revenge, and the only way is to destroy them, like the Baghdad Califate of old". This would be outrageous, no? But this is an almost exact paraphrase of what Freeman said. I am all for contrarianism and free discussion. My problem with Freeman is that the guy knows how to disappear facts. My only source is his Gulf cooperation council speech. He analyzes the Middle East crisis but never acknowledges what everybody knows: since 2000, Israel proposed peace that was rejected; then they vacated two places unilaterally; in return, they got three wars started against them. I mean, I don't want him to acknowledge the whole package, or to share my interpretation. But how is it possible to just disappear all those facts at once? And then there is his mad talk about how the Arabs may opt for Israel's destruction. Let me give you a comparison. Assume an American public figure talks to a mixed Israeli-American audience and says: “Arab behavior may make Israel believe that the Arab states are too theomaniac, too fixed on hate, rage and revenge, and the only way is to destroy them, like the Baghdad Califate of old”. This would be outrageous, no? But this is an almost exact paraphrase of what Freeman said.

]]> By: Casual Observer http://washingtonindependent.com/32988/freeman-loses-by-winning/comment-page-1#comment-21748 Casual Observer Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:27:50 +0000 http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=32988#comment-21748 I suggest that the Freeman discussion here and at interlinked websites is getting too complicated. A Freeman win here might actually be a win. In that more balanced thinking on the ME is being made available to the President--regardless of what detractors may say. <br><br>Why not take this small victory (if that is what it turns out to be with confirmation) for what it is? I suggest that the Freeman discussion here and at interlinked websites is getting too complicated. A Freeman win here might actually be a win. In that more balanced thinking on the ME is being made available to the President–regardless of what detractors may say.

Why not take this small victory (if that is what it turns out to be with confirmation) for what it is?

]]> By: Interesting change in attitude toward Israel « Later On http://washingtonindependent.com/32988/freeman-loses-by-winning/comment-page-1#comment-21636 Interesting change in attitude toward Israel « Later On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 20:22:38 +0000 http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=32988#comment-21636 [...] reading. Also note this brief Spencer Ackerman post with a somewhat different [...] [...] reading. Also note this brief Spencer Ackerman post with a somewhat different [...]

]]>